NJS

I don't want a full on nanny state to protect people from all idiocy but I do think there should be some boundaries in some areas and I think is one of them. I don't object to pay day loans completely but would just like to see some control. Having said that I'd introduce a national credit union and put them all out of business.

In most cases its probably okay. People go in with their eyes open and pay it back on time. Its the other side where it gets dodgy imo. People will fuck up - maybe through their fault or maybe through something they have no control over like sickness. It's then a matter of how the company reacts - are they sympathetic and flexible or do they send in the baliffs on day one? Also do they deliberately seek out the more desperate or do they say to someone "hang on from what you've said this isn't for you". I can't answer all those questions in this case but my impression is they take the wrong line. I may be wrong but I still don't want their name associated with us that's all.

The question then becomes do they want people to pay back on time? I'm sure their business model will include an ideal balance between the quick win of good payers, more money from rollovers, and opportunities mentioned above to take multiple payments with impunity. I know these are unsecured loans but I always thought cunts like Ocean Finance loved it when people defaulted so they could reposess. There will be an element of that with Wonga as well.

What a load of shite he's come out with about wanting the same for everyone's kids as his. The whole point of school selection whether public or private is to give your kids an advantage. That involves making sure the good school has the money and no trouble makers as well as keeping the poor schools down. Privilege exists to maintain the power for a select few - it can't be spread as he suggested as that would defeat its purpose. What a fucking idiot he is.

Probably - though I'd argue that people of all incomes and assets gamble whereas Wonga targets those in difficulties. I can see the similarity in terms of exploiting human weakness to a certain extent but its still about them having an edge of cuntishness. I'm not stupid enough to argue that I'd rather have a "nice" company and forego more money - the financial side of the club is important but I think a degree of ethics would have been nice (yes I am hopelessly idealistic). In all honesty I think the deliberate PR stunt of the ground name underlines that they know its a bit iffy - otherwise why would you come up with a nice token appeasement otherwese?

No, I despise "respectable" companies just as much - I think the way Tesco for example have destroyed thousands of shops is terrible but I just find companies whose whole ethos is to kick people while they're down to be that little bit worse.

Again, something I've never denied - I just don't like this particular species.

This might seem colloquial and probably racist but I don't care about slave labour in the third world compared with companies who actually target and exploit people in the North East as a matter of course.

They were completely conned as well - but I hate whatabboutery like that - yes they are cunts but so are these etc etc. I don't give a shit who sponsors any other team - all I know now as I said earlier in the thread, the association with tat and sleaze is complete. I would post what I think Ashley deserves but I understand I'd now be jailed.

Hook, line and sinker.

A sensible person who needs money for a car repair bill is fair enough but that's not the dark side of the business. As Parky said its people getting loans from two or three of them to pay each other off and being encouraged to roll them over every month. That's when the Apr will hit. Also if you take a day off you will see how full the tv is of their ads - obviously targetting recent job lossers, part timers and the unemployed.

Okay I accept that there a lot of morally dubious companies and industries - I work for an investment bank so I know I'm a hypocrite at a personal level but I still think they stand out. Say I decided to start a similar company lending to people who find it difficult to get credit elsewhere. Say I take the likelihood of default into account and charge 50% Apr. That's still a 48% profit margin which isn't bad. Then I think sod it I'll charge 2500%. Even discounting the targets that's despicable and dismissing them as just another capitalist company no different to any other is wrong imo.

I'd have the same objection to either of those. I also think there's a difference between illegal an immoral. After all there's no guarantee that those who make the laws are ethical. I think as a society you can make broad moral judgements regardless of legality - for example on topics like homosexuality - and I judge Wonga to be immoral and I don't want them associated with what remains of our good name.

I just don't get why people don't see this. I consider myself a world weary, cynical bastard but surely you have to care about some things.

Being topical there was that Scorpions one :

To beat better teams you either need to have a really good day or they need to have an off day. Neither happened. Of course having three players in the back four who aren't good enough makes the failure to strengthen apparent. Relieved there were no reds for the derby with that cunt in charge as well.

Most people sort of accept the player's shitbagness but I think shirt/gound sponsors are synonymous with the entire club. I pretty much think the "war" on illegal drugs is a sham given the damage tobacco and alcohol do but having said that I always thought having S&N in whatever guise linked to to NUFC was okay as the brand was part of NE culture no matter how much of a modern coroprate monstrosity the actual company was. Being associated with Wonga is just so unclassy its ridiculous. I know that sounds like the Mackem's "class" bollocks but you have to have some sense of pride in your club even if you recognise the modern game is flawed. We will be a club of tat from owner and his business through sponsors to kit and even the ground - a whole package*. * I realise reports suggest this is just shirts but if thats the case he'll be on the lookout for a tat completeion partner for the ground as we speak - how about Primark or Poundland?

There's a few morally dubious shirt sponsors out there including the mackems (pr front for an oil company) but I think this would be a low benchmark. I don't know why they ban tab companies if they allow these bastards. If true it would go with his treatment of Keegan and the ground renaming as unforgivable no matter what.

Onavo on Android - might be an iPhone version.

I like how Felliani was supposedly onside due to about half the length of Taylors trailing foot but when Cisse is played on by an opponents whole leg he's miles off. I really want to like Waddler because he was a hero of mine as a player for us but fuck me he's full of shit. As is the rest of the channel. Overall I'd much rather see teams of this mix/strength played that the previous games.

I can understand this on this occasion but the met get free travel all the time on or off duty which stinks.

I think you're a canny bloke who's a bit of an idiot when it comes to politics. Cabayaye and Rocky are genuine pricks.

Its the daughter who was assessed you illiterate moron.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/oct/03/work-woman-care Perfect example of a shit system and doctors who are mercenary shitbags.

Not necessarily but its a good example of a good day/bad day disease. My sister took early retirement last year but still does some part time work to help out. She has MS and on some days she just can't go in. Now she doesn't need the money to make a living but if she did it would certainly limit her earnings. At the moment it isn't that bad but of course it can and probably will get worse.