Do most people drink energy drinks for fun now?
There is intelligent life outside of Earth, on board the ISS. 
All these people are human beings, that's the only classification needed.
Pretty daft mistake really, Hamilton wanted to squeeze Kobayashi and misjudged the space available, or perhaps Hamilton though he could push Kobayashi into backing off early, only he knows. Surely he would've appreciated that Kobayashi really isn't the kind of driver that backs off easily.
I notice you're very selective with your examples, and yet you moralise to us about bias. Personally I've noticed the number of repeats has probably doubled since the cuts started.
Do you even watch BBC news? There is nowhere near as much opinion as there is in the Guardian. Its very juvenile to associate everything to the left of centre with the Guardian, by the same logic everything to the right of say... Ken Livingston should be associated with Hitler. But thats not the case is it?
I suppose your idea of a free market is the vast majority of publications falling under the control of one man? I noticed you didn't use any News Corp papers as an example there.
Well durr, the man is under investigation and at the centre of a scandal that undermines entire states! If he applied for his own license fee it'd no doubt raise a few eyebrows. At least the state is (sort of!) accountable to us, while Mr Murdoch isn't.
Last edited by 5haz, .
The quality of BBC broadcasting has no doubt not been helped by the huge cuts forced on them. I see you've dropped your favorite word (monopoly) and replaced it with bias, was it not working for you?
Are you seriously naive enough to think a completely impartial broadcaster is a realistic possibility? Nothing run by humans will be completely impartial. The BBC certainly makes more of an effort at it than most privately funded broadcasters.
Are you seriously naive enough to think a completely impartial broadcaster is a realistic possibility? Nothing run by humans will be completely impartial. The BBC certainly makes more of an effort at it than most privately funded broadcasters.
I buy up their agenda because it makes sense to me, I'm sorry but I won't pretend that views which don't make any sense to me do, for anyone's benefit. By the way, it is possible to hold views out of idealism without having some kind of insidious agenda behind them, sadly that doesn't seem to be the fashion in Westminster, either side of the floor.
Cameron may have not explicitly stated he wanted to hug hoodies, but his line on such things was remarkably different when he needed the masses to elect him to how it is now. He was very sympathetic to public sector workers too, now we have Oliver Letwin telling us they need "fear and discipline" amid sweeping job losses. My family know from personal experience that trying to communicate with HM Revenue and Customs is now one of the most frustrating experiences known to man, is that enough evidence to suggest major cuts do not equate to excellence?
You also use the term crowd pleasing in a pejorative fashion, surely the purpose of a democratically elected government is to please the crowd? Of course this would be the case if we actually lived in a democracy, and people weren't tricked so easily into voting against their own interests.
Just for the record, I've grown to despise Labour just as much as I despise the Conservatives. Just another club of public school career twats with different colour ties.
What was the original context then? I can't see how "there is no such thing as society" can be construed in any other way. The gist of it is we shouldn't ask for assistance from anyone and we should help only our families first, at least that's true to conservative values, unfortunately Maggie was too detached from the people she ruled over to realise some people have no way of helping themselves. 24 years later and nothing has changed, the vast majority of a states problems stem the ignorance of its leaders about the population they lead.
By the way, I noticed you have no reply for my last post last night, are you going to concede or justify what you said?
Last edited by 5haz, .
You know your politicians have ... king more sense than them, why am I posting mostly Guardian articles? Because they're the only mainstream UK paper that's talking any sense at all.
The right wing sure does love to play victim.
The right wing sure does love to play victim.
Are you trying to claim spending money is the same thing as dodging tax? This is almost a ridiculous as the time you tried to convince us that musicians deserve no credit for their compositions because they work within previously established musical scales. Just how do you expect me to take you seriously when you take an argument to such implausible ends just to avoid conceding anything or opening your mind to conflicting ideas?
If a business can't turnover a profit, then its business model is wrong or there is insufficient demand for that businesses goods or services to justify its existence. I don't understand why some people begrudge any concessions towards individuals who are struggling financially, but are so willing to make excuses for businesses that are failing financially. People on benefits are supposedly lazy yet businesses on 'benefits' are supposedly poor squeezed job creators being unfairly picked upon. While a company can be liquidated or change its production to suit demand, and struggling person who can't find a job can't simply dissapear, as much as many upper class would wish they would, they can't change their skills to suit the job market either when this too requires money.
And in the reality much of the worst offenders are not corporations barely struggling to stay afloat, they're making multi-million pound profits!
You're arrogant because your self assurance has absolutely no grounding in reality or conclusive proof.
Last edited by 5haz, .
For someone whose argument is made entirely out of very speculative conjecture, you seem very self assured. Lets not clutch at straws now, your initial point hit a very big rock when I told you I have no sponsors, you gets points for innovation for trying to nail me on the basis of my competitors being tax dodgers, but how can such an argument stand up without proof?
FYI, when I did have sponsors in my first season, they were the charities Teenage Cancer Trust and Richard Burns foundation, in fact they weren't even sponsors, we were representing them. I did many hours of charity collecting for both of them, there you go, my contribution to the big society, and I didn't even need Dave C to tell me to do it. There were also the obligatory family business stickers on the car and I'm pretty sure the old man didn't evade his taxes, otherwise we might've still had some money.
As much as you like to do it, direct comparisons can't be made between racing and life. Unlike a decent quality of life itself, racing is a privilege, not a right. I wont be doing anymore racing this season because the moneys run out and I can no longer justify paying the race entry fees when I have a student house to pay for. Race entry fees are not like public services, they are no essential to a reasonable quality of living.
Wow, how am I supposed to see your point of view if your heads that far up your own arse? Claiming victory for yourself just makes you look juvenile, especially when nobody wants to cheer for you.
Last edited by 5haz, .
Oh you're so sharp! Not sharp enough to know we don't have any sponsors though.
Last edited by 5haz, .
It'd be fine if it was spent where it was supposed to be. Rather than plundered by a government that called itself left wing.
Much of the avoidance isn't legal, and under the radar. The point being that much of this tax avoidance goes on completely unabated until someone bothers to pull them up for it.
Considering you've just added several posts filled with unnecessary and thoroughly corny sarcastic laughter (a poor attempt at sharp cynicism perhaps?), then just instructed me to 'grow a pair' as well as called me a 'looney', you're in no position to criticise me over personal insults. Don't dish out what you can't take.
And I'm sorry, but I must be honest, you really aren't that important to me, and I'm sure the feelings mutual, but that's fine by me.
I understand the subtle difference, I also understand that politicians use these subtle differences to sweeten what they are saying, a concept you apparently fail to grasp.
If you must know, I skip parts of what you type because they are of little importance to the actual debate, I've already explained to you that just because a politician says something doesn't necessarily mean his actions will follow his words, its not my problem if you're unable to take in anything at more than face value.
Last edited by 5haz, .
That's beside the point I was making, the point being that the right wing media rails against all your tax money supposedly going into letting benefit claimants live like kings, when in fact the reality is a significant portion of our tax has gone into bailing out wealthy people, I wasn't talking about the right wing media's position on the bailouts.[/QUOTE]
Please refrain from reading what you want to hear as opposed to the actual words.
Regardless of what he says, the way things stand we're not in it together.
Maybe you should drop your prejudice that every person who has opposing views to you somehow reads the Guardian.
They plug loopholes only after the media exposes them.
If I was talking to someone of any importance I might be more thorough, sorry. Just you seemed to imply that the link contained some piece of conspiracy theorist fiction when it was in fact a direct quote.
Tax avoidance is a glaring issue that no recent government has done anything to address, simply because it isn't in their personal interests to do so.
Looking the world around you is to miss the bigger picture. World changing events can happen while the street outside looks exactly the same.
Just because this state is a supposedly free democracy today doesn't mean there are those in power who want to change that, and they prey on people's ignorance of their intrigue.
The stuff written in the link is David Cameron's speech on the unrest, its the words that actually came out his mouth, did you even look at the link? There's even a video on the BBC of him saying it if that satisfies you.
Make of this what you will. Slightly tongue in cheek so try not to get too upset.
Last edited by 5haz, .
Have any valid response to that though? No I didn't think so.
You remind me of me, three years ago.
Its quite a big leap from restricting civil liberties to mind control radars, but that kind of subtlety is lost on flippant idiots like yourself.
If everyone is going to do nothing but rant and condemn, and nobody is willing to actually sit down and rat out the causes and think of ways to fix them, then how the **** are we ever going to prevent this kind of thing?
Instead we're swept up in a great big moral panic. Everyone's perfectly ready to complain about chavs, but nobody wants to actually put their thinking caps on and even begin to address how the chav phenomenon actually came about.
All I can say is fine **** you all then, but don't cry your eyes out when this happens again, these riots present the biggest missed opportunity to fix this country in living memory.
Last edited by 5haz, .
Ever heard of tax avoidance? Its rife among big business in the UK, in case you hadn't noticed.
The fact that they're even considering it seriously is worrying enough. Please don't fall for the reassuring political spin, just because he says hes considering whether it would be right means he probably wont consider to moral question of it at all, pretty much none of the big personalities in Westminster can be trusted, yet we let them abuse our trust repeatedly.
Well, this sums up the riot sitation ... oquently than I could...
Last edited by 5haz, .
Using the public purse to help the poor, rather than the rich would be a start.
Anyone else catch Dave's statement on the disorder, get this...
https://plus.google.com/115169 ... 4705450/posts/3SaicHi6xGB
Evidently Dave and his friends at News Corp etc have got tired of social networking exposing their corruption and lies, and the riots presents a prime opportunity to crack down on it. Only 3 years ago I would've scoffed at anyone who said we we're sliding towards some kind of Orwellian nightmare, now I think the nightmare might be coming true slowly.
Last edited by 5haz, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG