Rayvin

This is going to be a superb 4 years for this level of piss taking. We'll probably need it tbf.

...I get it now, sorry. Actually not bad, just went right over my head

Are you inferring that they're fascists? I think that one could just be a coincidence...

Poor Syria. I wonder if they'll hold us or the Russians primarily responsible for this in the long run...

Initially thought that this was recent. Was going to credit Alan with an impressively dark comic ability. Would he get away with saying that these days?

Another day on TT...

I guess I'd just suggest that we're careful about assuming Bannon is just in it for himself. If he is then he isn't much of a threat to anything - but I genuinely suspect that he'll be motivated by an agenda, and that this agenda is an opposite one to the SJW one that we've seen in recent years. I've heard some people describe him as some manner of radical leftist when it comes to the working class as well. He really could reach out to them en masse from where he is now. I think it's just that he's a guy who seemed to know Trump was going to win before anyone else did, and who outplayed the whole media establishment. I'm not convinced 'seeking money' is enough of a motivation for someone to play that kind of game. Let's just say that I hope he is in it for the money. Or that he's just a nationalist with real plans to help the working class, irrespective of creed or race... which feels unlikely... If he actually means what he says then violent change may be upon us.

The illegal ones do sure, but the legal ones are competing for the real jobs. In fairness I'm probably conflating Brexit into this now, I don't know if Trump actually ran on a platform for reducing immigration in the legal sense. Nice analysis on Bannon - I really don't know much about the guy but fair enough on the comments you've made. I'm just not sure why anyone looking to make money would go for the far right. He's playing a high stakes game if that was his thinking.

You can't bring back industry or anything like that, but you can limit immigration, creating less labour supply, and therefore more negotiating power for the workforce. Of course, this may put some companies under, or have them looking overseas, and may overall harm the US economy, but the logic there is actually sound. Bannon, despite his past, gave it all up to run what he considers to be a website for speaking truth to power. That suggests to me that he is someone who believes in something other than his own personal enrichment. I doubt he ever thought he'd get this close to power either, so it's hard to imagine that his was primarily motivated by that, either. This doesn't mean goals don't change though. And moreover, he could just be driven by racism - which isn't great either.

I reckon Bannon probably is genuine in his 'nationalism', and won't be particularly into the idea of being on side with globalist corporations. Still though, how much actual impact he's going to be able to make on Trump is another issue entirely.

Are large companies on a lower rate than smaller ones? That's totally passed me by if so. Unless you're meaning that they're not going to be able to base themselves elsewhere in the EU and continue trading here, and that this means they're going to have to pay our rate...? Fair enough on the actual percentage, the Guardian reported 15% for some reason.

Agreed but if I had to choose an area to blow a load of money on following our departure, this would be high up the list. Not sure if £2bn is all that much in this field though, these days.

I'm reliably told by facebook, the source of all fact based news, that the Queen is paying for this out of the income from her estate. The MSM seems to have verified this but points out that we're giving her a raise in terms of the income she receives (from said estate) from 15% to 25% for 10 years in order to cover this. I'm more concerned by the decrease in corp. tax to 15%. Where are we going to make up that 5% shortfall from...?

I'd agree with this, I find the idea of losing him a bit concerning to be honest, even if £18m is good money. We could definitely replace him for that kind of spend of course, but we'd not be guaranteed to get the same level of leadership.

Chelsea weighing up a move for Lascelles apparently... The Chronicle, Sun and Metro have all carried it so, y'know, probably nothing in it. £18m they reckon. http://metro.co.uk/2016/10/30/chelsea-eye-transfer-for-newcastle-united-captain-jamaal-lascelles-6223133/

I'm really looking forward to seeing how he does next year. Some of the journalists were speculating that our team would be midtable in the PL at the moment were we in it, and while we can't be sure if that's true, I'd imagine we're not far off that point. Have also been pleased that we've not heard a squeak out of Penfold or Ashley this year so far.

I think it's really hard to say until we're actually back in the PL. The drop off in defending capabilities is noticeable in this league - you have to consider that every team in this division 'is about as good' as Hull or Sunderland. I'd fancy him to score against both of them in the PL, but teams in midtable would be a different matter. To be honest though, it may be more to do with the service he'd receive rather than him.

Comfortable. Leeds look alright to me but I doubt they'll get anything other than near miss of promotion slots this year. Was probably a potential banana skin this one just based on the fact that Leeds fans were well up for it.

Fucking get in Gayle.

Well we're a much better team than they are, but they seem to be playing with a lot of enthusiasm. Need another goal (maybe two) to kill the game off.

Just need to get to half time.

Could just be a brief post-goal fightback.