Let's play - post your manifesto for the PM job
 

Please keep this non-political and civil. It would be helpful if we did not comment on political parties, politicians or their policies. This is about you, the aspiring PM.

The self-nominations will close at the end of the day and we can create a poll for the members.

MSS Manifesto
 

Herewith a list of the key policies that I would introduce in order to re-engineer society's values and individual contribution of the citizens.

1. All citizens over the age of 16, other than those medically declared as unable to work or those in formal education, will be expected to work for a living and be given 37 hours of work per week.

2. All paid work will attract a minimum living wage - circa £20k today.

3. Those incapable of working will also receive a living wage.

4. There will be an earnings cap of 5 times the living wage above which tax and NI will be levied at 100% of earnings (all earnings including dividends, interest, property etc.)

5. Pensions will be means tested, start at the age of 70 and effectively reduce with time.

6. Care for the elderly will be means tested and where appropriate state provided at a basic level.

7. Provision of NHS services will be prioritised for the 10 to 50 year olds, with medical intervention for over 75's limited to managing painful conditions.

8. All citizens approaching the age of 70 will be offered the opportunity to voluntary enter into an agreement that allows a reckless lifestyle, partly funded by the state, between the ages of 70 and 77 followed by a "Logun's Run" style graceful switch-off at 77.

9. Laws of the land will be supreme. All those harming others, damaging others' property and demonstrating anti-social behaviour will be terminated using a pain-free method.

10. All those with repeat minor offences will also be terminated. e.g. termination after 6 points for traffic violations.

11. Most political insitutions e.g. local councils will be replaced with bodies of professional technocrats.

12. All technocratic institutions will be responsible to a single elected supreme council and it's expert bodies. Elections to the council will be held on the basis of candidate quality as opposed to political affiliation. Membership of the council will be considered an honour and subject to the minimum living wage.

13. Voting will be optimised to provide a maximum weighting to the wishes of citizens in the 25 to 45 age bracket. Voting age will be lowered to 16 and voting rights will be withdrawn at the age of 70.

14. The state will assume ownership of all national infrastructure.

15. Public transport will be expanded to provide a service to 80% of the population for the purpose of getting to/from work. Car use for commuting will be taxed at enhanced rates in these areas.

All other policies will in some way link to the above as guiding principles.

:}

I’ll go with an old Lord Sutch proposal...

Cars drive on the right, lorries on the left.

A 4 day week for all, think of how many new jobs that would create.

Retirement at 60 for all.

Abolish petrol tax and do it on miles covered.

Death sentence for all murderers and sex offenders.

Anybody not born in the UK is exiled as soon as they commit a serious offence, no second chances.

Increase motorway speed limit to 85 if traffic permits. 60mph in wet/bad conditions.

Drunk drivers 4 year ban on first offence, second offence life time ban.

Speeding no points just fines unless 50% over limit and then a ban.

Another bank holiday later in the year and one less earlier.

What a good idea!!

I propose all car airbags be disconnected and a 6 inch metal spike pointing directly at the drivers heart/chest be fitted to steering wheels.

That should focus people’s attention on driving carefully, sensibly and with consideration.

I’d like to say this is original thought - but it isn’t. The idea came from Jeremy Clarkson

I propose there be a blanket ban on all internet forums, message boards and chat rooms, then I would not waste so much time reading all this nonsense. :D ;)

I have always admired Lord Sutch for his strategic thinking.

The problem is that most of his policies have been adopted by the mainstream parties but are being executed badly.:}



The solution is simple - just stop writing the nonsense. :D;)

You, sir, are cluttering this thread with irrelevance. Besides, you cannot propose something if you wish to be taken seriously - you have to state your policy. :}

my goodness I agree with some of your points.
point 4 seems to contradict 2
15 how do you thinkl it should be funded as some of the population will be so far spread out the cost for the transport companies could mean they run the service at a loss

14 can the state run all institutions more cost effective and efficient then private?

13 why cant over 70's vote

10 6 points is a bit low

7 why not an NHS for all, many of the people you will need will be over 50 :)

5 pension start at 70, too high.


macafee2

I am 73,thank god you are not my carer.;):D

if you increase speed limit to 85 what do you do with the 56mph limit. need to make sure the speed difference does not become dangerous.

death sentence for armed attacks on police?
not sure a 4 day week creates more jobs. I did a 4 day week for years as did a lot in my team. we did not increase our staff levels.

macafee2

child support and state responsibility ends at 2 children
stiffer jail sentences, see police code zero and you will understand
jail for repeated anti social behaviour
increase police force
increase customs checks
right to defend your property without fear of prosecution but video or audio evidence required to support your actions


macafee2

... and I was being kind. :p:

I would say, I suspect the will of the people has changed and we should confirm that in another referendum, crash out ASAP or stay in and continue to enjoy the benefits of membership.

What - in relation to my manifesto? :eek:

Let's keep this away from current politics as that will allow us to be really innovative. ;)

I think he had plans to drill holes in the channel tunnel to turn it into the largest drive through car-wash in Europe.

It today's climate, this was a very forward thinking strategy. ;)

All election party manifestos to be honoured.

Public floggings for animal cruelty.

Public hangings for severe animal cruelty.

You've got my vote:bowdown:

Just for fun (and I don't know if some of these are "legal" with international law....):

All persons who are in public office (i.e voted for by the public - councillors, MP's etc.) have their tax records open to the public for the 6 years before they take up office and for 6 years after the are voted out of office. They are in a position of power and privilege so they must be seen to uphold the highest standards.

Simplify the tax system -

If you "trade" in the UK you pay tax in the UK AND

The only tax is a "Turnover Tax" (at, say, 1%). No allowances, no offsets, no transferring a "loss" from one company against a "profit" from another, no expenses, nothing. You pay (say 1%) on the money through the till.

Personal tax threshold set at 10% above the national minimum wage (for ease of example say £9/hour x 40 hour week x 48 weeks/year = £17280 + 10% = £19008.) This releases the tax burden on the "lower" paid and removes a huge amount of work for HMRC so they can concentrate of "bigger" issues.

Andy.

Suspend driving licences and passports for non payment of debt/fines due to refusal to pay at a reasonable repayment rate.

once an employee gets to 3'ish dismissals without the courts ruling in employees favour, then employment record goes on line for perspective employers to view, why should they end up employing someone that's going to be a problem?

cap on solicitor/barrister fees for legal advice so legal advice is more affordable for all or means tested.

DNA taken at birth and held for life... makes identifying people easier from a crime.


politicians prosecuted for fraud if they make a claim that's not true so they or their party get elected

mp's fined if they waffle around and do not answer a question


macafee2

Get caught on your mobile whilst driving, you get 5 minutes to write down any details, then your phone is held for 1 week at a police station until you can get it back. Next time a month.

DNA taken at birth and held for life... makes identifying people easier from a crime.


politicians prosecuted for fraud if they make a claim that's not true so they or their party get elected

Agree with DNA test.
Politicians don't make false claims,it's just everything they say is taken out of Context.;):D

cut out the use of non recyclable plastic in food packaging. Not to be replaced with something else that we throw away that does damage.

reduction of pollution in manufacturing

litter picking, repair work for unemployed, no free ride for scroungers. This is not aimed at the honest.

more seizure of assists from criminals.

macafee2

That wouldn't work, the owner/user would just use another phone for that one week/month. :shrug:

The phone needs to be permanently confiscated and recycled, a huge whopping fine, banned from driving for six months, made to sit their driving test again, and made to watch a public service video on the dangers of being distracted by your mobile phone, the harm it can do to innocent people and their families.

Well it would get expensive buying multiple phones and inconvenient as well.

A nationwide ban on the term “hun”.

It definitely wasn't new when Clarkson suggested it either.

Death penalty for child killers, providing proof is irrefutable.

Postal votes to be handed out to the disabled and elderly only.

Foreign aid to no longer be given out freely. You want it? give us a credible reason and we'll consider it. (Does not apply in the event of a natural disaster)

Flat rate on fuel prices (£1 for Diesel, 90p for petrol)

No more vanity surgery on the NHS, unless accident or disease related. Want a boob job or gastric band? PAY FOR IT.

Apparently all the plastic containers that have "AdBlue" in them are totally non recyclable! So to "solve" a pollution issue we use a packaging product that makes it worse!

If you do a little research you'll find that many people on benefits are on more money than the people the other side of the counter administering the system! How can that be right? (Additions for disability etc. accepted).

For me the guilty should pay the whole cost of investigation/forensics/Justice system admin etc. So the Public Purse doesn't pay anything for the guilty - they do. And I'm quite happy to see them clad in fluorescent pink overalls doing community work as part of them "paying back" into society.

Andy.

I'd extend this to all motoring offences and also collisions deemed to be "your" fault.

And the new test is at IAM standard.

Since the driver has shown that they are not properly competent to be in control of a vehicle then the driver needs to be "retrained" and "rebrained" to a suitable standard.

Andy.

And anyone who starts every sentence with the word "so"

Free road tax and fuel for all who drive R75s? That's about as likely to pass as some of the hangers and floggers mentioned above.


When we were last in Iceland we saw a car being driven too fast and mentioned it to the hotelier. "What will the police do?" "Oh we don't need to do that. Someone will quietly mention it to his mother and that will solve the problem."

And the use of the word “LIKE “ every 10th word !

Boris Johnson


Next PM

If you're fishing in a cess pool, you are going to catch a NAUGHTY WORD-NAUGHTY WORD-NAUGHTY WORD-NAUGHTY WORD-.

just picking up on boob job.
Female has big heavy breasts. This could lead to back pain and possibly back problems. The cost of a boob job now is less then the medical attention required for back problems.

Would this qualify for NHS funding?

I'm not picking fault, example of how hard it is to be fair as I agree with your principle

macafee2

Not wishing to get into too much detail, but would it not depend on whether a reduction or enhancement job?

Boris went for a reduction by way of a circumcision - the surgeon couldn’t complete it as he found there was no end to the pr**k

Well if a reduction is required due to medical reasons I would let it slide.

But if it's just a case of "I want my boobs to be bigger because reasons" then she would absolutely have to pay for it.

Gastric bands often save money. Less weight, less trips to the hospital due to fewer complications.

I would have thought from my post you would take it as reduction on the NHS. Reduction it is.

charge NHS and emergency services time wasters.

macafee2

freeze bank accounts and credit cards for those that refuse to pay debt. Those that cannot afford to pay are a different case


macafee2

and "basically", and those who can't say anything before turning round first...

So, basically, hun, it's like ..... :}:getmecoat:

So, basically, hun, it's like ..... ..............whatever.:D

Nothing new there Ravinder- there are a couple of regimes in the last 100 years had similar values, Chris.S

mss, if you think any of that is 'funny', then you are a sick and twisted individual.

Your apparent disgusting regard for older folk ignores the contribution they can still make to society, their family and friends, regardless of age or ill health.

There is no point playing devil's advocate in such a way - it doesn't achieve anything and shows that you have some really dark thoughts going on inside your mind.

Thank you for those observations Bolin.

So that you are not mistaken about facts, I am one of the "older folk". What I think we the "older folk" need to take personal views on is whether we are happy to continue consuming an incerasingly larger share of UK's wealth, which will lead to increasing debt, that will affect the lives of the younger generation in years to come. If an individual is content with with this, then fine. But I would hope that after giving it due consideration, many of us would not be content and will wish to address their consumption accordingly. Equally, some will see it as their right to keep taking what is best for themselves. That is the way of the world

If you do not like my thoughts, put you own proposals on the table for a grown-up discussion insted of attacking me. ;).

mss,in a more serious reply to your views, than my earlier post, i think you are in the minority of pensioners who feel the same as you. I have worked continuously from the age of 15 until i retired at 63. During the those 48 yrs every week part of my pay was taken from me as tax and NI contributions so i am now getting back some of the money i put in the pot. As for number 8 on your list,i am now in the best years of my life,and not making money for the companies that employed and made a good profit of my time.So there is no way i would want to end my life any sooner than it will be. If you feel different to this, i genuinely feel sorry for you.
As regards to the Country's debt i can assure you it is not come about because of the people who have done a lifetime of work.

I suspect you are right, but that does not make my views or that of the broader minority any less valid. :}

I think this is where my views differ from most other "older people". Whilst our generation have consistently worked and paid into the "system", we have also consumed at an unsustainable rate and continue to do so. As a result the legacy that we shall be passing onto the younger generation is one of a debt ridden society leading to a hard and harsh life for the majority. This in my view is worthy of some personal sole searching and where necessary corrective action.

There is no need for anyone to feel sorry for me. Quite the opposite - most would find find it difficult to believe how content I am with my life. I feel that I am performing my obligations and duties as a citizen and a father as well as anyone could and with pride. As for death, I am a bit like the Klingons in that a good well timed death will be preferable to a bad life.

There is a tendency on this forum to demonise the young whilst upholding our generation as the guardians of high standards. This is not consistent with my general observation of the young nor the older generation.

Most workers have not “consumed at an unsustainable rate” - most have contributed more than they put in.

I’m now receiving the benefits from my personal pension and savings - and only I contributed to this - no one else. Yes I did get tax relief on contributions but that was because I was not taking the income then - so not tax and nic is payable until I take the benefit.

In contrast - a civil servant pays a measly 6% but gets a fully indexed linked pension linked to salary that is paid out of today’s tax take!

So we should be careful of tarring all with the same brush.

Civil servants pension contributions vary according to salary. Its not a flat 6 per cent

Personal pensions are just a means of saving a person's earnings, be it with tax advantages. It should be obvious that my comments were related to the general state pension which in my view should be means tested and would therefore take account of a personal pension as an income and/or accumulated wealth.

As for civil servants, and state employees in general, it was my understanding that the pension benefits were in fact offset by generally lower salaries relative to the private sector.

With any proposal, it is important to look at the whole proposal rather than picking individual bits. The fact is that the country as a whole is debt ridden and is exhausting resources at a faster rate than it generates. There is a need for a fundamental rethink of our approach to life, wealth etc.

Anyone saying that they've put in more than they've taken out has got to be a pretty bold statement.

How an earth do you work it out?

Christopher - young Ravinder would be most disappointed that I am being confused with him if he was to read this thread. :D

Ravinder is a smart, wee Scottish laddie, whereas I am a on old Grumpy man from Suffolk. ;)

I know that - overall the members contribution equates to circa 6%. If you take an average across the board it is about 4.6%.

Regardless of the tiny employees contribution - the employer (ie US -the taxpayer contributes a further circa 19%.

The scheme is a non-funded defined benefit scheme with an open ended liability. A liability that we the tax payer has to pick up.

Being non-funded - it was civil servants that devised Gordon Browns very first stealth tax whereby dividend income within pension schemes are taxed.

Obviously only funded schemes are hit.

Strange how those in charge of all Pension Scheme Legislation devised a tax that did NOT hit THEIR scheme - but DID hit all those schemes where the individual or company/employer actually has to SAVE MONEY for their retirement and not rely on just snatching what they need from the public purse.

He doesn’t - it’s a sound bite to get attention.

I suspect this is what most people believe, because it is what they want to believe. :}

Is there a post with such a statement from someone?

I'm paraphrasing, the general idea that anyone keeps any, even vague, count of what they've 'put in ' or 'taken out' isn't really possible.

None of us could know, it would be incredibly difficult to work out.


We pay taxes

We get what (hopefully) what we need when we need it.

The two aren't a debit account we need to equal out somehow.

Agreed. The amount of "putting in" can only really be determined at the time of such events. Similarly, how much a person feels they deserve to "take out" should be determined on the basis of the state of affairs at this different time. There cannot really be a correlation between the two on an individual basis.

By/from whom :shrug: one feels like asking.

Good morning Maninder, as a retiree and apart from Euthanasia, whats your government going to do for the pensioners, how will they win their vote for the next election?

How do you know that? You would need to know how many civil servants are in each of the different contributions bands to work that out. I doubt even HM Government knows that information? A statement plucked out of thin air! So whilst we are challenging this posters claims lets issue another challenge. A few days ago this member sought fit to make a cheap shot political post by way of an ingnorant and snide swipe at teenagers with Aspergers syndrome. I have already challenged this member to apologise for this but to date no such apology or response has been posted. I await a response. In the meantime I would take any claims of integrity or fatual accuracy on the part of this member with a pinch of salt

One again “your understanding” is a bit off the mark to say the least Maninder.

The ONS (Office of National Statistics) in its 2017 report (on 2016 data) found that Public Sector workers on average earned 13% more than their equivalents in the Private Sector.

Couple this with the gold plated pension the Public Sector enjoys and you can see how and why those in the Private Sector feel that they are being disadvantaged.

It’s worth making a few actual facts available rather than “reading between the lines” such that ones “understanding” is worth diddlysquat.

If someone works in the Public Sector for 40 years then under the old 1/80th scheme they would get 40/80ths of their final salary as a pension and 3 times that amount as a lump sum.

The new scheme is based on average salary but has a bigger percentage - for example the new Teachers scheme is based upon 1/57th’s.

But whatever scheme you enjoy as a Public Sector Worker it is guaranteed and is a Defined Benefit Scheme however the benefits are defined.

So how much is it worth?

Well when the HMRC works out the LTA (Life Time Allowance) on pensions it takes the Fund Value of a Defined Contribution (or Money Purchase Scheme as they are also known) and they work out the equivalent “fund value” of a Defined Benefit Scheme by multiplying the pension income by 20 and adding the tax free cash.

If we look at a civil servant on £40k a year who gets 40/80ths of final salary then this is £20k a year as a pension.

Multiply this by 20 and you get £400,000 -plus the lumps sum of three times the pension so that is 3x£20 = £60k

So the equivalent fund value of this realistic example of a Public Sector worker is

£460,000

Contrast that to the average pension pot that Private Sector workers accrue - based on research by LV (Liverpool Victoria) in 2017 :-


£71,342.

I make no apology for stating facts.

The 16 year old in question does suffer from Asperger’s Syndrome. I made no general comment on teenagers with Aspergers at all.

That is pure spin and misinformation by you!

Whilst I am very sorry for her misfortune - I question the wisdom of putting her on a pedestal when it comes to mitigation of Climate Change and the damage we are doing to our environment.

Once again - you take issue with a particular fact - and in such desperation to shut that fact down and hide it from view - you attack the “player not the ball”.

This is typical of a certain type of persons response to a genuine and real challenge to their “beliefs’

I shall remind others what the offensive post from this vacuous individual was. You make your own judgement gents...

Sadly tho - we have governments that listen to 16 year old children with Aspergers Syndrome and set their policies by that influence rather than reality and common sense.

This is in any ones books is an offensive and ignorant comment from someone with no moral substance.

I challenged the poster twice (Darcy Dog or as I refer to him as Last Word) to offer an apology for this slur on those who have this condition and look what happens. Tries to wriggle his way out of it.

As stated you make your own judgements. Personally he is a liability on this forum and chooses to pick and choose post to deviate them into a political diatribe usually, and also will never countenance any opinion contrary to his.

I find this rather bizarre and amusing. How you you can manipulate facts and then accuse others of doing just that is beyond me.

I’ve just re-read what I wrote on another thread - I see no issue with it at all.

It is clearly a criticism of Government rather than anyone with a medical condition.

I am happy with what I said and I am happy for Nick to repeat it here. Even if the motivation is highly dubious.

Answer the challenge that you posted an offensive and insulting slur against people with Aspergers syndrome. Simple question.
As usual a squirming response. You just can't accept criticism can you?

Seeing as you like using long words try this one. You are ranthoneous. Look it up. And yes I did google it (where most of your "facts based" posts emanate from)
One tings for sure. I'd hate you on my pub quiz team. Yes you'd be correct on all the answers but would also be 20 minutes late answering them as you'd be too busy googling the answer on your mobile rather than relying on learned knowledge.

So the challenge is, AGAIN (3rd time of asking by the way), did you feel your post about people with Aspergers syndrome was offensive?
Yes or No? No other response will do I'm afraid. Any response to the contrary shows you up for who you really are. Ranthoneous!

Just out of interest everyone on this post

Do you find this comment offensive....

Sadly tho - we have governments that listen to 16 year old children with Aspergers Syndrome and set their policies by that influence rather than reality and common sense.

No - not at all.

What a sad person you are. Seems your only pursuit in life is to seek approval through your posts on this person.

ranthoneous - a contentious person who is underknowledged in a field he thinks he is an expert in and will fly into angry rants when his incorrect statements are corrected by those who are actually experts or at least well versed in the field.

saves you looking it up (which you will undoubtedly do!)

I have to say I did have to look it up as it is not a word I have come across before.

I’m really pleased you described me thus.

I’ve just printed off your “rant” and put it on the noticeboard so we can all have a laugh :D

I think I might add it to my c.v.


Edit-

I’ve just found the “quote” you have used and as I suspected - it is not an official quotation but one that appeared on Twitter by a chap called Tino Rodreguez.

1:54pm Jan 23 2018

As I suspected - Too many Tweets make a Tw@t

I don't find it offensive, inaccurate yes but not offensive. Not to me anyway.

Good morning Phil, I take it that one is now off the ignore list? ;):D

It appears you may have missed the relevant part of our manifesto. Voting right and counting weight per vote will be inversely proportional to voter age between 16 and 70, having become zero by the age of 70 the proposed pension age.

Currently, we retirees and in particular pensioners have far too much influence on policy compared with say 16-18 year olds who have a far bigger stake in the impact of policies.

Retirement should be about a simple lifestyle, reflecting on the good that the retiree has done in life, instead of round-the-world cruises and other expensive indulgences (other than the few reckless years doumented as part of "the offer".

We have a viable solution for most scenarios - just waiting for society to catch-up. ;):}

P.S. We recently went out to a mid-to-upper range restaurant in Bury St Edmunds for a family meal, having combined the key birthday celebrations for my daughter and son. I could not help but notice that apart form my two teenagers, the wife and I were the youngest people in the restaurant which was completely full. It struck me that we the older generation are on a rather selfish trip whilst many of the younger generation are struggling with the basics in life.

I certainly agree that the young get a poor deal at the moment. But I fail to see how stopping those who have accrued wealth for their later years from doing what they want to do with their money is going to help?

The more that is spent in the economy the more filters down to those who need an income.

One of the issues today is how difficult it is to get a mortgage. One of my sons friends is a qualified electrician, earning about £30k a year but has been in rented accommodation for years.

He and his partner pay over £1000 a month.

My son pays about £700 a month for his mortgage.

By paying £1000 a month in rent there is no chance to build up a deposit. Plus Lenders tell this chap that on his income according to FCA Guidance- he can not afford a mortgage.

Despite the fact that he can and does afford to pay his rent each month and has done for years.

We insisted both of our sons, if they stayed at home in their early working years saved and saved and saved. If they didn’t - we would charge them rent.

It worked and both now own their own home - subject to mortgage payment of course!

I believe this is where the older generation could an should help the younger. Via family initially and maybe some sort of crowd funding where the security would be the bricks and mortar?

It would also require a more realistic and sensible Stress Test than that which the FCA requires lenders to apply now.

Clive, suspecting agent provocateur activity, I have missed all of the foregoing. Reference to 'ignore lists' and the like confirm my fears. Such a shame. Amongst the hyperbole, evident on here for those who thrive on such delights, I'm afraid I can't find the allegedly offending post. Even so, it seems to me that context, as ever, is of no small importance. Would you be so kind as to help with a link? Thanks.

heres the link....

https://www.the75andztclub.co.uk/for...ht=ULEZ&page=3

BTopman quotes it in post 72 Wraymond.

As you say the context is tortured - as is logic :shrug:

Just proves the point that if someone who is determined to be offended - they will undoubtably succeed.

You will see that any offence is manufactured and the truth is I got bored with the thread and didn’t go back to it.

Bit of a laugh then that my accused believed I “would have the last word”.

By default - I didn’t LOL!!!!

Complete tool.

In contrast I would suggest you have something missing...:D

For the sake of balance here is another members comment on the offending post

It’s not an insensitive statement it’s an ignorant and bigoted statement.

It’s also about as far from reality as you can get.



One of the traits of people with Asperger’s Syndrome or autism can be an unparalleled level of understanding and detail on a subject so if you found someone with Asperger’s Syndrome utterly interested in emissions regulation and the associated tax it would be a work of art, they are very far from the stereotype that they are thick that belongs back in the 70’s.

I did not find the comment offensive in this case. Just distasteful and contemptible.

Had it been made by a reasonable person, with a degree of empathy towards others, I would have found it highly offensive.

As it is, it is just typical of the poster in question. In fact, I am surprised that the description did not includes words such as "Neanderthal", "Idiot" and "Green Taliban".

And I agree with the third para - tho obviously not the first two sentences. Regardless of this poor girls medical condition- she has been manipulated by her parents who are on a mission.

My thoughts are that what you say about the special abilities of autistic people and those within the Aspergers spectrum is true - where this poor girl is being manipulated is by her parents who cynicaly use this.

If she was just any ordinary 16 year old - our old fridge magnet would apply - it says:-

“Teenagers please leave home now whilst you still know everything”

Whilst this 16 year old is focusing on Climate Change - 16 year olds where I live are looking forward to a long hot summer, a package trip abroad and getting their driving licence as soon as they can.:shrug:

Of course you won't agree with the first 2 sentences because you are pathologically incapable of accepting any view contrary to your own. Get a life sonny jim because the one you have at the moment is very sad indeed

Yes well - personal abuse is your trademark it seems so forgive me if I simply sigh in slight despair of you and move on.

Thanks. The context has been misrepresented, possibly in error, by your accuser. Nick has conflated one expertly focussed section of society with another focussed section.

In my view you wrote those two sentences in different context, apparent by the correct grammar principle of separate paragraphs. It seemed innocuous to me, I was not offended in any way and I don't think an affected individual would be either.
What I would be offended by is some of the replies in this thread and of course the name calling is extremely objectionable.

You were on my ignore list ages ago and it lasted about a month, not long in the scheme of things. Last time I mentioned this, Reebs promptly closed the thread.

And no worse than your trademark of being an opinionated know all on anything and everything who will never countenance anyone else's opinion ever. And a patronising one at that as well. Go to some googling for the next topic you feel the need to hijack. Have fun.

Yes - I’m not sure what I find more upsetting Wraymond!

The inability to comprehend the written word or the abuse that results when the reality is set out before them :shrug:

I take no offence, Phil. Being put on the ignore list by yourself should be a cause for some self reflection and possibly celebration for the extraordinary achievement. ;):}

I just wish I had known at the time. :cool:

The debate on this thread has been pretty reasonable- up till now.

I really don't want to have to close this thread - or any others for that matter.

Perhaps ALL concerned should think about what they are posting before hitting the submit.

Please be assured I do take great care to post clear and factual info. I happy to play “banter” with anyone. But the posts above clearly show that one person in particular out of two - does seem unable to raise their game away from playground antics.

If only we would - all of us - play the ball - not the player.

Not a complaint against Nick!

I like a laugh the same as the next guy!!:D

One characteristic I often observe on the forum is that when the mods step into an exchange, the worst offender usually tries to take the higher moral position by siding with the mods, thus attempting to make the other member appear the unreasonable one.

Even I, a simple man, can see what is going on - the mods are far wiser than I to be taken in by such maneuvering, entertaining though it is. ;):D

The point must surely be that 'We' are better than that. It is stunningly simple and more convenient to present an amicable response to absolutely anything that can be said or written. Just takes a step back to see everything as being in the best intention. Those that want a row can go to where they happen - and possibly meet their match - so good luck to them. They spoil it for everyone else and the result is a stunted growth.

Oh yes - brown noser me........:duh:

Good afternoon Wraymond.

:eek: We feel honoured that even the posh, wise, ones have decided to ingratiate my thread with their presence, be it only to offer a bit of support to members of the collective and to look down upon some of us.

Thank you for making what must have been a painful effort to bring yourself down to our level.

Just one question - do posh ones practice what they spout so eloquently?

Oh, will you be staying long?

;):D:getmecoat:

I agree but when someone will not ever countenance anyone else's opinion the whole thread ends up in being pointless to the extreme.

Nicely put - and it is interesting that the consensus on my offending words - which incidentally- had to be parachuted across from another thread :shrug: seems to be that no offence was taken but some disagreed with the content to a greater or lesser extent.

I’m happy with that.

To round things off for me - I categorically state that I intended no offence whatsoever when I referred to Greta Thunberg. My inference was clear and aimed directly at Government for not listening to true facts but listening to agenda driven zealots.

That is how we have ended up with dirty diesels on our urban streets because just as ER and Greta Thunberg insist that CO2 is a poison and the sole cause of the problem - lobbyists previous to them managed to hoodwink Government - when the reality is that CO2 is a vital constituent of Photosynthesis.

We ended up with diesels via lobbying by truly ignorant people.

Greta Thunbergs parents are very active within ER. They have manipulated this poor girl into some sort of cult figure in order to advance their mission.

My simple point was - should Governments be swayed by a 16 year old supported by the likes of Emma Thompson- who flew in from 5000 miles away to tell us that whilst she can fly (1st Class in her case) - we plebs shouldn’t fly at all.

I did not want to fall out with you in public. The thread was about Dyson. Maninder, you had your views and I had mine, different to yours. Last year I chatted with Reebs at the National Meeting in Anglesey, when we talked face to face about the problems of people writing contentious stuff up on the boards. He will remember our conversation ;) We both said the same things around, would you say the same to someones face, as in writing them up. Maninder, I don't see the mods as being wiser than you or you being simple. Never do yourself down ;) The mods are ordinary guys, doing a thankless and time consuming job. I admire them for what they do.

You might have fallen into a gaping hole Clive. Your newly acquired sign off is unknown to recognised fonts of knowledge. Nothing is forthcoming from OED, CED, or my Webster. It might be a made-up showy-off eccentricity too for the benefit of the virtue-wavers and is therefore erroneous.

Greta Thunberg was not mentioned in the offensive post.
It referred to "16 year old teenagers with Aspergers" not a specific person.

The sad thing is Nick - that the evidence clearly shown above - demonstrates that it is YOU that becomes abusive when I state an opinion that differs from yours! :shrug:

'Very active in ER' what does ER mean?

Personally I recommend this post is closed. It has outlived its purpose. And by the way patronising comments are no different to critical ones from me.

Well done and bravo:duh:

Thread closed because despite being warned participants on both sides can't post without having digs at each other