Terror Attacks

[Traf]

Tommy Robinson on with Piers Morgan in the morning.

 

Interesting.

 

Interesting if you like massive cunts, I suppose.

[Youri McAnespie]

Has the hot weather got you back on the White Lightning?

 

Norman Prince is one of the Horton Weavers, the last band from Bolton to make it big. He's a Wanderer, pleasant enough if you bend his ear in the Platinum Suite and AFAIK not a rent boy.

I meant Normam Prince - a well-known arsemonger from old London town, mixed the bummer up that's all, it was Ian Thorpe...

 

Anyhow, I know the other Prince, the weaver, years ago a mate of mine, who worked at the Wanderers at the time, used to describe in most ungentlemanlike language what he'd like to get up to with Norman's daughter. The bounder, his identity can be revealed, at the right price, if you're reading Mr Prince (Norman, not Normam) and want satisfaction in the matter.

Edited June 19, 2017 by Youri McAnespie

[radcliffe white]

Interesting if you like massive cunts, I suppose.

i know piers Morgan is massive cunt isn't he

[Alf Hartigan]

Presume Traf meant the pair of em to be fair

[bolty58]

Yes. But the point is Cameron wanted to deregulate further. It would have been worse. Blaming Labour was a nonsense. As nonsensical as blaming May for the terrorist attacks. I mean she has made decisions that may have contributed to difficulties amongst the emergency services but doesn't mean she is at fault.

 

 

Listen comrade, I have been reading your 'tacit support' for Labour posts for a while now so just take some advice from someone who has lived longer.

 

Throughout the last century and the beginning of this, socialist governments around the world, not just in the UK, have consistently spent beyond their means and subsequent conservative governments have had to come in and sort things out, in the process earning the blatantly unfair moniker of 'the nasty party'. This does not only happen in the UK I assure you.

 

It is simply the natural cycle of socialism v. conservatism and won't change.

 

You can try to score political points by picking up on one specific event or issue but the bottom line is that time and time again this cycle has been repeated - i.e. Labour fucks the economy, Conservatives have to do the hard yards in rectifying said fuck ups.

 

Once you grasp this, our duopoly starts to make more sense.

[Guest]

Listen comrade, I have been reading your 'tacit support' for Labour posts for a while now so just take some advice from someone who has lived longer.

 

Throughout the last century and the beginning of this, socialist governments around the world, not just in the UK, have consistently spent beyond their means and subsequent conservative governments have had to come in and sort things out, in the process earning the blatantly unfair moniker of 'the nasty party'. This does not only happen in the UK I assure you.

 

It is simply the natural cycle of socialism v. conservatism and won't change.

 

You can try to score political points by picking up on one specific event or issue but the bottom line is that time and time again this cycle has been repeated - i.e. Labour fucks the economy, Conservatives have to do the hard yards in rectifying said fuck ups.

 

Once you grasp this, our duopoly starts to make more sense.

 

Good points, Bolty, but pointless making it to some folks.

 

I fear we might have to go through the most left wing government for this generation to see the light.

[Zico]

Good points, Bolty, but pointless making it to some folks.

 

I fear we might have to go through the most left wing government for this generation to see the light.

See the light or repeat the cycle?

[mickbrown]

Good points, Bolty, but pointless making it to some folks.

 

I fear we might have to go through the most left wing government for this generation to see the light.

 

Funny how Labour's fuck ups coincide with global downturns.

 

They really must be shit to bring the whole world's economy down each time.

Edited June 20, 2017 by mickbrown

[birch-chorley]

Perhaps the Conservatives should learn their lesson then

 

No point 'sorting' the economy out if everyone gets so pissed off they bomb you out and it starts over again

 

Completely pointless

 

In 2010 George Osborne said he would clear the defecit by 2015 with huge cuts. Gordon Brown said that wouldn't work and would cause a double dip recession, he favoured a slower more long term approach to cutting the budget and bringing the defecit down.

 

Sure as Eggs are Eggs the double dip recession came and Osborne changed his target from 2015 to 2020. The Conservative party has now pushed it back even further showing that actually it wasn't as important as Osborne was making out - it would appear Brown was right and Osborne wrong

 

And the latter has managed to fuck people off so much that we have a swell of anti establishment votes that are taking us out of the EU and potentially putting a marxists in control, brilliant

 

Unintended consequences but shows a lack of foresight from the government over the last seven years

Edited June 20, 2017 by birch-chorley

[Traf]

i know piers Morgan is massive cunt isn't he

 

 

Presume Traf meant the pair of em to be fair

 

Alf would be correct, which is why I said cuntS

 

As much as I loathe Morgan, I feel he'd not be the biggest cunt on that show today.

[radcliffe white]

Alf would be correct, which is why I said cuntS

 

As much as I loathe Morgan, I feel he'd not be the biggest cunt on that show today.

shit show tbh two men talking over each other and Suzanna looking pretty

[L/H White]

i fucking hate that

 

why ask a question if you wont let them answer. same with paxman

 

utter cunts

[kent_white]

Listen comrade, I have been reading your 'tacit support' for Labour posts for a while now so just take some advice from someone who has lived longer.

 

Throughout the last century and the beginning of this, socialist governments around the world, not just in the UK, have consistently spent beyond their means and subsequent conservative governments have had to come in and sort things out, in the process earning the blatantly unfair moniker of 'the nasty party'. This does not only happen in the UK I assure you.

 

It is simply the natural cycle of socialism v. conservatism and won't change.

 

You can try to score political points by picking up on one specific event or issue but the bottom line is that time and time again this cycle has been repeated - i.e. Labour fucks the economy, Conservatives have to do the hard yards in rectifying said fuck ups.

 

Once you grasp this, our duopoly starts to make more sense.

Not true according to this analysis. In fact this suggests that in actual fact it's the other way around.

 

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/03/13/the-conservatives-have-been-the-biggest-borrowers-over-the-last-70-years/

[madthatter]

Not true according to this analysis. In fact this suggests that in actual fact it's the other way around.

 

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/03/13/the-conservatives-have-been-the-biggest-borrowers-over-the-last-70-years/

 

Facts, Kent . . . ?!  Whatever next?

 

I'm no financial expert but I imagine it's one of those things that could be spun in a few directions if one was so inclined?

 

I also see he's the author of 'Corbynomics' . . . not gonna be a popular read on here 

Edited June 20, 2017 by madthatter

[birch-chorley]

Not true according to this analysis. In fact this suggests that in actual fact it's the other way around.

 

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/03/13/the-conservatives-have-been-the-biggest-borrowers-over-the-last-70-years/

In fairness though Kent, if you ask any Corbynite about the Blair / Brown years they would just tell you it's Thatcher without the dress, anyone who supported Blair is in fact a Tory apparently

 

If you took the 12 Blair / Brown years out of the total 28 Labour years then run the numbers again I'd be interested to see the outcome

 

The plan as laid out by Corbyn would certainly be a step change from the fiscal responsibility of those Blair / Brown days

[bolty58]

Not true according to this analysis. In fact this suggests that in actual fact it's the other way around.

 

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/03/13/the-conservatives-have-been-the-biggest-borrowers-over-the-last-70-years/

 

 

All depends if you accept the analysis.

 

I prefer to rely on my own life experiences.

[kent_white]

Facts, Kent . . . ?! Whatever next?

 

I'm no financial expert but I imagine it's one of those things that could be spun in a few directions if one was so inclined?

True - it's an analysis after all - but the author does appear to go out of his way to account for anomalies and permeations which were outside of government control - I'll keep my eyes open for alternative analysis.

 

This one seems to pointing in largely the same direction as well....

 

http://www.primeeconomics.org/articles/taq30tk04ljnvpyfos059pp0w7gnpe

[Tonge moor green jacket]

No reason to dispute them, but would be interesting to see what the total earnings per government were.

[bolty58]

No reason to dispute them, but would be interesting to see what the total earnings per government were.

 

 

I have. Brother Kent will only seek out the ones which support his particular leftist view of things.

 

Worse than the Stasi yon mon (  in truth my favourite youghourt knitting bedwetter on here).

[kent_white]

All depends if you accept the analysis.

 

I prefer to rely on my own life experiences.

Annecdotal evidence then?

[kent_white]

I have. Brother Kent will only seek out the ones which support his particular leftist view of things.

 

Worse than the Stasi yon mon ( in truth my favourite youghourt knitting bedwetter on here).

Like I said - I'll keep my eyes open for an alternative analysis! :-)

[bolty58]

Like I said - I'll keep my eyes open for an alternative analysis! :-)

 

Or even analyses.

[Tonge moor green jacket]

In fairness most of us on here would have a similar approach, one way or another.

 

Frankly, I can't be arsed to read the full report, as a subject its just too massive to really comprehend all this economic stuff.

[famouswanderer]

To me it just seemed like Tommy Robinson was stating facts, and Piers Morgan didn't have much to come back at him with so he decided he wouldn't let him speak from then on

[Guest]

In fairness most of us on here would have a similar approach, one way or another.

 

Frankly, I can't be arsed to read the full report, as a subject its just too massive to really comprehend all this economic stuff.

 

Well read the headlines then. Better to look at something factual than someone's 'life experiences'.