Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[ralphjohn69]

First topic message reminder :

It's not logic. Most pot 4 teams are no worse than Rangers. If Rangers were the worst ever pot 4 team last year, what makes them any better now?

Because instead of playing another Pot 3 team they will be playing a Pot 4 team, who will probably be worse than a Pot 3 team so they have a better chance of getting 3rd, although it's obviously not guaranteed. You really don't help yourself when you post about football....

[JAS]

That isn't what they are doing with this inquiry though. They aren't considering all aspects of the pandemic handling. They're spending millions (140m in first six months) on politicians bitching about one another instead of actually addressing the main points.
For example, why aren't they asking why SAGE is staffed by people who have a proven record of failure, such as Neil Ferguson who has never been correct with his modelling or that communist psychologist Susan Michie who isn't even a scientist in anything remotely relevant?

You seriously believe CCP death figures?

Why are they not addressing why they adopted Chinese Communist responses to a pandemic and not WHO Pandemic response as planned and which result in less excess deaths?

At least Jenny Harries effectively admitted that face masks were a waste of time.

If your mind is so closed why do you even bother trying to engage in debates. Given your closed mind status I can see you would struggle with the whole concept of an enquiry in the first place.

For the record no I do not believe Chinese Covid numbers, I am very skeptical of ANY data coming out of China. At the same time that has absolutely zero relevance to our enquiry anyway.

I get the feeling you don't like the truth if you don't agree with it, if you don't agree, it cant be true and anything that tries to uncover the truth must be discredited and if a debate starts getting uncomfortably away from your beliefs, change it or add in distractions, I get it... we have a proper little Trumpian!!

I don't know what you aren't getting here. My point is the enquiry appears ONLY to be addressing the pandemic from a particular viewpoint. It isn't asking anything in regards to whether we followed the correct path.
Nice trope of calling me a Trumpian because I have a different view to you. Apparently I'm Trumpian because I wanted a WHO Pandemic Response based on tried and tested science and not a made up, fly by the seat of your pants knee jerk CCP policy? Great logic.

I'm not not getting anything, YOU think the enquiry isn't covering the things you think it should cover (I'm assuming you've looked through the terms of reference and came to an evidence based judgement rather than just made an assumption?)

It's not that you have a different view to me that makes you come across as Trumpian. It's the fact that your view and the truth don't exactly share the same page. In that scenario both you and Trump share the same traits, you ridicule factual evidence, you randomly discredit other experts in the field that would support the argument you don't agree with and....randomly you throw rocks at China and how awful they are...THAT is classic Trump!!

No, it isn't covering by definition what ANY inquiry should be asking. Crucially it isn't asking WHY?
We don't need to hear from bereaved relatives. We should be asking "why did you do that, or why didn't you do that"
"What evidence did you have to make that decision" etc, what is this person's "expertise" and why did you listen to them?

I didn't "throw rocks at China " I asked WHY we followed their pandemic response and abandoned our WHO approved pandemic response, and if anything we should be asking why the bloody inquiry glossed over that China were responsible for what is highly likely to be a man made virus.

So far it's just a preposterous stage for a pathetic grandstanding KC who seems only concerned with swear words in WhatsApp conversations instead of working out where the UK response definitively failed and it doesn't look like the agenda is going to delve much deeper.
140m spent already and NOTHING of any worth coming out.

If we had the same thing again, it sounds like you'd be happy to follow EXACTLY the same response.

140m…Christ with a bit of luck you could get half a dozen immigrants on a plane to Rwanda for that. Don’t you just love The Tories forming their circular firing squad :-p

What a ludicrous last statement of yours, I wouldn’t have managed it the way Coco managed it for a start. The next one (and there will be one) will be different anyway. I do share your concern that we’re maybe not going to get real valuable lessons from this enquiry. Either from the enquiry itself or how the findings are accepted or otherwise.

Clearly at the moment I don’t think this country is currently in a position to cope with another pandemic.

[navyblueshorts]

...and if anything we should be asking why the bloody inquiry glossed over that China were responsible for what is highly likely to be a man made virus...

Absolute b****cks. The fact that you even consider this to be the most likely source tells me all I need to know about the rest of what you're likely to say on this issue. Good grief.

[JAS]

...and if anything we should be asking why the bloody inquiry glossed over that China were responsible for what is highly likely to be a man made virus...

Absolute b****cks. The fact that you even consider this to be the most likely source tells me all I need to know about the rest of what you're likely to say on this issue. Good grief.

Another question for Super here...Who set the terms of reference for the enquiry then? I'll give you a clue he needs a haircut and a throat punch.

Anyway, totally agree with Navy here, you've been playing too many Trump videos again

[JAS]

Decent week for the Scottish co-efficient then Supes?? Apart from Rangers of course the damage was already done for the other 2 but still good results for them. That should I think cement 10th place but I don’t think Rangers on their own will squeeze it past Turkey or Belgium. Puts Rangers up to an individual high of 27th ranked in Europe.

[super_realist]

...and if anything we should be asking why the bloody inquiry glossed over that China were responsible for what is highly likely to be a man made virus...

Absolute b****cks. The fact that you even consider this to be the most likely source tells me all I need to know about the rest of what you're likely to say on this issue. Good grief.

You still think it came out of a wet market? Not remotely suspicious they have a massive Virology lab at the heart of the outbreak. Ochams razor.

[super_realist]

That isn't what they are doing with this inquiry though. They aren't considering all aspects of the pandemic handling. They're spending millions (140m in first six months) on politicians bitching about one another instead of actually addressing the main points.
For example, why aren't they asking why SAGE is staffed by people who have a proven record of failure, such as Neil Ferguson who has never been correct with his modelling or that communist psychologist Susan Michie who isn't even a scientist in anything remotely relevant?

You seriously believe CCP death figures?

Why are they not addressing why they adopted Chinese Communist responses to a pandemic and not WHO Pandemic response as planned and which result in less excess deaths?

At least Jenny Harries effectively admitted that face masks were a waste of time.

If your mind is so closed why do you even bother trying to engage in debates. Given your closed mind status I can see you would struggle with the whole concept of an enquiry in the first place.

For the record no I do not believe Chinese Covid numbers, I am very skeptical of ANY data coming out of China. At the same time that has absolutely zero relevance to our enquiry anyway.

I get the feeling you don't like the truth if you don't agree with it, if you don't agree, it cant be true and anything that tries to uncover the truth must be discredited and if a debate starts getting uncomfortably away from your beliefs, change it or add in distractions, I get it... we have a proper little Trumpian!!

I don't know what you aren't getting here. My point is the enquiry appears ONLY to be addressing the pandemic from a particular viewpoint. It isn't asking anything in regards to whether we followed the correct path.
Nice trope of calling me a Trumpian because I have a different view to you. Apparently I'm Trumpian because I wanted a WHO Pandemic Response based on tried and tested science and not a made up, fly by the seat of your pants knee jerk CCP policy? Great logic.

I'm not not getting anything, YOU think the enquiry isn't covering the things you think it should cover (I'm assuming you've looked through the terms of reference and came to an evidence based judgement rather than just made an assumption?)

It's not that you have a different view to me that makes you come across as Trumpian. It's the fact that your view and the truth don't exactly share the same page. In that scenario both you and Trump share the same traits, you ridicule factual evidence, you randomly discredit other experts in the field that would support the argument you don't agree with and....randomly you throw rocks at China and how awful they are...THAT is classic Trump!!

No, it isn't covering by definition what ANY inquiry should be asking. Crucially it isn't asking WHY?
We don't need to hear from bereaved relatives. We should be asking "why did you do that, or why didn't you do that"
"What evidence did you have to make that decision" etc, what is this person's "expertise" and why did you listen to them?

I didn't "throw rocks at China " I asked WHY we followed their pandemic response and abandoned our WHO approved pandemic response, and if anything we should be asking why the bloody inquiry glossed over that China were responsible for what is highly likely to be a man made virus.

So far it's just a preposterous stage for a pathetic grandstanding KC who seems only concerned with swear words in WhatsApp conversations instead of working out where the UK response definitively failed and it doesn't look like the agenda is going to delve much deeper.
140m spent already and NOTHING of any worth coming out.

If we had the same thing again, it sounds like you'd be happy to follow EXACTLY the same response.

140m…Christ with a bit of luck you could get half a dozen immigrants on a plane to Rwanda for that. Don’t you just love The Tories forming their circular firing squad :-p

What a ludicrous last statement of yours, I wouldn’t have managed it the way Coco managed it for a start. The next one (and there will be one) will be different anyway. I do share your concern that we’re maybe not going to get real valuable lessons from this enquiry. Either from the enquiry itself or how the findings are accepted or otherwise.

Clearly at the moment I don’t think this country is currently in a position to cope with another pandemic.

The fact you don't know the difference between an inquiry and and enquiry troubles me a bit, and no Boris didn't personally set the terms of reference for the COVID Inquiry, at least he didn't set out what would be discussed, he might have signed off that an INQUIRY would occur, but he doesn't get to decide what he's asked or what findings they arrive at.
Having just checked the TOR, it seems that smug Hugo Keith and his oddly verbose line of questioning isn't following the TOR. Why not?

[navyblueshorts]

...and if anything we should be asking why the bloody inquiry glossed over that China were responsible for what is highly likely to be a man made virus...

Absolute b****cks. The fact that you even consider this to be the most likely source tells me all I need to know about the rest of what you're likely to say on this issue. Good grief.

You still think it came out of a wet market? Not remotely suspicious they have a massive Virology lab at the heart of the outbreak. Ochams razor.

Good grief. Occam's Razor? Occam's tinfoil hat, more like. It's far easier to invoke the natural/zoonotic outbreak as the one satisfying maximal parsimony here, but I'm not sure I expect you to understand that position. Even if it came from that lab (and there's zero evidence, zero, that it did), you don't appear to understand the difference between a man-made virus and a natural one accidentally released by human mistake from a virology lab. There's even less than zero evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is man-made than there is of it being a natural, but accidentally, released pathogen. The assumption that it was both man-made and came from the WIV appears similar to a religious conviction i.e. no real idea, so postulate some 'other power' to be responsible.

Yes, in all likelihood, the wet market was the source of the outbreak, but even that doesn't mean it 'came' from there; just that it might have expanded from there. All the evidence points to the wet market as the point of outbreak. The biological theory is sound, and there are plenty of other known occurrences of zoonotic infections known, several mediated by the same family of viruses. You choose to believe it was all some Chinese plot gone wrong - I wonder why?

[JAS]

That isn't what they are doing with this inquiry though. They aren't considering all aspects of the pandemic handling. They're spending millions (140m in first six months) on politicians bitching about one another instead of actually addressing the main points.
For example, why aren't they asking why SAGE is staffed by people who have a proven record of failure, such as Neil Ferguson who has never been correct with his modelling or that communist psychologist Susan Michie who isn't even a scientist in anything remotely relevant?

You seriously believe CCP death figures?

Why are they not addressing why they adopted Chinese Communist responses to a pandemic and not WHO Pandemic response as planned and which result in less excess deaths?

At least Jenny Harries effectively admitted that face masks were a waste of time.

If your mind is so closed why do you even bother trying to engage in debates. Given your closed mind status I can see you would struggle with the whole concept of an enquiry in the first place.

For the record no I do not believe Chinese Covid numbers, I am very skeptical of ANY data coming out of China. At the same time that has absolutely zero relevance to our enquiry anyway.

I get the feeling you don't like the truth if you don't agree with it, if you don't agree, it cant be true and anything that tries to uncover the truth must be discredited and if a debate starts getting uncomfortably away from your beliefs, change it or add in distractions, I get it... we have a proper little Trumpian!!

I don't know what you aren't getting here. My point is the enquiry appears ONLY to be addressing the pandemic from a particular viewpoint. It isn't asking anything in regards to whether we followed the correct path.
Nice trope of calling me a Trumpian because I have a different view to you. Apparently I'm Trumpian because I wanted a WHO Pandemic Response based on tried and tested science and not a made up, fly by the seat of your pants knee jerk CCP policy? Great logic.

I'm not not getting anything, YOU think the enquiry isn't covering the things you think it should cover (I'm assuming you've looked through the terms of reference and came to an evidence based judgement rather than just made an assumption?)

It's not that you have a different view to me that makes you come across as Trumpian. It's the fact that your view and the truth don't exactly share the same page. In that scenario both you and Trump share the same traits, you ridicule factual evidence, you randomly discredit other experts in the field that would support the argument you don't agree with and....randomly you throw rocks at China and how awful they are...THAT is classic Trump!!

No, it isn't covering by definition what ANY inquiry should be asking. Crucially it isn't asking WHY?
We don't need to hear from bereaved relatives. We should be asking "why did you do that, or why didn't you do that"
"What evidence did you have to make that decision" etc, what is this person's "expertise" and why did you listen to them?

I didn't "throw rocks at China " I asked WHY we followed their pandemic response and abandoned our WHO approved pandemic response, and if anything we should be asking why the bloody inquiry glossed over that China were responsible for what is highly likely to be a man made virus.

So far it's just a preposterous stage for a pathetic grandstanding KC who seems only concerned with swear words in WhatsApp conversations instead of working out where the UK response definitively failed and it doesn't look like the agenda is going to delve much deeper.
140m spent already and NOTHING of any worth coming out.

If we had the same thing again, it sounds like you'd be happy to follow EXACTLY the same response.

140m…Christ with a bit of luck you could get half a dozen immigrants on a plane to Rwanda for that. Don’t you just love The Tories forming their circular firing squad :-p

What a ludicrous last statement of yours, I wouldn’t have managed it the way Coco managed it for a start. The next one (and there will be one) will be different anyway. I do share your concern that we’re maybe not going to get real valuable lessons from this enquiry. Either from the enquiry itself or how the findings are accepted or otherwise.

Clearly at the moment I don’t think this country is currently in a position to cope with another pandemic.

The fact you don't know the difference between an inquiry and and enquiry troubles me a bit, and no Boris didn't personally set the terms of reference for the COVID Inquiry, at least he didn't set out what would be discussed, he might have signed off that an INQUIRY would occur, but he doesn't get to decide what he's asked or what findings they arrive at.
Having just checked the TOR, it seems that smug Hugo Keith and his oddly verbose line of questioning isn't following the TOR.  Why not?

Is that your best shot?? Distractionary pedantic twaddle about the supposed un-interchangeability between enquire an inquire?? Good grief!! Fill your boots with being troubled

[JAS]

Is the Glasow pendulum on the swing back?

Just a few weeks ago Rangers were running on zero confidence, Pumped in CL play-off round, pumped in first OF game at home, new signings playing the way Super debates topics on here, 8 points off the pace in the league, manager handed p45, embarrassing result against Europa League group minnows. All in all pretty horrific start to the season.

Here we are xmas just round the corner, domestic silverware in the bag, Europa league group won with an away victory in Spain and only 5 point adrift with 2 games in hand in the league. Carlsberg don't do turnarounds but if they did...

Meanwhile, seemingly invincible Brendans jacket is suddenly on a shaky peg and IF he loses the next OF game... I do think it's crazy that Rodgers' position could be remotely under threat but that is the craziness of football life in Glasgow

[JAS]

Anyone else been watching Mr Bates v the Post Office? I know it’s a dramatisation of a true story but is IS a true story. I can’t remember when I last got so insensed watching a drama knowing that it was basically a true story that really happened.

The whole scandal literally stinks and nowhere either in the establishment or the political sphere (anywhere in the political sphere - well except for Zahawi who did a brilliant cameo of himself on the select committee) can anyone claim any sort of moral high ground. There should be people going to jail over it (and NOT falsely accused subpostmasters) and as for Fujitsu they should be terminated on any public sector contracts  they have and never be allowed to bid for any ever again.

[BlueCoverman]

Couldn't agree more. Watched the first episode last night and will be catching up further tonight. It's difficult to believe that, absolutely no one in the Post Office had the guts to recognize that it was extremely unlikely, for all of these people of previous good character to be fraudsters. Surely someone in the organisation must have had suspicion that it was a software failure, but presumably were unwilling to put their own head above the parapet.

[navyblueshorts]

Couldn't agree more. Watched the first episode last night and will be catching up further tonight. It's difficult to believe that, absolutely no one in the Post Office had the guts to recognize that it was extremely unlikely, for all of these people of previous good character to be fraudsters. Surely someone in the organisation must have had suspicion that it was a software failure, but presumably were unwilling to put their own head above the parapet.

Agree. However, "computer says no"....

[navyblueshorts]

If anyone wanted more evidence for why this country is the mess that it currently is:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67890334

[JAS]

If anyone wanted more evidence for why this country is the mess that it currently is:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67890334

Yep, people in power (whether that be politics, industry, judiciary or whatever) they are so so so out of touch with the day to day lives of ordinary people.
That Post office drama also starkly highlighted that. This pains me to say as a left leaning person but I hope no-one is under the impression that the "blindness" displayed by Davis in the link and the insensitive abuse of power by Senior Post Office execs and their cohorts highlighted in the drama will just go away if the Tories get kicked out. I normally rail against the statement "They're all the same" when levelled at politicians but really that out of touch-ness cuts right across the political spectrum. At the height of the Horizon scandal Starmer was DPP, Ed Davey was in a ministerial position where he could have done more and the Post Office Chairperson through most of it was none other then Jack Straw's other half FFS. I can say it's shocking that the Tories are letting the compensation issue drag and that's not having a pop at the Tories per se that's an attack on elitist power not giving a damn about ruining the lives of ordinary people.

[I'm never wrong]

Wonder how far up the chain of responsibility any prosecutions will fall on those responsible with the police investigation.

[Duty281]

If anyone wanted more evidence for why this country is the mess that it currently is:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67890334

Yep, people in power (whether that be politics, industry, judiciary or whatever) they are so so so out of touch with the day to day lives of ordinary people.
That Post office drama also starkly highlighted that. This pains me to say as a left leaning person but I hope no-one is under the impression that the "blindness" displayed by Davis in the link and the insensitive abuse of power by Senior Post Office execs and their cohorts  highlighted in the drama will just go away if the Tories get kicked out. I normally rail against the statement  "They're all the same" when levelled at politicians but really that out of touch-ness cuts right across the political spectrum. At the height of the Horizon scandal Starmer was DPP, Ed Davey was in a ministerial position where he could have done more and the Post Office Chairperson through most of it was none other then Jack Straw's other half FFS. I  can say it's shocking that the Tories are letting the compensation issue drag and that's not having a pop at the Tories per se that's an attack on elitist power not giving a damn about ruining the lives of ordinary people.

Who on earth thinks it would? It's got hardly anything to do with the Tories. The vast majority of the prosecutions occurred under a Labour government, and it was Tony Blair, in the late 90s, who was warned that Horizon was flawed, but Blair nonetheless continued with the project.

[JAS]

If anyone wanted more evidence for why this country is the mess that it currently is:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67890334

Yep, people in power (whether that be politics, industry, judiciary or whatever) they are so so so out of touch with the day to day lives of ordinary people.
That Post office drama also starkly highlighted that. This pains me to say as a left leaning person but I hope no-one is under the impression that the "blindness" displayed by Davis in the link and the insensitive abuse of power by Senior Post Office execs and their cohorts  highlighted in the drama will just go away if the Tories get kicked out. I normally rail against the statement  "They're all the same" when levelled at politicians but really that out of touch-ness cuts right across the political spectrum. At the height of the Horizon scandal Starmer was DPP, Ed Davey was in a ministerial position where he could have done more and the Post Office Chairperson through most of it was none other then Jack Straw's other half FFS. I  can say it's shocking that the Tories are letting the compensation issue drag and that's not having a pop at the Tories per se that's an attack on elitist power not giving a damn about ruining the lives of ordinary people.

Who on earth thinks it would? It's got hardly anything to do with the Tories. The vast majority of the prosecutions occurred under a Labour government, and it was Tony Blair, in the late 90s, who was warned that Horizon was flawed, but Blair nonetheless continued with the project.

Jeezo, not sure whether it's your reading or comprehension skills that have gone awry here. I've quite openly said that this scandal cuts right across the political spectrum. This horizon scandal spans 8 yes EIGHT Prime Ministers, yet your prejudices won't let you see wider than one??. EVERY one should have questions to answer about what they did or didn't do BUT....dont you think there's a far wider issue here. i.e. the way we've allowed the worst aspects of neo-liberal economics to dominate our political thinking. Profits over people, Private over public. Yes the Post Office is public sector but like most other Public Sector entities it's been raped by unscrupulous multinationals making the public purse pay exorbitant prices for systems built by cheap labour in emerging economies. Great for the multinationals, great for the emerging economies but utterly Poopie for end users and British Taxpayers. It is the scourge of neoliberalism and it's outsourcing ethos that gave birth to this scandal. We (and all political shades of we) as a supposed leading economic nation are pathetic in having allowed a situation to develop whereby we think our middle management is most places is so Poopie that it will all be better if we just outsource work to someone else. NO it bloody well will not. If we think public sector middle management is not up to the job, FIX IT, train them, don't abdicate responsibility elsewhere because if you do you're inviting the next Horizon.

As for Who on earth thinks it would? People with the same kind of idiot thinking that thought the 2008 global financial crash was Labours fault!!

[navyblueshorts]

Re. the PO sub-postmaster scandal. Love the fact that all of a sudden, purely because of the ITV dramatisation of it, MPs are all up in arms and pressing for wholesale exoneration of all who were ruined etc because of it, compensation to be paid and the ex-PO CEO's CBS to be investigated re. presumable rescindment.

Hmm. Is it me, or should it really take a dramatisation to get our MPs/Government to do the right thing? Pathetic.

Also, love the fact that Sunak is touting investigating Vennells' CBE, but he's apparently A-OK with the corrupt abuse of the Lords etc by insertion of political puppets, unaccountable thinktank wonks etc via ex-PMs etc? Again; pathetic.

...People with the same kind of idiot thinking that thought the 2008 global financial crash was Labours fault!!

I wouldn't hold Labour entirely to fault, but they were there from '97 to '10 and had a large hand in creating/empowering the City regulations and financial d!ckheads who created, and used, a lot of the dodgy financial tools etc that contributed to the credit problems in '08/'09. They could, if they'd been so inclined, have enforced better financial rules on the big banks' UK operations, such that they had better liquidity. They didn't, so in my view, they definitely own some of the opprobrium for the crash.

[JAS]

Re. the PO sub-postmaster scandal. Love the fact that all of a sudden, purely because of the ITV dramatisation of it, MPs are all up in arms and pressing for wholesale exoneration of all who were ruined etc because of it, compensation to be paid and the ex-PO CEO's CBS to be investigated re. presumable rescindment.

Hmm. Is it me, or should it really take a dramatisation to get our MPs/Government to do the right thing? Pathetic.

Also, love the fact that Sunak is touting investigating Vennells' CBE, but he's apparently A-OK with the corrupt abuse of the Lords etc by insertion of political puppets, unaccountable thinktank wonks etc via ex-PMs etc? Again; pathetic.

...People with the same kind of idiot thinking that thought the 2008 global financial crash was Labours fault!!

I wouldn't hold Labour entirely to fault, but they were there from '97 to '10 and had a large hand in creating/empowering the City regulations and financial d!ckheads who created, and used, a lot of the dodgy financial tools etc that contributed to the credit problems in '08/'09. They could, if they'd been so inclined, have enforced better financial rules on the big banks' UK operations, such that they had better liquidity. They didn't, so in my view, they definitely own some of the opprobrium for the crash.

I’ve always said new Labours biggest failing (yes even more than Iraq) was not reintroducing some degree of regulation swept away by the Thatcher/Regan deregulation in the 80s. The counter to that which I understand too is that it’s something that would have to have been done internationally. In other words doing it unilaterally would have driven multinational finance institutions to base themselves in different jurisdictions. The resultant implications of that would have been significant in terms of employment. That being said there nothing to suggest that they even tried to get international consensus on it in the mid 00s when they should have been pushing. Given the buy in Brown/Darling got in the midst of the financial crisis suggests that maybe they underestimated themselves and their ability to shape international financial regulation.

[navyblueshorts]

Liar's Poker and The Big Short (both by Michael Lewis) are both simultaneously good reads and pretty shocking re. the finance industry. Gobsmacking in places. I have no doubt the same sort of people are still there now and I doubt the mentality has really changed that much.

[JAS]

Liar's Poker and The Big Short (both by Michael Lewis) are both simultaneously good reads and pretty shocking re. the finance industry. Gobsmacking in places. I have no doubt the same sort of people are still there now and I doubt the mentality has really changed that much.

Yep some of the safeguards that were supposedly put in post 2008 crash have been redismantled.. it’ll happen again. Why?? Because every time a major crisis happens, the wealthy exploit it and clean up and the little people collectively pick up the tab. That’s how society is rigged. Until we start stringing people up for abusing power, it’ll always be like that.

All too often the rich and powerful wriggle off the hook. Fujitsu for example, when the initial judgement that implicated that Horizon WAS faulty, should IMMEDIATELY have been suspended from bidding for ANY govt contract until the issue with Horizon and the resultant fall out/coverup was cleared and satisfactorily resolved for all involved. To NOT do that is effectively giving a green light to corporate abuse of power.

[navyblueshorts]

The trouble with all our political systems is that they ignore human nature i.e. the inherent greed, stupidity and power-hungry drive that's in-built in far too many. It brought down Communism and it's corruped Capitalism. Nationalism and ****ing religion also get in the way all the bloody time. We're actually all far too childish and self-centred when it comes right down to it. We like to think we're somehow advanced, but too much of our societies are based on the same old drivers of the strongest survive etc. It's just cloaked in a stupid veneer of 'civilisation'. Pathetic.

My dad (when I had the chance to sit on my golf club's committee some time back) suggested i steer clear. Reason? His view/experience was that all those you'd want on a committee wanted nothing to do with it and those that desperately wanted in (and usually ended up on it) saw that as some sort of validation of their unimportant existence (i.e. they were not, are not, and never will amount to very much in reality). Extrapolate that logic and you have the typical UK politician of the last few decades. That, and they've cut so many slimy deals to get their hands on power, they're both so corrupt that they're totally unaware of it and they're so compromised to those that enabled their political ascent that they're functionally useless.

Part of me thinks this Horizon/Post Office scandal is so big and outrageous that it might just force those responsible (businesses and relevant politicians) to account, but I doubt it. People have the attention span of a fruit fly:

"This Post Office scandal is disgusting! People's head should roll!!!!"
"Look at this! The new iPhone is out!"
"Wasn't there a problem at the Post Office a while back? Ah well. Gotta check my Facebook feed..."

What will happen with this is the same as w/ Levenson and the press. A lot of sound and fury, ultimately signalling f-all and the status quo gradually re-asserting itself.

I quite like sci-fi. What this planet needs is a 'The Day the World Stood Still' intervention to force us to wake the **** up, and grow up.

God, I'm in a bad mood. TFI Friday....

[JAS]

The trouble with all our political systems is that they ignore human nature i.e. the inherent greed, stupidity and power-hungry drive that's in-built in far too many. It brought down Communism and it's corruped Capitalism. Nationalism and ****ing religion also get in the way all the bloody time. We're actually all far too childish and self-centred when it comes right down to it. We like to think we're somehow advanced, but too much of our societies are based on the same old drivers of the strongest survive etc. It's just cloaked in a stupid veneer of 'civilisation'. Pathetic.

My dad (when I had the chance to sit on my golf club's committee some time back) suggested i steer clear. Reason? His view/experience was that all those you'd want on a committee wanted nothing to do with it and those that desperately wanted in (and usually ended up on it) saw that as some sort of validation of their unimportant existence (i.e. they were not, are not, and never will amount to very much in reality). Extrapolate that logic and you have the typical UK politician of the last few decades. That, and they've cut so many slimy deals to get their hands on power, they're both so corrupt that they're totally unaware of it and they're so compromised to those that enabled their political ascent that they're functionally useless.

Part of me thinks this Horizon/Post Office scandal is so big and outrageous that it might just force those responsible (businesses and relevant politicians) to account, but I doubt it. People have the attention span of a fruit fly:

"This Post Office scandal is disgusting! People's head should roll!!!!"
"Look at this! The new iPhone is out!"
"Wasn't there a problem at the Post Office a while back? Ah well. Gotta check my Facebook feed..."

What will happen with this is the same as w/ Levenson and the press. A lot of sound and fury, ultimately signalling f-all and the status quo gradually re-asserting itself.

I quite like sci-fi. What this planet needs is a 'The Day the World Stood Still' intervention to force us to wake the **** up, and grow up.

God, I'm in a bad mood. TFI Friday....

Never on the pages of 606 has frustration come across so eloquently :-)
...and I pretty much agree with most of it.

I'm now off to get a cloth to clean my keyboard and desk (after spluttering my coffee out giggling when I got to "Look at this! The new iPhone is out!")

[Duty281]

If anyone wanted more evidence for why this country is the mess that it currently is:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67890334

Yep, people in power (whether that be politics, industry, judiciary or whatever) they are so so so out of touch with the day to day lives of ordinary people.
That Post office drama also starkly highlighted that. This pains me to say as a left leaning person but I hope no-one is under the impression that the "blindness" displayed by Davis in the link and the insensitive abuse of power by Senior Post Office execs and their cohorts  highlighted in the drama will just go away if the Tories get kicked out. I normally rail against the statement  "They're all the same" when levelled at politicians but really that out of touch-ness cuts right across the political spectrum. At the height of the Horizon scandal Starmer was DPP, Ed Davey was in a ministerial position where he could have done more and the Post Office Chairperson through most of it was none other then Jack Straw's other half FFS. I  can say it's shocking that the Tories are letting the compensation issue drag and that's not having a pop at the Tories per se that's an attack on elitist power not giving a damn about ruining the lives of ordinary people.

Who on earth thinks it would? It's got hardly anything to do with the Tories. The vast majority of the prosecutions occurred under a Labour government, and it was Tony Blair, in the late 90s, who was warned that Horizon was flawed, but Blair nonetheless continued with the project.

Jeezo, not sure whether it's your reading or comprehension skills that have gone awry here. I've quite openly said that this scandal cuts right across the political spectrum. This horizon scandal spans 8 yes EIGHT Prime Ministers, yet your prejudices won't let you see wider than one??. EVERY one should have questions to answer about what they did or didn't do BUT....dont you think there's a far wider issue here. i.e. the way we've allowed the worst aspects of neo-liberal economics to dominate our political thinking. Profits over people, Private over public. Yes the Post Office is public sector but like most other Public Sector entities it's been raped by unscrupulous multinationals making the public purse pay exorbitant prices for systems built by cheap labour in emerging economies. Great for the multinationals, great for the emerging economies but utterly Poopie for end users and British Taxpayers. It is the scourge of neoliberalism and it's outsourcing ethos that gave birth to this scandal. We (and all political shades of we) as a supposed leading economic nation are pathetic in having allowed a situation to develop whereby we think our middle management is most places is so Poopie that it will all be better if we just outsource work to someone else. NO it bloody well will not. If we think public sector middle management is not up to the job, FIX IT, train them, don't abdicate responsibility elsewhere because if you do you're inviting the next Horizon.

As for Who on earth thinks it would? People with the same kind of idiot thinking that thought the 2008 global financial crash was Labours fault!!

What prejudices or issues with reading comprehension?

You said you hope no one thinks the abuses of power will go away once the Tories are out, but I haven't encountered anyone remotely thinking along this mindset, so it seems a strange thing to bring up. The only ones with the political power to nip this in the bud from the outset was Blair's government, who knew the system was flawed but did nothing.

I don't think it's got anything to do with neo-liberal economics, either. Ironic that you talk about my supposed 'prejudices', while revealing your own. It had everything to do with a misplaced trust in technology and misplaced suspicions. The top people at the Post Office long thought the sub postmasters were on the take. Horizon comes along and supposedly proves this. The court system, and some experts, have infallible trust in the computer technology. Meaning guilty verdicts. And the legal system is weighted against the small individual (something that predates neo-liberal economics).

[JAS]

What prejudices or issues with reading comprehension?

You said you hope no one thinks the abuses of power will go away once the Tories are out,

Yes… meaning that I don’t think Labour are currently any better equipped to eradicate abuses of power ffs!!

but I haven't encountered anyone remotely thinking along this mindset, so it seems a strange thing to bring up.

Do you live in your echo chamber bubble??

The only ones with the political power to nip this in the bud from the outset was Blair's government, who knew the system was flawed but did nothing.

I think you’ll find the pilot had flaws in 1996. So procurement and pilot pre-date Blair in terms of bud nipping…nice try though. Do I think the Blair Govt did enough/what they they should have? No absobloodylutely not. By the same token they never gave Vennels or her predecessor a CBE either!!

I don't think it's got anything to do with neo-liberal economics, either.

It’s got absolutely everything to do with neoliberal economics and the steer that ethos has given society in the past 40 years. Only an ostrich doing what ostriches do would not see that.

Ironic that you talk about my supposed 'prejudices', while revealing your own.

I’m pretty open, aware and unashamed of my prejudices

It had everything to do with a misplaced trust in technology and misplaced suspicions. The top people at the Post Office long thought the sub postmasters were on the take.

Whilst all the time it was themselves that were on the take Who'd of thunk it!!

Horizon comes along and supposedly proves this. The court system, and some experts, have infallible trust in the computer technology.

No… infallible trust in technology is a smokescreen justifying their disgusting abuse of power against ordinary hard working people Meaning guilty verdicts.

And the legal system is weighted against the small individual (something that predates neo-liberal economics).

Yes indeed it does, you’d like to think that as economic systems evolve they would keep the good bits and dump the bad bits but nope. Power and wealth in the hands of the few just breeds further greed and abuse of power. This scandal illustrates that perfectly and fuels why ordinary working people should wake up and pursue abuses of power relentlessly.

[JAS]

Well that last comment was a tumbleweed generator :-p

…or has everybody been engrossed in watching Traitors or something?

[McLaren]

Well that last comment was a tumbleweed generator :-p

…or has everybody been engrossed in watching Traitors or something?

Don't know about anyone else but I am thankfully intellectually beyond the demographic politics is currently aimed at.

[JAS]

Well that last comment was a tumbleweed generator :-p

…or has everybody been engrossed in watching Traitors or something?

Don't know about anyone else but I am thankfully intellectually beyond the demographic politics is currently aimed at.

Could read that little nugget several ways :-p Go on then, do elaborate.

[McLaren]

Politics is not conducted in a serious intellectual manner anymore. It has jumped the shark.

[JAS]

You just never know when or to what extent a tragedy can strike relatively close. Turns out a colleague at work is an uncle to one of the 2 Bristol kids that were stabbed to death recently.

It could be us, our kids or grandkids next week, next month, whenever. Knife crime is a bloody menace. Personally I have my doubts about how effective petitions are to our tone deaf leaders but… signed it anyway


https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/642085

[navyblueshorts]

You just never know when or to what extent a tragedy can strike relatively close. Turns out a colleague at work is an uncle to one of the 2 Bristol kids that were stabbed to death recently.

It could be us, our kids or grandkids next week,  next month, whenever. Knife crime is a bloody menace. Personally I have my doubts about how effective petitions are to our tone deaf leaders but… signed it anyway


https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/642085

Ta for this. Had a look, but it's a bit of a nonsense petition for me. Not its ethos/spirit, but as worded, its completely unworkable. The guy in Nottingham had a 'double-edged fighting knife' - how the **** was he (someone w/ known mental health issues) able to obtain that? It has no purpose other than as a weapon. Outside of the military, I can't see why very many should be able to own one. For many of these people, if it's not a knife, it'll be a sharpened screwdriver etc.

I'd really object to any legislation that might stop me carrying a kitchen knife back from a shop where I'd just bought it, or taking a 2"-3" bladed lock knife to the allotment, camping etc.

Rushed, emotional legislation will always be bad legislation, I think. Tricky problem to solve.

[McLaren]

Is knife crime actually worse or is that just how the media are spinning it?

Jas

Obviously a terrible incident that you mentioned but like Navy I'm not sure about the proposal in that petition. Prison offers little rehabilitation and therefore the only we are really locking people up is for punishment/keeping them out of our society. Obviously people who commit knife crime deserve punishment but I tend to think kids are not running around with knifes because they come from well adjusted backgrounds, and therefore it's questionable what jailing them would do to fix communities impacted by knife crime.

[JAS]

Yes I get and agree with both yourself and Navy. Knife crime IS a whole lot worse and more prevalent than when we were kids. Something does have to be done but Navy's point is very valid re making/changing laws based on emotive events, not being a great idea.

They also have to be careful about the practical implications of any legislation re carrying i.e there's a world of difference between coming out of a kitchen utensils shop and heading home with the latest Gordon Ramsay fish filleting knife and venturing out for a walk in the park with a zombie knife bought online. We know there's a huge difference and the law should reflect that but...that doesn't mean to say that the would be chef doesn't get caught in a "situation" on the way home where the fish filleter knife ends up being used.
You cant draft legislation to cover EVERY scenario but by the same token that in itself should not be used an excuse to do nothing.

[JAS]

Anyone able to check if this thread still has a pulse??

[navyblueshorts]

Duh, dum, duh, dum....

[super_realist]

Dead as a door nail

[navyblueshorts]

TBH, I'm tending to see the 'Off Topic' section as more the place to comment, where I'd have commented here in the past.

[super_realist]

Have we had an exodus of members?
I'm presuming Mac is away protesting on behalf of Hamas, trans lobby, climate change or riding a bus but it seems to be a pretty dead place these days.

[JAS]

I sometimes think, “Poopie, was it something I said that has put people off?”…I know I rant on about politics (just calling it as I see it). Even my other half sometimes says “oh ffs will you give it a rest” Having said that I do think I’ve got through to her, she has been a lifelong Tory but not any more…can’t believe it took her this long :-p

[super_realist]

I sometimes think, “Poopie, was it something I said that has put people off?”…I know I rant on about politics (just calling it as I see it). Even my other half sometimes  says “oh ffs will you give it a rest” Having said that I do think I’ve got through to her, she has been a lifelong Tory but not any more…can’t believe it took her this long :-p

Ha ha. Nothing to do with the worst Tory government in history.
I really can't see Britain being much better under a policy-less Labour and what ideas they do have are either just more Tory, or truly ridiculous like VAT on Private school fees.

[navyblueshorts]

Removal of charity status and/or adding VAT for private schools is long since overdue. Minor issue, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed. Screw them.

To be fair to Labour, not sure why they should publish much in the way of policy until they need to get a manifesto out for the next GE. They don't need to a thing with the current morons in the Tory party, who're self-destructing quite nicely.

[super_realist]

Removal of charity status and/or adding VAT for private schools is long since overdue. Minor issue, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed. Screw them.

To be fair to Labour, not sure why they should publish much in the way of policy until they need to get a manifesto out for the next GE. They don't need to a thing with the current morons in the Tory party, who're self-destructing quite nicely.

It wouldn't raise much money Navy, that's the point and it would move a lot of pupils into the state school system which would cost money. Some simple calculations show it would be worth less than 1bn in revenue, but Labour are acting as if it is some major source of revenue that can be used to sort out the entire economic issue of the UK.

If you're going to remove tax free status and charitable status from private schools, then you should also apply it to religions The Church of England is one of the richest institutions in the UK, yet it pays zero tax

[JAS]

The thing is if it is the worst Tory Government in history, where does anyone get the mindset that says “yeah they’re bad, but I’ll keep voting for them because I’m scared to contemplate any alternative” I’m fascinated by the misconceptions that drive that narrative.

Given how the last 3? 8? 14? Years have gone it should be an ABC election, Anyone But Conservatives.
Does anyone really think if Sunak did get re-elected he’d survive any more than half his 5 year term? I’ve lost count of the number of No Confidence votes on a sitting PM this shower have inflicted. I could be wrong but I don’t think the Labour Party has ever ousted one of its own sitting PMs. Why does that matter? One word…stability. Since 2016 there is not ONE govt department that has had ANY sort of stability because of the persistent churn of ministerial leadership. The Home office being a prime example.
Starmer is Majoresque in terms of coming across as dull and boring but a least he would bring some level of stability and confidence.

[super_realist]

I disagree Starmer will bring confidence, especially given how prone he is to changing his position and how weak he is. He is anything but confidence inspiring and his entire tactic of becoming PM is based on remaining quiet whilst watching the Tories implode.
Labour aren't going to get in because they are seen as a credible alternative, they're going to get in because they aren't the Tories, it's as simple as that. I'll give credit to Starmer for crushing the mad far left wing element of his party and anyone who can make a twerp like Owen Jones quit the party deserves kudos but he's still got problems with Unjooollla Raaaaaaaynurrr and wonks like David Lammy and Sadiq Kh*nt

I'd quite like to come back to UK at some poiny, but I think the next 10 years are going to be pretty awful there.

[navyblueshorts]

Removal of charity status and/or adding VAT for private schools is long since overdue. Minor issue, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed. Screw them.

To be fair to Labour, not sure why they should publish much in the way of policy until they need to get a manifesto out for the next GE. They don't need to a thing with the current morons in the Tory party, who're self-destructing quite nicely.

It wouldn't raise much money Navy, that's the point and it would move a lot of pupils into the state school system which would cost money.  Some simple calculations show it would be worth less than 1bn in revenue, but Labour are acting as if it is some major source of revenue that can be used to sort out the entire economic issue of the UK.

If you're going to remove tax free status and charitable status from private  schools, then you should also apply it to religions The Church of England is one of the richest institutions in the UK, yet it pays zero tax

Absolutely don't disagree re. church etc. I also don't really care re. actual monies raised as a result. For me it's a point of principle and, as usual, it's the wealthy that benefit. Time to call an end to it.

[navyblueshorts]

It's odd to say that Starmer is weak, but then credit him with squashing the extreme left within Labour.

Starmer is under no obligation that I can see to do anything much except watch the Tories implode. The fact that the latter are doing just that must seem like a blessing. When the election is called and they have to publish a manifesto, that's a different kettle of fish.

[super_realist]

It's odd to say that Starmer is weak, but then credit him with squashing the extreme left within Labour.

Starmer is under no obligation that I can see to do anything much except watch the Tories implode. The fact that the latter are doing just that must seem like a blessing. When the election is called and they have to publish a manifesto, that's a different kettle of fish.

Smashing the far left lunacy is the only thing resembling strength he's done, and he even did that tepidly by dithering on getting rid of racists like Corbyn and Abbot. Like I say though, well done to him for doing that, but even David Blunkett could see that the only electable Labour party is a centre left one,.

Starmer's obligation as leader of the opposition is to offer a credible opposition, not just simply NOT being Tory, but this is politics today. Parties get in simply because they're not the other side, has it always been thus? Perhaps, but never seen it to this degree in US, Britain, London, Scotland, Europe etc. Has there ever been a worse period in politics and more inept politicians than now? I can't remember one.

Don't even get me started on the stupid protests.

[super_realist]

Removal of charity status and/or adding VAT for private schools is long since overdue. Minor issue, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed. Screw them.

To be fair to Labour, not sure why they should publish much in the way of policy until they need to get a manifesto out for the next GE. They don't need to a thing with the current morons in the Tory party, who're self-destructing quite nicely.

It wouldn't raise much money Navy, that's the point and it would move a lot of pupils into the state school system which would cost money.  Some simple calculations show it would be worth less than 1bn in revenue, but Labour are acting as if it is some major source of revenue that can be used to sort out the entire economic issue of the UK.

If you're going to remove tax free status and charitable status from private  schools, then you should also apply it to religions The Church of England is one of the richest institutions in the UK, yet it pays zero tax

Absolutely don't disagree re. church etc. I also don't really care re. actual monies raised as a result. For me it's a point of principle and, as usual, it's the wealthy that benefit. Time to call an end to it.

There is an assumption that those who send their kids to private school are inherently rich. I don't think that is true or even close to being true. Many parents simply work very hard to do this for their kids and are just the professional middle classes and not only have Labour seemingly not considered this but they also haven't considered that this will result inevitably in a huge number of additional school pupils entering the already creaking and demoralised state system and the costs this will incur. I've worked with people whose entire income went on school fees with the other spousal income meeting the rest of living costs. That isn't being rich. Perhaps if the UK actually provided a sufficiently good state school system of a higher standard than it does at the moment parents wouldn't want to send their kids private. Education, like books, children's clothes, health services and fresh food should never be taxed.

They also haven't realised that those who use private schools are also already paying tax for a state school system they aren't even using. 12% of our income tax already goes on education, so you're penalising parents twice if you tax private schools, by all means charge them VAT on Private fees IF you refund the tax they pay for a state school they don't use.

[navyblueshorts]

Removal of charity status and/or adding VAT for private schools is long since overdue. Minor issue, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed. Screw them.

To be fair to Labour, not sure why they should publish much in the way of policy until they need to get a manifesto out for the next GE. They don't need to a thing with the current morons in the Tory party, who're self-destructing quite nicely.

It wouldn't raise much money Navy, that's the point and it would move a lot of pupils into the state school system which would cost money.  Some simple calculations show it would be worth less than 1bn in revenue, but Labour are acting as if it is some major source of revenue that can be used to sort out the entire economic issue of the UK.

If you're going to remove tax free status and charitable status from private  schools, then you should also apply it to religions The Church of England is one of the richest institutions in the UK, yet it pays zero tax

Absolutely don't disagree re. church etc. I also don't really care re. actual monies raised as a result. For me it's a point of principle and, as usual, it's the wealthy that benefit. Time to call an end to it.

There is an assumption that those who send their kids to private school are inherently rich. I don't think that is true or even close to being true. Many parents simply work very hard to do this for their kids and are just the professional middle classes and not only have Labour seemingly not considered this but they also haven't considered that this will result inevitably in a huge number of additional school pupils entering the already creaking and demoralised state system and the costs this will  incur. I've worked with people whose entire income went on school fees with the other spousal income meeting the rest of living costs. That isn't being rich. Perhaps if the UK actually provided a sufficiently good state school system of a higher standard than it does at the moment parents wouldn't want to send their kids private. Education, like books, children's clothes, health services and fresh food should never be taxed.

They also haven't realised that those who use private schools are also already paying  tax for a state school system they aren't even using. 12% of our income tax already goes on education, so you're penalising parents twice if you tax private schools, by all means charge them VAT on Private fees IF you refund the tax they pay for a state school they don't use.

All points well made. Accept the point on extra seats being needed in already creaky state schools (even if it's an unproven assumption at the moment), but it doesn't surprise me that much if a political party hasn't thought through all the angles. Tend to agree w/ you on those items etc you suggest shouldn't be taxed, but there certainly shouldn't be any difference in that area between state and private education sectors.

As per usual in this country, there's never any informed discussions nationally about what's wanted by a state education system, what it requires, how much it would cost and how that would be funded. No wonder it's a s**t show.

Re. your last point, that's what happens w/ the NHS and those that choose to pay additionally for private care. If we want to go down the route of a purely "What's in it for me?" and only paying for what one gets oneself argument, we may as well go back to clubs and spears and the strongest take what they want.

[super_realist]

I think it's pretty clear that a reform of the health system, where we actually do pay a direct contribution whether that's as insurance or per visit is required.
It works in health systems around Europe and Australia which are better than our health systems and have less waiting and better outcomes.

The big problem with the NHS is that it's seen as some sort of national sacred cow which like a US Gun Law cannot be reformed, people are deluded that it's a great system and simply can't see we need to reform it. That, contrary to what they believe does not mean USA is the only other model.

The funny thing is, that when a Doctor or Nurse flounces off to Australia for more money (deservedly) and you ask them if they want the Australian model in the UK then they refuse to have it.
The other funny thing is that the NHS has more staff in it than any other Health System in Europe. Germany has 16m more people in it's population, but has a better doctor/nurse/bed ration per patient than the UK, but does it with fewer staff, so it begs the question what exactly are all those employed in the NHS (50% are non clinical) actually doing?
Furthermore when "Head of Diversity" is paid double what "Head of Cyber Security" you know they have their priorities wrong.

[Sponsored content]