Posts by codejunky 7119 publicly visible posts • joined 24 Oct 2011
'We are all gonna fry' green madness is so important that the solution of EV's must be made difficult to source and more expensive. Surely if there is such concern then it doesnt matter where the product comes from we need to allow it to be available?
Of course from my perspective its idiots acting like idiots over the latest religion so I can laugh at the stupidity of it all.
@gandalfcn
"I note your comprehension is zero, as usual.
I know it is difficult for you to understand but "UK" and "world wide" are not the same."
I know you have been following me like some love sick troll but I actually think you might mean this. That the world is not the UK was my point, the same problem is world wide and doesnt stop at our border
@AC
"Brexit is responsible for about a third of UK food price inflation since 2019, according to researchers at the London School of Economics."
So the claim is that brexit caused the inflation we see world wide? Thats a new one.
"The fact there are actually people who believe that trade from outside the EU is banned from inside the EU is extremely concerning."
That is very different from what I said. You are arguing against your own straw man
@heyrick
"Oh FFS."
Pretty much what I thought after reading your comment. What does it have to do with the price of fish?
And back to all the claims that food would be more expensive after leaving with a huge bloody asterisk *from the EU. Because without the asterisk it was bull, entirely down to the trade rules we were limited by.
@Tom Chiverton 1
"Most people didn't vote in the referendum ergo most people were happy to stay in Europe"
Most people didnt care about the EU and didnt feel it worth voting to support.
To correct the largest mistake however, the EU is not Europe. The UK didnt leave Europe it left the EU. One is geography the other is a political union.
@Paul Crawford
"But you are happy for excess corporations to rape you and your children's data privacy at every turn?"
Rape is illegal. Especially bad against children. But to take you barely more serious, who is putting a gun to you and your childrens heads for your data? And you dont seem to realise that data is collected on you all the time, its not some sucking out of your soul that eats away your life force. It is by itself benign and very ambiguous. And what nefarious use are we looking at here that is so damn scary that nobody will use it anyway? Or do you fear its not so scary so people will freely choose to use it?
I assume you were recently born and missed the days of creation for Google, facebook, twitter, etc? Or you have forgotten how data was used to make a search engine that actually found what you were looking for, a place people inexplicably paste their lives for the world to see and a messaging system that has been used from cat videos, porn and uprisings.
@demon driver
"The first intelligent question you should ask in this context is whether Meta *should* be allowed to collect and share all kinds of personal/private user data between their several sub-companies and services."
Why? Should is a very fuzzy word, short of context.
"Or do you think a law is good and just, just because it exists?"
Eh what? A law is a restriction which can be applied for good reasons, bad reasons or just have consequences beyond the intention. It is a blunt instrument which needs to be used carefully.
"Also, you could have a look at your domestic law and find out whether they actually *are* allowed to do that in your country at all. Are they?"
This is where I used the word if. I dont assume they are breaking the law and as we are out of the EU the UK could change laws it disagrees with.
"Nothing of what you yourself write is intelligent."
Come back with a better comment.
@iron
"Shut up you moron."
So much for an intelligent conversation. Do you think we are still in the EU or agree that we are out so can make our own decisions on products and services? If it breaks a UK law the UK can enforce it. If its a law the UK doesnt wish to continue with it can be removed.
@MaximusRex
"When 'all jobs get taken and humans have no work', the economy still needs raw materials, energy, manufacturing, etc. to run. All of those belongs to the capital (in Labor vs. Capital sense)."
If all jobs were taken by machines then the machines collect the raw materials, energy, manufacturing, etc and so everything is free. Its a 'never going to happen' scenario because unless machines can achieve 'innovation' then people will continue to solve the hard problems such as new sources of energy, new materials and their uses etc. But food used to be almost everything of a persons 'budget' and not working (in the field) meant starving to death. Now its a small portion of a persons budget. Same with clothing until automation vastly crashed the price. We are having an educational shift as the internet, searches and competition are driving down the costs of learning while the old institutions struggle to keep the old order.
In the hypothetical world of machines doing all the work then people are free to do other things.
"So the capital, i.e. those mighty 1% of the world population (or whatever percentage to consider in 80/20 rule, or 'rich-get-richer' phenomenon, or Pareto principle, or 'preferential attachment', etc.), has very little incentive to share the 'a world of abundance where our every need and desire is catered for' with the rest 99% of humans."
That assumes a fixed size of (the example often is a pie). That the rich get more and more and the rest of us get less and less. Except I can make calls around the world (literally all over the world) and it costs me almost nothing as a portion of my income (whatsapp, fb messenger, etc). I remember the mobile phone being a house phone attached to a huge battery and costing insane amounts only the rich could possibly afford. A computer was too much for most homes, cars a luxury of the rich and so on. This is achieved through the 'market' of peoples interactions advancing and improving society and a rising tide lifting all boats.
"Looking forward for your kind response, Maximus."
I appreciate the polite comment/questions and look forward to discussing with you
@Mooseman
"I never had you pegged as a communist!"
Its nice how you set the tone for your whole comment. Start with bull on your first line and set my expectation for the rest of your comment.
"Still, since you believe that our betters, sorry, very wealthy people, pay vastly more tax than us plebs"
Your green eyes are showing. At what point did I call them betters or the rest of us plebs? Is that how you see yourself? Have you sought help for your... perspective? Dont put yourself down so.
"His inherited wealth is exempt from inheritance tax"
So are you are also against the double taxation of death tax?
"Part of the Trust owns several farms and other businesses, and employs around 1000 people"
This reminds me of the comment (need to look it up) of a tradesman (think it was a window cleaner) who pointed out he gets hired by people with money because they can afford to hire him. Those of us who work require someone who can afford to pay us. A salary or directly for our time and effort.
"Your beloved victim of what you fondly call fraudulent prosecution has like many very wealthy people carefully avoided a lot of tax"
First of all I have highlighted where you are arguing with yourself. You are attributing things to me that I dont see anywhere?
My response however- And so they should. Avoid is actually not paying more tax than you legally have to. Do you have an ISA? Do you have a pension? Interestingly do you send extra money to the government every year just because you want to?
"Keep on telling yourself that the very wealthy pay so much more than the rest of us...."
If you paid so much tax as they did you too would be hiring accountants to avoid paying more than you legally should and it would save you money. That you dont suggests you wouldnt save money by hiring such accountants. So you dont pay that much tax while they do.
@Stoneshop
"Given your history it's useless to suggest you look up the meaning of 'proportionally' and 'disproportionally', but I'll do so anyway."
You even agree they pay more you muppet as the absolute value. So you get a percentage of their prosperity vs a higher percentage of nothing. Then the question is how you measure proportionally as 'progressive' taxation takes more from the higher incomes. People dont have to take money as incomes if they dont want which I assume you are complaining about, but then how many tax's has it gone through to get to that point?
You used the words tax avoidance in your previous comment, which is paying the legally mandated amount of tax. Because the more you make the more the gov tries to steal.
@Jonathon Green
"While I’m sure it’s theoretically possible to do good quality conversions my suspicion is that the poor quality lash-up on a building which was cheaply constructed in the first place, and which just about scrapes through planning rules will always look better on the developer’s spreadsheet, and so that’s what we’ll get."
The fact that is scrapes through the planning rules puts it to a minimum accepted standard in the country. If it ends up as low end housing stock I cant imagine that being something to complain about as people are looking for cheap housing. It is the rules that restrict the building of housing and there is a housing shortage so I do wonder if this is an easy improvement to the situation (not a solution because housing needs to be built to keep up with population growth).
@AC
"Good idea, but are there not already massive amounts of unused housing (250K homes) and office space (100 million sq ft) ? How will even more empty offices help?"
Isnt it estimated that 250k new homes need to be supplied per year just to handle year on year growth? More housing means lower house prices which people have been complaining about the costs rising for some time.
I hope this leads to the situation where businesses keep work from home as much as possible and freeing up a load of offices etc which can then (with government snails pace permission) can be turned into residential homes. A bit of converting which can be handled privately and we quickly gain more homes.
@DrSunshine0104
"I feel like I will be talking to brick wall but..."
Of course you do. You are repeating that you believe Trump is a criminal, because you believe so. And dont care at all about Biden so expect due process.
"Trump's alleged crimes have had a grand jury, evidence and an indictment"
At least you know its alleged. Remember all the alleged crimes people believed against him even with fabricated evidence?
"As far as my belief that Trump is a criminal... I mean Trump has no compulsion against admitting his crimes in writing or on tape, so it isn't a difficult stroll to arrive to that Trump committed crimes."
So again you are happy to take a snippet of limited information and assume crime. He is being accused so you assume he is criminal?
@AC
"From January to December 2017, Joe Biden did not hold any political offices. During that period, Joe Biden was a private citizen after leaving the vice presidency on January 20, 2017, following the end of the Obama administration. He did not hold any elected or appointed political positions in 2017."
Hang on a minute... so are you now saying Joe Biden is a liar and did know about Hunters business dealings. Denials Joe made because people were questioning how connected to his sons 'activities' Joe was. And so I wonder how the investigation of the laptop is going and if this will lead to any further questions concerning the 'big guy'.
"Boy, the schmucks really fell for this one. Ha ha ha."
For some reason you seem to be looking at your comment as some kind of win when you appear to be scoring an own goal.
@DrSunshine0104
"If he has done something wrong and a grand jury indicts him, or if the Republicans actually make a impeachment case against him that isn't absolute horseshit. Well, yeah I wont't be voting for him or lose my god-damn mind about it."... "But the court of public opinion isn't really interesting to me, because I don't care about Biden himself nor am I interested in rumor-mill, school-age gossip."..."But that doesn't nullify my position on Trump's indictment, my belief that Trump is a criminal, or my preference of political policies."
That last quote where you believe Trump is criminal because you just believe whatever vs the first 2 I quote (or even your comment before the last quote) is exactly the problem. Biden would need to be proven to be criminal to you. You assume Trump is criminal just because. I point out the two are treated differently in investigation which is clear to see but also Trump is just assumed criminal while Biden is not.
I am watching the latest revelations as this could turn very quickly on Biden
@Robert 22
"It is curious how Republicans would have you believe that Biden is senile and clueless while, at the same time, being a criminal mastermind who has pulled off all kinds of crimes without leaving a trace of evidence."
From my limited knowledge of such opinions I dont think they see him as a criminal mastermind, just a criminal protected by the security services. They seem to see him as senile and clueless with a criminal son and protected from the law. Something not helped by the laptop cover-up and Hunters plea deal. Add the Twitter revelations and recent whistle blowers with evidence and that opinion starts to look a bit like another one of those conspiracy theories that turns out to be true. We will see.
@genghis_uk
"Sounds like whataboutism to me."
Sure does but FF22 is the one who moved off the FBI agent and onto the 'orange man'.
"Joe and Hunter may or may not be dodgy - does that make Trump less so?"
Actually yes. This is the scary proposition that the hatred against Trump and continued unfounded attacks is the reason some people have such a hatred. Remember this kicked off with a fabricated dossier and illegal actions against him by the security services. Hunters troubles stem from having his taxes being investigated as an offshoot of another probe (Hunter was not targeted) and leaving a laptop containing evidence of crimes. This brought about denials of wrongdoing or even awareness from Joe of his sons activities which evidence seems to show otherwise (Hunter texting the Chinese and stating his father is in the room) and whistle-blowers coming forward concerning the interference protecting the Bidens, even accusing of lawbreaking! One particular claim I am keeping an eye on is the Bidens lawyers being told of in advance of agents coming to investigate evidence materials held by the Bidens.
"If itwas anyone else, they would be looking at 20years with Republicans being the first to denounce them"
So again it should be guilty without bothering with the law? Trump through various accusations has been denounced by Democrat and Republicans, you might remember he became president after taking on both parties battling against him.
"Double standards maybe?"
Absolute double standards that seem to be finally coming out.
@Jim Mitchell
"Those President Biden stories all seem to lack substance or verifiable evidence behind them."
Eh? Guess you may want to check the latest news or even white house briefings where difficult questions about Joe and his son being more than a bit dishonest and whistle-blowers with evidence of FBI and DOJ corruption and interference. Joe lying about his business dealings as Hunter tells the Chinese his father is next to him by whatsapp text.
@AC
"Either you are extremely naive or you think everyone else here is."
Assuming you are the same AC, didnt you say they borrow against the assets you mentioned? If you borrow money then you are expected to pay it back with interest. Have you ever borrowed money? Or did your original comment have a problem?
@AC
"The notion that Nazi Germany was a left-wing government is a gross misinterpretation of history and a distortion of political ideologies."
Because state direction of the private sector, competing against the communist vote, in the National Socialist party with policies which UK Labour members align with (removing the Aryan race stuff) isnt left wing?
"The Nazi Party's fundamental ideology revolved around racial superiority, militarism, and authoritarianism, which are antithetical to the core tenets of left-wing politics."
You may want to come up with a new list. That fundamental ideology is the same as the glorious communist countries. Your description there works with the USSR which was of course left.
"Rather than advocating for collective ownership or redistribution of wealth, the Nazis promoted a form of state capitalism where private ownership was preserved, but the government exerted extensive control over the economy. This approach aimed at consolidating power in the hands of the state"
The outcome of the glorious socialist countries to hold extensive control over the economy. The state having extensive control of the private businesses. The USSR having a glorious example of wealth redistribution and collective ownership... not.
"Such actions are incongruous with the principles and actions of a left-wing government."
All of those persecutions/prosecutions, you could be talking about the USSR. See how close this is?
But back to the question you seemed to hide from- "I know the left likes to disavow the National Socialist Party of Germany but to now try to claim the Soviets as right wing?". Do you think the Soviets were right wing too?
@AC
"The wealth is mostly in the form of stocks and non monetary assests."
Ok but that isnt hording. Stocks for example is how businesses get funding which is used to hire and pay staff and acquire the capital to start and run the businesses we all depend on to provide for our lives. Stocks go up and down in their valuations and so not guaranteed to hold their value or increase in value.
"Which the elites then borrow against, for tax free income"
Except that leaves them with a loan which must be repaid with interest on assets that may or not hold their value. Kinda like how people borrow a mortgage for their home but the house price can fall below the value of the loan.
"Educate yourself. Do your own research."
Based on your education what response do you have for the above?
@anthonyhegedus
"Because we all know they didn’t earn that wealth through hard work."
Do you? That is interesting. So how did they make money? Noting that you seem to be saying all billionaires.
"They aren’t millions of times better workers than the average person"
Then what is your envy? They were successful, why is that wrong?
"And secondly, yes, they horde it."
How do they horde it? In what form?
@Elongated Muskrat
"Stalin was a dictator"
Yes. And seriously left wing.
"Despite what you might think, this is not left-wing, but very-very right wing"
This is a new one. I know the left likes to disavow the National Socialist Party of Germany but to now try to claim the Soviets as right wing? You guys like to try it on dont you.
"Just because the Soviet Union started out with communist ideals, that doesn't mean they weren't subverted"
Of course they were, just as every attempt at socialism has descended into the same fate. Just because far left ideology leads to an undesirable outcome does not mean it is magically right wing.
"Read literally any book on the history of the Soviet Union, rather than trotting out bollocks like that."
Yes it was socialist. You try reading?
"Stalin was just as right-wing as Trump, and the likes of Farage, and the likes of you."
Does that mean Trump and Farage are far left? Or that your version of right wing is 'stuff I dont like'?
@DS999
"I see you are subscribing to the apocryphal right wing fantasy about schoolchildren "identifying as cats" and schools making litterboxes available to them"
I was thinking of the idiot woman (from Norway?) but I did hear something about that (someone mentioned it yesterday). I was disappointed to read the teacher scolding the pupil as despicable for sticking to reality instead of the latest fad (dunno if that is the same incident).
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
