Rayvin

If that's true then it's great news, but until May is actually saying it, I can't quite believe that we'd be so lucky.

But why wouldn't they have just come out and said where we are heading. How does delaying the inevitable help the Tories electorally? The sooner they come out and admit that there is no way of them actually achieving Brexit in any meaningful way (save for no deal), take the hit in the polls, etc - the sooner they can start recovering from it. These are career politicians, you would think that they would at least be savvy enough to avoid burying their heads in the sand just for short term popularity (that doesn't make any strategic difference to them at all).

I still think they'll find some way of sorting the NI situation. There is no way May can let us crash out with no deal, and I think it very unlikely she feels she can keep us in the SM without the Tories being annihilated the next time out. If these were the only two options, they would have gone to the public with the situation and attempted to put a positive spin on it somehow. The fact that they're still acting as if a solution can be achieved, suggests to me that there must be -something- that they are working towards.

Really? I always thought it was somewhere between tabloid and broadsheet. I don't really think she's good enough to write for them, not when she has to stand up alongside people like Ronay. That said, the other 'regional' football reporters are about the same level.

Nowhere close to their level. I don't even own my own house.

No. The point was more about the whole 'hard work, being responsible, etc' I'm the most junior director on the board, so I get all the shit projects and have to listen to all the millionaires waffle on about the football pitch sized extension they're building in their garden. With a bridge over the water feature ffs. I'm also leaving in the summer

And I'm one of the younger ones on here. In fact in the politics threads, with the exception of the odd cameo from Andrew, I think I might be the youngest. (I don't really know, apologies to anyone I just aged). I'm also on the board of a multi-million pound business, run a side business from home in my spare time, have two degrees (one of them in business) and voted Corbyn and Labour every fucking time I could because I recognise that I am where I am not solely because of hard work, but because I was very fortunate with the upbringing I had and the opportunities I was afforded. If Corbyn gets in and raises taxes, that's more money out of my pocket - but you know what, I'm totally happy with that because the country is falling over due to extensive cuts and the most vulnerable in society are paying the price. I'm not so bothered what you think about anyone else's views, I'm more interested in your own. Feel free to cross examine me to your hearts content and I'll reply as best I'm able, as long as it's quid pro quo in terms of effort. I wrote a pretty lengthy post to you earlier which was just ignored flatly. I do not personally have any issue with you having a different opinion to me - I regularly seek out opposing views, which is why I am simultaneously known as the forum nazi, and also a bleeding heart liberal. I even posted on this thread saying how pleased I was that we could add another intelligent voice to the debate. But so far you've offered little in terms of actual content and intelligent insights, and the longer that's gone on, the more everyone else has assumed you have nothing to say. Hence where we are now. EDIT - apologies to everyone else for the lack of humility, just trying to make a point.

Then why are you even in here? If you have no need to debate anything, and simply shot in to throw your opinion down, why do you have another 50 posts in this thread? Surely the only other possible reason, is wumming. Which is what you were accused of. I'm 32 as well (what bearing that has on anything, I don't know). And yet I'm prepared to respect people's opinions enough to debate them properly if I'm going to add mine. Good grief...

The thing is, I guess you could make -some- arguments for anarcho-capitalism. Something about it being a system that mirrors the biological order, and producing the most efficient means by which humanity can progress. Taking away a safety net and forcing everyone who (in the anarcho-capitalist's view) is bone idle and thus being actively damaged by a state that doesn't incentivise them to work. It's hugely simplistic and takes no extenuating circumstances into account though. The streets would be lined with the bodies of the dead, those who were too weak to 'fight' in an ultra competitive system (which no one would dispose of as you would need a collective payment from the community to some manner of organisation to do so... I mean I guess you could do that. Could call it a 'tax' or something).

It's not so much that. It's more that you aren't answering with any substance. We're used to these opinions, we get them from CT all the time - and tbf to him, usually with more detail. I mean you're an anarcho-capitalist ffs, you would have thought you would have some in depth assessments and reasoning behind that.

Oh god. Pro-Thatcher. Tbh i thought some of this was just a wind up but no one would joke about being pro-Thatcher.

A tad harsh I wouldn't wish that on anyone. Which is why I am happy to pay taxes and support a social security network that includes healthcare

Devil's Advocate - he might genuinely think that all men are born equal and that the social status, wealth, location, upbringing etc of each individuals' parents count for nothing.

Anarcho-capitalism. Fascinating

I agree with this for me personally, as a middle class, well educated individual. But then I also see and work with many working class people who work solidly at their jobs, every bit as hard (or moreso) than me, and I know for a fact that they will never get as far in life as I could. There are class barriers to equality of opportunity, and we should all aim to change that. It's the only fair solution. Why should feckless rich kids get an easy ride through life? Why shouldn't they have to be responsible for themselves?

I lived in China for a year and they seemed to get along just fine tbh. Democracy is grand farce in my view anyway since so many people don't understand what they're voting for, but I thought that before the referendum and have little interest in it generally. More interested in what is actually best for people. That said, I don't want to overturn the referendum result - I just want the government to come and tell people that they've been lying to them about what the benefits are and be honest about the reality. You know, as you might expect in an actual democracy.

Out of interest, what in your view, is the appropriate response Remainers should be taking to a political action that has made the country unrecognisable for many of us, and which we fear will damage the standard of living for our children? Pointless argument. This is an adult conversation and no one is throwing punches. We're entitled to think the people who voted out were ill-informed and no one on here doesn't understand the reasons for the vote or what people were thinking - we went through this in tremendous detail at the time. But take immigration as one point - say 25% of the people who voted out did so to curb immigration - I think it's over 30% actually but let's keep it conservative since it doesn't matter. We have David Davis here claiming that immigration could fall to almost zero in the weeks before the referendum: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/26/immigration-could-fall-to-almost-zero-if-uk-leaves-eu-says-david-davis And then we have Amber Rudd saying that it won't actually change, months afterwards: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/feb/26/immigration-will-not-dramatically-fall-after-brexit-says-amber-rudd So, the people who voted to curb immigration clearly aren't getting what they want, and immigration will continue as normal. Those people's reasons for voting out are now moot. 25-30% of the overall Brexit vote is enough to lose the referendum on. That's just one issue. The fact is, you can take every single 'reason' for voting out, demonstrate the fallacy of the argument, and take it apart - with the sole exception of sovereignty. And even then it's not going to be anywhere near the level of autonomy that people seemed to think they would get.

Given that it was a lie, what is to stop anyone protesting it. Even the arch-capitalists are calling it a lie: http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2018/03/06/john-redwood-admits-it-there-never-was-a-reason-for-austerity/

That is brilliant

Tbf it's not, I just remember a lot of waffle about it being over from May throughout the past two years: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-austerity-brexit-plans-uk-leave-eu-hard-soft-latest-tax-cuts-welfare-benefit-a7787001.html There's been a clear sea change from the Tories on it in terms of narrative since Brexit (and the election).

I think lessons have been learned along the lines of "The older generations have utterly fucked us because we didn't care, and we cannot let that happen again"

So you think that the Tories ditching it as soon as the referendum results were confirmed doesn't suggest that they know it was linked? Curious.