Tim Stanley has a message for Merc

[threegee]

Quote

...

But the most obvious benefit to Brexit is that it compels us to look beyond Europe for our markets. I don’t like using history to make predictions, but decoupling from economic alliances has often proved beneficial. When we abandoned the Gold Standard in 1931, everyone predicted disaster – but it actually helped us get out of the Great Depression. When we slipped out of the Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992, it felt like the sky had fallen in, but 15 years of astonishing growth followed.

Crucially, the future is only as bleak as we allow it to become. Brexit was a vote to reaffirm British self-governance. We may choose to shrink the state and become a bigger, richer Hong Kong. We may choose to nationalise and build the socialist Jerusalem. What we must not choose is what so many Remainers seem to be willing on: we must not choose to fail.

The Reformation offers a good lesson for Brexit

 

[mercuryg]

"When we slipped out of the Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992, it felt like the sky had fallen in, but 15 years of astonishing growth followed."

I love this; of course it did, as when you're at the bottom, the only way is up. 

"Brexit was a vote to reaffirm British self-governance."

No, it wasn't; it was a vote carried on the basis of lies, lies that those in the know knew were lies, yet failed to correct before the vote. Remember the famous 350million on the side of the bus? How many people voted leave because of that, when it never meant what it appeared to say? Here's a quick tip: a number of people I know voted leave because they believed, on the basis of that slogan, that the money was going to the NHS! They were furious afterwards, when they found out it wasn't, and never would be! How many voted on the grounds of immigration, when in fact nothing will change? I know of people who actually believe that a leave vote would see all the Eastern Europeans, here legally, sent home! I know of others who, for some strange reason, believe it would see Muslims deported! How stupid is that, yet they voted leave on those grounds. I know of many who, and there are likely a great number, voted leave because the Want Britain To Be Great Again, they Want Our Country Back, and so on, despite admitting they had absolutely no idea what the EU is, what it does or in some cases what it stands for; they just don't like Germans. Reaffirm self-governance? No, it was vote by misguided, lied-to people, who should not have been given the reins in the first place. 

Again, why are we using examples from the past to justify this? This is not 1992, and it's certainly not 1931, and it is even less certainly the mid 1850's when we repealed the Corn Laws. Let's see this economic recovery; bring it on. I'll not hold my breath.

[threegee]

5 hours ago, mercuryg said:

Again, why are we using examples from the past to justify this? This is not 1992, and it's certainly not 1931, and it is even less certainly the mid 1850's when we repealed the Corn Laws. Let's see this economic recovery; bring it on. I'll not hold my breath.

I think the title of "The Reformation offers a good lesson for Brexit" offers a clue here.

What would this recovery be from?  If it's the disastrous affects of the Brexit vote I think you are utterly on your own on this one now.

Yes, only the left's distorted interpretation of things holds any weight, and democracy is something that we can take or leave as according to convenience (EU style).  52% of the electorate are moral deviants, or ignorant, or utter fools!  There was no ridiculous scaremongering on behalf of Remain, and everything Leave said was a lie.   I guess we will just have to live with this until the glorious revolution, comrade - when those 17.5M morally deviant fools can be re-educated.  Would you like me to bring you a pot of tea at the barricades?

[mercuryg]

52% of the electorate? You're good at spin, although not that good! You mean, of course, 52% of those who bothered to vote, which was about 70odd percent of the electorate, I believe. They voted for lies, didn't they? The vast majority couldn't give a monkeys chuff about the economic situation; they voted on immigration, the money for the NHS, and other lies, and you know that as much as I do. They voted for things they are not going to get. That's brilliant, isn't it? Bananas for all? 

[Canny lass]

Here’s another message for you mercuryg, this time from CL:

Today I looked at 3gs contributions in just ONE forum – Chat Central – during the period 2015.01.01 -2016.07.24.

 

3g posted, during that time, 129 new topics. Of these 129 new topics:

 31 received no response at all before 'dying'.

 53 received 1-5 responses, half of which were from 3g himself, before dying like a damp squibt.

17 topics elicited 6 - 10 responses, and once again half were from 3g himself. Death inevitably followed

9 topics  managed to produce 11-15 responses with a significant proportion (I’d stopped counting by now) from 3g, before dying.

2 topics achieved amazing 15-20 responses – again quite a few by 3g. Again, death was inevitable

12 topics actually produced a response in excess of 25 and some of them are,  to a degree, still breathing.

Now, that’s all very boring, I know (numbers always are). However, what caught my eye was that, for the most part, the only people who bother to respond to 3g are you and I. I think there is something to be learned from the above figures. If we stop responding then he won’t have anybody to talk to. Should he continue to slag off my muslim friends on this site then I think it’s perfectly in order that they, and I, make a formal complaint and ask that the site be monitored for hate speech. You can mail me on puttevanilla@gmail.com (as can anybody else) should you have any comments. Do not direct message me. It only causes outbursts of the type just witnessed.

Edited July 25, 2016 by Canny lass

[Canny lass]

Here’s another message for you mercuryg, this time from CL:

Today I looked at 3gs contributions in just ONE forum – Chat Central – during the period 2015.01.01 -2016.07.24.

 

3g posted, during that time, 129 new topics. Of these 129 new topics:

 31 received no response at all before 'dying'.

 53 received 1-5 responses, half of which were from 3g himself, before dying like a damp squib.

17 topics elicited 6 - 10 responses, and once again half were from 3g himself. Death inevitably followed

9 topics  managed to produce 11-15 responses with a significant proportion (I’d stopped counting by now) from 3g, before dying.

2 topics achieved amazing 15-20 responses – again quite a few by 3g. Again, death was unavoidable

12 topics actually produced a response in excess of 25 and some of them are, to a degree, still breathing/gasping for breath.

Now, that’s all very boring, I know (numbers always are). However, what caught my eye was that, for the most part, the only people who bother to respond to 3g are you and I. I think there is something to be learned from the above figures. If we stop responding then he won’t have anybody to talk to. Should he continue to slag off my muslim friends on this site then I think it’s perfectly in order that they, and I, make a formal complaint and ask that the site be monitored for hate speech. You can mail me on puttevanilla@gmail.com (as can anybody else) should you have any comments. Do not direct message me. It only causes outbursts of the type just witnessed.

Ps Absolutely nothing wrong with your understanding of grammar ('they' replaces the whole nominal phrase). However, some people would do well to learn that 'future' is an uncountable noun which cannot take the plural 's'. 

[threegee]

LOL!  That's a supreme effort in the cause of issue avoidance, and arguably deserves the (unfortunately now discredited) Nobel Peace Prize.

Could you detail any particular instance of this "hate speech" please, and we will have it very thoroughly investigated by a third party?  I think what you actually mean is that any discussion or attempted discussion about the Islamic belief-set must be suppressed, discredited and shamed by all means possible, because that's the way it is in morally superior Sweden.

The reality is that I embrace your Muslim friends, and have already offered you the opportunity to increase the gift.  So, again: I am more than happy to hand your visiting card out to many more.

But... let's now remove the barrier of having to tediously post me a supply of visiting cards as I can assist you with this chore:  With your permission I will hand out slips of paper with your contact details on it, and the advice that if they make it to Sweden they are sure of a warm welcome from my friend there. To show my sincerity I will provide each such "refugee" with a 20 euro note to help them on their way - every such gift to be documented and posted here. 

There is obviously a limit to this (unlike the apparently unlimited supply of so-called "refugees") so let's say only the first hundred. That's two thousand euros into the pockets of arguably the most needy, that only needs your say so.  I wouldn't worry too much about the actual numbers as I'm likely to be handing out more €20 notes than will ever take up your kind offer. Can we agree on this joint humanitarian effort, or are they no longer likely to receive the welcome they would have received if you'd acted earlier?

 

BTW what is really puzzling me is that if these threads are as "dead" as you claim then surely they're nothing to get animated about?  Try some of the popular press comments sections if you want to go on a hate speech crusade - you'll find this far more fruitful than my "boring" observations.

[threegee]

4 hours ago, mercuryg said:

52% of the electorate? You're good at spin, although not that good! You mean, of course, 52% of those who bothered to vote, which was about 70odd percent of the electorate, I believe. They voted for lies, didn't they? The vast majority couldn't give a monkeys chuff about the economic situation; they voted on immigration, the money for the NHS, and other lies, and you know that as much as I do. They voted for things they are not going to get. That's brilliant, isn't it? Bananas for all? 

 

Twist an obvious typo and then imply that it was spin!  How clever!

Have you thanked CL for the up vote here?  She's has no answers either, but is still rooting for you.  I think she deserves a better champion.

"Bananas for all?"  Your contempt for the electorate is only matched by your paucity of thought.  With this in mind, have you considered standing for Labour; they are getting pretty desperate these days.  You'll probably make the shadow cabinet in a fortnight.

[mercuryg]

No typo; I try my best not to do typos. I also don't support labour, which sort of screws your constant references in that area. Also, did you not understand the 'bananas' reference? Dear me! I thought all from the North East would get that one!

Forgot to add, yes, I can be clever, when I want to be. It shines brightly sometimes. 

Edited July 26, 2016 by mercuryg

[mercuryg]

23 hours ago, Canny lass said:

Here’s another message for you mercuryg, this time from CL:

Today I looked at 3gs contributions in just ONE forum – Chat Central – during the period 2015.01.01 -2016.07.24.

 

3g posted, during that time, 129 new topics. Of these 129 new topics:

 31 received no response at all before 'dying'.

 53 received 1-5 responses, half of which were from 3g himself, before dying like a damp squib.

17 topics elicited 6 - 10 responses, and once again half were from 3g himself. Death inevitably followed

9 topics  managed to produce 11-15 responses with a significant proportion (I’d stopped counting by now) from 3g, before dying.

2 topics achieved amazing 15-20 responses – again quite a few by 3g. Again, death was unavoidable

12 topics actually produced a response in excess of 25 and some of them are, to a degree, still breathing/gasping for breath.

Now, that’s all very boring, I know (numbers always are). However, what caught my eye was that, for the most part, the only people who bother to respond to 3g are you and I. I think there is something to be learned from the above figures. If we stop responding then he won’t have anybody to talk to. Should he continue to slag off my muslim friends on this site then I think it’s perfectly in order that they, and I, make a formal complaint and ask that the site be monitored for hate speech. You can mail me on puttevanilla@gmail.com (as can anybody else) should you have any comments. Do not direct message me. It only causes outbursts of the type just witnessed.

Ps Absolutely nothing wrong with your understanding of grammar ('they' replaces the whole nominal phrase). However, some people would do well to learn that 'future' is an uncountable noun which cannot take the plural 's'. 

The fact is nobody else can be bothered; and from now on, neither can I.

[threegee]

That's the royal "nobody else" is it?

You haven't "bothered" to answer any searching questions for quite some time; bold unsubstantiated assertions work in the bar do they? 

[threegee]

3 hours ago, mercuryg said:

No typo; I try my best not to do typos. I also don't support labour, which sort of screws your constant references in that area. Also, did you not understand the 'bananas' reference? Dear me! I thought all from the North East would get that one!

Forgot to add, yes, I can be clever, when I want to be. It shines brightly sometimes. 

I think you need to improve this "scan reading" - it was a clear reference to my typo.

Where did I say you are a Labour supporter?  I said you might want to consider standing for them as they are desperate, and made a joke about you getting into the shadow cabinet, but that's hardly a claim that you are a Labour voter.  I think I also referred to your views as left-wing Liberal at one time too, and you didn't object to that.

Bananas relate to monkeys?  Hand bananas to monkeys  - ergo, the people who don't vote the way you think they should are monkeys?  Correct me if I'm wrong.

Clever would be to answer a few simple questions honestly.  Always the best way of getting at the truth - ask any lawyer.

[mercuryg]

Yes, monkeys; the famous Hartlepool Hang'us the Monkey, who was elected to office on a platform of free bananas (which he never delivered). 

Clever is, in fact, saying nothing when there's nothing to say. 

[mercuryg]

5 hours ago, threegee said:

That's the royal "nobody else" is it?

You haven't "bothered" to answer any searching questions for quite some time; bold unsubstantiated assertions work in the bar do they? 

No, but not bothering when you can't be bothered does. 

[Christopher Doyle]

Do you two need a room?