Jump to content

Justin Smith

Closed
  • Content Count

    3,894
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Justin Smith


  1. Uk inflation is currently just over 2%.

     

    And whilst your point is reasonable, this is explicitly not what the economists predicted.

     

    As I`ve said before I cannot understand this at all. Going by the price increases of all of my suppliers (the latest one I`ve been informed today is 8%) and the fact I`ve had to have two price rises in the last 8 months, I`m not sure I even believe the official inflation rates any more.


  2. I expect so. I have a pretty good record for admitting it when I find out I'm wrong.

    How about you?

     

    Oh yes, I`m sure you know I`ve offered to apologise should the UK get what was promised (or at least heavily implied) by the Leave campaign during the referendum. In fact if we get the (more or less) free trade deal and the NHS gets it`s £350 million a week I`ll even respect the result of the referendum. I`ll still not think leaving the EU was the right thing to do, but at least I`d not be so angry about it in that I don`t believe that a majority would have voted to Leave had they not believed the above two promises was what they`d get.


  3. There is now 69% support for Brexit: Polling data

     

    I`d just like to check that if, in a year or two, the figures are reversed, you`ll still be quoting them, and, one assumes, saying we should take notice of them ?

     

    ---------- Post added 04-04-2017 at 10:38 ----------

     

    Yes [the fall in the pound]. We were expecting that. But it's caused by uncertainty and that will pass.

     

    Was it "experts" or "economists" who predicted that ? ! ?


  4. Your all stark raving mad still, it's like watching a load of dogs getting ready for crufts, all this crowing and preening going off and nobody still has any idea if this is going to be bad or not.

    Here's an idea, how about you all stop jostling for the line, wait and see what is actually agreed and then debate on the ACTUAL consequences of the UK voting to leave the EU,

    There could well be some humble pie to be had on both sides. There's been about a million pages and a trillion posts on it, take a breath and let's wait and see.

     

    Let`s be honest, he/she has a point, certainly about what it looks like is actually being negotiated at least.

    I would add that, if either side is proved to have lied, they should apologise, as I have offered to do on multiple occasions, if the UK gets a free trade deal and can pay £350 million a week into the NHS.


  5. Minus the gentle sexism Justin :rant: it's a good question I'd not considered. However, the odds of being charged a recovery fee seems highly unlikely and it's not mentioned on any website I've looked at. You aren't charged anything if you breakdown on a part of the motorway that's being worked on and the signs are up saying 'free recovery'. I presume the same rules would apply for the smart motorway.

     

    I suppose technically it`s sexism, but, let`s be honest, how many women would attempt to change a wheel ? It`s not so much the technical skills but the brute strength which is usually required.


  6. It is becoming increasingly clear that EU 27 (here meaning the member states and the EU institutions) are pursuing a policy based on vindictiveness and selfishness towards the UK. I never expected anything less, given that the lofty ideals of the EU project are mainly moonshine, to cover the self-interests of the member states. I hope at some point that the Prime Minister will have the courage to walk away from the bad deal which the other member states will present her with. EU 27 will, predictably, be too short-sighted and rigid in its thinking to realise that its demands will in the long run be bad for the member states as well as for the UK (in fact, probably even worse for the former).

     

    No NF, that is not what you said before. Every man and his dog said the EU wouldn`t be of a mind to give us a good deal, it`d be illogical for them to do so. But you said in a post last year* that the UK have always been semi detached from the EU so were actually fairly pleased to be rid of us, so, contrary to logic, we`d get a deal as good, or almost as good, as being members.

     

    * Very annoyingly I can`t find the original post, is that because the topic has been closed so the search functions don`t work fully ? Anyway, it was in response to me saying there`s no chance of a good trade deal (heavily implying more or less a free trade deal), and never was. So everything Leave said during the referendum campaign was another very serious lie.

     

    ---------- Post added 04-04-2017 at 09:48 ----------

     

    Its not wishful thinking at all,the eu export more to us than we export to them,so a deal will be made to suit both parties.

     

    That`s what the Leave campaign said in the referendum campaign. They also went further saying we`d get a good deal (implying free trade) when no other non member gets that "because we`re more important than any of them". Anyone with half a brain knew that was rubbish but they kept saying it anyway, and enough people believed it (along with the NHS £350 million a week) to swing a close vote. Brexiteers may not like that fact, but it`s a fact none the less.

    That said, I could be wrong so I say this (again) :

     

    Let`s come to an agreement shall we ? If the UK gets its free trade deal and it doesn`t cost them anything so the NHS can get its promised £350 million a week, you quote this post and I`ll publically apologise. In fact you can PM me if I don`t see the post where you ask me to do that. Don`t get me wrong I`ll still think leaving the EU was the wrong decision because for me it`s not just about the economy, but I`ll apologise for calling the close referendum result a democratic farce.

    But on the other hand, if the UK gets neither the promise free trade deal nor the NHS gets its £350 million a week, will you apologise ? Because, let`s face it, if people didn`t believe that`s what we`d get the referendum result would definitely have been different, and you know that`s true just as much as I do, after all only 2% would have had to vote the other way.

    It will be noted that none of the Brexiteers have offered to apologise if the campaign they supported is proved to have been lies.


  7. Hairyloon said it to me, when I was advocating remaining in the EU. it was said in very unpleasant terms as well.

     

    Think about it, if one doesn`t agree with Brexit, or even that the Referendum was honest (as I don`t), what can one say which is "positive" ?

    It seems to me this "positive" request is simply a request for everything on here to be Pro Brexit.....


  8. As we were driving up the M1 (the bit with a hard shoulder) the other day I saw a car stopped with a flat tyre. It made me wonder what one is supposed to do if one has to stop in a live running lane with a flat ? Most people, men anyway, would change the wheel, but I`m not sure I`d want to do that if there was no hard shoulder. No, on reflection, there`s no chance I`d change it, no chance whatsoever. If one is lucky enough to be in the RAC or AA they`re supposed to change the wheel for you, but, as far as I`m aware, they won`t attend a breakdown in a live running lane.

    As an aside, I assume the AA or RAC just forward the call to the Highways Agency, is that right ? And if so does anyone know how much the Highways Agency charge you to recover your vehicle from the (non) hard shoulder ? I have to say, particularly if you can prove you are actually in a recovery scheme, they should do it for free, after all, they`re saving shed loads of money by simply making a three lane motorway a four lane high speed road


  9. For goodness sake, try to find a different drum to beat.

    You really are becoming boring!

    As someone said " if you have nothing positive to add, say nothing "

     

    Sorry, with relevance to a forum thread, any forum thread, who said that ?

     

    And there is no chance whatsoever that I will cease reminding as many people as I can what lies the Leave campaign told to win, significantly, by a narrow margin. The only thing which will stop me is if the UK actually gets its promised free access to the single market (which will also mean the NHS can get it`s extra £350 million a week). As I`ve said, if that happens I`ll not only shut up but publicly apologise. The question is, if neither happens, will you and the other Brexiteers apologise for dishonestly winning ?

    I`m not holding my breath.


  10. We can't have the same benefits being out of the EU than being in it. :confused:

     

    Au contraire ! The Leave campaign was quite specific, we can "because we`re more important that Switzerland". I actually think this is going to be the most significant lie they told, more so that the NHS £350 million a week thing. As I`ve said already, I can`t wait to see what excuses the Brexiteers come out with, assuming we don`t get the promised excellent (heavily implied as good as now) free trade deal.

     

    This bears repetition :

     

    Let`s come to an agreement shall we [in answer to Brexiteers] ? If the UK gets its free trade deal and it doesn`t cost them anything so the NHS can get its promised £350 million a week, you quote this post and I`ll publically apologise. In fact you can PM me if I don`t see the post where you ask me to do that. Don`t get me wrong I`ll still think leaving the EU was the wrong decision because for me it`s not just about the economy, but I`ll apologise for calling the close referendum result a democratic farce.

    But on the other hand, if the UK gets neither the promised free trade deal nor the NHS gets its £350 million a week, will you apologise ? Because, let`s face it, if people didn`t believe that`s what we`d get the referendum result would definitely have been different, and you know that`s true just as much as I do, after all only 2% would have had to vote the other way.


  11. So it's okay to call leavers uneducated idiots, but insulting to call remoaners unintelligent?

     

    Why not read the Mail or Express, they are just as informative as the rest of the rags, it's what you do with the information that counts, Times readers go Baaa.

     

    Where did I say Leavers were all uneducated idiots ?

     

    Anyone who posts as you do and, apparently, thinks the Express and Mail are "as informative as the other rags", is not worth taking any notice of.

     

    ---------- Post added 01-04-2017 at 16:39 ----------

     

    [/b]

     

    Gosh! Where do I fit in?

    I read the Times most days and the express most days when I go to greaves park cafe with my dogs ( Rottie and GSD normally parked outside) as it's free to read while drinking my coffee.

    Won't read weekend papers due to the obvious faff printed and watch, BBC, itv news and BBC, sky online.

    Guess what else? , but if you continuously wish to use that bash those who voted Brexit in order to assuage your frustration for losing, please do.

    I also didn't believe the guff put about by every ministerial department forecasting doom and gloom ( which some obviously did ) and outright catastrophe which actually brought me off the fence to vote leave.

    However, I do believe that this country is resilient and will do very well I didn't believe the nonsense about 350 million going back to the NHSwithout the EU.

     

    You may have not believed it, nor believed it when the Leavers said, or heavily implied, that the UK would get a free trade deal with the EU "because we`re more important than Switzerland". The problem is that the result was 52/48, not 60/40. Thus over 96% (or, if they changed sides, 98%) of those who voted leave would also have had to believe or disbelieve what you do. You may believe that`s what actually possible, I don`t. Quiet apart from anything else, if 96% plus of voters disbelieved the NHS thing, why did the Leave campaign have it plastered all over their bus ?


  12. Education is wasted on some, they are not intelligent enough to use it?

     

    Retep, let`s get this straight. You seem to be implying that education is only worthwhile for those who would vote as you would. You`re in serious danger of people just thinking you talk rubbish, and insulting rubbish as well.

     

    As an aside I`m guessing you read the Mail or the Express ?


  13. I fear you will be disappointed: they won't squirm, they will blame the EU and the negative attitude from the likes of you.

     

    Once you have accepted that lies are the normal way to do politics, the facts become increasingly irrelevant.

     

    Sadly I think you`re right, even though the EU playing hardball is totally to be expected and every man and his dog was saying that during and after the campaign. In fact I`d think it irrational if they didn`t.

    Also, sadly, it certainly won`t be my fault if we don`t get the "good deal" the Leave campaign promised us, there is absolutely nothing I can do to influence it either way. And that`s probably a good thing, because I`m still so mad I want those who lied (sorry "campaigned") to Leave to suffer. Truthful democracy demands it. But I realise me and my family would also suffer, which is so unfair. It`d be more equitable if it was only those who voted to leave suffered.


  14. Its potentially dangerous to be part of a club that is very hard to leave and you have no control of its overall composition and nature.

     

    What if one day most of the EU member state governments and MEP's were mostly comprised of Far right parties/people? would you be so happy to be part of that, subject to its laws and rules etc?

     

    I don`t see how that could happen, but if it did the answer is no, I`d want to leave. There, I`ve proved I`m not as extreme as Unbeliever, Nigel Fargate, Gamston etc who all said, "nothing would make them feel we shouldn`t have left". That specifically even included if the UK leaving the EU fatally weakened it, it then broke up and there was a war between 2 or more of its ex members. I`d say that scenario was about as likely as the one you`ve postulated, but notice how I answered your question honestly and seriously, unlike what most of the Brexiteers did to mine.

     

    ---------- Post added 01-04-2017 at 13:42 ----------

     

    The man in the street decided by the referendum to leave, get over it.

    The more intelligent side won.

     

    Can we quote you on that if and when we don`t get what the Leave campaign said we would ?

    Incidentally, you`re incorrect, generally speaking the more educated voted to remain, and that`s got to tell you something.


  15. Really Justin, you could have fooled me, your reaction to Brexit is like that of a spoilt child who can't get his own way, and your irrationality about what papers people buy say's it all, the UK is leaving the EU buckle up for the ride it's not the end of the world.

    Oddly enough the arrogance of the Remain stance was what cost them in the end, the average man in the street gave a big two fingers to them not because they read the DM etc but because their opinions have been ignored for too long. The so called benefits of being in the EU were never sold to the man in the street, if they were so good why not ?

     

    There are two separate points here :

     

    1 - It`s not like a spoilt child at all. I`m a hard core idealist and that is what it is about. Let`s come to an agreement shall we ? If the UK gets its free trade deal and it doesn`t cost them anything so the NHS can get its promised £350 million a week, you quote this post and I`ll publically apologise. In fact you can PM me if I don`t see the post where you ask me to do that. Don`t get me wrong I`ll still think leaving the EU was the wrong decision because for me it`s not just about the economy, but I`ll apologise for calling the close referendum result a democratic farce.

    But on the other hand, if the UK gets neither the promise free trade deal nor the NHS gets its £350 million a week, will you apologise ? Because, let`s face it, if people didn`t believe that`s what we`d get the referendum result would definitely have been different, and you know that`s true just as much as I do, after all only 2% would have had to vote the other way.

     

    2 - When people read papers like the Daily Mail and Express it`s perfectly rational to worry about it. Those papers are biased and inaccurate therefore their readers have a biased and inaccurate view of the world. Those very same people vote, and that affects me. Don`t get me wrong, in a free country the papers shouldn`t be banned, but the readers should constantly be reminded that they`re reading biased inaccurate news.


  16. Before anyone starts spouting off about the EU unfairly bringing up Gibraltar in the Brexit negotiations, can we just remind ourselves that it is Spain doing that, because Spain is a member of the EU and therefore its views are listened to and acted on within the EU. You know, just like the Brexiteers said doesn`t happen with members......

     

    I have to say I`m loving all this. I`m really looking forward to the excuses and all the squirming that the Brexiteers will be doing over the next two years. In the meantime I think we should all be digging out all the quotes from the Brexiteers on here so we can requote them over the next couple of years.

     

    I`m still of the view that even worse than the NHS £350 million lie was the one about the UK will get a free trade deal with the EU "because they sell more to us than we sell to them", and what was the other one ? Oh yes : "we`re not Switzerland so we`ll get what we want".


  17. I was reading my mother-in-law`s copy of the Daily Mail yesterday. it was a painful experience but I thought of it as "research".

    The article below caught my eye and I have copied it out exactly, I thought it`d be a good example of how the DM`s bias works :

     

    Daily Mail (9 Mar 17)

     

    £13bn a year Brexit boost.

     

    Britain will bank nearly £13 billion a year from leaving the UU, official estimates suggest.

    By the time the UK leaves in 2019, ending payments into the EU budget will boost the Government finances by £12.7 billion, the office for Budget Responsibility said yesterday.

    However, the OBR risked further criticism for other more characteristically downbeat forecasts about Brexit.

    It warned that leaving will result in a decade of lower growth in exports to the European Union, and that as a result, Britain will have a “lower share of EU markets”.

     

    Now, I looked for this £12.7 billion figure on the OBRs website but Google was unable to find it. Maybe the DM is getting mixed up with the infamous and discredited £12.7 billion we pay to the EU which the Leave campaign have trumpeted in the past. This page explains that it may be a figure we pay into the EU, but we get £4 billion back again. There was no mention of that in the DM article.

     

    It also says "the OBR risked further criticism", by whom ? I read the Times and the Telegraph before that and they`d never come out with such an unattributed comment, they`d say who was doing the criticising and, if it was a "think tank" whether it was left or right leaning.

     

    Lastly the article never mentions the moneys which have been promised to the farmers, Nissan and Gawd knows who else. Nor does it mention any other calls on that £12.7 billion due directly to the EU exit. It`s classic biased journalism.

     

    Can anyone else spot any other bias in it which I may have missed ?

     

    All in all it really is no wonder that Daily Mail and Daily Express readers have such an inaccurate and biased view of the world around us all. Without wishing to sound too patronising, it`s not all their own fault if they read the DM or DE. The problem is those people vote and those votes affect the rest of us.

     

    God you really are patronising and biased aren't you?

    Daily mail and Daily express readers, Audi drivers, Mercedes drivers in fact any German car driver and folk who voted Brexit.

    Why would anyone listen to what you have to say?

     

    Sorry, how do you get that ? This is an article in the Daily Mail which I`m using to prove just how biased the paper is. When you say I`m patronising, are you saying I shouldn`t be explaining why it`s bieased because it`s so obvious anyway ? If so, why do so many people read the Daily Mail and the Daily Express ?

     

    And I`m not "biased against German car drivers", I have simply pointed out, and proved, that, relative to their numbers on the roads, they are involved in a higher number of instances of aggressive driving. That`s not bias.

     

    ---------- Post added 31-03-2017 at 13:48 ----------

     

    I think the picture provides an insight into why the Daily Mail is the UK's most successful newspaper. Other papers provide dull pictures of talking heads or of Brexit documents, whereas the Daily Mail reserves its serious coverage for the inside pages and adds an interesting, if trivial sidelight, on the meeting between the two women. I didn't find it offensive. Nor, presumably, did the majority of female readers of the Daily Mail (the majority of its readers are female anyway)

     

    This is yet another example of the illness of acute offendicitis which is afflicting the UK.

     

    Hold on, surely serious coverage implies unbiased coverage ? In fact I`d have thought the two were mutually indivisible. But nobody could say the Daily Mail or Daily Express are fettered by such an inconvenience.

     

    Tell me, I may be way off here and you could shoot me down in flames with an appropriate link, but during the Referendum campaign, did the Daily Mail or Daily Express * point out the fact the £350 million a week to the NHS pledge was, at best, a massive exaggeration, and at worst, just plain wrong ? I`m guessing they didn`t. If so, that`s QED.

     

    * And I don`t mean buried in some obfuscation or hinted at in some minor news story at the bottom of page 10.


  18. Not all of them surely ? Certainly not the ones who only voted for Trump because they disliked Clinton even more ? I read a piece the other day that if Obama could have stood again he`d have comfortably beaten Trump. Similarly, if Mitt Romney had have stood (for the Republicans) he`d have got a bigger majority than Trump. Not that Trump actually got a majority but you know what I mean.

     

    But the reality is that the people wanted Mr. Trump.

     

    That`s not the message I read from that poll. Even if we forget about the fact Trump actually got less votes than Clinton, the message I got is neither candidate was popular, and, it implied, almost any other candidate would have beaten either Trump or Clinton.


  19. I think you've got it wrong the Guardian is for those who are indoctrinated, the others are for light reading and not to be taken seriously.

    Do you read the Guardian?

     

    No I read The Times.

    I`d have thought the Daily Star was for light reading....

    Are you saying no Daily Mail or Daily Express readers take their "news"paper seriously ? I find that very hard to believe.


  20. Originally Posted by Justin Smith :

    I was reading an article the other day, it was in The Times as opposed to the Mail or Express, so we can believe it. The Muslims least likely to commit terrorism are those from South Asia, i.e. Pakistan and Bangladesh. On the other hand, relative to their numbers, the ones far more likely to commit terrorism are converts. And the most likely of all were converts who have criminal records. The perpetrator of this outrage ticks all the boxes.

     

    Well I never, people who are have committed violent crime are more likely to commit a violent crime. Never saw that one coming...:roll:

     

    It`s not quite as simple as that though is it ? One would have thought that criminals cant be devoutly religious. Let`s be honest, to commit some of the acts these people do you`ve got to take religion to a stratospheric level, as well as completely misunderstanding it, obviously.

    But it isn`t just about criminal records, it`s about the fact converts are statistically far more likely to become terrorists than those who have always been Muslim.

    Lastly, it gives a lie to those who think restricting immigration is going to have any significant effect of terrorism.


  21. I have seen this system (being notified if someone quotes your post) on another forum. It`s particularly useful for mega threads, like the Brexit one, I haven`t got the time to read all those posts, but am particularly interested to read a response to one of my own posts. The latter usually involves a quote. Have the producers of the Sheffield Forum software been asked if notification of a quote is either available or in the pipeline ? At the very least they should be advised there`s a demand for it.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

X