MP expenses.

[Guest alex]

I just did. Well, you did actually

[Fop 1]

I just did. Well, you did actually

Fop sees, so you can time travel now?

 

Or are you now admitting your first assertion was pure attempted (point scoring ) WUMery and bull-?

Edited May 13, 2009 by Fop

[Renton 22495]

Another straight answer missing there from you btw Fop. You did ask.

WUMery.

 

You never did provide an example in this thread.

 

I'm trying to have an intelligent discussion with you Fop but you're making it impossible. It's not about point-scoring for me, that's the truth. It's sad that's what it's all about for you though.

Then get yourself educated, then we can actually have a discussion about it.

 

Does education mean taking someone else's word for outlandish claims, without them having any evidence to back their claims up? No thanks all the same.

[Fop 1]

Another straight answer missing there from you btw Fop. You did ask.

WUMery.

 

You never did provide an example in this thread.

 

I'm trying to have an intelligent discussion with you Fop but you're making it impossible. It's not about point-scoring for me, that's the truth. It's sad that's what it's all about for you though.

Then get yourself educated, then we can actually have a discussion about it.

 

Does education mean taking someone else's word for outlandish claims, without them having any evidence to back their claims up? No thanks all the same.

 

Nope it means finding out for yourself, instead of claiming everything is "wrong" without (clearly) actually having the slightest clue yourself.

 

The first leads to discussion, the second leads to the usual WUMery of toontastic (which everyone claims to hate , yet constantly revels in ).

 

So like Fop said get yourself educated, if Fop is wrong about MP tax issues, it should be easy enough to discover and "prove" shouldn't it?

 

Now Fop is off for 2nd Lunch, so get busy.

[Renton 22495]

Another straight answer missing there from you btw Fop. You did ask.

WUMery.

 

You never did provide an example in this thread.

 

I'm trying to have an intelligent discussion with you Fop but you're making it impossible. It's not about point-scoring for me, that's the truth. It's sad that's what it's all about for you though.

Then get yourself educated, then we can actually have a discussion about it.

 

Does education mean taking someone else's word for outlandish claims, without them having any evidence to back their claims up? No thanks all the same.

 

Nope it means finding out for yourself, instead of claiming everything is "wrong" without (clearly) actually having the slightest clue yourself.

 

The first leads to discussion, the second leads to the usual WUMery of toontastic (which everyone claims to hate , yet constantly revels in ).

 

So like Fop said get yourself educated, if Fop is wrong about MP tax issues, it should be easy enough to discover and "prove" shouldn't it?

 

Now Fop is off for 2nd Lunch, so get busy.

 

It's impossible to disprove something that doesn't exist Fop, hence the prevailing popularity of religion. Chop chop for your afternoon meds then.

[Guest alex]

I just did. Well, you did actually

Fop sees, so you can time travel now?

 

Or are you now admitting your first assertion was pure attempted (point scoring ) WUMery and bull-?

So you're admitting you have just avoided answering a straight question? Nice one

[manc-mag 1]

'He who asserts must prove' tbh Fop (and you know that fine well of course).

 

Irrespective of what if anything you do ultimately manage to post by way of evidence Fop (and Renton's request seemed genuinely inquisitve tbf), it looks utterly desparate when you attempt to shift the burden of proof like that. Really plumbing new depths of late.

[Fop 1]

'He who asserts must prove' tbh Fop (and you know that fine well of course).

First rule of WUMery? That would be Rention then.

Irrespective of what if anything you do ultimately manage to post by way of evidence Fop (and Renton's request seemed genuinely inquisitve tbf), it looks utterly desparate when you attempt to shift the burden of proof like that. Really plumbing new depths of late.

It took you a while, but you got there in the end point scoring WUMery, alex and tom will be so very proud.

 

Same question though; do you believe that UK MP get tax breaks/Tax free perks others do not get or do you believe Fop made this up? (oh and how many people currently qualify for Legal Aid if you really want to stretch your google-fu )

 

I just did. Well, you did actually

Fop sees, so you can time travel now?

 

Or are you now admitting your first assertion was pure attempted (point scoring ) WUMery and bull-?

So you're admitting you have just avoided answering a straight question? Nice one

Hmm.... now what was that about point scoring WUMery again alex?

 

Just to make things clear are you for point scoring WUMery or against? (again a simple yes or no will do )

 

 

It's impossible to disprove something that doesn't exist Fop, hence the prevailing popularity of religion. Chop chop for your afternoon meds then.

So you are now saying that it is "impossible" to prove that UK MP's get tax breaks/have tax free perks? Yes or No?

 

 

Surely if it is impossible to prove that, then Fop's point about the opaqueness of the system stands.

And if it is NOT impossible to prove, then way haven't you?

[manc-mag 1]

Your head must be in bits man. This is awful tbh.

[Fop 1]

Your head must be in bits man. This is awful tbh.

Yup that is some damn poor WUMery from you Sammy man man, you need to do better.

 

 

(shockingly you didn't answer the question [/alex] )

Edited May 13, 2009 by Fop

[Happy Face 29]

I love these meta-arguments Fop always reduceds a thread to that transend the subject matter.

 

[Fop 1]

I love these meta-arguments Fop always reduceds a thread to that transend the subject matter.

 

 

Aye, it's all Fop, not alex, Rention, Chezzy, manc-foplite (and yourself).

 

As usual they just don't like it up em.

 

 

 

 

Out of interest do you think MPs get tax breaks and tax free perks or not? No one seems to want to give an answer for some reason.

[Happy Face 29]

I love these meta-arguments Fop always reduceds a thread to that transend the subject matter.

 

 

Aye, it's all Fop, not alex, Rention, Chezzy, manc-foplite (and yourself).

 

 

You're the only constant mate.

 

I can have a good debate with any of the others you list while completeley disagreeing. You're the only one who debases disussion to the level of arguing over the approach to the argument at every turn.

[Fop 1]

I love these meta-arguments Fop always reduceds a thread to that transend the subject matter.

 

 

Aye, it's all Fop, not alex, Rention, Chezzy, manc-foplite (and yourself).

 

 

You're the only constant mate.

 

Utter rubbish, there's loads of "constants" they constantly engage other posters in this way, they just can't "break" Fop is all and it irks the hell out of them , but the only real constant is the usual suspects above doing what they do (WUMery). Now Fop doesn't mind at all, but equally Fop isn't going to let them get away with playing the martyr/"complaining" about it either.

 

Look at alex in this thread..... point scoring WUMery indeed.

 

 

I can have a good debate with any of the others you list while completeley disagreeing. You're the only one who debases disussion to the level of arguing over the approach to the argument at every turn.

Again rubbish, there's of course two sides to any mob, but what does that prove?

 

Fop and Parky can and do disagree without any major hysterics, does that mean that Fop and Parky are paragons of diplomacy, reason and tact?

 

 

Even the fact that you're getting into THIS argument pretty much means

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway back the the point in question; do you believe UK MPs get tax breaks and tax free perks that others do not get?

Edited May 13, 2009 by Fop

[manc-mag 1]

oh dear.

[Park Life 71]

Stay strong Fop, the weak need to feel like they are in a group.

[Guest alex]

Stay strong Fop, the weak need to feel like they are in a group.

You just like him because he makes you look almost level-headed.

[Park Life 71]

Stay strong Fop, the weak need to feel like they are in a group.

You just like him because he makes you look almost level-headed.

[Guest alex]

Stay strong Fop, the weak need to feel like they are in a group.

You just like him because he makes you look almost level-headed.

Not quite though.

[Renton 22495]

'He who asserts must prove' tbh Fop (and you know that fine well of course).

First rule of WUMery? That would be Rention then.

Irrespective of what if anything you do ultimately manage to post by way of evidence Fop (and Renton's request seemed genuinely inquisitve tbf), it looks utterly desparate when you attempt to shift the burden of proof like that. Really plumbing new depths of late.

It took you a while, but you got there in the end point scoring WUMery, alex and tom will be so very proud.

 

Same question though; do you believe that UK MP get tax breaks/Tax free perks others do not get or do you believe Fop made this up? (oh and how many people currently qualify for Legal Aid if you really want to stretch your google-fu )

 

I just did. Well, you did actually

Fop sees, so you can time travel now?

 

Or are you now admitting your first assertion was pure attempted (point scoring ) WUMery and bull-?

So you're admitting you have just avoided answering a straight question? Nice one

Hmm.... now what was that about point scoring WUMery again alex?

 

Just to make things clear are you for point scoring WUMery or against? (again a simple yes or no will do )

 

 

It's impossible to disprove something that doesn't exist Fop, hence the prevailing popularity of religion. Chop chop for your afternoon meds then.

So you are now saying that it is "impossible" to prove that UK MP's get tax breaks/have tax free perks? Yes or No?

 

 

Surely if it is impossible to prove that, then Fop's point about the opaqueness of the system stands.

And if it is NOT impossible to prove, then way haven't you?

 

What a shambles of a post. You've truly lost it this time Fop.

[Fop 1]

oh dear.

 

Really that is WUMery of the lowest level, try harder.

 

Stay strong Fop, the weak need to feel like they are in a group.

 

mobs always follow the same pattern (much like MP's ).

 

Stay strong Fop, the weak need to feel like they are in a group.

You just like him because he makes you look almost level-headed.

 

More WUMery alex? At least it wasn't point scoring WUMery this time.

[Fop 1]

 

It's impossible to disprove something that doesn't exist Fop, hence the prevailing popularity of religion. Chop chop for your afternoon meds then.

So you are now saying that it is "impossible" to prove that UK MP's get tax breaks/have tax free perks? Yes or No?

 

 

Surely if it is impossible to prove that, then Fop's point about the opaqueness of the system stands.

And if it is NOT impossible to prove, then way haven't you?

 

What a shambles of a post. You've truly lost it this time Fop.

 

 

So are you saying it's impossible to prove MP do get tax breaks and tax free perks or not?

 

(or can't you even remember what you're supposed to be disagreeing with now )

[Renton 22495]

 

It's impossible to disprove something that doesn't exist Fop, hence the prevailing popularity of religion. Chop chop for your afternoon meds then.

So you are now saying that it is "impossible" to prove that UK MP's get tax breaks/have tax free perks? Yes or No?

 

 

Surely if it is impossible to prove that, then Fop's point about the opaqueness of the system stands.

And if it is NOT impossible to prove, then way haven't you?

 

What a shambles of a post. You've truly lost it this time Fop.

 

 

So are you saying it's impossible to prove MP do get tax breaks and tax free perks or not?

 

(or can't you even remember what you're supposed to be disagreeing with now )

 

You're the one that claimed that MPs get' tax breaks and tax free perks' that nobody else does Fop, not me. It's therefore up to you to substantiate this, not up to me to disprove it. Hilariously now I see you seem to be suggesting the reason you can't prove it is down to the opaqueness of the system!

 

You're barking mate.

[Fop 1]

 

It's impossible to disprove something that doesn't exist Fop, hence the prevailing popularity of religion. Chop chop for your afternoon meds then.

So you are now saying that it is "impossible" to prove that UK MP's get tax breaks/have tax free perks? Yes or No?

 

 

Surely if it is impossible to prove that, then Fop's point about the opaqueness of the system stands.

And if it is NOT impossible to prove, then way haven't you?

 

What a shambles of a post. You've truly lost it this time Fop.

 

 

So are you saying it's impossible to prove MP do get tax breaks and tax free perks or not?

 

(or can't you even remember what you're supposed to be disagreeing with now )

 

You're the one that claimed that MPs get' tax breaks and tax free perks' that nobody else does Fop, not me. It's therefore up to you to substantiate this, not up to me to disprove it. Hilariously now I see you seem to be suggesting the reason you can't prove it is down to the opaqueness of the system!

 

You're barking mate.

 

So are you now saying it's not impossible to prove they don't get tax break and tax free perks that other don't get?

 

You seriously need to make your mind up.

 

 

 

It is utterly hilarious though, because anyone with the slightest idea about this issue knows that MP do get many tax breaks and tax free perks (just watch the news, they'll mention at least 3 separate issues where they do pretty much any time they mention the scandal ).

 

Yet here you are arguing about something you clearly know absolutely nothing about at all (it's the CPU thread yet again ) and claiming that Fop just "made up" that MPs get loads of tax breaks and tax free perks that no one else gets.

 

You couldn't make this up.

[Renton 22495]

 

It's impossible to disprove something that doesn't exist Fop, hence the prevailing popularity of religion. Chop chop for your afternoon meds then.

So you are now saying that it is "impossible" to prove that UK MP's get tax breaks/have tax free perks? Yes or No?

 

 

Surely if it is impossible to prove that, then Fop's point about the opaqueness of the system stands.

And if it is NOT impossible to prove, then way haven't you?

 

What a shambles of a post. You've truly lost it this time Fop.

 

 

So are you saying it's impossible to prove MP do get tax breaks and tax free perks or not?

 

(or can't you even remember what you're supposed to be disagreeing with now )

 

You're the one that claimed that MPs get' tax breaks and tax free perks' that nobody else does Fop, not me. It's therefore up to you to substantiate this, not up to me to disprove it. Hilariously now I see you seem to be suggesting the reason you can't prove it is down to the opaqueness of the system!

 

You're barking mate.

 

So are you now saying it's not impossible to prove they don't get tax break and tax free perks that other don't get?

 

You seriously need to make your mind up.

 

 

 

It is utterly hilarious though, because anyone with the slightest idea about this issue knows that MP do get many tax breaks and tax free perks (just watch the news, they'll mention at least 3 separate issues where they do pretty much any time they mention the scandal ).

 

Yet here you are arguing about something you clearly know absolutely nothing about at all (it's the CPU thread yet again ) and claiming that Fop just "made up" that MPs get loads of tax breaks and tax free perks that no one else gets.

 

You couldn't make this up.

 

FFS. If it's so widely reported just give me a link Fop. I'm not playing games or point-scoring, I'm genuinely interested in these tax benefits that are exclusive to MPs. Basically put up or shut up, you complete fruit loop.