John McDonnell said this >>>>"We’re in the ludicrous position of seeing an analysis produced today on the economic implications of Brexit which is in fact an assessment of the Chequers proposals abandoned months ago.
The government has been unable to assess the vague, half-baked deal the PM is promising, but what we do know is the latest proposals are worse than even the Chequers deal.
What the analysis produced by the Treasury today does show us is that the Tories plans will leave the country poorer"
I am still not sure why you posted this? Was it because he said Chequers has been abandoned? Or because he said the current plan is half baked? Or because he said we are going to be poorer, when your constant response to previous claims of this occurring is that nobody knows? Have you now accepted that this will be the case?
As I have (once again) been brought up in reply to someone else, I shall try to explain.
What I shloud have said was - If all the forum is used for is slagging people off the sooner it’s closed the better. I am going through a particularly horrendous time st present, one which I wouldn’t wish on anyone ( including you @dobiesdraw ) I let my emotions get the better of me that day, I should know better.
As far as being “Haysies no.1 fan” - He is a person I respect yes, but we have had our disagreements in the past, which he ( and I) put our points across without bringing personal insults into it, it really is that simple.
But you didn't , so perhaps more thought needs to go into what you type in future .
John McDonnell said this >>>>"We’re in the ludicrous position of seeing an analysis produced today on the economic implications of Brexit which is in fact an assessment of the Chequers proposals abandoned months ago.
The government has been unable to assess the vague, half-baked deal the PM is promising, but what we do know is the latest proposals are worse than even the Chequers deal.
What the analysis produced by the Treasury today does show us is that the Tories plans will leave the country poorer"
I am still not sure why you posted this? Was it because he said Chequers has been abandoned? Or because he said the current plan is half baked? Or because he said we are going to be poorer, when your constant response to previous claims of this occurring is that nobody knows? Have you now accepted that this will be the case?
None of the above , I posted it because it's an opinion that is someone elses apart from yours !
Sir Bill cash ( who you obviously don't want to hear , because he opposes your stance ) said this ( allegedly ) " Veteran Conservative Eurosceptic Sir Bill Cash said Mr Hammond was effectively arguing for the UK to stay in the European Union in his "extraordinary" statement.
What I have clearly said is that I am not sure why you think I should be concerned about one politicians view of another politician?
The comment was Bill Cash criticising The Chancellor, and nothing to do with my views on anything.
I have my own views about Bill Cash and The Chancellor.
Sir Bill cash ( who you obviously don't want to hear , because he opposes your stance ) said this ( allegedly ) " Veteran Conservative Eurosceptic Sir Bill Cash said Mr Hammond was effectively arguing for the UK to stay in the European Union in his "extraordinary" statement.
What I have clearly said is that I am not sure why you think I should be concerned about one politicians view of another politician?
The comment was Bill Cash criticising The Chancellor, and nothing to do with my views on anything.
I have my own views about Bill Cash and The Chancellor.
You don't seem to understand the concept of a forum thread do you ? Let me try and explain , people post comments and quotes , these items will probably not be want you agree with or want to see , however that's what makes it a forum thread worth reading . On the contrary , a forum thread not worth reading is one where mainly only one person posts their thoughts on a subject and their is next to nothing to contradict it . For clarification , amount of thread views does not indicate something is worth reading .
Finally more than happy to stay here and challenge you on anything i think needs challenging .
put them on a forum or blog that was going to get some decent coverage i.e politics on a political forum as opposed to a tiny little poker forum .
Your views which don't appear complimentary are above. Such a tiny little poker forum would seem to be beneath you. You seem to be inferring that you would prefer a much bigger audience for your well thought out comments.
The reason you appear bitter and twisted, is evident from your posts.
The responsible thing to do in the referendum, would have been to have bothered to find out the pros and cons, and voted. Maybe we are leaving because people like you couldn't be bothered to find out any information and didn't vote.
The reason I gave examples on averages is because you seemed at a loss. You were asking what an average person was. I assumed you knew what a person was, and therefore struggling on average.
The comments made by Jac were in connection with remarks I had made about one person.
I am aware of the limits of my knowledge.
If I become fixated on a topic, and go off on war and peace length rants, does it harm you in any way? Is it illegal? Do you have to read them? Do you have to respond to them?
I am unable to understand why anyone would read, or post on a thread they had no interest in. Unless of course they are looking for a row.
I visited the Tommy Robinson thread because I was asked, and have subsequently said I was sorry I did so. I did call two people morons which I regret.
Not everyone shares you view of my contribution to the forum. The comment below was posted by Tikay, when you were moaning about this thread being in poker chat. In the same post you claimed that this thread was boring you to tears. What a change of heart. I wonder what other people think of your contribution to the forum? , he is contributing handsomely to the Forum, & if we had 10 more like him the Forum would be a far better place.
If you were reading a trading analysis produced by The Government, and part of it referred to the likely effect on the average citizen, are you seriously saying that you wouldn't understand what this meant?
If so this would be a first for me. I have never known anyone who was prepared to make themselves appear as thick as two short planks, in order to nitpick and create an argument.
Sir Bill cash ( who you obviously don't want to hear , because he opposes your stance ) said this ( allegedly ) " Veteran Conservative Eurosceptic Sir Bill Cash said Mr Hammond was effectively arguing for the UK to stay in the European Union in his "extraordinary" statement.
What I have clearly said is that I am not sure why you think I should be concerned about one politicians view of another politician?
The comment was Bill Cash criticising The Chancellor, and nothing to do with my views on anything.
I have my own views about Bill Cash and The Chancellor.
You don't seem to understand the concept of a forum thread do you ? Let me try and explain , people post comments and quotes , these items will probably not be want you agree with or want to see , however that's what makes it a forum thread worth reading . On the contrary , a forum thread not worth reading is one where mainly only one person posts their thoughts on a subject and their is next to nothing to contradict it . For clarification , amount of thread views does not indicate something is worth reading .
I welcome alternative views, but I will have more to say on this later.
My apologies , I mistakenly thought you wanted other opinions on this thread apart from your own . Hence the quote from a leading politician .
I do, but you could have chosen a more credible politician.
Oh i see , you mean Haysies interpretation of credible
If you read a couple of the articles I posted, you could put your own value on his opinion. I am allowed to have an opinion on whether he is credible, as you are. That is what a forum is for. If you think he is credible you could argue the point. I have posted some articles which summarise the reasons why I think he is not credible.
Finally more than happy to stay here and challenge you on anything i think needs challenging .
put them on a forum or blog that was going to get some decent coverage i.e politics on a political forum as opposed to a tiny little poker forum .
Your views which don't appear complimentary are above. Such a tiny little poker forum would seem to be beneath you. You seem to be inferring that you would prefer a much bigger audience for your well thought out comments.
The reason you appear bitter and twisted, is evident from your posts.
The responsible thing to do in the referendum, would have been to have bothered to find out the pros and cons, and voted. Maybe we are leaving because people like you couldn't be bothered to find out any information and didn't vote.
The reason I gave examples on averages is because you seemed at a loss. You were asking what an average person was. I assumed you knew what a person was, and therefore struggling on average.
The comments made by Jac were in connection with remarks I had made about one person.
I am aware of the limits of my knowledge.
If I become fixated on a topic, and go off on war and peace length rants, does it harm you in any way? Is it illegal? Do you have to read them? Do you have to respond to them?
I am unable to understand why anyone would read, or post on a thread they had no interest in. Unless of course they are looking for a row.
I visited the Tommy Robinson thread because I was asked, and have subsequently said I was sorry I did so. I did call two people morons which I regret.
Not everyone shares you view of my contribution to the forum. The comment below was posted by Tikay, when you were moaning about this thread being in poker chat. In the same post you claimed that this thread was boring you to tears. What a change of heart. I wonder what other people think of your contribution to the forum? , he is contributing handsomely to the Forum, & if we had 10 more like him the Forum would be a far better place.
If you were reading a trading analysis produced by The Government, and part of it referred to the likely effect on the average citizen, are you seriously saying that you wouldn't understand what this meant?
If so this would be a first for me. I have never known anyone who was prepared to make themselves appear as thick as two short planks, in order to nitpick and create an argument.
Bolded parts :
1) Once again you draw the wrong inference , but one that suits you .
2) That's your opinion and you are entitled to it
3) being asked to do something doesn't mean you have to , and it certainly doesn't mean you have to comment .
4) Tikays entitled to his opinion as well , of course many people who read things on here , but don't post will also have an opinion
5) "average person " ..a generic , overused phrase , which is becoming distinctly blurred , with an ever increasing diverse society . I'd genuinely like to know what you think this " average citizen " is , but you keep dodging it !
6) Well done , you just managed to shy away from calling me a moron .
Comments
Who exactly is this " average working man " you speak of ?
Do you know which political benefits he may have been referring to?
Was it because he said Chequers has been abandoned?
Or because he said the current plan is half baked?
Or because he said we are going to be poorer, when your constant response to previous claims of this occurring is that nobody knows?
Have you now accepted that this will be the case?
No I don't .
What I have clearly said is that I am not sure why you think I should be concerned about one politicians view of another politician?
The comment was Bill Cash criticising The Chancellor, and nothing to do with my views on anything.
I have my own views about Bill Cash and The Chancellor.
My apologies , I mistakenly thought you wanted other opinions on this thread apart from your own . Hence the quote from a leading politician .
I do, but you could have chosen a more credible politician.
Are you a Bill Cash fan?
Philip Hammond Fan?
Happy with his budget?
Are you a Bill Cash fan?
Philip Hammond Fan?
Happy with his budget?
No, No and unaffected
Oh i see , you mean Haysies interpretation of credible
put them on a forum or blog that was going to get some decent coverage i.e politics on a political forum as opposed to a tiny little poker forum .
Your views which don't appear complimentary are above. Such a tiny little poker forum would seem to be beneath you. You seem to be inferring that you would prefer a much bigger audience for your well thought out comments.
The reason you appear bitter and twisted, is evident from your posts.
The responsible thing to do in the referendum, would have been to have bothered to find out the pros and cons, and voted. Maybe we are leaving because people like you couldn't be bothered to find out any information and didn't vote.
The reason I gave examples on averages is because you seemed at a loss. You were asking what an average person was. I assumed you knew what a person was, and therefore struggling on average.
The comments made by Jac were in connection with remarks I had made about one person.
I am aware of the limits of my knowledge.
If I become fixated on a topic, and go off on war and peace length rants, does it harm you in any way? Is it illegal? Do you have to read them? Do you have to respond to them?
I am unable to understand why anyone would read, or post on a thread they had no interest in. Unless of course they are looking for a row.
I visited the Tommy Robinson thread because I was asked, and have subsequently said I was sorry I did so. I did call two people morons which I regret.
Not everyone shares you view of my contribution to the forum. The comment below was posted by Tikay, when you were moaning about this thread being in poker chat. In the same post you claimed that this thread was boring you to tears. What a change of heart. I wonder what other people think of your contribution to the forum?
,
he is contributing handsomely to the Forum, & if we had 10 more like him the Forum would be a far better place.
If you were reading a trading analysis produced by The Government, and part of it referred to the likely effect on the average citizen, are you seriously saying that you wouldn't understand what this meant?
If so this would be a first for me. I have never known anyone who was prepared to make themselves appear as thick as two short planks, in order to nitpick and create an argument.
Wow.
That's surprisingly honest.
So do you now have a view on Brexit, or know how you would vote if there was another referendum.
If you read a couple of the articles I posted, you could put your own value on his opinion. I am allowed to have an opinion on whether he is credible, as you are. That is what a forum is for. If you think he is credible you could argue the point. I have posted some articles which summarise the reasons why I think he is not credible.
put them on a forum or blog that was going to get some decent coverage i.e politics on a political forum as opposed to a tiny little poker forum .
Your views which don't appear complimentary are above. Such a tiny little poker forum would seem to be beneath you. You seem to be inferring that you would prefer a much bigger audience for your well thought out comments.
The reason you appear bitter and twisted, is evident from your posts.
The responsible thing to do in the referendum, would have been to have bothered to find out the pros and cons, and voted. Maybe we are leaving because people like you couldn't be bothered to find out any information and didn't vote.
The reason I gave examples on averages is because you seemed at a loss. You were asking what an average person was. I assumed you knew what a person was, and therefore struggling on average.
The comments made by Jac were in connection with remarks I had made about one person.
I am aware of the limits of my knowledge.
If I become fixated on a topic, and go off on war and peace length rants, does it harm you in any way? Is it illegal? Do you have to read them? Do you have to respond to them?
I am unable to understand why anyone would read, or post on a thread they had no interest in. Unless of course they are looking for a row.
I visited the Tommy Robinson thread because I was asked, and have subsequently said I was sorry I did so. I did call two people morons which I regret.
Not everyone shares you view of my contribution to the forum. The comment below was posted by Tikay, when you were moaning about this thread being in poker chat. In the same post you claimed that this thread was boring you to tears. What a change of heart. I wonder what other people think of your contribution to the forum?
,
he is contributing handsomely to the Forum, & if we had 10 more like him the Forum would be a far better place.
If you were reading a trading analysis produced by The Government, and part of it referred to the likely effect on the average citizen, are you seriously saying that you wouldn't understand what this meant?
If so this would be a first for me. I have never known anyone who was prepared to make themselves appear as thick as two short planks, in order to nitpick and create an argument.
Bolded parts :
1) Once again you draw the wrong inference , but one that suits you .
2) That's your opinion and you are entitled to it
3) being asked to do something doesn't mean you have to , and it certainly doesn't mean you have to comment .
4) Tikays entitled to his opinion as well , of course many people who read things on here , but don't post will also have an opinion
5) "average person " ..a generic , overused phrase , which is becoming distinctly blurred , with an ever increasing diverse society . I'd genuinely like to know what you think this " average citizen " is , but you keep dodging it !
6) Well done , you just managed to shy away from calling me a moron .
Try it sometime !