WildSybianRider

You've missed a chunk of the discussion, ghost.

I've read all the way through. Your excellent earlier post (from another thread, I think) doesn't - to me - sit square with what you've gone on to say.

If you acknowledge the cause and effect, is it not a higher-order good (or level of productivity, going by the thread) to tackle the cause? Whilst of course dealing with the effect, too - i.e. punishing twats. That's all Whiskey and bobbins are saying but they're getting attacked left and right for it.

But most of them weren't just rioting because they'd got a bum deal in life, they were rioting because they are absolute twats

Is there no room for any cause and effect there, though?

There's a world of difference between 'excuses' and 'reasons'. I think ninety per cent of this argument between Whiskey, bobbins on the one side and yourself, Pitcos et al on the other is over this distinction. Looking for the reasons behind all this is surely more productive? Of course they're being twats. But stopping your critical analysis at that point is just fighting the symptoms. The cure for HIV won't come from finding out how best to manage AIDS, will it?

Oooooh, the misanthrophy. It hurts. It huuuuuuuuurts.

Your El Hijo del Bill Hicks bullshit in this thread is embarrassing. Fuckoff.

Think you need to re-read what's been said, dickbrain.

(or prance off and ignore the thread like you usually do when you're wrong.)

Towards what purpose?

I'm not saying they are intentionally antagonistic. Saying that they can be perceived as such and not just by a black drug dealer crying racism when he's caught with dope on the table.

That's not what I said. More that stop and searches have a staggeringly low rate of conviction and - allied with the statistics Whiskey already posted that a disproportionate number of searches are of minorities - I don't think it's a stretch to say they can easily be seen as antagonistic towards (particularly socioethnic) communities. Efforts to reduce recorded data about stop and search powers certainly don't help.

Cheers johnnyboy. So patrol cars are just stopping the people behaving suspiciously or acting on gathered intelligence rather than racial profiling, then.

That's what they're meant to do. But the legislation is hardly going to say "stop all niggers".

If you can link to a news article then yes. I'm going to say now that any "I also heard he...." will result in suspensions.

boom

Tuesday I watched Deep Blue Sea. No irony, no punchline, I just fucking love that film. Reckon I could write a John Darnielle-style 500 reasons I love it. Could probably manage a hundred on LL Cool J's character alone.

Indeed. Such a renewable and non-finite economic foundation for independence cannot possibly go wrong.

If Scots are smart (and I doubt that many of them will be able to see through the propaganda that we'll undoubtedly see when the time comes) they'll opt for independence and get ourselves as far away from these jokers as possible.

Good luck without the massive Wminster subsidies that pay for your prescriptions and University fees

... which is, of course, what I was saying.

Melanie Phillips was amazing. We all want to help destitute, starving people abroad blah blah blah, so lets completely stop helping them in any way.

Unless it's the poor, defenceless, can't-catch-a-break Israelis.

Nadine Dorries, the gift that keeps on giving.

When AV loses and the boundary changes kick in, I almost hope this type of lunatic legislation can get through; I'll invest all my money in dominatrix clubs, treatments for STDs and sexual assault therapy. I'll clean up when a generation of sexually repressed and confused kids all start raping each other.

Interesting thread. In terms of awfulness, I reckon it goes -

Affliction t-shirts / Biffy Clyro (TIE)

Dennis Pennis

wrestling t-shirts

I rarely wear graphic t-shirts anyway but I guess some reslo ones can be cool. Either way, the people arguing on the last page are both essentially social lepers.

Noted oppressor of conservative views, the Guardian CiF, ran an article by Tory MP David Willetts, today.

They would have been doing him a favour censoring him, as it may be the worst thing I've ever read on that site. And I read the football section.

Like I've said, he's trying to make a name for himself. Can anybody actually remember anything about him or anything he posted before he became a politics thread mong? It just all happened a bit too quickly and overwhelmingly for him to be anything more than a complete WUM.

I might be wrong but he's SharkWrestling, right? If so, I think he used to work on the same floor as (and trade tapes with) the UKFF's most left-leaning ever poster, Famous Mortimer. Which must have been fun for them.

Yoghurt,

I really should stop replying to obvious troll but clearly a lot of your real views seep through your lame reaction-seeking. Congrats on the first but it only emphasises your central problem: you see the country as a business to be managed towards a bottom line, rather than as a nation state. Myopic in the extreme. I'm no Marxist but your false consciousness is really sad.

Happ,

it was me that (more or less) asked "how can you enjoy the Wire and have the political views that you do". I've avoided responding to you in the politics threads as people only get more entrenched in their views in these type of debates. The Wire thing struck me, though. You're right - it is a great piece of entertainment telly and can be enjoyed as such by people of any political persuasion. But what made it so significant - to me, at least - was that it *is* a polemic against capitalism whether you like that fact or not. A polemic that is played out not in a textbook or essay but in real (well, fake) people's lives and their struggles against the effects of a society constructed around raw numbers.

I didn't say that. The priority is (should be) to encourage a national economic recovery and, when it reaches a cyclical surplus, *then* worry about paying off the deficit. It's not as though someone is sending out bailiffs to repossess the UK. Going on a mad frenzy screaming AHHHH DEFICIT will send the country back into recession.

EDIT - that's to Van D. Yoghurt stfu your BTEC in business doesn't really apply to global economics.

A big sovereign nation isn't your local cornershop. Running at a deficit is a part of modern international macroeconomics. The deficit is a handy excuse for the Conservatives to impose their ideology.

re: income tax. Kenny's half nailed it with VAT but beyond that, the couple of hundred quid a low-salary family makes won't make up for no longer being able to send their kid to a Sure Start centre, or for reduced standards of policing in their area. It's classic small c conservativism; that the relationship between state and individual is just about cash money. It's easy to feel that way when you can afford to live in nice safe areas and send your kids to the best schools.

What I don't understand is your avatar. Did you not get that programme at all? Or is it intended as a tribute to the system that keeps Bubbles in the gutter selling t-shirts for a couple of dollars?

Were you not old enough to vote in 97?

SHIT! Can I withdraw my entry about Lexx then, I don't need no lawyers on my ass.

"You really don't know what to make of me do you."

You are either a pretty entertaining troll or a more sophisticated version of Happ Hazzard. After your amazing line about turnover vs. profit yesterday, it seems only slightly more sophisticated. Regardless, your faux-arrogant posturing is indicative of some real insecurities. Not much to make of you, really. There's a few of you in every consultancy-type business in the country, clinging onto the ideals of free marketeering because they think one day they'll be top of the tree, when the sad reality is they'll hit (at best) 50k pa and get their gold watch thirty years down the line. Quite sad, in a way.

after reading your posts in the tranny thread and re: charities, pat, sorry for helling you in the past. You really make me sad, though

Loki, work comp won't let me open the doc you linked a few pages. Do the figures quoted for banks' contributions include tax and nat. insurance from their payroll? It's only corporation tax (etc.) that is relevant - banks claiming the tax PAID BY THEIR EMPLOYEES in their figures is disgraceful. Although obv... this only emphasises your point.