Cookie Policy: This web site uses cookies. By using this site you agree to our cookie policy.
Disclaimer: By posting on this web site it is accepted that you have agreed to the T&C. This is an information forum, and it is just that information, all views are of the individual poster and not that of the site owner. Please DO NOT publish copyrighted material without the owners permission. If you copy news or articles include a link back to the original site. Threads/Posts may be deleted on request. No other links without permission.
BEFORE POSTING A QUESTION: Your question has probably been asked before, so please use the
SEARCH FUNCTION, as we grow tired of answering the same question again and again.
Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 LastLast
Results 211 to 240 of 381

Thread: Monuments to Stupidity

  1. #211

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Up the creek
    Posts
    7,897
    Rep Power
    78
    40- What is it with the current crop of politicians? Why can't they just get the out of my life unless I endanger others or cause a nuisance.

    The latest wheeze by Alan Johnston, the Health Secretary (where do they find enough morons to run this portfolio?) is to give every pregnant woman £120 IN THE HOPE that they will spend it on fresh fruit and veg. Applying the "Onlyforfun Reasonableness Test" I find a problem! Those that would buy fruit and veg anyway, will get £120 to put towards their increasing road tax and those who wouldn't are mor elikely to spend it on booze, fags or even heroine than on decent food.

    This from the hypocritical morons that slated DC for wanting to give married couples having children tax breaks! Now tax breaks could help keep families together as money is a particular lever of stress in married couples, especially with dwindling real wealth (see 39 - Inflation Again). And more children is good for the economy and the country, so a bribe to have more is justifiable and works well in other countries.

    "Be Right and Sit Tight" - Jesse Livermore, trading legend...


  2. #212

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Waterford, Ireland
    Posts
    7,355
    Rep Power
    80
    Fruit and Veg vouchers were the first thing that popped into my head when I saw this on the only channel I had in my holiday apartment last week, sky news. (Or the Find Madeleine Channel)



  3. #213

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Up the creek
    Posts
    7,897
    Rep Power
    78
    41- Turns out that the reason the Bank of England couldn't lend "covertly" to Northern Rock or force a merger with Lloyds, was because the Treasury under a certain Gordon Brown took the EU directive on Market Abuse and made it even tougher. Under the original code the crisis could have been avoided (well, imo, put off until another day - but you know what I mean).

    So Brown indirectly takes credit for solving a problem of his own making. What a shower of bds.

    "Be Right and Sit Tight" - Jesse Livermore, trading legend...


  4. #214

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,948
    Rep Power
    109
    whoo calm down OFF. Just because some people disagree with the fact some children would be discriminated against because they only had one parent dont make them a hypocritical moron.

    There will be an election within the next two years, and if you are right about your theories over the past two years that the country will reject Brown because he happens to be a scottish Member of Parliament and people find him boring, then you will have the last laugh and can push Dave Cameron for your 11% pay rise and extra tenner a week for been married with kids. :)

    It is not the cards you are dealt but what you do with them that counts


  5. #215

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Up the creek
    Posts
    7,897
    Rep Power
    78
    I'm from single parent family, and a tax break wouldn't have kept my parents together, my Dad was well paid, but he pissed off abroad and left us with nothing apart from a roof over our heads.

    But, there is no escaping the FACT that children of 2 - parent families do much better on average and get into less trouble than those from single parent families, so anything that helps and/or encourages families to stay together is a GOOD THING, even if it doesn't help others in other situations. I don;t think single-parents should be punished but neither is there a moral argument for treating them equally or preferentially.

    And I don't need DC for an 11% raise. (I had the interests of those who don't understand these things at heart)

    "Be Right and Sit Tight" - Jesse Livermore, trading legend...


  6. #216

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,948
    Rep Power
    109
    Maybe, maybe not, its open to debate

    I dont think there is any argument that kids in a stable family stand a better chance of doing better.

    The argument is does offering, what is in reality a pretty flimsy tax break to the many who have that advantage of a stable two parent family already make sense? Or would it be better to spend any spare money on giving support to the people who need the help more, i.e. children at that disadvantage through no fault of their own.

    I dont think it makes any difference at all to whether people stay together or not and the money could be spent better and be better targetted to the people who really need it.

    It is not the cards you are dealt but what you do with them that counts


  7. #217

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Up the creek
    Posts
    7,897
    Rep Power
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by tophatter View Post
    Maybe, maybe not, its open to debate
    Everyone is entitled to their opinions, I just wish they'd keep them to themselves. :D

    Quote Originally Posted by tophatter View Post
    I dont think there is any argument that kids in a stable family stand a better chance of doing better.
    That is contrary to every study ever done on the issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by tophatter View Post
    The argument is does offering, what is in reality a pretty flimsy tax break to the many who have that advantage of a stable two parent family already make sense? Or would it be better to spend any spare money on giving support to the people who need the help more, i.e. children at that disadvantage through no fault of their own.
    Ah, so you think it is better to strive for equality through lowering standards to the mean rather than creating incentives for "better" behaviour?

    Quote Originally Posted by tophatter View Post
    and the money could be spent better and be better targetted to the people who really need it.
    Should the State be entirely about giving people what "they need". I could say I "need" more money, but what I might really "need" is to simplify my life and cut expenditure? As the saying goes, "People rarely get what they want or what they think they need, instead, they usually get what they deserve."

    "Be Right and Sit Tight" - Jesse Livermore, trading legend...


  8. #218

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,948
    Rep Power
    109
    I dont understand your second point there OFF - I was actually agreeing that there was no argument about that kids in a stable family stand a better chance of doing better.


    On your third point, I did not actually advocate giving a tax break to anyone. However if you are going to discriminate then better to discriminate in giving money to people who might be more in need of it. The way you are describing it is almost like saying it is a reward. I much prefer it to be concentrated on those in needs - dont like this nanny state stuff saying you can encourage people to get married - much prefer to let people make up their own minds.

    Your fourth point is not about what you need as an individual but what the society needs as a whole to make it a better place for all. I agree though about letting people make their own mind up, such as whether they think getting married is a good idea or not.

    People will make their minds up on this issue at the general election. You have two parties that respect and believe in public services and varying degrees of distribution of wealth and a party who are less enthusiastic. If 4 out of 10 people who vote go for the party who believes less in "the state" (note im giving Dave the benefit of the doubt and accepting he was speakinig sincerely when he apologised for his partys attitude towards the public services in the past, and im saying he just believes a little less in the state) than the other two parties then you will get a Conservative Prime Minister.

    4 out of 10 people who vote is all they need to persuade and then we can see the power of this magical tenner keeping famalies together and creating queues outside churches and registery offices.

    I just hope for the people who have put their faith in Cameron that this is not his big idea. Maybe they can spend the extra tenner putting windmills on their roofs and offsetting their carbon footprints.

    You cant believe in this stuff OFF, I refuse to believe it. You are not stupid, vote for the serious guy, then you can play a part in getting rid of the clown leading the party and replace him with someone who should be representing the kind stuff you believe in becuase this stuff is not even credible.

    It is not the cards you are dealt but what you do with them that counts


  9. #219

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,948
    Rep Power
    109
    In all seriousness and leaving the knockabout stuff aside, I am beginning to think that some Tories might have now resigned themselves to losing the next election and might just think that if they are going to lose it might be better to lose big. I bet David Davies is! Much better to become the leader of the opposition with a blank canvas, than a shadow home secretary watching the years go by. He made a bad speech at conference two years ago and paid the price, maybe he will make a better one this time round?

    Its a bit like when you have a manager at a football club you dont like. You get to a point where you secretley hope you lose heavily in order for him to be sacked.

    Cameron already needed to climb a mountain to win a majority and become PM. He was young enough when elected though to be able to take an election defeat as long as he got the majority down to a size similar to John Majors wafer thin majority which rendered him even more impotent than he naturally was.

    Who knows? I reckon all this talk about "Brown Tories" may be Gordon Brown thinking he might even be able to get the silent (or quietly whispered) support of the likes of the Daily Mail and telegraph because they hate Cameron as much as he does!

    Cameron might have one or two good ideas but Brown can just take them off him now anyway seeing as he helped Mandleson write the handbook Cameron is working from before they fell out.

    Every trick is nearly used up now. Cameron had to modernise his party and so nailed his colours to that mast. I honestly dont see what he has left. He has been stitched up politically by Gordon Brown. We can disagree on who has the best policies, and lets be honest they dont differ that much, but there is no doubt in my mind who is the better politician.

    It is not the cards you are dealt but what you do with them that counts


  10. #220

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,948
    Rep Power
    109
    42 - that bloke caught speeding at 172 mph.

    cost him his liberty for a few weeks and his job, lucky it did not cost him his life because surely you need special training to be able to drive at speeds like that? . Did he really think he could drive like that and get away with it?

    It is not the cards you are dealt but what you do with them that counts


  11. #221

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    up a vagina
    Posts
    9,440
    Rep Power
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by tophatter View Post
    42 - that bloke caught speeding at 172 mph.

    cost him his liberty for a few weeks and his job, lucky it did not cost him his life because surely you need special training to be able to drive at speeds like that? . Did he really think he could drive like that and get away with it?
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/7012989.stm

    The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out the conservative adopts them.

    Mark Twain.


  12. #222

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,561
    Rep Power
    90
    Theres todays Britain for you....he was supposed to serve at least half of a measly 15 month sentence....out in about 3 months.....space must be a premium! :splapme



  13. #223

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,948
    Rep Power
    109
    Im more concerned that he only got a two year driving ban.

    You cant keep someone in prison indefinatley but you can keep them from getting behind the wheel for life.

    I would like to see the law changed so anyone causing injury by dangerous driving such as that case is banned for life.

    In fact on a seperate matter I would like to see a law where people convicted of serious crime have to serve an additional sentance on the outside in addition to their custodial sentance where they are not allowed to have a driving licence or a passport for a period of 12 months.

    As these things are documentation and on databases it would be easy to enforce and if they were caught in breach I would fine them heavily and than ban them for life from driving.

    It is not the cards you are dealt but what you do with them that counts


  14. #224

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Up the creek
    Posts
    7,897
    Rep Power
    78
    43- I am a Conservative, I believe in a small state, low taxes and simple solutions, even if they are hard to implement. Some people seem to think my dislike of Gordon Brown and Labour equates to a high approval of David Cameron and his policies, but all it means is I would rather be governed by a bad Conservative than a good Socialist.

    It amuses me to see certain Labour supporters tying themselves in knots championing Brown, who in turn is doing his damndest to trump Tony Blair and David Cameron as the heir to Thatcher. So much for deeply held convictions. He has taken the Labour party further to the right than most Conservative governments in terms of low public sector pay rises (unless you work in the NHS) and smashing what was left of the Unions, not very socialist. Hells bells, the tax take is even lower than during Maggies years.

    "Be Right and Sit Tight" - Jesse Livermore, trading legend...


  15. #225

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    N Wales
    Posts
    50,310
    Rep Power
    275
    43a. I am a Scouser, I believe in everthing being in a state, low taxis so we can get in when pssst, and simple solutions like crack.

    FREE Live Odds Comparison Software

    Keith Driscoll - Administrator
    Managing Director, Win2Win Limited



    Filipino UK Filipino Forum | Win2Win Racing - Free Tips


  16. #226

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    24,653
    Rep Power
    177
    43b - I am an antichrist, I am an anarchist, Don't know what I want, But I know how to get it.... :wink

    My keyboard's running out of ink....


  17. #227

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,948
    Rep Power
    109
    I dont think you champion Dave Cameron at all OFF as I suspect most conservatives dont believe in him either.

    I have no problem with Gordon Brown been dubbed the heir to Thatcher either. If it helps the daily mail and telegraph readers hold their nose and vote for him then as far as Im concerned he can be the heir to anyone they like.

    The bottomline is I dont think Cameron has got the skills to be Prime Minister and would be a disaster.

    I dearly love Michael Foot but if I had been able to vote in that general election and thought it was a close call I would have seriously considered voting for Thatcher because I think Foot would have been a lousy PM. As it was he was so far behind her that he did not stand a hope in hell of beating her so I would have been safe to vote Labour but if it had been a tight election - would I have said I voted Foot but secretly voted Thatcher instead? I think i might have.

    I believe many people will vote on who they think will be the best Prime Minister rather than prefer to be governed by a bad conservative rather than a good socialist. Like it or not Brown is Prime Minister now and I think most people will be prepared to give him a proper shot at it now he is already in the hot seat.

    Personally, for me - I just want Cameron destroyed as I think he is not the real deal I thought he might be. Out of him and Thatcher, much as I disagreed with her policies, I would always take her as PM over him. I put up with Blair because he was a brilliant politician who destroyed the last remnants of the old style right wing by forcing the Conservatives to modernise. Thatcher did the same to the old Left wing of the Labour party.

    It means in the future I might be in a position to vote Conservative if Labour ever find themselves saddled with such a weak leader. I would always prefer Labour as I believe in their aspirations and direction more than a centre right party, but having voted for Blair I do know if it ever comes to it, and providing the conservatives have a decent leader, I can just about stomach voting for a centre right Party. The key word though is centre, I will never be able to vote for the likes of Keith Joseph/John Redwood but maybe Ken Clarke/ Michael Heseltine. Cameron though? No way!

    It is not the cards you are dealt but what you do with them that counts


  18. #228

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Up the creek
    Posts
    7,897
    Rep Power
    78
    Very well said TH, but it doesn't give me much chance for argument! :)

    44- Gordon Brown (Failed Trader). At least Nick Leeson only lost £800 million.

    Back in 1999-2001 Brown sold the UK reserve from 715 tons to 320 tons or 17% to 8% and bought mainly Euros and some Yen and Dollars.

    What a bad trade, with gold now at $735 / oz that is a loss of over £3 billion or £2 billion compared against investing the proceeds entirely in Euros (not an entirely unexpected result of letting academics loose in the real world where the sharp toothed predators await). Not so bad you might say, Government receipts in 2006-07 are estimated at around £517 billion and expenditure at $550 billion, so you might be tempted to say that this was a drop in the ocean.

    But first, think about the word reserve. This implies something kept until it is required. In the case of national currency and gold reserves this is exactly what they should be, a reserve for times of difficulty. And guess what, at times of difficulty it is more than likely that the gold price will rise.

    Take the Northern Rock fiasco where the Government has guaranteed some £22 billion of deposits. Even 715 tons of gold would now be worth something like £9.2 billion, but 320 tons is only worth £4.1 billion, not really enough to cover this guarantee. And guess how much money is currently available to the deposit protection scheme, go on, have a guess...

    £4.4 million That's right, a shortfall of merely, err, £22 billion. And with the Bank of England prostituting what's left of our reserves starting today, lending £10 billion a time against mortgage collateral you might want to consider just how strong a government gurantee can be.

    "Be Right and Sit Tight" - Jesse Livermore, trading legend...


  19. #229

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    N Wales
    Posts
    50,310
    Rep Power
    275
    And during the Tory years we sold off the following, well undervalued by £Billions;
    Cable & Wireless,Amersham International,Britoil,Associated British Ports,Enterprise Oil,Jaguar,British Telecom,British Gas,British Airways,Rolls-Royce,BAA,British Steel,Regional water companies,Electricity distribution companies.....plus big parts of BP, etc, What are they worth now?

    How many of these are now British?

    FREE Live Odds Comparison Software

    Keith Driscoll - Administrator
    Managing Director, Win2Win Limited



    Filipino UK Filipino Forum | Win2Win Racing - Free Tips


  20. #230

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Up the creek
    Posts
    7,897
    Rep Power
    78
    What were they worth then? Most lost money and were subsidised by the taxpayer. Now that same taxpayer has shares in the profitable private entities in his pension fund...

    And anyway, what has that to do with improper use of reserves?

    "Be Right and Sit Tight" - Jesse Livermore, trading legend...


  21. #231

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Londinium
    Posts
    26,188
    Rep Power
    171
    Quote Originally Posted by Onlyforfun View Post
    And anyway, what has that to do with improper use of reserves?
    Absolutely...

    Playing in the south-east counties is no good The avon combination is where it's at! :D

    The Vegster!


    Winner of Ada's Eurovision Game 2014


  22. #232

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    herefordshire
    Posts
    5,712
    Rep Power
    66
    Is there to be yet another U-turn by Prudence Brown? It was announced on Monday by our new Prime Minister that he is ready to reverse Labour's controversial decision to allow 24-hr drinking and has "ordered a review" to see if it has encouraged excessive consumption and criminal behaviour. What a waste of time and money.

    I think this will be U-turn number seven, and he's only been there 10 weeks. It would appear that instead of running my country for me (for which, by the way, I pay him a lot of money) he is working full time correcting the cock-ups he and The Yob have made over the last ten years. He also intends to scrap the move to allow Britain's first Super Casino. Well done Pru, good thinking.

    Next on the list is the downgrading of cannabis to a class C drug. Jack Straw (our new Justice Secretary) told Channel 4 news "I was always against reducing cannabis from B to C. I thought it was wrong"

    I wonder if he had the guts to say so to the Yob at the time? :)



  23. #233

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    N Wales
    Posts
    50,310
    Rep Power
    275
    If a new company director comes in via promotion it is reorganising, if a PM does it when in a new job, it is a u-turn

    FREE Live Odds Comparison Software

    Keith Driscoll - Administrator
    Managing Director, Win2Win Limited



    Filipino UK Filipino Forum | Win2Win Racing - Free Tips


  24. #234

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    24,653
    Rep Power
    177
    typical Tory bleating... criticise them for making a mistake, and then again for trying to correct it... but then the only way they'll get much attention these days is by petty stuff like that

    My keyboard's running out of ink....


  25. #235

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    herefordshire
    Posts
    5,712
    Rep Power
    66
    Quote Originally Posted by Win2Win View Post
    If a new company director comes in via promotion it is reorganising, if a PM does it when in a new job, it is a u-turn
    No, Keith, Brown is NOT a new director. He has been there from the start and has had a hand in almost every decision that has been made in the last ten years and if he didn't agree with the Yob there was nothing to stop him threatening to resign his position as Chancellor of the Exchequer and put some restraint on some of the Yob's stupidities but he preferred to duck down below the parapet and shut up . So our Prime Minister of Conviction (his own opinion and one that we are supposed to believe) didn't have the courage of HIS convictions and stand and be counted. Now he is trying to put right the wrongs of the last ten years.

    I wonder what he would say if asked, in public, "DID YOU VOTE TO INVADE IRAQ." As he doesn't let you forget he is a man of the church with noble principles. Did he stand up to the Yob and say "YOU INVADE IRAQ AND I'M OUT" or did he subdue his convictions for the sake of his job and vote yes?

    I'll ask him the next time we meet.



  26. #236

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    24,653
    Rep Power
    177
    It'll be interesting to see how DC and co go in the polls at their conference... as they'll really only be preaching to the faithful. I think the electorate are realising we now have a PM who is a real politician of substance, unlike Cameron who will probably rely on the usual pathetic jibes at Labour instead of actually coming up with something solid enough to get back those lost voters.

    My keyboard's running out of ink....


  27. #237

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    herefordshire
    Posts
    5,712
    Rep Power
    66
    Quote Originally Posted by bigcumba View Post
    typical Tory bleating... criticise them for making a mistake, and then again for trying to correct it... but then the only way they'll get much attention these days is by petty stuff like that
    Not so much "Typical Tory Bleating" Big C. I complained at the time that they had it wrong and if I so wished I would be within my rights to say, "I told you so at the time." but what good would that do? I reckon that the last ten years have been wasted and it will take some twenty years to get back to some sort of normality.

    And now for my "piece de resistance." I have never set out to deliberately fool you Big C, or Keith, or Piggy, and not even TH, but the truth is - I AM NOT A CONSERVATIVE - I just kept my personal politics out of it and gave my honest opinion on the days events as I saw them.

    The last time I voted Tory was sometime back in the seventies, when Thatcher won her last election. When they stabbed her in the back that was it for me.

    And if your thinking "Ah! He's a Thatcher lover" then I'm in good company since my new Prime Minister thinks likewise, having invited her to Downing St.

    I'll bet he didn't ask for advice on re-decorating! :D



  28. #238

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    24,653
    Rep Power
    177
    I kind of figured you were really a Green Party man Tov... must be the tank top, wispy beard and biodegradeable sandals that gave it away...

    It's funny how you see the last 10 years as wasted and the next 20 to put it right when I saw the previous 18 years as wasted and likely to take just as long to put right...

    My keyboard's running out of ink....


  29. #239

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,948
    Rep Power
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by tovarich View Post
    The last time I voted Tory was sometime back in the seventies, when Thatcher won her last election.:D

    It is not the cards you are dealt but what you do with them that counts


  30. #240

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    herefordshire
    Posts
    5,712
    Rep Power
    66
    In an earlier post OFF was saying how our prudent Chancellor sold off our Gold Reserves for a pittance. That was going to be one of my arguments of their stupidity of not saving for a rainy day, by selling off your nest egg. But it wasn't long before I realised that I was wrong. As it turned out later they didn't need reserves, THEY'VE GOT ME. If they need (or more likely want) more money all they have to do is ask me for some more TAX.
    As from next Monday- I think - Prudence will be asking me for an EXTRA 2.35p per litre for fuel and I will pay up, I don't see that I have any choice, after all it's just another tax increase to add to the other 700 or so, but it won't induce me to vote for him at the next election. I might not feel so bad if I thought, or could see proof, that it would go towards better roads,etc but we know it won't don't we!

    So, as I say, who needs reserves?

    P.S. - Any chance of our Prime Minister giving OAP's a decent State Pension?:)



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. piggys c4 saturday stupidity
    By piggy in forum Your Daily Horse Racing Tips
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 15th August 2015, 08:54
  2. Eurotunnel Stupidity
    By Win2Win in forum Off Topic Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11th September 2008, 17:52
  3. stupidity
    By silax in forum Horse Racing Discussion, Daily Waffle, Q&A
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 18th July 2008, 11:55
  4. Men's Stupidity!
    By Win2Win in forum Humour Room
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12th September 2006, 08:55

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Free Tips | Betting Advice | UK Horse Racing Tips | Free Bets | Staking Advice | Horse Racing Systems | Horse Racing Lays | Laying System | UK Horse Racing Tips | lay betting