1902

That I'm definitely not going to dispute.

I'm not quite sure why? I never assumed that news presenters don't masturbate and I never assumed none of them did over some form of ****. I also don't assume that of my doctor, my MP or any other position of responsibility. If he is buying it from a consenting adult then it's none of my business and it doesn't make them less credible as a news reporter It may not be many people's cup of tea but it doesn't make him incompetent.

As is proven by employment stats from the 60s, when the UK had an unemployment rate of 1.5%. To all intents and purposes that was full employment. Nowadays we are at 3.4% officially, though it's so distorted by people taking involuntary early retirement and the underemployed that it's essentially a meaningless statistic.

All I know is that I have seniority by 20 years.

He doesn't give a ****. He would bomb Vladivostok if it kept him in power.

I was on benefits for 3 weeks. I have absolutely zero shame over that and would have none if I had been for 6 months. "Care workers and others dealing with the vulnerable and with children need to be properly vetted and trained, unless you think we should let just anybody take care of your kids?" That's not an actual argument, that's just an attempt to ignore my point by pointing to predators. "Vegetable pickers are required for most of the year." Even if this was true 'Most of the year' doesn't pay unless it's for substantially more than minimum wage. "Employers will pay what it takes to secure a worker." Well that's not actually been the case since minimum wage legislation arrived. As for "What often prevents securing a worker is the government subsidising someone to sit at home idle all day. If it can't compete with a conservative governments benefit scheme in an age of austerity then I think my statement that pay is too low is self evident. "Wrong. The biggest tax cut of all was to reduce income tax rate from 20 to 19%, which benefits those on lower incomes the most." Which was progressive, doesn't stop the fact that there was also a massive drop in high earners tax rates which should have gone to low earners (except tbh that would still be inflationary. A tax incentive to increase pension contributions would have been the best option).

Because employers don't pay enough, the jobs aren't always where people's homes are and lots of low level jobs require qualifications which are costly in time and money to get. Also if you vegetable pick (which is seasonal) you then have to navigate the deliberately Byzantine benefits claim system when you lose that job when the season is over. Also your favourite party could have done something about this, by passing tax cuts to the lowest paid, therefore making work pay better, but they didn't. They gave it to the richest.

Except badger just proved that it isn't hard evidence.....

"One wonders what sort of colonialist connective tissue exists with non Nato Ukraine that forces this little remnant of an empire to fall into boots that are far too big." I think there's supposed to be a relevant point somewhere in this...

True, it's really a case of US interests also aligning with the ethical case in this instance. Though tbh I don't think it's in US interests for this to stretch out. It's in their interests to win at the lowest financial cost and shorter wars are cheaper.

I really love the kind of poster who doesn't realise that plenty of people think Biden is crap, however most on here still believe he is preferably to Trump. Which says a lot for their chosen horse. Not of course that it's even our country. Though some act like we are already the 51st state by constantly trying to drag their politics and culture wars to the UK.

He's back!!! God I'd missed the attrocity denying and genocide apologism and I was really struggling to understand the world without your enlightened input of "what about Iraq and NATO MADE Russia want a sphere of influence". Could you direct me to some Craig Murray articles so that I can finally see the trees for the wood just like you?

It's possible but: "Rather suspicious that the explosion takes place right under the nose of the security camera, what are the odds. If it was a truck bomb, how did it evade Russian security." This implies that the Russians have shown competence at any point during this conflict.

Fight would probably be a very kind way of describing my likely performance in a military setting. I know a man who served in a foreign army and on his 7th day managed to blow half his own foot off. It took him a very long time to persuade a military tribunal that he had genuinely accidently shot himself in the foot and wasn't avoiding service. In the end, the army decided he was indeed 'an idiot' and that was the end of it. I feel this would be about my level.

Exactly. The only way this happens is yet another drastic miscalculation from Putin. Who unfortunately is on a bit of a role on that front. I'm not saying he won't do it, I'm just saying that it's often categorised as in some way a disaster for Ukraine and the West (which it would be) but anything but a larger disaster for Russia. We all have to remember that Putin would like to survive, so would most of his lieutenants. The Russians also know that a full scale nuclear exchange would probably result in all our destructions and the use of small yield 'tactical nukes' is just a blunt tool to do what smart weapons can kind of do anyway.