  |
 EU/Brexit Discussion Thread III, Here we go again. |
| Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum |
 Jun 14 2018, 07:29 PM
Post
#161
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812 User: 17,376 
  
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 14 2018, 02:53 PM)  It depends on what kind of stories you want to read. If I wanted to read ones on how 'criminals are not really bad people, just victims of circumstance', then I would read the Gaurdian, OTOH, If I wanted to read ones on how 'criminals are really bad people, and should be locked up for a very long time', then I would read the Mail. No prizes for guessing which I prefer.  Then you should read Private Eye. They are very good at pointing out which powerful people should be locked up, and which ones lie and bend the rules. Those who steal millions from the taxpayer are worse than those who steal a bag of crisps from Tesco. Sorry, but they are. The daily Mail chooses to focus on the latter and is part of the former. Read Private Eye and find out for yourself. For instance, before the editor of The Daily Mail (now "moved on") knew that Stephen Lawrence's father had painted one of his houses the Mail spent 4 years slagging off his bereaved parents in headlines, calling them and others calling for Justice "militants" using the "tragedy" for their own "causes". Then when it became clear the racists who murdered him for no reason were guilty they had a change of heart and claim to have supported the cause of justice. But they still took attacked black parents trying to get the white murderers put in prison where they belong, choosing to believe the police who were lying through their nasty little teeth about his parents and the culprits. So, if you are looking for justice don't try preaching to me about the moral-free Daily Mail and their ongoing campaigns of lies. PS the new editor is a Remainer. Looking forward to hear your views on forthcoming Brexit articles. |
 |
 
|
|
Jun 15 2018, 05:50 AM
Post
#162
|
|
 Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Queef of Skreech @ Jun 14 2018, 03:15 PM) What classes as a criminal? Tory shading dealings? Lies about Brexit? Should we lock up the Tories for a very long time? What does jail do - is it a productive part of society? Does it benefit society? Or is it a tool to punish the poor and give more power to authorities? Jail benefits society by preventing criminals from committing crimes against the public, at least for a while. The idea of 'punishing the poor' cuts no ice with me, simply because there are plenty of other people in similarly bad circumstances who do *not* commit crimes - so if they can resist it, there's no excuse for others not to! QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 14 2018, 08:29 PM) PS the new editor is a Remainer. Looking forward to hear your views on forthcoming Brexit articles. Any noticeable change in editorial stance will be reflected in the nature of the comments posted, assuming they do reach publication - about 1/3 to one half of mine fail to make it, despite being significantly toned down from what I post here. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 15 2018, 06:56 AM
Post
#163
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 15 2018, 06:50 AM) Any noticeable change in editorial stance will be reflected in the nature of the comments posted, assuming they do reach publication - about 1/3 to one half of mine fail to make it, despite being significantly toned down from what I post here. good to see you didnt comment on the quoted evidence that the Daily Mail does NOT headline justice, it headlines revenge and racism. The editorial stance will be reflected in the sort of political headlines they choose, and comments, and elections. So, I repeat, is a billionaire who dodges paying tax and moves their company into tax havens to avoid paying tax levels we all have to pay, or abroad, or lives abroad despite imposing non-EU status on the rest of us via propaganda more or less of a criminal than someone who nicks a bag of crisps from Tesco? Which of them deserves to be put in prison? But back on Brexit: May has decided the NHS will get 4 billion a year extra as a Brexit Bonus. That's 77 million a week, quite a bit short of the promised £350m a week. This was promised on the side of a bus, cast in writing large and on the media week after week. It was the central principle of the whole campaign. f***ing liars. This compares with annual rises of about 1.2% or below inflation on a budget of 125 billion or thereabouts, so say for example I make that about 1 billion short per year every year inflation is higher. After 4 years that means a shortfall of about 10 billion, despite extra pressures due to older generations living longer, or about 4 billion a year. So really, what May has done is saved 10billion and reinstated the lost 4 billion in one fell swoop, but with no promise that this will continue beyond Brexit year in terms of annual rises keeping up with inflation. I'm taking a very simplistic view on NHS finances here, but that's how I see it. So, no extra cash for the NHS at all. Nothing. Certainly not a single boost of £350 million times 52 to the annual budget. Thanks liars. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 15 2018, 07:03 AM
Post
#164
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812 User: 17,376
|
Meanwhile Corbyn has made it clear he wants a Hard Brexit in Parliamentary votes this week. Labour Remain-supporters please note that this is the logical result of his entire political career. Here's a good summary:
https://www.markpack.org.uk/153744/jeremy-corbyn-brexit/ enjoy. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 15 2018, 08:11 AM
Post
#165
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 15 2018, 07:56 AM) good to see you didnt comment on the quoted evidence that the Daily Mail does NOT headline justice, it headlines revenge and racism. Well, I assumed your comment was rhetorical. QUOTE So, I repeat, is a billionaire who dodges paying tax and moves their company into tax havens to avoid paying tax levels we all have to pay, or abroad, or lives abroad despite imposing non-EU status on the rest of us via propaganda more or less of a criminal than someone who nicks a bag of crisps from Tesco? Which of them deserves to be put in prison? Your above scenario would be called a crime by almost everyone, but what about the issue of tax avoidance - legally using measures to avoid tax? QUOTE But back on Brexit: May has decided the NHS will get 4 billion a year extra as a Brexit Bonus. That's 77 million a week, quite a bit short of the promised £350m a week. This was promised on the side of a bus, cast in writing large and on the media week after week. It was the central principle of the whole campaign. f***ing liars. But what Remainers love to 'forget', is that it was exposed *before* the vote, therefore anyone who was undecided before the campaign would be unlikely to make their final decision on what they knew to be a falsehood. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 15 2018, 07:11 PM
Post
#166
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 15 2018, 09:11 AM) Well, I assumed your comment was rhetorical. When was the last time anyone was put in prison for merely stealing a bag of crisps? Your above scenario would be called a crime by almost everyone, but what about the issue of tax avoidance - legally using measures to avoid tax? But what Remainers love to 'forget', is that it was exposed *before* the vote, therefore anyone who was undecided before the campaign would be unlikely to make their final decision on what they knew to be a falsehood. 1. It wsn't rhetorical, I was engaging you in debate... 2. Tax avoidance using legal measures didnt stop Jimmy Carr, Take That & co getting named and shamed. The irony of politicians slagging off celebrities for doing what they do isnt lost on me. To me they are the same, legal and illegal, it's just politicians get to write their own laws to help themselves (quite literally) while Joe Public isn't allowed to stick his savings or wages in offshore accounts, or call themselves a limited company - unless they are being head-hunted of course. 3. Bag of crisps? In the USA it's 3 strikes and your in jail for decades. So yes, 3 bags of crisps on 3 occasions and the State pays a fortune for less than a dollar. Ok you didnt state you meant UK justice, but what constitutes justice isn't the same throughout the world, so it is at the very least arguable that your very black and white responses need careful re-assessment because I gave perfectly accurate examples of the Daily Hate NOT supporting justice in favour of racism and injustice. Just because it's in a newspaper (any newspaper) doesn't mean something is true, but some are much better at getting it right than others. 4. It said £350m on the bus and thats what everyone remembers. No-one quotes £250m as claimed accurately by the Remain side. Boris & his minions continued to claim £350m was the accurate figure, and that farmers & co getting the rebate didn't exist. It's all moot anyway, had they put the correct figure on the bus they would still have lied about giving it to the NHS, just that the lie would have been mathematically accurate rather than a lie based on another lie. Still a lie. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 16 2018, 05:58 AM
Post
#167
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 15 2018, 08:11 PM) 1. It wsn't rhetorical, I was engaging you in debate... 2. Tax avoidance using legal measures didnt stop Jimmy Carr, Take That & co getting named and shamed. The irony of politicians slagging off celebrities for doing what they do isnt lost on me. To me they are the same, legal and illegal, it's just politicians get to write their own laws to help themselves (quite literally) while Joe Public isn't allowed to stick his savings or wages in offshore accounts, or call themselves a limited company - unless they are being head-hunted of course. 3. Bag of crisps? In the USA it's 3 strikes and your in jail for decades. So yes, 3 bags of crisps on 3 occasions and the State pays a fortune for less than a dollar. Ok you didnt state you meant UK justice, but what constitutes justice isn't the same throughout the world, so it is at the very least arguable that your very black and white responses need careful re-assessment because I gave perfectly accurate examples of the Daily Hate NOT supporting justice in favour of racism and injustice. Just because it's in a newspaper (any newspaper) doesn't mean something is true, but some are much better at getting it right than others. 4. It said £350m on the bus and thats what everyone remembers. No-one quotes £250m as claimed accurately by the Remain side. Boris & his minions continued to claim £350m was the accurate figure, and that farmers & co getting the rebate didn't exist. It's all moot anyway, had they put the correct figure on the bus they would still have lied about giving it to the NHS, just that the lie would have been mathematically accurate rather than a lie based on another lie. Still a lie. 1. Sorry, my mistake. 2. But the problem has always been one of definition. Employing reductio ad absurdem, then *not* buying cigarettes or petrol could be classed as tax avoidance, as you are depriving the treasury of revenue by that action.  3. But we weren't discussing US laws, that's the point. In any case, California has passed a law which prevents trivial crimes from counting as 3rd strikes. 4. Just because everyone remembers it, partially because Remainers bring it up *every single time* the referendum is discussed,  doesn't mean it was as influential as they claim, since it was debunked *before* the vote!
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 16 2018, 06:45 AM
Post
#168
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 16 2018, 06:58 AM) 1. Sorry, my mistake. 2. But the problem has always been one of definition. Employing reductio ad absurdem, then *not* buying cigarettes or petrol could be classed as tax avoidance, as you are depriving the treasury of revenue by that action. 3. But we weren't discussing US laws, that's the point. In any case, California has passed a law which prevents trivial crimes from counting as 3rd strikes. 4. Just because everyone remembers it, partially because Remainers bring it up *every single time* the referendum is discussed, doesn't mean it was as influential as they claim, since it was debunked *before* the vote!2. Desperate arguments here....not buying cancer-sticks is not tax dodging. Selling them to people and then sticking your money and other business in offshore banks or out of the country and in other EU countries to protect your own interests while forcing the rest of us to face a Hard Brexit, is. It shows no truist in the UK to be able to help British Businesses. Hello hypocrite Jacob-Rees-Mogg, leading light of a Hard Brexit. What a huge cult. 3. Anyway, other States do, and my point remains that there is no such thing as natural justice. Please provide some definitive account of what is and who deserves to go to jail. 4. Just because Brexiters can't support the lies they told and which very much definitely persuaded people to vote Leave in a wafer-thin referendum is no reason to try rewriting recent history which we can all recall quite clearly and what we know know is the truth because err we work, live and still talk to people who voted leave every day of our lives. We haven't been ostracised from them. Sorry if that undermines your own beliefs, cos I don't deal with beliefs I deal with facts and evidence. I have in fact been f***ing a Brexiter for 15 years, which is only fair as I personally feel he's f***ed half the country with his vote
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 16 2018, 07:27 AM
Post
#169
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 16 2018, 07:45 AM) 2. Desperate arguments here....not buying cancer-sticks is not tax dodging. Selling them to people and then sticking your money and other business in offshore banks or out of the country and in other EU countries to protect your own interests while forcing the rest of us to face a Hard Brexit, is. It shows no truist in the UK to be able to help British Businesses. Hello hypocrite Jacob-Rees-Mogg, leading light of a Hard Brexit. What a huge cult. 3. Anyway, other States do, and my point remains that there is no such thing as natural justice. Please provide some definitive account of what is and who deserves to go to jail. 4. Just because Brexiters can't support the lies they told and which very much definitely persuaded people to vote Leave in a wafer-thin referendum is no reason to try rewriting recent history which we can all recall quite clearly and what we know know is the truth because err we work, live and still talk to people who voted leave every day of our lives. We haven't been ostracised from them. Sorry if that undermines your own beliefs, cos I don't deal with beliefs I deal with facts and evidence. I have in fact been f***ing a Brexiter for 15 years, which is only fair as I personally feel he's f***ed half the country with his vote 2. That's why I mentioned I was using reductio ad absudem - I figured it was OK, since you were doing exactly the same with your 'packet of crisps' line 3. I'm not interested in getting back into the 3 strikes argument in this thread 4. Either *prove* that the £350m claim made all the difference, or drop it! |
|
|
|
|
Jun 16 2018, 09:02 AM
Post
#170
|
|
|
Queen of Soon
Joined: 24 May 2007
Posts: 74,075 User: 3,474
     
|
Excuse me a sec while I get my tax consultant hat on, but Tax Avoidance these days is no more legal than Tax Evasion. The government are cracking down on it with legislation like DASVOIT and Promoters of Tax Avoidance schemes. All of these tax avoidance little loopholes have to be registered now with HMRC and they will rule on the legality of such a scheme. As someone who works in tax for a big4 firm, we had a lot of training on the new disclosure arrangements and regulations
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 16 2018, 09:17 AM
Post
#171
|
|
|
Paul Hyett
Joined: 4 April 2006
Posts: 25,346 User: 364
|
QUOTE(5 Silas Frøkner @ Jun 16 2018, 10:02 AM) Excuse me a sec while I get my tax consultant hat on, but Tax Avoidance these days is no more legal than Tax Evasion. The government are cracking down on it with legislation like DASVOIT and Promoters of Tax Avoidance schemes. All of these tax avoidance little loopholes have to be registered now with HMRC and they will rule on the legality of such a scheme. As someone who works in tax for a big4 firm, we had a lot of training on the new disclosure arrangements and regulations Unfortunately, when the government is in charge of setting the rules, it's a case of quis custodiet ipsos custodes. 
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 16 2018, 09:17 PM
Post
#172
|
|
|
Howdy, disco citizens
Joined: 16 January 2010
Posts: 12,775 User: 10,455
   
|
The Sunday Telegraph is reporting on its front page tomorrow that the NHS is to get an extra £384 million per week after Brexit.
Sceptical Brett remains sceptical. The story notes that if it does happen, it will be funded not just by the so-called "Brexit dividend", but through raising taxes as well. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 16 2018, 11:02 PM
Post
#173
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 16 2018, 08:27 AM) 2. That's why I mentioned I was using reductio ad absudem - I figured it was OK, since you were doing exactly the same with your 'packet of crisps' line 3. I'm not interested in getting back into the 3 strikes argument in this thread 4. Either *prove* that the £350m claim made all the difference, or drop it! 1. Quoting Latin does not an argument make. Veni vidi vicI. 2. Me neither. Because u can't supply examples of definitive justice. No one can. 3.if it made no difference why are Tories trying to make it look as though it did make a difference? Or as Latin scholars say complexitum bolloxi obvioustata. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 17 2018, 05:57 PM
Post
#174
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812 User: 17,376
|
well here's a thing:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/ju...MP=share_btn_tw Handing legal documents relating to arrest of farage's asisstant by FBI to Russian Embassy. Now that's taking "social engagement" to a whole new level.... |
|
|
|
|
Jun 17 2018, 07:23 PM
Post
#175
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812 User: 17,376
|
In other news: at Labour Live a minor demo against Corbyn's Brexit stance.
https://inews.co.uk/news/labour-live-stop-backing-brexit/ Labour supporters there having been given free tickets in the end express disappointment that the banner blocked their view of the Prophet Jezza as they had to focus on what he was saying rather than gaze longingly into his gorgeous eyes..... |
|
|
|
|
Jun 17 2018, 07:31 PM
Post
#176
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,654 User: 3,272
  
|
QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 17 2018, 08:23 PM) In other news: at Labour Live a minor demo against Corbyn's Brexit stance. https://inews.co.uk/news/labour-live-stop-backing-brexit/ Labour supporters there having been given free tickets in the end express disappointment that the banner blocked their view of the Prophet Jezza as they had to focus on what he was saying rather than gaze longingly into his gorgeous eyes..... How dare these people go along and suggest that Corbyn is not right about absolutely everything? The cheek of it. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 18 2018, 09:17 AM
Post
#177
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Jun 17 2018, 08:31 PM) How dare these people go along and suggest that Corbyn is not right about absolutely everything? The cheek of it. I know! I was especially impressed by the supporter who spoke on behalf of Jeremy (far too busy with his loaves and fishes miracles to speak for himself) - he actually was able to read Saint Jezza's mind and say what he was thinking when he first saw the banner! With people like that on board what could go wrong? Loved how nobody was reported actually talking about the words on the banner itself, so either supporters bothered enough to turn up at an overpriced choreographed adulation are indifferent, or the reporter was, cough, not asking anyone about the issue and a bit biased? |
|
|
|
|
Jun 20 2018, 07:33 PM
Post
#178
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,654 User: 3,272
|
The Tories' contempt for parliament continues unabated. After overturning one of the Lords amendment last week thanks to more lies from May, the Lords reinstated the amendment by an even larger majority than before. The Commons got to vote on it again today. First, May supposedly offered concessions to the would-be rebels. That was enough to convince lily-livered Dominic Grieve to vote against his own amendment and the government won the vote. However, the disgraced former defence secretary, Liam Fox, was soon crowing that the "concession" was meaningless. Therefore, we are still faced with the ludicrous possibility that the only one of the 28 EU member states not to allow their parliament a meaningful vote on the deal will be the UK.
That's not all. There is a long-standing convention that seriously ill MPs don't actually have to go through the division lobby. They can be taken to the Palace of Westminster in an ambulance and then be "nodded through". The government refused to follow that convention today. There's more. The amendments were due to go back to the Lords tomorrow. However, May is insisting that they go back there today. Cynics would say that, if somebody wants you to make a particular decision quickly, the best thing to do is to make the opposite decision. Let's hoe the Lords follow that advice. Can you imagine how the press would be reacting if a Labour government tried even half of this? |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2018, 08:35 PM
Post
#179
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,812 User: 17,376
|
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Jun 20 2018, 08:33 PM) The Tories' contempt for parliament continues unabated. After overturning one of the Lords amendment last week thanks to more lies from May, the Lords reinstated the amendment by an even larger majority than before. The Commons got to vote on it again today. First, May supposedly offered concessions to the would-be rebels. That was enough to convince lily-livered Dominic Grieve to vote against his own amendment and the government won the vote. However, the disgraced former defence secretary, Liam Fox, was soon crowing that the "concession" was meaningless. Therefore, we are still faced with the ludicrous possibility that the only one of the 28 EU member states not to allow their parliament a meaningful vote on the deal will be the UK. That's not all. There is a long-standing convention that seriously ill MPs don't actually have to go through the division lobby. They can be taken to the Palace of Westminster in an ambulance and then be "nodded through". The government refused to follow that convention today. There's more. The amendments were due to go back to the Lords tomorrow. However, May is insisting that they go back there today. Cynics would say that, if somebody wants you to make a particular decision quickly, the best thing to do is to make the opposite decision. Let's hoe the Lords follow that advice. Can you imagine how the press would be reacting if a Labour government tried even half of this? Total undemocratic w*n**rs. God help this country now they realise they can do whatever they want and Parliament just lets themselves be over-ruled in the name of the Holy Referendum which Gave Them Holy Purpose To Pass Whatever Laws They Say People VOted For In The Holy Referendum - while all the time moving their own f***ing Business interests abroad so they don't get any of the benfit of the wonderful new business interests that are coming any day now. Hypocritical lying f***ers. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2018, 08:46 PM
Post
#180
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,654 User: 3,272
|
Among the MPs forced to go through the division lobbies was Jo Swinson, the Lib Dem deputy leader. She was due to give birth a few days ago. They also included a Labour MP who had to sign herself out of hospital and attend in a wheelchair. Because the wheelchair wouldn't fit through the usual route, she had to be wheeled in by another route.
|
|
|
|
|
| Time is now: 19th April 2024 - 06:07 PM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
