Golf and austerity

First topic message reminder :

Is it fair to say that the golfing world during the boom years built too many golf courses. Leading to many closing as a downturn hit? Add to that golfs own struggles in the modern world in that its a time consuming activity.

There will inevitably be downturns and upturns, golf courses will come and go cyclically over the long term as the popularity of the sport waxes and wanes.

A more recent alarming trend tho is that many munis are now scheduled for that chop. Muni’s are the lifeblood of grassroots golf if golf wants to appeal to the masses. They are generally cheaper and therefore naturally more accessible to a wider demographic. Cut away the availability of municipal courses and you cut away participation levels significantly and instead of growing and appealing to a wider audience golf retreats to a more exclusive income bracket.

Commercial reality is commercial reality though and so munis simply have to up their game, I’m delighted to belong to a club based on a more forward thinking municipal. It’s over 5 years now since the council leased out our course to a private operator to run. It’s not been perfect but...the course is now much better maintained and presented that it was. The golf academy based onsite is churning out promising and committed juniors, We have a big AG store onsite (above the driving range) and our membership is up. The place is basically thriving so I’d stick my neck out and say our local council got it spot on.

Now contrast that with the news I saw in the Ayrshire Post this week, in my old home county which has something like 9 municipal courses is earmarking several for closure including Belleisle considered by many to be one of the best munis in the country. The council is being forced to make over £9m in cuts and 5 of the golf courses are in the firing line. I’m sure we were told that austerity was now over but apparently not. South Ayrshire is absolutely steeped in golf, it must bring in significant revenues to the county. Somebody needs to give them a shake about being so short sighted. The thing is once a course goes, it ain’t coming back, Not sure about some of the others earmarked but not Belleisle, surely.

super_realist wrote:Christ, if a budget of a council is cut, where do you think they are going to look to make their own cuts to ensure services don't suffer as much as they might?
That's precisely what they have done. Virtually every council in the entire country has made personnel cuts.

Can you give me an example of any council in the UK who hasn't had some sort of redundancy programme, voluntary or otherwise in the last 10 years? I doubt it.

You might also notice that I never mentioned the constant cutting of budgets year on year. You were the one who did that. I agree that if you cut year on year that services will suffer, but if you don't raise council tax for example and instead freeze it for the benefit of votes, how on earth do you expect to pay for services? Of course it's going to suffer, and I really don't care if it's a dog track of a municipal course that closes as a result. We have too many courses in this country and pouring council money into facilities that are a constant drain on resources means they could clearly be re-appropriated elsewhere and to greater benefit. Golf is a luxury.

Remember, you were the "imbecile" who accused me of thinking I had all the answers, when all I claimed was that public owned companies are notoriously inefficient and I offered a few examples of where the councils could make savings. Also remember is a story about Golf and Austerity, not austerity and the benefits system or whatever. If you want to do that, there's a Marxist on here who I'm sure would be happy to discuss.

I’m intrigued, who’s the Marxist?

beninho wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

beninho wrote:

super_realist wrote:

beninho wrote:Case closed, realist did 4 years at a council. He is the font of all knowledge on the inner workings. Cut staff, close services, screw the residents. Easy. That's your £20m for year one.

Jesus, you are dense. I said it was a few methods on how Council's or local government or any public sector arrangement could save money. I didn't say it was a solution, I didn't say it was the only way that these organisations could save money and I didn't say there wasn't a funding problem, but if anyone genuinely thinks that public sector organisations could not benefit from being more efficient than they have no place in this discussion.

That's not the arguement you imbecile  the argument isn't, could councils be more efficient. Its probably true, the same as a lot of businesses in the uk. My point is that constant cutting if budgets, takes you way past the line of using it to become more efficient  and has a massive impact on services and residents.

The parrot view if cut budgets equals more efficient doesn't wash anymore.

Resorting to insults show you've lost the argument, better luck next time.

Insightful again, thanks for your input.

Stick to the insults. That's your level

Soul Requiem wrote:

beninho wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

beninho wrote:

super_realist wrote:

beninho wrote:Case closed, realist did 4 years at a council. He is the font of all knowledge on the inner workings. Cut staff, close services, screw the residents. Easy. That's your £20m for year one.

Jesus, you are dense. I said it was a few methods on how Council's or local government or any public sector arrangement could save money. I didn't say it was a solution, I didn't say it was the only way that these organisations could save money and I didn't say there wasn't a funding problem, but if anyone genuinely thinks that public sector organisations could not benefit from being more efficient than they have no place in this discussion.

That's not the arguement you imbecile  the argument isn't, could councils be more efficient. Its probably true, the same as a lot of businesses in the uk. My point is that constant cutting if budgets, takes you way past the line of using it to become more efficient  and has a massive impact on services and residents.

The parrot view if cut budgets equals more efficient doesn't wash anymore.

Resorting to insults show you've lost the argument, better luck next time.

Insightful again, thanks for your input.

Stick to the insults. That's your level

Thanks for your comments.

Why don't you join in. Tell us about yourself. While the debates are lively, no I'll will is ever meant. And Its not always serious debates. Anyway, tell us what's brought you to the golf board. Regular player?

JAS wrote:

super_realist wrote:Christ, if a budget of a council is cut, where do you think they are going to look to make their own cuts to ensure services don't suffer as much as they might?
That's precisely what they have done. Virtually every council in the entire country has made personnel cuts.

Can you give me an example of any council in the UK who hasn't had some sort of redundancy programme, voluntary or otherwise in the last 10 years? I doubt it.

You might also notice that I never mentioned the constant cutting of budgets year on year. You were the one who did that. I agree that if you cut year on year that services will suffer, but if you don't raise council tax for example and instead freeze it for the benefit of votes, how on earth do you expect to pay for services? Of course it's going to suffer, and I really don't care if it's a dog track of a municipal course that closes as a result. We have too many courses in this country and pouring council money into facilities that are a constant drain on resources means they could clearly be re-appropriated elsewhere and to greater benefit. Golf is a luxury.

Remember, you were the "imbecile" who accused me of thinking I had all the answers, when all I claimed was that public owned companies are notoriously inefficient and I offered a few examples of where the councils could make savings. Also remember is a story about Golf and Austerity, not austerity and the benefits system or whatever. If you want to do that, there's a Marxist on here who I'm sure would be happy to discuss.

I’m intrigued, who’s the Marxist?

I believe it's you.

JAS wrote:Looks like the “end of austerity” is about to be shunted another few years down the line as Western free market capitalism copes “so well”  with a wee flu like bug. A lot of people’s pension pots will have taken an absolute pasting this week. Never mind, we win some, we lose some onwards and eh...downwards!!

So this is Johnson's fault, is it?

dynamark wrote:Its flu with a different name.Stuff like this happens every few years.I will be in Tenerife this time tomorrow and back on Thursday.NO worries bad news for those affected but I am informed we loose 8000 folk a year due to flu related illness.See what happens be cautious hope for the best

Good perspective to have. Mortality of Covid-19 looks similar(ish) to influenza. Don't know for certain yet though. Still, no point worrying as can't do anything about it. Enjoy the beach .

navyblueshorts wrote:

dynamark wrote:Its flu with a different name.Stuff like this happens every few years.I will be in Tenerife this time tomorrow and back on Thursday.NO worries bad news for those affected but I am informed we loose 8000 folk a year due to flu related illness.See what happens be cautious hope for the best

Good perspective to have. Mortality of Covid-19 looks similar(ish) to influenza. Don't know for certain yet though. Still, no point worrying as can't do anything about it. Enjoy the beach .

Correct, it's similar to flu. Massive hysteria around this. Only worrying thing is that we don't have a cure yet. But people with a normal immune system wouldn't be at risk.

navyblueshorts wrote:

JAS wrote:Looks like the “end of austerity” is about to be shunted another few years down the line as Western free market capitalism copes “so well”  with a wee flu like bug. A lot of people’s pension pots will have taken an absolute pasting this week. Never mind, we win some, we lose some onwards and eh...downwards!!

So this is Johnson's fault, is it?

I don’t believe I actually said that anywhere did I?

beninho wrote:

JAS wrote:

super_realist wrote:Christ, if a budget of a council is cut, where do you think they are going to look to make their own cuts to ensure services don't suffer as much as they might?
That's precisely what they have done. Virtually every council in the entire country has made personnel cuts.

Can you give me an example of any council in the UK who hasn't had some sort of redundancy programme, voluntary or otherwise in the last 10 years? I doubt it.

You might also notice that I never mentioned the constant cutting of budgets year on year. You were the one who did that. I agree that if you cut year on year that services will suffer, but if you don't raise council tax for example and instead freeze it for the benefit of votes, how on earth do you expect to pay for services? Of course it's going to suffer, and I really don't care if it's a dog track of a municipal course that closes as a result. We have too many courses in this country and pouring council money into facilities that are a constant drain on resources means they could clearly be re-appropriated elsewhere and to greater benefit. Golf is a luxury.

Remember, you were the "imbecile" who accused me of thinking I had all the answers, when all I claimed was that public owned companies are notoriously inefficient and I offered a few examples of where the councils could make savings. Also remember is a story about Golf and Austerity, not austerity and the benefits system or whatever. If you want to do that, there's a Marxist on here who I'm sure would be happy to discuss.

I’m intrigued, who’s the Marxist?

I believe it's you.

It’s playground stuff Ben, because disagreeing with a wide range of conservative policy and being quite vehement in expressing such views obviously places me in the polar opposite position because everything in the world can only be black or white.

Can’t say I’ve read that much of Das Kapital, all those kind of works are a bit of a dry drudge of a read to be fair. Going from Marx at one end to Adam Smith at the other I’m pretty much in between. Of the main classic political/economic theorists I’d probably align myself closer to Keynes more than any other. They all make statements I both agree and disagree with in differing measure, yes even Adam Smith had a lot of useful stuff to say. Modern day political economists have had the benefits of watching the implementations of political economy pan out so it’s a bit easier for them. One guy I do listen to quite a lot is Mark Blyth who’s an Ivy League professor and talks a lot of sense on political and economic theory, most of which I think he has spot on and he considers himself more right than left of center.

All of which means the label of Marxist misses the mark quite significantly.

pedro wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

dynamark wrote:Its flu with a different name.Stuff like this happens every few years.I will be in Tenerife this time tomorrow and back on Thursday.NO worries bad news for those affected but I am informed we loose 8000 folk a year due to flu related illness.See what happens be cautious hope for the best

Good perspective to have. Mortality of Covid-19 looks similar(ish) to influenza. Don't know for certain yet though. Still, no point worrying as can't do anything about it. Enjoy the beach :OK:.

Correct, it's similar to flu. Massive hysteria around this. Only worrying thing is that we don't have a cure yet. But people with a normal immune system wouldn't be at risk.

But it is not the same as flu.

Flu is a relatively well understood virus and the disease it causes in humans is also pretty well understood. The type of mutation the influenza virus typically undergoes is somewhat predictable and that is why you can get a flu shot each year. It is not well understood how covid-19 will mutate from year to year or what effects it will have on humans. For example is it harmful to fetuses like zica is? Are there other long lasting health problems like zica that are yet to emerge? How will the transmission rate and severity of the disease change with mutation. All pretty unknown at the moment. At present the virulence of covid-19 is comparable to influenza but will this always be the case?

And for that reason it makes sense to limit the initial spread as much as possible.

pedro wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

dynamark wrote:Its flu with a different name.Stuff like this happens every few years.I will be in Tenerife this time tomorrow and back on Thursday.NO worries bad news for those affected but I am informed we loose 8000 folk a year due to flu related illness.See what happens be cautious hope for the best

Good perspective to have. Mortality of Covid-19 looks similar(ish) to influenza. Don't know for certain yet though. Still, no point worrying as can't do anything about it. Enjoy the beach .

Correct, it's similar to flu. Massive hysteria around this. Only worrying thing is that we don't have a cure yet. But people with a normal immune system wouldn't be at risk.

We don't know that and one can have a normal immune system, but other underlying health issues that put one at risk. In addition (although too late now), it's not a good idea to give a zoonotic agent a reservoir of new hosts to potentially mutate into something nastier.

JAS wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JAS wrote:Looks like the “end of austerity” is about to be shunted another few years down the line as Western free market capitalism copes “so well”  with a wee flu like bug. A lot of people’s pension pots will have taken an absolute pasting this week. Never mind, we win some, we lose some onwards and eh...downwards!!

So this is Johnson's fault, is it?

I don’t believe I actually said that anywhere did I?

I know, but it did kind of read as if all that nasty austerity (which you blame on Tories?) will now be perpetuated. You'd agree that the current Tory administration can't do a great deal about this I assume? Same as, I assume, you wouldn't want everyone piling all the blame on New Labour for why we've had to endure recent austerity?

navyblueshorts wrote:

JAS wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JAS wrote:Looks like the “end of austerity” is about to be shunted another few years down the line as Western free market capitalism copes “so well”  with a wee flu like bug. A lot of people’s pension pots will have taken an absolute pasting this week. Never mind, we win some, we lose some onwards and eh...downwards!!

So this is Johnson's fault, is it?

I don’t believe I actually said that anywhere did I?

I know, but it did kind of read as if all that nasty austerity (which you blame on Tories?) will now be perpetuated. You'd agree that the current Tory administration can't do a great deal about this I assume? Same as, I assume, you wouldn't want everyone piling all the blame on New Labour for why we've had to endure recent austerity?

Indeed, it’s pretty much out of govts control (although some authoritarian regimes are trying - without much success) but I would say this...The press are going pretty easy on Johnson (ok he hasn’t done anything to illicit any negative response yet) and Hancock ( don’t know about you but he doesn’t exactly fill me with much confidence that he has a grip). Just imagine for a minute how the right wing press would have laid into Corbyn had he been elected, I’m surprised they’re not saying it was all his fault anyway.

JAS wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JAS wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JAS wrote:Looks like the “end of austerity” is about to be shunted another few years down the line as Western free market capitalism copes “so well”  with a wee flu like bug. A lot of people’s pension pots will have taken an absolute pasting this week. Never mind, we win some, we lose some onwards and eh...downwards!!

So this is Johnson's fault, is it?

I don’t believe I actually said that anywhere did I?

I know, but it did kind of read as if all that nasty austerity (which you blame on Tories?) will now be perpetuated. You'd agree that the current Tory administration can't do a great deal about this I assume? Same as, I assume, you wouldn't want everyone piling all the blame on New Labour for why we've had to endure recent austerity?

Indeed, it’s pretty much out of govts control (although some authoritarian regimes are trying - without much success) but I would say this...The press are going pretty easy on Johnson (ok he hasn’t done anything to illicit any negative response yet) and Hancock ( don’t know about you but he doesn’t exactly fill me with much confidence that he has a grip). Just imagine for a minute how the right wing press would have laid into Corbyn had he been elected, I’m surprised they’re not saying it was all his fault anyway.

Yeah; I accept that, given left-right split of main press bodies. As to Hancock, well, I get the impression he's inline w/ the second syllable of his surname...

navyblueshorts wrote:
We don't know that and one can have a normal immune system, but other underlying health issues that put one at risk. In addition (although too late now), it's not a good idea to give a zoonotic agent a reservoir of new hosts to potentially mutate into something nastier.

And I think it doesn't have to mutate into something nasty like you would get in an apocalypse movie but just become an endemic disease with the same outcomes as influenza to be something worth limiting.

navyblueshorts wrote:

I know, but it did kind of read as if all that nasty austerity (which you blame on Tories?) will now be perpetuated. You'd agree that the current Tory administration can't do a great deal about this I assume? Same as, I assume, you wouldn't want everyone piling all the blame on New Labour for why we've had to endure recent austerity?

Didn’t have the time earlier to respond more fully regarding austerity and the causes of austerity
Yes I do blame the coalition and subsequent govts for austerity it WAS a choice they made (and I believe the wrong choice if you listen to most reasonably centrist economists).
But but but I hear you say, Labour crashed the economy!!! Well not quite true actually, Labour happened to be in power when the world banking system thought it would pretend to be one gigantic casino and it all went wrong. They had to bail out the banks, there wasn’t really a choice. That’s where the money went, after a good few years of managing public finances pretty well, RBS etc managed to hole the country’s finances below the waterline. Other than reverse much of the banking deregulation that went on in the ‘80s (for which Brown would no doubt have been labelled a Marxist loony) there wasn’t a lot Labour could have done to prevent the crash and it would have to have been done via global cooperation, unilaterally reregulating U.K. banks wouldn’t have worked either.

Ironically now, if we accept the view that the banking crisis triggered the Tories to impose austerity, you now have one of the foxes in the hen house. Our beloved chancellor is ex Golden Sacks and a hedge fund manager. He, if truth be told is up to his neck in the causes of the financial crisis, you honestly couldn’t make it up.

As an aside did you know that in the weeks leading up to the crash Goldman Sachs changed their status from investment Bank to retail bank (so that they would get govt protection from bankruptcy - they knew what calamity they were about to unleash on the world and they very slyly handed the bill to taxpayers.

I think the only way those on the right could blame labour for the UK's portion of grief from the global financial crisis 07/08 would be if they had spent the time in opposition to labour calling for the UK banking sector to withdraw from global finance or for massive regulatory changes to UK banking. Neither happened. And in truth the seeds of the GFC were set in motion by Reagan, Thatcher and Clinton.

And as Jas has pointed out austerity is not what the evidence from economic theory or economic data show should happen in response to a shock like the GFC, going down the austerity route is a purely ideological one. I liken austerity in response to the GFC to the christian creationist myth being used as a response to evolution.

The big problem with austerity, is that it hasn't actually worked.

https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/334/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/

This is about as simple an explanation as you’ll see on what is a complex problem to explain
https://youtu.be/go2bVGi0ReE

JAS wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

I know, but it did kind of read as if all that nasty austerity (which you blame on Tories?) will now be perpetuated. You'd agree that the current Tory administration can't do a great deal about this I assume? Same as, I assume, you wouldn't want everyone piling all the blame on New Labour for why we've had to endure recent austerity?

Didn’t have the time earlier to respond more fully regarding austerity and the causes of austerity
Yes I do blame the coalition and subsequent govts for austerity it WAS a choice they made (and I believe the wrong choice if you listen to most reasonably centrist economists).
But but but I hear you say, Labour crashed the economy!!! Well not quite true actually, Labour happened to be in power when the world banking system thought it would pretend to be one gigantic casino and it all went wrong. They had to bail out the banks, there wasn’t really a choice. That’s where the money went, after a good few years of managing public finances pretty well, RBS etc managed to hole the country’s finances below the waterline. Other than reverse much of the banking deregulation that went on in the ‘80s (for which Brown would no doubt have been labelled a Marxist loony) there wasn’t a lot Labour could have done to prevent the crash and it would have to have been done via global cooperation, unilaterally reregulating U.K. banks wouldn’t have worked either.

Ironically now, if we accept the view that the banking crisis triggered the Tories to impose austerity, you now have one of the foxes in the hen house. Our beloved chancellor is ex Golden Sacks and a hedge fund  manager. He, if truth be told is up to his neck in the causes of the financial crisis, you honestly couldn’t make it up.

As an aside did you know that in the weeks leading up to the crash Goldman Sachs changed their status from investment Bank to retail bank (so that they would get govt protection from bankruptcy - they knew what calamity they were about to unleash on the world and they very slyly handed the bill to taxpayers.

I don't believe that, but you know that loads probably do. Covid-19, and it's effects on global economies, is unfortunate, but I don't think we should be beating the present administration w/ it.

Re. Goldman and their status, I didn't know that. If true, pretty despicable.

McLaren wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:
We don't know that and one can have a normal immune system, but other underlying health issues that put one at risk. In addition (although too late now), it's not a good idea to give a zoonotic agent a reservoir of new hosts to potentially mutate into something nastier.

And I think it doesn't have to mutate into something nasty like you would get in an apocalypse movie but just become an endemic disease with the same outcomes as influenza to be something worth limiting.

True. Hopefully, it'll be one wave now and nothing longer lasting.

JAS wrote:This is about as simple an explanation as you’ll see on what is a complex problem to explain
https://youtu.be/go2bVGi0ReE

I can find videos on YouTube which explain how 9/11 was an inside job. If you want to prove a point JAS, don't use YouTube as a source.

JAS wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JAS wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JAS wrote:Looks like the “end of austerity” is about to be shunted another few years down the line as Western free market capitalism copes “so well”  with a wee flu like bug. A lot of people’s pension pots will have taken an absolute pasting this week. Never mind, we win some, we lose some onwards and eh...downwards!!

So this is Johnson's fault, is it?

I don’t believe I actually said that anywhere did I?

I know, but it did kind of read as if all that nasty austerity (which you blame on Tories?) will now be perpetuated. You'd agree that the current Tory administration can't do a great deal about this I assume? Same as, I assume, you wouldn't want everyone piling all the blame on New Labour for why we've had to endure recent austerity?

Indeed, it’s pretty much out of govts control (although some authoritarian regimes are trying - without much success) but I would say this...The press are going pretty easy on Johnson (ok he hasn’t done anything to illicit any negative response yet) and Hancock ( don’t know about you but he doesn’t exactly fill me with much confidence that he has a grip). Just imagine for a minute how the right wing press would have laid into Corbyn had he been elected, I’m surprised they’re not saying it was all his fault anyway.

Why do you care about the right wing press getting laid into Corbyn? Didn't the left wing press get laid into Cameron, May and Johnson? What about left wing morons like Owen Jones, Lily Allen and the moustachioed Ash Sarkar? The left is every bit as rabid to the current administration as the right would have been against Corbyn had he got in, besides, Corbyn has hardly helped himself has he? He supplies all the ammunition they need.
You need to stop this persecution complex. Labour deservedly lost the election, and like the right, they attack through the media any government, it's called being the opposition. Just as the right have attacked the left (with good reason). The current Conservative government aren't in power because of the power of the media, primarily it's because the public rejected the laughable policies of the Labour party and their inept, limp, feeble leader, reflected perfectly by the traditional Labour constituencies laughing in Corbyn's face.

Comment on ash sarker, similar to the right wing nut jobs on twitter. Good old realist holding the same views.

She does have a moustache. It's not a view, it's an observation.

SHe's also one of the worst Labour apologists who still can't accept that Labour were to blame for their failure. She's still not blaming Corbyn, crazy policies or a lack of a coherent stance on Brexit. She's actually blaming the right wing media for attacking Corbyn, which is hilarious. Corbyn was the weakest and worst Labour leader since Michael Foote, and probably even worse, yet she still hasn't criticised him. That's pathetic.

Well,she doesn't. But I will put you in the box with the twitter trolls who bring it up. Anyway, dark skinned person has darker hair. Shock.

super_realist wrote:

JAS wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JAS wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JAS wrote:Looks like the “end of austerity” is about to be shunted another few years down the line as Western free market capitalism copes “so well”  with a wee flu like bug. A lot of people’s pension pots will have taken an absolute pasting this week. Never mind, we win some, we lose some onwards and eh...downwards!!

So this is Johnson's fault, is it?

I don’t believe I actually said that anywhere did I?

I know, but it did kind of read as if all that nasty austerity (which you blame on Tories?) will now be perpetuated. You'd agree that the current Tory administration can't do a great deal about this I assume? Same as, I assume, you wouldn't want everyone piling all the blame on New Labour for why we've had to endure recent austerity?

Indeed, it’s pretty much out of govts control (although some authoritarian regimes are trying - without much success) but I would say this...The press are going pretty easy on Johnson (ok he hasn’t done anything to illicit any negative response yet) and Hancock ( don’t know about you but he doesn’t exactly fill me with much confidence that he has a grip). Just imagine for a minute how the right wing press would have laid into Corbyn had he been elected, I’m surprised they’re not saying it was all his fault anyway.

Why do you care about the right wing press getting laid into Corbyn? Didn't the left wing press get laid into Cameron, May and Johnson? What about left wing morons like Owen Jones, Lily Allen and the moustachioed Ash Sarkar? The left is every bit as rabid to the current administration as the right would have been against Corbyn had he got in, besides, Corbyn has hardly helped himself has he? He supplies all the ammunition they need.
You need to stop this persecution complex. Labour deservedly lost the election, and like the right, they attack through the media any  government, it's called being the opposition. Just as the right have attacked the left (with good reason). The current Conservative government aren't in power because of the power of the media, primarily it's because the public rejected the laughable policies of the Labour party and their inept, limp, feeble leader, reflected perfectly by the traditional Labour constituencies laughing in Corbyn's face.

Oh ffs here we go again, would you actually just listen to yourself? Read back what you’ve written a try to come to a conclusion about the point you’re actually trying to make. You seem to want to polarise this debate into 2 party politics. The debate was about austerity which I think was a wrong choice, if Labour had stayed in power in 2010 and gone for austerity it would still have been the wrong choice. You however seem to think that it was the right choice and seem to be heading in the Trumpian direction of everything that contradicts your narrow view of the world must be fake news.

If I was female and had a moustache and especially if I was in the media, I would probably get it waxed off.

Anyway, it was just a snide comment to further ridicule someone who already does plenty to humiliate herself with her crackpot views.

Realist, can you post a picture of her with a moustache not just darker hair, due to her ethnicity.

I don't have an Ash Sarkar picture book, just google it.
She has dark hair a.k.a a moustache. There's loads of women with dark hair and dark skin, but have the common sense to get rid of it when it looks like a moustache.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=ash+sarkar&prmd=inv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj5p73I9f3nAhVmQEEAHdSZB9kQ_AUoAXoECBEQAQ&biw=412&bih=650&dpr=2.63

I'm not seeing it.

I quick Twitter search does show the type of person making those comments though.

What was it Soul R said the other day about resorting to personal insults. I think that true whether directed at the other debater or directed at the people being discussed.

So let me get this right...Jones, Allen and Sarkar are all morons because they don’t subscribe to Supers narrow minded view of the world....classy debating!! It’s not really is it, it’s desperately deflecting the thread away from the central point because the argument for austerity and implementing it just simply doesn’t stack up.

Note also that the additional personal insult was aimed at the person of colour.

Super

When it comes up again, your comments above will serve as evidence of your racism. The brown women have beards trope is now considered racist.

Jones and Sarkar views are so ridiculous that there's no need to insult them beyond that.

Jesus wept!

navyblueshorts wrote:Jesus wept!

What comment was this in response to?

All of them probably!

McLaren wrote:Super

When it comes up again, your comments above will serve as evidence of your racism. The brown women have beards trope is now considered racist.

Pathetic Mac. I see just as many white women with moustaches as I do Asian.

JAS wrote:What was it Soul R said the other day about resorting to personal insults. I think that true whether directed at the other debater or directed at the people being discussed.  

So let me get this right...Jones, Allen and Sarkar are all morons because they don’t subscribe to Supers narrow minded view of the world....classy debating!!  It’s not really is it, it’s desperately deflecting  the thread away from the central point because the argument for austerity and implementing it just simply doesn’t stack up.

Have you ever listened to any of them JAS? I went into exactly why I thought Sarkar's views were ridiculous and you completely ignored it. So as you say, "classy debating".

You couldn't get more odious than Jones with his pathetic persecution complex, and as for being intolerant of anyone who doesn't share the same views, it's Jones who has history of walking out of debates when people don't agree with him.

As for Lily Allen, she's just an idiot with her pictures of her shedding fake tears in front of the Labour manifesto when they hilariously lost the election.

I'm not a fan of Jones or Sarker, I think it's just the personal abuse that was uncalled for. But, I think we had a discussion about personal abuse on here not long back. And you had no issue with it. While I, thought it a bit dickish, and accepted that even when I have done it, it's still a bit dickish.

beninho wrote:I'm not a fan of Jones or Sarker, I think it's just the personal abuse that was uncalled for. But, I think we had a discussion about personal abuse on here not long back. And you had no issue with it. While I, thought it a bit dickish, and accepted that even when I have done it, it's still a bit dickish.

It's hardly abuse Ben because Sarkar is not even reading this, it's a comment, besides I have no requirement to be nice about Sarkar, Jones, Allen, Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott, Woods, Hamilton, Terry, Lowry or anyone else I don't like even if you think it's "d1ckish" to do so. It's just a fun forum, not the Oxford Union or a job interview.  It would be pretty boring if we all typed on this forum in BBC English without a bit of ribbing, urine taking, cajoling, winding up etc.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/03/lost-decade-hidden-story-how-austerity-broke-britain?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0XMQuPp6OUgWjch-b1D8GePpsDwCxWq3dCEMXf8_ouw5TlCOV7cZ3ZPws#Echobox=1583305984

super_realist wrote:

McLaren wrote:Super

When it comes up again, your comments above will serve as evidence of your racism. The brown women have beards trope is now considered racist.

Pathetic Mac. I see just as many white women with moustaches as I do Asian.

You might do, but what has that got to do with the brown women have beards insult you used? The offensiveness of the comment has nothing to do with actual studies of what body hair women have.

McLaren wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:Jesus wept!

What comment was this in response to?

The general tenor.

Fair to say the thread has diversified somewhat from the original point which was

Municipal golf has suffered and is suffering because of austerity but are there better ways of dealing with it than just closing courses? My club/local council has shown that it is possible.

The austerity defenders then polarised the argument by stating the obvious that essential services are more important than leisure services which are a luxury. Which of course is a typical right wing response to any challenge. Set the masses against each other by having them fight each other for something they are no longer getting.

As an analogy...A lottery syndicate of Tom Dick and Harry (organised by Tom) has a £100000 windfall.

A left wing Tom spends a ridiculous amount of time and energy trying to work out the whys are wherefores of how best to divide up with his 2 friends even thinking that it may be better to share it out among some other worthy causes. The 3 spend a lot of time and money having endless meetings about how best to spend it.

A right wing Tom gives Dick £1000 keeps the rest and tells Harry that Dick has all his money.

JAS wrote:As an analogy...A lottery syndicate of Tom Dick and Harry (organised by Tom) has a £100000 windfall.

A left wing Tom spends a ridiculous amount of time and energy trying to work out the whys are wherefores of how best to divide up with his 2 friends even thinking that it may be better to share it out among some other worthy causes. The 3 spend a lot of time and money having endless meetings about how best to spend it.

A right wing Tom gives Dick £1000 keeps the rest and tells Harry that  Dick has all his money.

You have issues.

Soul Requiem wrote:

JAS wrote:As an analogy...A lottery syndicate of Tom Dick and Harry (organised by Tom) has a £100000 windfall.

A left wing Tom spends a ridiculous amount of time and energy trying to work out the whys are wherefores of how best to divide up with his 2 friends even thinking that it may be better to share it out among some other worthy causes. The 3 spend a lot of time and money having endless meetings about how best to spend it.

A right wing Tom gives Dick £1000 keeps the rest and tells Harry that  Dick has all his money.

You have issues.

If you don’t see that as a joke then I think it’s you that has the issues

JAS wrote:Fair to say the thread has diversified somewhat from the original point which was

Municipal golf has suffered and is suffering because of austerity but are there better ways of dealing with it than just closing courses? My club/local council has shown that it is possible.

The austerity defenders then polarised the argument by stating the obvious that essential services are more important than leisure services which are a luxury. Which of course is a typical right wing response to any challenge. Set the masses against each other by having them fight each other for something they are no longer getting.

Who has defended austerity? I don't think anyone did. I think they said that in the sea of municipal courses that you mentioned, that it wasn't a big deal if some of them closed.