|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 20:36:31 GMT
Fair enough. I'm sure you didn't mean it this way, Andy, but I'd be surprised if many people, including yourself, thought that Starmer would suddenly become a socialist once he was in power. My opinion of him hasn't changed one bit by this article in which he identifies those British leaders who effected meaningful change. There's not a fat lot of actual praise there for Thatcher, but that doesn't make such a good story, obviously. Starmer's a centrist first and foremost, soft left, much like his deputy. Everything he's done as leader is about bringing the party back to the centre ground in order to get it elected after the debacle of 2019. I fully respect your decision to be appalled by the article, although I suspect that's more about how it's been portrayed rather than Starmer actually threatening to become a Thatcherite! We'll have to wait and see what he does in power, if he gets there. This latest article is about doing exactly what Blair did. Don't frighten the horses! It's the only way to get elected in Conservative England - you can try the alternative approach like Corbyn did and, as much as you and I might recognise that a lot of what he said has come to pass, there was no way he was ever going to get voted in. The media saw to that, turning people against him until he got his arse handed to him in spectacular style at the last election. They haven't got anywhere to go with Starmer. But wouldn't it be lovely if we could both vote for parties we genuinely aligned with and saw actual representation in the HoC according to actual voting percentages. Another clarion call for PR. I agree with what wannabee said if Stamer's quote had been about conviction politicians I would probably not have such a difficult challenge. She did have conviction and undoubtedly changed Britain. He chose to highlight a positive of her tenure, "entrepreneurial spirit". Rather than point out the giveaway of the family jewels to her city backers and a class war. He just left it it ambiguous enough to pacify Tory voters and the media moguls and he did it on purpose. I think he knows how to play the game.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 20:30:09 GMT
You need to read the whole piece instead of just going by the headlines for effect, waga! He singles out Attlee, Thatcher and Blair as leaders who had significant impact on the UK. You wouldn't know that, of course, just going by the headlines! I have read the article and I'm still very pissed off by it as will anyone impacted by her negatively in the 1980s, which runs into millions of people that had previously voted Labour. I respect it doesn't seem to bother you or Oggy. Equally I hope you will accept that trivialising it as a headline is apologist. Stamer has got enough track record on various issues now to convince me that this isn't about getting into power and suddenly becoming a socialist. He's as wedded to centre right politics as it is possible to be. His views aren't even particularly liberal with a small l. If that's where the majority of the UK is now, fair enough. It's not where many of past Labour voters are including me. Come on then, tell me how centre right the following are: 1. Vat on private school fees 2. Increasing windfall taxes on energy companies 3. Abolishing non-dom status 4. Creating a nationalised green energy company For a man constantly criticised for having no policies and for being centre right, I have name 4 clear policies which prove both criticism completely wrong.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 18:23:25 GMT
You have just demonstrated exactly why it is best Starmer reveals very little before the next election. Cleverly (if you are right - I have not seen the news today) has copied the Labour policy. Do you see why announcing everything now is not a good idea? A preventative health service is a focus on preventing disease rather than waiting until you are disease ridden before doing anything. It is a massive culture shift. It means being checked more regularly to prevent disease before it is too late. Why is it that medical students on the continent are always shown British cancer patients as examples? Because we are good at detecting disease but often after it is too late. The preventative model transforms that. I am amazed you are not supportive of this. Simplify the tax code means removing loop holes exploited by the rich. I am amazed you are not supportive of this. Why should he simply repeat endlessly what he has already said? Judge him by his manifesto. Nationalising energy is far too expensive. It would be better to regulate profits via the windfall tax at the same time as pumping investment into a nationalised green energy company, thus reducing share process of the rival fossil fuel firms. Then nationalising could be an option, or alternatively let everyone choose the cheaper green energy (if that is achievable). I am not sure what you want from the opposition? Other than another defeat at the next election perhaps? I’m not a particularly big fan of Starmer. But certainly the left wing of the Labour party are desperate to stop labour getting into power. The left of labour would prefer more years of tory rule it seems, rather than having a better but by no means perfect Labour government. It is ridiculous. It didn't stop the likes of Smeeth, Hodge, Austin, Mann and many more right wingers in collusion with the Tory press from sabotaging Labour's chances in 2019. So I'll take no lectures thank you. You reap what you sow. And this is exactly why the tories keep winning elections.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 17:34:52 GMT
Nationalised green energy company, going after covid fraud, not binning a levels, binning Rwanda policy, preventative nhs, simplifying tax code, Lords reform, moving away from culture war issues, higher windfall taxes on energy companies, reducing incentives for businesses to employ from abroad rather than from here. There are a few for you. Many more will appear in the manifesto. Is the Rwanda policy not being scrapped whoever is in charge due to legal issues? I don't see any progress in the last 12 months in regards to it. Has Clevery not just made an announcement in regards to reducing incentives for businesses to employ abroad? The scrapping of A levels is just a change to Advanced British Standards were pupils will do more subjects and A levels and T levels will come under same scheme. Why is starmer deciding not to scrap them a vote winner? Despite party members voting for it. Did the shadow business secretary not say at the Labour conference that they won't be nationalising energy - www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67056005Windfall tax on energy companies. Has he mentioned this in the last 12 months? All went very quiet there. Tacking covid fraud. Let's see if actions speak louder than words when push comes to shove. House of Lords reforms. Pretty sure he said he was going to scrap that but then u turned. What is a preventative NHS? Aside from being similar to a tory three word slogan. Words aside what's the plan? Or is that the plan "a preventative NHS" with no actual plan, just a slogan. What's the big pledge to move away from culture war issues? Is immigration not one of those, something which starmer has been getting involved in? Same for trans and self identity. I don't see how he's moved or moving away. What is the simplyfing tax code going to do for the working man? Why not raise tax for the highest earners giving inequality. Whys he saying he's not going to do that? If that's the best he can come up with then you can see why it's not inspiring in the slightest. We've a huge issue with inequality in this country and none of the above suggests there's any plan to tackle it. You have just demonstrated exactly why it is best Starmer reveals very little before the next election. Cleverly (if you are right - I have not seen the news today) has copied the Labour policy. Do you see why announcing everything now is not a good idea? A preventative health service is a focus on preventing disease rather than waiting until you are disease ridden before doing anything. It is a massive culture shift. It means being checked more regularly to prevent disease before it is too late. Why is it that medical students on the continent are always shown British cancer patients as examples? Because we are good at detecting disease but often after it is too late. The preventative model transforms that. I am amazed you are not supportive of this. Simplify the tax code means removing loop holes exploited by the rich. I am amazed you are not supportive of this. Why should he simply repeat endlessly what he has already said? Judge him by his manifesto. Nationalising energy is far too expensive. It would be better to regulate profits via the windfall tax at the same time as pumping investment into a nationalised green energy company, thus reducing share process of the rival fossil fuel firms. Then nationalising could be an option, or alternatively let everyone choose the cheaper green energy (if that is achievable). I am not sure what you want from the opposition? Other than another defeat at the next election perhaps? I’m not a particularly big fan of Starmer. But certainly the left wing of the Labour party are desperate to stop labour getting into power. The left of labour would prefer more years of tory rule it seems, rather than having a better but by no means perfect Labour government. It is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 17:27:54 GMT
You don’t speak for everyone. Some people will vote for Starmer because they like him/his policies more than Sunak’s. Did I say I speak for everyone? Well I don't see many posters on here who voted tory last election saying they're changing their vote due to starmers policies. Those who are, are changing because of the tory sleaze. No, but you did say “ If Starmer gets elected its not due to anything he's done or said”. I think lots of people will vote for Starmer for the things he has said and done. He may be uninspiring and not very transformative, but he strikes me as capable of running an administration not drenched in sleaze and corruption. Others will agree and therefore, as you say, vote for him because he represents a likely change from Tory sleaze. He must have said or done something for that conclusion to be reached.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 10:26:47 GMT
surely if salaries are 33% higher then labour cost to business is 33% higher plus employers NI of 13.8% therefore prices will be 37.5 % higher assuning profits aren't increased . but we all know that profit will be maintained by businesses so the result is job losses or higher prices ? oh , sorry , thats a labour manifesto .
Average salaries may be 33% higher. I suspect the people who have benefited the most from that are at the top of the tree, ie the shareholders and business owners, not the workers. So your logic doesn’t follow.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 8:40:03 GMT
You don’t speak for everyone. Some people will vote for Starmer because they like him/his policies more than Sunak’s. Id like to know what these "different policies" are. Nationalised green energy company, going after covid fraud, not binning a levels, binning Rwanda policy, preventative nhs, simplifying tax code, Lords reform, moving away from culture war issues, higher windfall taxes on energy companies, reducing incentives for businesses to employ from abroad rather than from here. There are a few for you. Many more will appear in the manifesto.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 8:34:51 GMT
Shit house. There is just no credible alternative is there, right wing tory politics or right wing Labour take your pick. I would say that most people in this country are middle of the road and more Liberal than anything else. But every time the Liberal party get anywhere near doing really well they fuck it up, or get in bed with the devil. Starmer, like Blair, fits very well in that centre ground where the lib dems have occupied. Do you think Thatcher didn’t effect change in the country then? That’s what Starmer actually said. He also commented that several other former PMs did the same. A headline of “Starmer says Thatcher changed things” isn’t as attractive as click bait.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 8:31:43 GMT
Would you prefer Truss style approach? Starmer is reducing expectations. I’d prefer to see him say “I will spend what I can and make the rich pay” but that would be electoral suicide. He can’t do anything if he doesn’t get elected and our electoral system encourages politicians to be simply the least worst option of two parties to get into power. Odds on him biting the hand that feeds him when he gets into power? He'll be off to Davos on the private jet like the rest of the grifters. Of course he will be off to davos. He was there last year. I suspect he will make more rich people pay than the tories. A low bar of course. Going after covid fraud is a start, but reeves wants to simplify the tax code and that is exactly what is needed. Proof will be in the pudding, obviously.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 7:49:36 GMT
If Starmer gets elected its not due to anything he's done or said. He's up against a tory party drenched in corruption which has been self combusting for the last few years. It's more of a people desperate to get tories out rather than a people desperate to get starmer in. And this tory party seem to be content with that outcome. He doesn't strike fear into them or their media paymasters like a true left wing leader would. Did Blair tell alot of lies to get elected? Or was he just not terribly left wing both pre and post election? Was there this dramatic 180 in his attitude before and after election that some starmer super fans think is going to happen? Or was he very much mostly the same. www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/dec/03/keir-starmer-labour-wont-turn-on-spending-taps-wins-electionSame masters, different colour ties. The ordinary Joe will see little real change. In fact they'll likely just experience further regression. It'd a country run by the 'elite' for the 'elite', the rest of us are just a hindrance. Same as it ever was. Would you prefer Truss style approach? Starmer is reducing expectations. I’d prefer to see him say “I will spend what I can and make the rich pay” but that would be electoral suicide. He can’t do anything if he doesn’t get elected and our electoral system encourages politicians to be simply the least worst option of two parties to get into power.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 4, 2023 7:28:35 GMT
I completely agree with what you are saying. My issue is that the two parties with any chance of forming a government have to lie about their real convictions in order to get elected. Starmer is bullshitting just as much as Johnson did at the last election. It's understandable but all it does is undermine trust on the political process. If Starmer gets elected its not due to anything he's done or said. He's up against a tory party drenched in corruption which has been self combusting for the last few years. It's more of a people desperate to get tories out rather than a people desperate to get starmer in. And this tory party seem to be content with that outcome. He doesn't strike fear into them or their media paymasters like a true left wing leader would. Did Blair tell alot of lies to get elected? Or was he just not terribly left wing both pre and post election? Was there this dramatic 180 in his attitude before and after election that some starmer super fans think is going to happen? Or was he very much mostly the same. You don’t speak for everyone. Some people will vote for Starmer because they like him/his policies more than Sunak’s.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 3, 2023 19:48:01 GMT
Anybody else feeling like we are destined for a centre of right government no matter what at the next election? I don’t think saying Thatcher “effected meaningful change” and that she "sought to drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism" makes Starmer centre right. It isn’t really praise after all, but we wouldn’t want to get in the way of a good headline!
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 3, 2023 12:21:28 GMT
Was peace achieved in N Ire just by a foreign government having a vote about it during the height of tensions? Or did it take years of diplomacy and negotiations? Realistically, a temporary ceasefire, or humanitarian pause, is the only plausible way of persuading Israel to stop for aid to get in. They are never going to stop when they know the second they do, Hamas will attack them again. I am all for peace. So is Sunak and Starmer. But peace doesn’t happen overnight. The big difference between this situation and NI is that within the groups representing the two communities there were people at the top willing to lay down their arms and agree a political solution. Neither the leaders of Hamas nor the current government of Isreal are showing the slightest interest in a political solution - they are both committed to the violent destruction of the other side. Unless both communities find alternative leaders to represent them the pre conditions for a political solution simply isn't there. Hence why asking for a permanent ceasefire is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 2, 2023 12:45:57 GMT
Poor landlords. What an awful position to be in to own multiple properties. They could always sell the spares to people who need a home. Most of the LL's I know are normal, decent people who own 1-2 properties locally in an attempt to add a little bit extra to their pensions. They are not slum LL, drug barons or from families with million pound properties in the SE. It's a fairly simple matter for the Govt to make ownership of a 2nd home illegal. Why don't they do that if it will easily fix the housing problem as you seem to believe? I think your contempt for people who own more than one property is misplaced. p.s. not all LL's with 1-2 properties are rich. In fact, most have mortgages on their 2nd homes so there is an element of risk in what they are doing but they are trying to plan for their future. I agree that the situation in the SE may be different and not representative of the rest of the country. I think tenants who cannot find homes because of too many air bnbs are more vulnerable than landlords who own more than 1 property. I am not saying all landlords are bad. I just have less sympathy for someone who, worst case, can sell their second or third home, than I do for someone who cannot afford to buy or who cannot find a rental property and so their children have to move schools. Short holiday let income should be taxed at a higher level than rental income. Perhaps they should make it so you cannot offset any expenses against tax regardless of what they are against short term rental income. It would benefit more people than it would hurt, and the people it hurts own more than one property so will probably be fine (and could always let it to tenants instead). Certainly have I never suggested prohibiting owning more than one property. I do think it should be unlawful for a company to run a business of residential property letting. That way rental income would always have to be on someone’s personal income and taxed accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 2, 2023 11:20:43 GMT
Perhaps we should begin serious investment in renewables? With our skills in innovation, perhaps we could lead the world in it. Be to renewables what Saudi is for oil and gas. But this government has no vision or long term plan, other than for power. We were in relation to wind a threw that away. We could be in relation to tidal energy but we'll balls that up to no doubt. Or sell it to another nation’s government to fleece us on costs (subsidised by our government, naturally)
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 2, 2023 11:18:56 GMT
Air BnB is a cancer infecting local communities which pushes rental prices up at the detriment of local residents. It means in nice places like Cornwall, landlords evict tenants and make far more money on air bnb. The tenants often cannot find another place to live so have to leave jobs and children leave schools as a result. Avoid air bnb at all costs! This is a valid point but also consider the landlord's point. The Govt has made it increasingly difficult for LL's in the last 10 years or so. Their responsibilities towards long-term tenants now are more onerous and more costly. The risk of renters defaulting is very real and it is almost impossible to evict them in a timely or cost effective manner. The local council will invariably be on the side of the renter. AirB'n'B removes a lot of that hassle for the same or better returns. A simple place in S-o-T can bring in about £100 a week for long term rent living in the property 365d. AirB'nB can bring in the same for only 100d occupancy. The LL has better control over the accommodation, they generally make more money and they get significantly less hassle from the authorities and the customers. I don't blame any LL's for taking this option. The ridiculous state of the UK housing sector is almost entirely due to the UK Govt. Poor landlords. What an awful position to be in to own multiple properties. They could always sell the spares to people who need a home.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 1, 2023 17:22:38 GMT
Air BnB is a cancer infecting local communities which pushes rental prices up at the detriment of local residents. It means in nice places like Cornwall, landlords evict tenants and make far more money on air bnb. The tenants often cannot find another place to live so have to leave jobs and children leave schools as a result.
Avoid air bnb at all costs!
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 1, 2023 16:52:12 GMT
Having posted the above I thought how are we doing today on power generation? What a mountain we still have to climb!!! No solar power generation today - not surprising! Very little wind power, so there must be little wind. 10% of what we are consuming is imported , mostly from France. Little from Norway because no wind? Small amount of nuclear, biomass, and tiny bit from coal. Vast majority from gas. We are still just starting on this long journey to renewable energy. Perhaps we should begin serious investment in renewables? With our skills in innovation, perhaps we could lead the world in it. Be to renewables what Saudi is for oil and gas. But this government has no vision or long term plan, other than for power.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Dec 1, 2023 9:05:02 GMT
But we couldn’t possibly ask rich people to pay more tax to reduce poverty. Far better would be to reduce benefits and force more people to food banks.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 30, 2023 7:43:38 GMT
I mean, we could have just done it without leaving the EU. Anyone who understood the EU knew the buck stopped with the government and it was just the loony right wing of the tories (who have all been very badly exposed as idiots) and the daily mail and express that wrongly blamed the EU. I bet you are delighted that now we have left the EU the government allows businesses to recruit from abroad for specific jobs by offering foreign workers 80% of what they pay Brits to do the same job! Another brexit bonus! Are these the loony right wing?: One of the greatest speeches made: How would they feel about the pay incentives now available for businesses to employ foreign workers over British workers, now possible as we are not in the EU? The so called left wing case for brexit was never on the table. The vast majority of brexiteers were right wing loonies who have utterly failed to deliver it when in government, backed by the right wing press.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 29, 2023 18:51:28 GMT
So the problems you experienced were down to our government being rubbish (compared to the Dutch). Absolutely nothing to do with the EU (which is obvious as the Netherlands is in the EU and their government did choose to help industry). That's correct. And we now have a government and Opposition both committed to supporting British industry unlike when the UK was in the EU. It has dawned on them to invest in Britain instead of pouring British tax payers money into other EU countries. By stopping freedom of movement we have "full employment" with nearly a million job vacancies, low unemployment, low redundancies, and higher wage increases, all driven by a labour shortage. All foreigners are treated equally, apart from special cases like Ireland and Hong Kong, and can come to fill jobs that need filling where there are shortages of British workers. Higher wages will drive investment in automation, robotics, AI, etc. and improve the UK's very poor productivity which was the result of cheap labour from Europe. Hopefully that will make the UK more competitive on the world market and start to reduce our dreadful trade deficit that has grown over the last quarter of a century. Previous governments were afraid of modernising industry and adding to the unemployment numbers and losing votes. The "greening" of the steel industry now proposed will lead to 1000s of job losses but they will be quickly absorbed into the jobs market now there is no freedom of movement. We have a shortage of workers which is leading the Tory government to encourage the "rich" back to work with tax and pension "breaks" , and force sick back into work by threatening their benefits. I agree British governments have been rubbish whichever party has been in power. Nevertheless I'd rather be governed by people accountable to the British public who can be removed from power by the British people, than governed by Brussels. Although I see there are posters who believe the 27 countries in the EU have more sovereignty than the 227+ countries not in the EU!!! British politicians and civil service now know that the buck stops with them and they can't blame the EU. Thankfully we are no longer trapped in a system of "ever closer union", being steered by an unelected bureaucracy. I mean, we could have just done it without leaving the EU. Anyone who understood the EU knew the buck stopped with the government and it was just the loony right wing of the tories (who have all been very badly exposed as idiots) and the daily mail and express that wrongly blamed the EU. I bet you are delighted that now we have left the EU the government allows businesses to recruit from abroad for specific jobs by offering foreign workers 80% of what they pay Brits to do the same job! Another brexit bonus!
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 29, 2023 18:46:16 GMT
Is it tory or labour? I need to know whether to blame the government or the local authority. On a more serious note, does anyone think they may be underfunded with so many going bust? That’s the reason apparently, they’re blaming the government It must be labour run then.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 29, 2023 18:32:18 GMT
Is it tory or labour? I need to know whether to blame the government or the local authority. On a more serious note, does anyone think they may be underfunded with so many going bust?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 29, 2023 18:05:52 GMT
We share tastes in biscuits and beverages, if not politicians Or Channel 4 “comedy” shows😉 You don’t like Peep Show 😮 ?
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 29, 2023 17:58:18 GMT
Earl grey I’d sooner have a bovril Even with a Choco Liebnitz? We share tastes in biscuits and beverages, if not politicians
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 29, 2023 17:25:32 GMT
So in other words the notion that you can't control your borders whilst being a member of the EU is bollocks? You’re telling me that the Leave campaign lied? No, surely not.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 29, 2023 17:19:12 GMT
Just sounds like bone idle, underperforming and ill informed management in the company you worked for rather than an EU issue to me. Evidently your Dutch colleagues were more tenacious and less willing to take 'No' for an answer. Thanks for your response. I worked for 6 companies including British, French, Anglo-Dutch, and Indian and all, bar the first two, international companies. In the 00s I attended a company conference on business improvement that was facilitated by a business consultancy who were advisors to the Labour government cabinet office. During coffee/lunch break one of my colleagues took a consultant aside and asked just how seriously did the government take manufacturing. The consultant said, it depends on who you mean by the government. If you mean the cabinet office then on a scale of priority 4 out of 10. If you mean the Chancellor Gordon Brown then 3 out of 10. Remember Brown plundered the pension schemes and effectively ended the viability of final salary linked pensions. Unless of course you work for the government! As for Tony Blair, he had no interest in industry and believed industry had to fend for itself. As for my Dutch colleagues they were an excellent bunch and very generous when I left. (Maybe they were glad to see the back of me?!) It was Dutch government practice to give 50% grants for environmental schemes then. Maybe because of the Green influence in their government? They were certainly well ahead of the UK in stopping the use of diesel power on the canals. So the problems you experienced were down to our government being rubbish (compared to the Dutch). Absolutely nothing to do with the EU (which is obvious as the Netherlands is in the EU and their government did choose to help industry).
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 29, 2023 16:59:22 GMT
Another very solid performance by Starmer in PMQs. Certainly appeared more of a leader and statesman than Sunak this week!
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 29, 2023 16:48:15 GMT
Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion (I never said otherwise) and I am entitled to pick holes in those opinions. I have never shut Satoshi down (Satoshi has tried of me by name calling), I have instead challenged his/her opinion. In doing so, it is safe to conclude that the opinions of satoshi about covid are deeply flawed and illogical and are not based on anything other than conspiracy. When these opinions were challenged, the response was to call me a vagina. Need I say more? I haven't said you're not entitled to Implicitly you did. Because you said “ There is a conversation to be had around covid and I don't agree with shutting it down as many people share similar views” when I have not shut anyone down, I have just shown their opinion to be delusional by picking it apart.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 29, 2023 16:35:48 GMT
Don’t encourage him/her. He/she is arguing that covid was some sort of global conspiracy and vaccines did nothing. He/she has argued that because people’s hearts didn’t stop beating due to covid that it didn’t kill people (but distanced himself/herself from applying the same logic to diseases such as dementia, MS and cancer when people have them and die of something else like pneumonia). Everyone is entitled to their views and opinions whether we agree or not. There is a conversation to be had around covid and I don't agree with shutting it down as many people share similar views. I'm not a covid expert or someone who has went far down the rabbit hole with it but I'd rather allow people with concerns to speak up and be proven wrong (if they are) than to be silenced and unchallenged. The best way to debunk conspiracies isn't to silence them in my opinion. I'm not a covid denier and I got some vaccines. But that doesn't mean I think those who have went further down the rabbit hole don't deserve a voice whether we agree with it or not. But I do think it's better suited to the covid thread Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion (I never said otherwise) and I am entitled to pick holes in those opinions. I have never shut Satoshi down (Satoshi has tried of me by name calling), I have instead challenged his/her opinion. In doing so, it is safe to conclude that the opinions of satoshi about covid are deeply flawed and illogical and are not based on anything other than conspiracy. When these opinions were challenged, the response was to call me a vagina. Need I say more?
|
|