
TheCat
Member-
Posts
1,916 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by TheCat
-
or, how about this one?......given that country voted to Leave the EU, albeit by a small margin, would that allow me to escape the law if I went and toppled the Sir Ted Heath bust at the national portrait galltey and replaced it with one of Boris (or perhaps Nigel?)..... If your opinion on that is coloured by whether or not you support brexit, then that very stange seems strange to me...as eitrher way, surely Im willingfully damaging prublic property? (not to mention casuing a 'public nuisance' with my ourtageous farage scultpure:))
-
rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > couldn't agree more re. the CPS. How anyone could > think this prosecution was in the public interest > is beyond me. I totally agrtee with this as well. But given that it did go to court...I think the outcome rasies some contentious issues and precendents as I've mentioned.... lets move away form the emotice issue of salevery/raceism then.... If I start grwoing and selling truckloads of marijuana.....plenty of people's values probably mean they dont care that much, andh they wqould like to see it legalised...if I then get busted by the police.....should I expect to be found not guilty of drugoffences, becuase most people are cool with it? Its a simislr concept surely?
-
DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > Where outside I suddenly found myself 'On The > Deck' > I had fallen cracked my head on the road and not > being able to get up... move with a broken right > hip. > > The staff at M&S were marveloous and their First > Aid Team attended to me. > They called emergency services. > There was The Fox lying onthe floor , head in the > road inches from Passing traffic /Buses > > A Passing Ambulance stopped to attend to me after > being flagged down by a large crowd that had > gathered. For Fox Sake!!!...that's a terrible story Foxy. I hope you're on the mend and the parecetamol is working its magic (at both ends) As an aside....I actually heard about your fall on Xmas eve (not knowing at teh time it was DulwichFox of EDF fame), as Mrs Cat and the mini-cats were amongst that large crowd that had gathered outside M&S. I did berate her when she finally got home, as to why it took so long to bring my percy pigs back home.....But perhaps I was touch hasty:)
-
Its January 6th, amnesty is over, time for a thread where people can hurl insults at eachother again....:) A fascinating debate emerging today in the papers with regards to this scquittal of the 'Colston 4' on the charge of criminal damage for pulling down the statue in Bristol. So my take on what have here is a case of 'Our values' versus 'The law'. Sure, one could argue that the law should be soemthing which reflects society's values. And, while I personally beleive the 'value' of opposing slavery is clearly the 'correct' one (concincdentally, it also happens to be 'the law' as well, as it happens!), this decision does set a very dangerous precendent to my mind, as to how these two dyanmics of values versus laws interact within the legal system...nice when they align...but as in this case, they didnt....and it seems a recipe for trouble... When they donlt align....where is the line? Who gets to decide which laws and which values takes precendence over the other? Is crime A excusable in the name of Value B? I expect many who share my concern probably wholeheartedly agree with the 'values' which drove the 'Colston 4'. So their 'values' will likely be on the right side of history (as the defence put it, apparently), but were the actions taken in support of those values b on the right side of the law? And is a court meant to judge matters of law or matters of value?..... SO many questions. I'll sign off with a a hypothetical for the EDF to ponder.... Lets imagine we had use of a time machine, and it wasnt a statue of Colston on top of that plinth, but we'd brought Edward Colston himself to 2020, and set him atop that plinth. Here is the actual man who did all these terrible things and benefitted from others misery, surely he deserves to feel the cold hands of justice? just as the court said his statue did? Should the crowd have been acquitted of assult (or worse) if they'd torn him off the plinth and thrown him into the river?
-
Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > imagine not knowing that anyway and having to take > down a United Kingdom and many many businesses > just to realise that little > > (yes yes I know that's not the spirit in which the > post was intended etc etc) You can always edit it, to get in the spirit.....;)
-
OK....so here is hopefully a 'silver lining' thought to end the year for the many people concerned about brexit/tories etc etc.... At the time of the referendum, I recall saying to a friend that at least out of EU, there would be absolutley nowhere to hide for any government of the UK. And so it is transpiring, that while the pandemic is providing some cover, the general populace is slowly realising that this govt, under Johnson, is bereft of basically most positive qualities one would hope for in a government. So...while we may enter another year of brexit doom for many of you, feel comforted that it should hasten the demise of this absolute sh-tshow of a PM... Happy New Year all....
-
'From ours to yours' 'To you and yours' On social media at Xmas. Me and my what?!
-
KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Has TheCat got your tongue ? It's nice to see that people are thinking about me, even in my forum absence. I'm touched.
-
Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > (I mean, this isn't the thread I would start on > Christmas Eve... but hey) Ha...fair...Cat is hungover and just filling time until the traditional Xmas Eve Cat family fish and chips this evening
-
Im aware the NHS and 'free at the point of use' is something of a religion in this country. But...having now lived in 3 different countries, I can confidently say that the NHS is by far the worst health service that I have had the misfortune to deal with. Not the medical expertise, but the accesss, bureaucracy and patient service is bordering on comical sometimes. I know it's par for the course, but step back and think how ridiculous it is that if you're unwell, you often have to wait 2-3 weeks for a doctor appointment... I don't understand the intense objections to the idea of people paying a nominal fee for a GP appointment if this can improve access. If this type of thing is means/income tested....It's no different to taking it out of taxation really, and those that can't afford it can still be supported... I understand that people might think any move in this direction is the start of a 'slippery slope'....but it seems people are terrified that any move in this direction would end up with an American system. There's plenty of good hybrid health systems that aren't the American system...Australia and Netherlands for example...
-
Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > TheCat Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > if you beleive things like the long term OBR > projections for economic impact, then they say a > 4% negative impact to GDP long term (10 years) > ...even if you take it as read, then that's what I > would consider to be wtithin the margin for error > on a long term forecast - so lets call it wash > overall from an economic standpoint. > > That's a very breezy approach! I was trying to be concise by that point...given I was already circa 1000 words in.....:)
-
Apols for what turned into more of a 'position paper'.....than a response to a comment!
-
Two British comedies that I quite enjoyed recently.. Breeders....with Martin Freeman...the grandad character cracks me up...but I think it's only accessible on sky. After Life by Ricky gervais...has some great amusing moment. But to be fair, also some quite harrowing moments...it's a 'comedy' about a guy trying to cope after his wife passes away. Is on netflix
-
j.a. Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > TheCat Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > > Fair enough J.a.. And I'm not unsympathetic to > > people doing it tough (despite screeching from > > some people that I don't care about anything or > > anyone) > > > > But putting the conversation over this deal in > > context.....agriculture is around 120billion > > sterling industry in the UK, and according to > > those stats being bandied around, this deal > will > > have a 94m sterling impact on the agriculture > > sector...so a 0.08percent hit to the farming > > sector. I'd argue that probably qualifies as 'a > > bit'. Of course I might not be comparing > Apple's > > with apples on those two figures..as this is > just > > off the cuff calls, so happy to be told > otherwise > > if I should be thinking different numbers. And > of > > course am aware that specific impacts will be > felt > > more keenly by certain types of farmers than > > others, it won't be a uniform hit of > 0.08percetn > > across the sector. > > > > In anycase...as I've said...this deal is small > in > > the context of the overall economy...but with > > positive impacts on the manufacturing sector > > (around 18percent of British GDP, versus less > than > > 1 percent for farming) that's a core reason why > > the net impact is positive. > > > > More broadly, surely if we're talking about > > impacts on the national economy, we should be > > considering national impacts. At the individual > > level someone will always lose out from any > > decision or agreement to some degree unfort, > but > > hopefully on balance positive changes from a > > national perspective can be the aim. > > All of that may well be (probably is) true. But > consider the following? > > Part of how Brexit was sold to us was that we > could take back control of our fishing and allow > our farmers to sell around the world. This was a > large part of what I call the ?emotional? > arguments in favour of Leave. The idea - and is > was just an idea, because the ?how? of it was > never defined - that we could have greater command > over how fish and meat was reared, butchered and > sold, theoretically around the world. > > So far? I?m sure you?re aware of how hard fishing > is having it. Meat farming is not doing much, if > any, better. While on the grand scheme of things > the numbers may be small, I can assure you it?s > 100% for those involved. > Put crudely, what you?re supporting is basically a > death knell for high-quality, high-welfare animal > husbandry in this country. > > Let us ask what will happen next. Well, once those > farmers are out of business, those who replace > them will in all likelihood *not* be so interested > in maintaining such high standards, because the > only people in a position to take over will be the > big conglomerates. We will lose the skill set and > the desire to raise good-quality and humanely > cared-for beef, pork, chicken and lamb. The stuff > coming over from your homeland? I?m sorry, but it > isn?t always that wonderful - and yes, I really do > know what I?m talking about. You know how the > energy market is your area of expertise? This kind > of thing is mine. > > Now, there are those who might feel that if the > current crop of farmers can?t compete in the > market as it is, then they should get out of it. > This is of course a point of view. But I would say > that people in this country have become > disconnected from the real cost of what it takes > to create high-quality food. People want it cheap, > but they don?t want it bad. Well, when it comes to > meat and fish, quality costs. If you can?t afford > it, go veggie or even vegan. But frankly, lower > your expectations about how little you feel you > should pay for that leg of lamb. > > My point is this - when you focus on results at > the strategic level then a deal like this seems > pretty sweet. But zoom down to the actual people > involved and it becomes apparent there are real > human costs involved, as well as a literal danger > to the quality of food we consume. If you?re > willing to go that route then fine, but what are > you going to do about the farmers and fishers who > see their livelihoods evaporate? Because some of > them are going to put a shotgun in their mouth. > > To me this is another example of those mistakes > made early in the Brexit process about which I > harp on relentlessly. There?s a *lot* of Leave > voters for whom control of this kind of thing was > exactly what they wanted from it. But as you point > out, there precious little money in it, not many > votes, so the Tories just sold it down the river. Thanks for the respectful comment j.a. Makes a nice change on this thread! I guess I would make a couple of broad pointss (which also address some other posters recent comments as well). WHAT WAS 'SOLD' DURING THE CAMPAIGN: I've said this a number of times over the years in different ways, but perhaps it bears repeating/rephrasing at this point. Just as you have above, a number of posters on here often respond to some of my pro-brexit arguments with something like 'yes that's fair, but that's not what was promised/how it was sold by leavers/brexiteers prior to the referendum'. Im not really sure how Im supposed to respond to that sort of comment. All im trying to do here is point out some reasons why I personally voted leave, and highlight some potential opportunities that I personally see. As is probably fairly obvious, I didn't work on the Leave campaign:)...and for the most part I actually totally agree with all those criticisms of a very poor campaign. I understand that remain supporters may be angry as they feel sections of the leave voting population might have been misled, and I get that (particularly on this forum) I might often be a lone Leaver voice and its natural that Remainers might want to use me as a target for frustrations at the campaign - but I don't feel a need to justify what the campaign said, or what other people did or didn't expect Brexit to be when they voted - I can only express what I hope(d) it could possibly be. Some may feel the need to now resort to a pithy 'That's not my brexit' type soundbites.....fair enough....if that makes people feel better, but yes, I totally acknowledge that different people have/had different ideas about how brexit might look (one would also think that every Remainers would have also had different ideas (however vague) about how Brexit might look in their head as well...surely that was necessary to feel justified in a decision to vote against it?). So (as regular thread readers will know), when the 'brexit will not have any downside, but will only bring upside' quote is thrown at me, I can only totally agree that it was a ridiculous thing to be said. So all-in-all, if brexit isnt turnng out how some people in deifferent sectors hoped for, after they voted for it....well, thats an issue to take up with the leave campaign I guess. WINNERS AND LOSERS: As you mentioned, you obviously have some level of connection to/knowledge of farming and agriculture, and that seems evident from the way you speak about it, so I'll defer to your comments which suggest that many farmers are doing it tough, and things like the Aussie trade deal will likely make life very difficult/uncertain for many. I don't wish to see anyone suffering hardship (what type of person would!?), and I think it's purposefully inflamatory/antagonistic when some other posters on here (who don't know me from a bar of soap) want to pick up the cause of people who are doing it tough and suggest that I don't give a 'flying fark' about those people. It sounds like you have a personal connection to farming, and as a result discussion of this sector might be particularly sensitive for you. However (yes..there's a 'but'...so now I can be painted as callous and uncaring!)...as you (and others) have acknowledged, there is a 'strategic level' (as you refer to it); and (again as others have acknowledged) there will be winners and losers from every deal/agreement/policy/regulation. From a top down perspective I would argue that a utilitarian approach (greatest good for the greatest number) sort of needs to take priority - the idea being of course that if the overall economic impact is positive then an economy should be better positioned to be able to support those who lose out as the economy pivots. I understand that this is cold comfort in the short term for those people losing - but I beleive (rightly or wrongly) that a higher productivity economy will create a wealthier nation overall. Now I'm quite sure that to some posters on here this will all seem 'pie in the sky' and 'theoretical', and dismissive of 'real impacts to real people'...perhaps it is....but its the approach I take, and it has rational basis. Did I vote leave specificly knowing that farmers and fishers would be 'screwed'?...no...because I didn't have in my mind the exact terms that would be struck in trade deals for different sectors. But overall, I felt that that regulatory divergence could promote faster growth in fast emerging areas of the economy (which are also areas where the EU is rather slow and lumbering), and controlled immigration could incentivise capital investment in sectors overlly dependent on low cost labour. So all that being said, I do think that some posters rather flippantly say 'yes, there will be losers'....but then in the next breath say 'You dont care about the FARMERS/FISHERS/EXPORTERS ETC ETC?!'...im afrid its always going to be someone. And for anyone that wasnt to criticise and say that 'well it wont be TheCat'...not that it should matter, but ve spoken before about negative Brexit impacts to my own business in the near term, which I hope will improve in coming years. Of course, all of the above hinges on whether the overall economic impact of brexit in time is positive or negative - as there's very little in the way of winners 1 year in (not entirely suprising personally), so if the longer term impact is not positive, then my overall arguement collapses. To try and put it as concisly as possible....if you beleive things like the long term OBR projections for economic impact, then they say a 4% negative impact to GDP long term (10 years) versus a remain scenario (but still trend grwoth from today)...I've commented before about some of the shortcomings of this analysis, but even if you take it as read, then that's what I would consider to be wtithin the margin for error on a long term forecast - so lets call it wash overall from an economic standpoint. So then the question is 'why bother?'.....well then it really comes down to wehether one thinks there's potential to do better than those long term forecasts through some of the opportunitiess I've previosly mentioned, and wether you think that opportunity is worth the short term pain being suffered by various sectors in the near term (and perhaps for some sectors in the longer term too)......thats a personal judgement call that we each need to make, and no one can know for sure which way that will go (of course much will depend on policy decisions which have yet to be made - so the story on how the brexit impact ends up is far from 'done'). It might have been 'sold' as a magic bullet...but thats total cr@p...all that happened on 1 Jan was the chance to start making changes which can creaste positive shifts in the economy, if those positive changes arent made, then (as most posters here complain about) all you have is more barriers to trade with europe - so on that basis I'll agree with many remainers that Brexit in isolation, without subequent progressive policy changes is a bad idea (just as Lord Frost said in his CBI speech recently too) THE PRICE OF PRODUCE: As aside, I would totally agree with you that consumers dont really understand the cost of quality produce, just as consumers dont understand a lot of things unfort. In my world, its people who want to 'ban mining to save the planet'...without realising that coal mining is only one very small part of 'mining', and without a massive increase in invetsment in certain types of mining we will not even come close to having the materials we need to trasition to a low carbon economy (i.e. you cant just grow a battery for an electric vehicle, or a solar cell, or a wind turbine!).
-
I see your tactic when you've been pushed into a corner in a discussion/debate, is to just double down on the personal attacks and whataboutery... I'd remind you that you were actually the one who raised the issue of this aussie trade deal today by unthinkingly posting links to headlines you liked the sound of. I'm sorry if, upon closer inspection, the numbers and discussion didn't go your way on this occasion. But that's not really my fault, or problem.
-
j.a. Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @thecat > > ?Farmers lose a bit? > > Dude, it?s a lot worse than that. > > Farming in this country is on a precipice. Fair enough J.a.. And I'm not unsympathetic to people doing it tough (despite screeching from some people that I don't care about anything or anyone) But putting the conversation over this deal in context.....agriculture is around 120billion sterling industry in the UK, and according to those stats being bandied around, this deal will have a 94m sterling impact on the agriculture sector...so a 0.08percent hit to the farming sector. I'd argue that probably qualifies as 'a bit'. Of course I might not be comparing Apple's with apples on those two figures..as this is just off the cuff calls, so happy to be told otherwise if I should be thinking different numbers. And of course am aware that specific impacts will be felt more keenly by certain types of farmers than others, it won't be a uniform hit of 0.08percetn across the sector. In anycase...as I've said...this deal is small in the context of the overall economy...but with positive impacts on the manufacturing sector (around 18percent of British GDP, versus less than 1 percent for farming) that's a core reason why the net impact is positive. More broadly, surely if we're talking about impacts on the national economy, we should be considering national impacts. At the individual level someone will always lose out from any decision or agreement to some degree unfort, but hopefully on balance positive changes from a national perspective can be the aim.
-
I don't think it's a particularly marvelous win at all. I think you've imagined that little soundbite. It's a nice incremental positive, which is small in context. All I did was fill in the missing bits you ignored from the article you linked to, which you didn't mention in your post. Surely I can't be castigated for quoting information which you have provided to the thread? Fascinated to know why this particular economic forecast you believe is optimistic? What specific assumptions in the calculations would you point to as being optimistic? Its nice to see you critically analysing estimates and forecasts from various bodies, as previously when you've linked to forecasts and estimates that support your existing position, you haven't seemed to question them at all. I'm glad we'll be evolving towards a more sophisticated level of discussion. Or will we only be making judgement calls on forecasts where you don't like the conclusion?
-
'lets see'?!!! What?! That's crazy talk I thought you had all the 'evidence' you need that the entire thing is 'objectively wrong'. Case closed. There's no room for debate you said. Others who might have wanted to 'wait and see' weren't even worthy of "agreeing to disagree" you said. People like me who are suggesting we judge impacts in a few years are a vanishingly small group of oddballs, kooks and cranks you said. You constantly refer to groups of people in different industries who are 'screwed', with no possibility that things might change for the better in the future at all. And now, on just this sole, specific issue. Only on the australia/UK trade deal (and nothing else, right?)....'lets see'..... You'll forgive me if I'm a bit confused!..... (You'll also forgive me for going over the top with my response in this comment. Of course we should wait and see!!! But I've been dismissed and mocked constantly for quite some time by you and others for having the temerity to suggest we should give things some time, and that impacts we see today are not necessarily the impacts we should judge the whole thing by)
-
Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sunlit uplands.. for Australia > > British fishermen - not so much > > https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-australia > -trade-deal-94m-hit-uk-farming-forestry-and-fishin > g-government-study-reveals-1361797 > > But in 10 years they will be winning because... > fish? Sigh.... You've linked to an article about a report which concludes the overall impact of the UK/australia trade deal is POSITIVE for the UK, to the tune of ?2.3bn. It cites a 'reallocation of resources within the economy'..farmers lose a bit, manufacturing wins a bit. Overall impact positive. I'll give you a hand...if you wanted to criticise this deal in the context of brexit, you could argue it's benefits are very small in the overall context of the British economy. That would be a reasonable argument...not a half-arsed knee-jerk comment about 'farmers being sold down the river'..... Please read the whole article next time, it's tiring having to make rational arguments for you and we'll as making my own....
-
Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > TheCat Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > TheCat Wrote: > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ----- > > > > brexit is 'done'. That's it. > > > > > > Was it any good, then? > > > > I had a great time. Woke up on 1 Jan, and glad > it > > was in the past. You? > > Bit crap tbh. Turns out no-one had done any > preparation so there were no trade deals, no > regulatory opportunities seized, no useful bits of > legislation passed that were previously impossible > under the EU... That sux. Sounds like you've got a problem with a government not good at completing all those sort of things....;)
-
Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "It does bemuse me how much my very existence > clearly irritates you." > > Absolute scenes > > an absolute chance for the shyster-in-chief to > parlay his position into real world "look farming > chaps - I know it;'s tricky - but sunlit uplands > ahead!!" A chance to talk about victims, cost > > and he makes it about him! > > he always always always swerves the issues. he > should replace Boris for all that we would notice Some bloke living in Dulwich, posting his off-the- cuff thoughts about brexit (amongst other things) on a suburban internet forum... A.k.a. "Shyster-in-Chief"....:)... You really are too much.
-
Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > TheCat Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > brexit is 'done'. That's it. > > Was it any good, then? I had a great time. Woke up on 1 Jan, and glad it was in the past. You?
-
Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Let's leave the > elitist-brexit-is-a-gamble-worth-taking-think-abou > t-it-yeah? discussion aside for a moment > > Let's dip into leave-voting Wales, and hear what > leave-voting farmers are saying > > https://nation.cymru/news/brexit-too-hard-and-uk-g > ovs-trade-deals-naive-says-welsh-farming-union-bos > s/ > > well... it's not good is it? I'd say the "give it > 10 years" merchants are f***ed - but hey. The > absolute JOY of a "give it 10 years" plan is... > no-one will remember!! > > Meanwhile real lives and jobs and industries are > being screwed. If it was short term pain for long > term gain you might try and mitigate it - but > these people (and their kin in other industries) > are being simply abandoned > > Cat has no words for these people > > Cat has many many many many words for his > opponents on here - because that's his only > battleground. He literally stands to lose nothing > and lacks the empathy to care about those that do It does bemuse me how much my very existence clearly irritates you.
-
Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > TheCat Wrote: > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > The comparisons with socialism are a false > > equivalence in my mind. Socialism has been > > tried...numerous times, and has failed. Brexit > has > > never been tried...so if there's no > commensurate > > commitment and delivery to at least the theory > > that people like Frost espouse...then we > genuinely > > have no evidence that it wouldn't work do > we...? > > Not only has Brexit been tried, it's been done. > The UK has left the EU. You can't say "Brexit > isn't Brexit unless it's done in the way I want > with the results I hoped for". That really is "no > true Scotsman" logic. > > Not loving how Brexit is being done just leaves > you as the Trotsky to Johnson's Stalin, > complaining about the direction in which the > Russian revolution has been taken. Hmmmm....I sense you're just trying for a reaction here:)...not a bad effort to be fair. Sure, brexit is 'done'. That's it. After all, there was a three word slogan and everything....we can stop talking about it now.
-
Don't get all piquey DR... Apology accepted.
East Dulwich Forum
Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.