horsefly

Last word? Never!

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/brexit-has-reduced-uk-tax-receipts-by-40-billion-a-year-340864/ Brexit has reduced UK tax receipts by £40 billion a year Now what was the size of that hole the Tories blasted into our economy? We could have given the nurses and paramedics their justified pay rises and still had billions to put into NHS improvement. Perhaps they should put this figure onto the side of a bus, although, of course, you won't be able to recruit a driver to drive it now that Brexit has lost us willing EU citizens to do such work.

You're very welcome! You're such a rare visitor these days I was beginning to think you had passed on. I now realise you have been making a noble attempt to keep your five-year old joke as fresh as possible, with less frequent repetition. Perhaps if you do locate Bill you should ask him to lend you a new joke, I distinctly remember him saying he had been a stand-up comedian once upon a time. I'm sure he would be happy to oblige.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/trump-news-live-irs-failed-to-audit-president-s-tax-returns-for-two-years-house-committee-says/ar-AA15vtXD?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=31cdf3bee3bf46e6ae948516d3bf6bc2 Trump news – live: IRS failed to audit president’s tax returns for two years, House Committee says

Priti Patel makes herself a fairy magicking up deportations in bizarre Christmas card So far the government have given the Rwandan government £140m for the promise of taking 200 asylum seekers from our shores. Perhaps Preeti can magic up the billions we will require to send all the other asylum seekers there too. And while she's at it, can she magic up a way of preventing those asylum seekers immediately leaving those Rwandan "hotels" and beginning their boat journeys all over again. Best of all, could she instead make a new year's resolution to keep her foul mouth shut and permanently eradicate her hateful and malign influence on UK politics.

I can't recommend more highly the Reith lecture given by the expert on Russian issues, Fiona Hill, on Radio 4 this morning. Hopefully it will be uploaded immediately. Extremely insightful, particularly on the issue of the Russian political and cultural assumption that absence of fear requires complete absence of danger. This, she thinks, is the true explanation of why Putin has decided the eradication of Ukraine as an independent country is essential for Russian safety. Really worth listening to.

You see him everywhere, so let us know.

Who knows! Buendia took a long time to establish himself in the first team that first year. I think we've seen signs that both players have talent, it remains to be seen whether they can develop that in a way reminiscent of the wee Argy.

Despite the government claims that there are no shortages of medical supplies I now have personal evidence to the contrary. Just popped into the GP dispensary to pick up a prescription that was meant to be available on/after December 9th. Neither of the drugs had arrived.

My mother and her sisters and friends lived in rural Norfolk through the war. They encountered many prisoners of war that were sent to work on the farms. They formed friendships that not only lasted a lifetime, involving visits to each other's countries, but friendships that were passed on to the next generations in those families.

You need to learn the difference between an answer, and an answer you don't happen to like because it shows your position to be dreadfully flawed. I can't be bothered to engage with pointless repetition of the same obvious points any longer, you will never understand. So I'll leave you to ponder why there isn't a single board of any football club in the country that doesn't understand the importance of maximising their income in order to secure financial viability and squad development. Name me a single one of our Championship competitors whose strategy involves intentionally avoiding promotion because they fear humiliation in the following season more than they recognise the importance of bringing £200m into their club. You can't do that because not a single club would be so foolish. But feel free to ring around the boards and come back on here and tell me which club agrees with your plan.

Indeed! but falsehoods always need challenging and that was precisely what I did by providing evidence and argument. Sadly, LYB could only respond with a stream of vile abuse and refusal to engage in genuine debate. The example of his claims about Starmer's position are classic LYB misinformation to serve his own ends. It would have been simpler for him to acknowledge that Starmer is not anti-PR but simply against introducing it to the next Labour manifesto as a "priority" (for precisely the sort of reasons I have raised). He could then have tried to make an argument for why PR reform would justifiably be more of a priority than dealing with the other crises confronting the country, but he didn't do that. An interesting debate could have then ensued but instead he attempted to short cut by lying about what Starmer actually said and throwing disgraceful abuse at me to deflect from that manipulation. Exactly the same happened in his claims about Sturgeon's speech. For debate to be possible there has to be at minimum an agreement (tacit or explicit) to represent with veracity the views of those whose views are being discussed. On Sunday I posted the following in an attempt at conciliation, in the interest of focusing discussion on the issues rather than personal attacks and manipulation of evidence. Obviously it was foolish of me to think he wouldn't simply ignore my plea: Worthwhile debate on these issues is only genuinely possible if we are prepared to represent the views expressed by others with veracity. If you wish to add your own claims about PR and trust to Sturgeon's views that's fine; but own those additions as your views and not claim that they were made by Sturgeon. Sometimes in our earnest commitment to a cause we read into a statement something that simply isn't there, and I respectfully suggest that's what you have done here. We have all done it, and it doesn't mean we have acted in malice in falling foul of such an error. I get that you are an enthusiastic supporter of PR, so am I. I get that you are genuinely committed to the eradication of corruption from our political system, so am I. I get that you want to see trust restored to our political system, so do I. Where we differ is in our beliefs about the extent to which PR would reform our political system. I believe it to be a necessary reform to advance the cause of genuine democratic representation of the different political voices of the nation. We clearly agree on that point. We clearly disagree over the issue concerning the power of PR to restore trust in UK politics. I look to the history of European countries that use PR and see no evidence whatsoever that it has a better record than FPTP on reducing corruption and increasing trust. Thus for me, PR is a necessary reform in regenerating participation in our democracy, but one that will require additional and separate reforms to parliamentary processes to enshrine transparency and integrity if trust is to be restored. There is much we could usefully discuss about the reforms required alongside the campaign for PR and greater representation. So perhaps we could do just that.

Yep! And where do you think the money has come from to ensure we have kept those assets under ownership, and indeed improved them to PL standard (see the comments of previous incoming transfers for the importance of that)? Perhaps you haven't examined "Cov for reference" closely enough. Lack of their own ground saw a number of their games postponed at the start of the season, and threatened actual exclusion. Their manager has very recently bemoaned the fact that their impoverished position leaves them unable to prevent other wealthier teams poaching all their talent (see the fan website). The "survival" of Coventry without any real estate assets, and permanently having to sell off their best talent, is not a model NCFC should follow.

Sheer genius! Not remotely absurd to claim, "it's never a case of not bothering to gain promotion" while at the same time claiming we should spend several years in the Championship developing the youth team players. Perhaps we shouldn't mention that it would be a team of young players who will have had no experience of Pl football, far less so than the teams previously promoted. And let's not mention that after several years in the pauper league we wouldn't have the money to pay for anyone of genuine quality and experience of the PL to augment our "promoted" youth squad. Perhaps we also shouldn't mention that we will have had to sell off the really talented youth players to cover for the loss of PL money each season, nor that the vast majority of youth team players don't even develop into Championship quality players, let alone PL standard. And for God's sake don't mention that half the Carrow Road crowd were calling for Farke's dismissal after a year and a bit of mid-table obscurity, and he would never have been given several years by the CR crowd to develop a youth team. Neither mention that Farke had to sell off Maddison, but was able to bring in "undiscovered" talent like Buendia to compensate, something that we now wouldn't be able to do because of the Brexit rules. I could go on, but let's just not mention any more complications and just accept that anyone with even the slightest understanding of football (which excludes all the current boards of every single club outside the PL, who would rip your arm off for the rewards of promotion irrespective of the following season's prospects) couldn't possibly fail to understand the magnificence of your business plan.

You would hope so YF. Unless of course the PR system had resulted in a Tory/UKIP coalition. After all the EU elections saw a tidal wave of UKIP MEPs elected under a proportional system. But let's not get distracted by that speculation. The reality is that the electoral system is irrelevant to the Brexit shi*t storm the country must somehow now resolve.

That's an unforgiveable exaggeration Mr Gunn. No way are their knobs that big.

The current electoral system is entirely irrelevant to the Brexit issue. It was a coalition government that legislated for the Brexit referendum, and it was LibDem Party policy for many years prior to that to have such a referendum on EU membership.

Indeed! And could you imagine Starmer saying to the electorate at the next election, "I know you are all suffering from the dire and dreadful consequences of the cost of living crisis, and I know you are seriously worried about losing your homes, putting food into your children's' mouths, the imminent collapse of the NHS, and education, and social care etc, etc. However, I have decided we should spend the first 2-3 years of government re-running another Brexit referendum, then the next few years negotiating with the EU for re-entry. I can think of no better way to unify the country and resolve the current sh*it storm you are all facing". What a brilliant election winning strategy that would be.

Truly sad! A singer who used his talents to make genuine social commentary that has had lasting influence. Hopefully he will inspire the new generation of young musicians to confront the dire circumstances of society that they have inherited too.

Ok! You win! Your masterplan is clearly genius beyond the perception of every board of every football club in the Championship. I look forward to hearing how Webber gets on when he announces to our board that we will no longer attempt to gain promotion and stick £200m in our coffers but instead plan to hang around mid-table for the next few years. Why no one at NCFC have had such a stroke of genius defies belief, but I'm sure the penny will drop when you give them a call.

Pathetic! You did not previously claim that Starmer is "concretely" against PR "just for the next manifesto", you claimed he (and indeed the entire Labour leadership) is opposed to PR full stop. Ruling out PR from the next manifesto does not remotely, under any perverted interpretation of the English language, mean or imply that he is against PR. Attempt to manipulate your previous lie as much as you like, it remains patently obvious that you are lying. Otherwise, when I tell my partner that painting the bathroom is not a priority next year I would imply that I am concretely against painting the bathroom at any point in the future. Truly an absurd conclusion! I have already explained why Starmer would consider it electoral suicide to make a pledge to introduce it to the next manifesto but you are too disingenuous to attempt a reply to the actual points made. As regards the rest of your post, I have no intention to report its vile content to the moderators. I'm delighted that you have revealed your true nature for all to see. I have no regrets about any of the PMs I sent you, you piece of utter scum. How many times had you called me a liar before that yon here, you verminous piece of sh*t? As I said at the time, if you wanted to report it, I'm sure any moderators are smart enough to put it in context, you second-rate waste of space. Must make your family proud!

missing

So, nothing to say about your lies that Starmer is "concretely" against PR as opposed to what he actually said which was that it is not a "priority" for the next manifesto. You don't have the remotest interest in genuine debate. Shock horror, Sturgeon doesn't like Labour or the Tories. Just how do you get from that to your made up crap about her claiming PR would resolve "trust issues". As for use of "hyperbolic adjectives", do you not read your own posts. Perhaps I should publish the stream of four-letter vitriolic abuse you posted to my private message box.

The change in the England team has been phenomenal. What I found particularly striking today was the commentary; the discussion was about whether England would knock off the required 160 runs by the end of play or would require a few more overs in the morning. If this had been a year ago we would have all been seriously doubting the probability of England standing much of a chance of making those runs on a dry, spinning Pakistani wicket.

You really are remarkably ignorant. Starmer said PR is NOT A PRIORITY for the next manifesto. What is it about simple English language that you find so difficult? "your pontificating about the lack of the word 'trust' in Sturgeon's piece in an unparalleled piece of pedantry" And there you go again with your oh so obvious attempt to deflect from the fact that you lie about what people actually say. I merely pointed out that Sturgeon never used the word trust in her speech and never made any claim that PR would restore trust. She's not stupid enough to make such a claim given the huge amounts of corruption that has been exposed in countries using a PR system of election. Sensibly she stuck to the obvious merits of PR as providing a greater voice for different viewpoints. It doesn't get much more Trumpian than complaining that someone is a "pedant" for simply pointing out the truth of what has actually been said in response to another person's attempt to distort the reality for their own ends. How very sad to continually resort to such pathetic tactics.