[Archived] Extra ! Extra ! Read All About It !

[VinjayV4]

Are you just assuming Jack was a conservative ?

Well he certainly was a Thatcher supporter though don't know who he supported before or after. Guess I just assumed he was a one party voter.

[yoda]

Why criticise the government for foreign aid when they just cut taxes for those who didn't need it, costing the country 500 billion?

I find criticism of giving to the poorest people sickening when we all know what some businesses in this country get away with, but that's just me.

500 billion what ?

Well he certainly was a Thatcher supporter though don't know who he supported before or after. Guess I just assumed he was a one party voter.

How do you know he was ?

[VinjayV4]

500 billion what ?

How do you know he was ?

Because people on here said he admired Thatcher as one example! You do read the boards I'm sure you have seen others say it. Quit playing Devils advocate.

[yoda]

Because people on here said he admired Thatcher as one example! You do read the boards I'm sure you have seen others say it. Quit playing Devils advocate.

Can't say that I have ever read that on here

[VinjayV4]

Can't say that I have ever read that on here

Well you know now. Do a search for posts mentioning it.

It was Thatcher's government who privatised British Steel. Somehow I can't help thinking Jack was happy about that! Though did I have to hear recording of him saying it directly? Or hear him say it face to face/phone before he died? "Hello Vinjay its Jack Walker here. I sold my company Walkersteel to British Steel after Thatcher's government privatised it. This was very beneficial for me as I didn't think selling my company to them for over 300 million was a bad thing! I was very pleased and supportive of this and her government!"

[yoda]

Well you know now. Do a search for posts mentioning it.

It was Thatcher's government who privatised British Steel. Somehow I can't help thinking Jack was happy about that! Though did I have to hear recording of him saying it directly? Or hear him say it face to face/phone before he died? "Hello Vinjay its Jack Walker here. I sold my company Walkersteel to British Steel after Thatcher's government privatised it. This was very beneficial for me as I didn't think selling my company to them for over 300 million was a bad thing! I was very pleased and supportive of this and her government!"

From a well respected Jorno at the time

"In 1989, when it looked as if Walker Steel might be bought by a foreign competitor, British Steel stepped in with what the City took to be a defensively high offer.

Even though Walker's company was then reporting annual profits of £48 million, some commentators believed that Walker had very much got the better of the deal, and indeed soon afterwards the market went into a steep slump and British Steel struggled to make its investment pay. "

[VinjayV4]

Yes fully aware there was a steel recession following the sale as I've seen that quote. What's your point though?

[yoda]

Yes fully aware there was a steel recession following the sale as I've seen that quote. What's your point though?

It was business, nothing to do with privatisation

Jack's moto if you did not know it,

Rule One: I am always right.

Rule Two: When I am wrong, read Rule One.

[VinjayV4]

It was business, nothing to do with privatisation

Jack's moto if you did not know it,

Rule One: I am always right.

Rule Two: When I am wrong, read Rule One.

Of course I do even if its another one I've normally quoted in the past. I definitely like that motto myself!

Yes it was business but it was good business to support her government.

He supported Thatcher. Whether he made donations to the party I have no idea but he admired her. End of.

[yoda]

Of course I do even if its another one I've normally quoted in the past. I definitely like that motto myself!

Yes it was business but it was good business to support her government.

He supported Thatcher. Whether he made donations to the party I have no idea but he admired her. End of.

It only works if you are actually the boss,

end off

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Why criticise the government for foreign aid when they just cut taxes for those who didn't need it, costing the country 500 billion?

I find criticism of giving to the poorest people sickening when we all know what some businesses in this country get away with, but that's just me.

I find foreign aid pointless when all it does is significantly increase the population of those countries, meaning more mouths to feed and more aid required.

The "[insert anything] isn't a waste of money when the rich aren't taxed enough" argument is starting to fail in my opinion when the biggest left-wing nationalist in British politics, Sturgeon, immediately backs down on getting tough on the issue. Either she's a typical pander to the rich politician like the rest of them and has just been trying to look like a socialist this whole time, or it is genuinely detrimental to the poor to get too tough on the rich and risk them moving abroad and taking their taxes and companies with them.

If the second option is the case then personally I think the stick to beat the Tories with just got a lot weaker and the justification by comparison for why we can fritter away money elsewhere just stopped working. Unless the comparison changes from top rate tax cost to IS bombing campaign cost. Although the state of the war currently (IS in full retreat) has entirely justified our decision to get involved in my opinion.

[perthblue02]

Oh the irony, the overpriced fruit company now wants the FBI to disclose how it unlocked the phone that they refused to

http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-apple-next-steps-20160330-story.html

[K-Hod]

500 billion what ?

How do you know he was ?

Come on Yoda, wasn't 'Baroness Thatcher' an honorary life-president of Rovers at one point? Safe to assume Jack would be a fan if that was the case?!

Re the tax thing, it sticks in a lot of people's throats when the wealthiest aren't paying what they should, then you consider how much the government have spent fighting bedroom tax at the high court, cutting disabled benefits etc. Yet not getting tough on tax avoidance/non doms (though that isn't just this government in fairness).

[joey_big_nose]

So I'm confused. Are you agreeing with the end of civilization?

Not being willing to man the walls and spill blood will be the end of civilization as we know it. Treating war as a criminal justice matter will be the end of civilization as we know it.

If we're at war, we kill people. We don't read them their rights and try to use the least amount of force to apprehend them. We kill them.

If we're dealing with domestic crime, not infiltrating terrorists and their supporters, then the criminal code applies.

And if we're dealing with terrorists/traitors, and those who give aid and comfort to terrorists/traitors (who are, as a result,terrorists/traitors themselves), we could, if you like, give them a trial before we line them up against the wall and shoot them. But I think expelling those who give them aid and comfort is a much more humane course of action and, maybe, result in them policing their own.

Have you heard of the Geneva Convention?

Sanctioned indiscriminate attacks by Western States on Civilians has happened once in recent history - the bombing campaigns of WWII. That was in the face of a genuine existential threat to Western Europe and Pacific Rim states from a Japan and Nazi Germany who had killed hundreds of thousands of people.

What you are advocating is the murder of families and neighbours of terrorists merely for being proximite, all justified on the basis of very low numbers of people actually being killed in terrorist attacks in the West. Far more people have been killed in the US by school shootings than muslim terrorists since 2001.

We are losing our grip on sanity here.

[oldjamfan1]

Come on Yoda, wasn't 'Baroness Thatcher' an honorary life-president of Rovers at one point? Safe to assume Jack would be a fan if that was the case?!

I think he was a Maggie fan, but the Thatcher link to Rovers was established long before Jack became involved, if I remember correctly?

[K-Hod]

I think he was a Maggie fan, but the Thatcher link to Rovers was established long before Jack became involved, if I remember correctly?

Ah right, it might have been to be fair. I just remember seeing it in the programme when I was a nipper.

[yoda]

Ah right, it might have been to be fair. I just remember seeing it in the programme when I was a nipper.

I think it was William Bancroft that arranged that.

[JBiz]

I find foreign aid pointless when all it does is significantly increase the population of those countries, meaning more mouths to feed and more aid required.

The "[insert anything] isn't a waste of money when the rich aren't taxed enough" argument is starting to fail in my opinion when the biggest left-wing nationalist in British politics, Sturgeon, immediately backs down on getting tough on the issue. Either she's a typical pander to the rich politician like the rest of them and has just been trying to look like a socialist this whole time, or it is genuinely detrimental to the poor to get too tough on the rich and risk them moving abroad and taking their taxes and companies with them.

If the second option is the case then personally I think the stick to beat the Tories with just got a lot weaker and the justification by comparison for why we can fritter away money elsewhere just stopped working. Unless the comparison changes from top rate tax cost to IS bombing campaign cost. Although the state of the war currently (IS in full retreat) has entirely justified our decision to get involved in my opinion.

Why would anybody think the way forward is "less" mouths to feed? Surely the way forward is portion money and service better so 99% of the worlds wealth isn't owned by 1%.

The "rich aren't taxed" argument SHOULD be failing but unfortunately it holds true. Look at Amazon and Google, then remind yourself of how those with a spare bedroom had to pay more. Corporations like the foreign banks make absolutely billions in this country, but pay a pittance in levy.

Why be so obsessed about right and left? Wouldnt democracy work better if it is about people choosing what they think? Rather than what colour tie they have on? We all have views that cross the centre line.

IS in full retreat? It's not a war on an army, how could you think that? Their intentions are terror, not to amass land or develop. They are mostly unorganised as a group but work in smaller cells, dropping bombs just gives their chief brainwashes more rhetoric. You do realise that those bombs which cost millions each (of pounds yoda, what did you think I meant? Republic credits?) have made little if no difference to stemming attacks in the west? It's made no difference to people fleeing borders and it's certainly not helped to clean up country completly destroyed by their own Government in Syria.

[K-Hod]

Why would anybody think the way forward is "less" mouths to feed? Surely the way forward is portion money and service better so 99% of the worlds wealth isn't owned by 1%.

The "rich aren't taxed" argument SHOULD be failing but unfortunately it holds true. Look at Amazon and Google, then remind yourself of how those with a spare bedroom had to pay more. Corporations like the foreign banks make absolutely billions in this country, but pay a pittance in levy.

Why be so obsessed about right and left? Wouldnt democracy work better if it is about people choosing what they think? Rather than what colour tie they have on? We all have views that cross the centre line.

IS in full retreat? It's not a war on an army, how could you think that? Their intentions are terror, not to amass land or develop. They are mostly unorganised as a group but work in smaller cells, dropping bombs just gives their chief brainwashes more rhetoric. You do realise that those bombs which cost millions each (of pounds yoda, what did you think I meant? Republic credits?) have made little if no difference to stemming attacks in the west? It's made no difference to people fleeing borders and it's certainly not helped to clean up country completly destroyed by their own Government in Syria.

To be fair mate, by definition that's exactly what IS want, to create an 'Islamic State'.

[joey_big_nose]

The biggest issue facing the world today is not Islamic extremism (although it is a very serious one), it is vast growing inequality (both within countries and globally) and the erosion of the middle class. This trend is only set to accelerate.

That is what will ultimately threaten the viability of western states and destabalise the political settlement - as we are already seeing with the more radical rhetoric rising across the developed world from Trump to Farage to Corbyn to the French nationalists.

The reason

[jim mk2]

The middle class isn't being eroded in emerging economies - in fact, China, India, Brazil, Russia and southeast Asian countries have a ballooning middle class that will be the biggest spending sector in the global economy over the next few decades. The mc in the west is certainly being squeezed by stagnant wages over the past 20 years or so.

Trump and Farage are populists, not radicals. Corbyn comes across as a voice of reason compared to the strident tones of those two.

[Steve Moss]

Have you heard of the Geneva Convention?

Sanctioned indiscriminate attacks by Western States on Civilians has happened once in recent history - the bombing campaigns of WWII. That was in the face of a genuine existential threat to Western Europe and Pacific Rim states from a Japan and Nazi Germany who had killed hundreds of thousands of people.

What you are advocating is the murder of families and neighbours of terrorists merely for being proximite, all justified on the basis of very low numbers of people actually being killed in terrorist attacks in the West. Far more people have been killed in the US by school shootings than muslim terrorists since 2001.

We are losing our grip on sanity here.

Joey, I'm not the one who is losing my grip on reality.

Last I checked, ISIS and/or the Caliphate are not signatories to the Geneva Convention. They certainly don't comply with it. That means they are not protected by it. We are perfectly entitled to line them up against the wall and shoot them when we capture them. Which is far more humane that the way they treat our prisoners.

This is not a football game. This is war. It is about survival. It is not a situation where we decide to be good sports and spot the opposition a few points. We should give them no advantage, give them no quarter and show them no mercy, if we decide we need to fight them.

Of course, we're spineless which is why we're still fighting them 15 years later and, from all appearances, losing. I'm most angered by the fact that our sons and grandsons will be fighting these same battles because we lacked the fortitude to end this conflict, one way or the other. Our forefathers would be disgusted with us, and rightly so.

[JBiz]

To be fair mate, by definition that's exactly what IS want, to create an 'Islamic State'.

Khod, please don't quote a whole post to reply to one sentence.

In the scheme of things, you are correct if the papers are- however I find it very hard to believe that all Islamic fundamentalists are working together to amass land to rule over.

Treating it like such, almost like an old school war is ignoring some facts.

[jim mk2]

So in other words, we show the same sort of barbarity towards IS as they do to others? It's the same argument for capital punishment - and that has never been a deterrent to heinous acts either.

Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and Libya haven't solved the situation from 15 years ago. This so-called "conflict" is a battle of intelligence and technology - not bombs and firing squads. And I wouldn't worry about our successors - most wars finish through exhaustion or generational change. This one will be no different.

[otto man]

Why would anybody think the way forward is "less" mouths to feed? Surely the way forward is portion money and service better so 99% of the worlds wealth isn't owned by 1%.

The "rich aren't taxed" argument SHOULD be failing but unfortunately it holds true. Look at Amazon and Google, then remind yourself of how those with a spare bedroom had to pay more. Corporations like the foreign banks make absolutely billions in this country, but pay a pittance in levy.

Why be so obsessed about right and left? Wouldnt democracy work better if it is about people choosing what they think? Rather than what colour tie they have on? We all have views that cross the centre line.

IS in full retreat? It's not a war on an army, how could you think that? Their intentions are terror, not to amass land or develop. They are mostly unorganised as a group but work in smaller cells, dropping bombs just gives their chief brainwashes more rhetoric. You do realise that those bombs which cost millions each (of pounds yoda, what did you think I meant? Republic credits?) have made little if no difference to stemming attacks in the west? It's made no difference to people fleeing borders and it's certainly not helped to clean up country completly destroyed by their own Government in Syria.

You are aware of the burden currently being placed on our natural resources as it is and the consequences of unchecked population growth?

I'd love to hear your explanation of just how this wealth redistribution is going to be implemented

So all those fellas running round armed to the teeth and killing people don't constitute a para military force?

So you are unaware that the stated aim of Daesh is to establish a "caliphate" (islamic state)?

My Mum used to tell me to "Engage my brain before sticking my mouth in gear"

Good advice that maybe you should heed?