I'm just asking how it works, Quizzlestick! Chie obviously feels strongly that he knows who to blame so I'd just like some enlightenment as to how he reached this decision.
And no, I don't really have a clear opinion on this since I'm not so arrogant as to think I understand regulation, macroeconomics and law. What I DO feel is that blame can't be attributed to a single party, despite what the tabloids shriek from their covers.
That woman who threw green stuff at Mandelson
For someone on with a self-confessed ignorance on the subject, you have stated what looks remarkably like an opinion. Unless, perhaps, what you ‘feel’ is not what you believe to be true?Sput wrote:I don't really have a clear opinion on this since I'm not so arrogant as to think I understand regulation, macroeconomics and law. What I DO feel is that blame can't be attributed to a single party, despite what the tabloids shriek from their covers.
Perhaps you would care to explain it in more detail, or are you just voicing a personal point of view which lacks any basis in fact or truth?
Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion - even Chie, however much that obviously irritates you. However, since you always insist on a veritable thesis from others to justify theirs, surely it’s only fair to suggest that you do the same, is it not?
As the most recent poster, I assume you were responding to my post there, Sput. It seems a shame that you still haven’t grasped the concept of a ‘forum username’ and continue to denude what little value your posts have by including some sort of pointless attempt at mockery within them!Sput wrote:I'm just asking how it works, Quizzlestick!
User removed
DID I AKS YOU?
That shows don't have an opinion on who should be BLAMED because I don't understand the whole thing, and I don't see how Chie's whole "it's all one person's fault" perspective can possibly cover it, so I was asking him to connect the dots for me. That's not what irritates me. I actually LIKE playing the devil's advocate to hear someone else's argument out. What irritates me is how you insist being such a sanctimonious cunt Stuart. I'm SO SICK of you wading into threads where I have the temerity to ask someone to back up an empty opinion/rhetorical statement with a little bit of actual REASON. In doing so you don't bring anything whatsoever apart from a healthy dose of smug twattery.
Oh your last bit there, you're just as bad as me, effectively calling Nini a dog at every opportunity with your repeated use of the word "Muzzle" so fuck off on that front.
Knight knight
Sput wrote:
DID I AKS YOU?
That shows don't have an opinion on who should be BLAMED because I don't understand the whole thing, and I don't see how Chie's whole "it's all one person's fault" perspective can possibly cover it, so I was asking him to connect the dots for me. That's not what irritates me. I actually LIKE playing the devil's advocate to hear someone else's argument out. What irritates me is how you insist being such a sanctimonious cunt Stuart. I'm SO SICK of you wading into threads where I have the temerity to ask someone to back up an empty opinion/rhetorical statement with a little bit of actual REASON. In doing so you don't bring anything whatsoever apart from a healthy dose of smug twattery.
Oh your last bit there, you're just as bad as me, effectively calling Nini a dog at every opportunity with your repeated use of the word "Muzzle" so fuck off on that front.
Good Lord!
That's partially what I was getting at with my line of questioning, barcy. Good work! It strikes me that a lot of people on the Right are blaming the government for not being interventionist enough but of course such things are characteristic of the left, so their implication of "It wouldn't have happened under the tories" doesn't ring true in my ears. Not in that sense, anyway, and that's what I picked up from Chie's post.
Knight knight
I'm not sure I'd like to be under any Tory really. Just make sure you stay away from Hamstead Heath.barcode wrote:Well a better question, Would it be any better under the Tories? Or should that be would you be better of under them?
Seriously though, I like many here would not like to even begin to explain exactly what caused the crunch de credit. I would hazard that a lot of greedy people made a lot of silly mistakes which has certainly lead to a decline in confidence in the banking sector. Of course I would like to say that I don't "blame" the government for the recession but I would like to register my disappointment that they haven't moved quicker on certain things that possibly might have helped eased the pain. The "Quantative Easing" programme is seen as "too little, too late" but of course it will be a matter of time as to whether it will get banks lending again.
Right, enough politics - I was always told my a learned friend that you should never discuss politics at the bar. I would like to think this applies here too as there just aren't enough people educated on the subjects we want to get into. Consequently it just turns into a load of people spouting headlines and reminds me of the phrase that "Opinions are like arse holes. Everyone's got one."
Good Lord!
Once again, Sput, you seem to take delight in connecting your own dots and creating someone else’s point of view for them, complete with stereotypical insults which no doubt cheer your baying mob of supporters (such as Jimmy Ison with his inept reposting of the ‘paddle image’).Sput wrote:That shows don't have an opinion on who should be BLAMED because I don't understand the whole thing, and I don't see how Chie's whole "it's all one person's fault" perspective can possibly cover it, so I was asking him to connect the dots for me.
I’m struggling to find:
He said NOTHING of the sort! There are only two pages to this thread; surely you can manage to stretch back far enough to see what he posted and quote him correctly? Here it is for you:Sput wrote: Chie's whole "it's all one person's fault" perspective can possibly cover it.., so I was asking him to connect the dots for me.
I don’t think expressing an opinion against the view that the government has NO BLAME could be converted into your assumption that he was stating the government was to blame for EVERYTHING. Yet you state it as a quote.Chie wrote: In reply to Susanna Reid asking him why the government is refusing to acknowledge and apologise for its part in the recession, Mandelson declared the government doesn't share any of the blame for what's happened to the economy whatsoever. :roll: Those were his words.
Do you, it doesn’t seem apparent? More correctly, you were simply choosing a forum member for some sort of ridicule – perhaps your brand of ‘ritual humiliation’:Sput wrote: That's not what irritates me. I actually LIKE playing the devil's advocate to hear someone else's argument out.
Perhaps you can explain what you mean by that?Sput wrote:Anyway, Chie, I'm after you. I suspect you're spouting more Daily Mail-esque opinions that you've not bothered to think about yourself.
I could accuse you of simply “wading into threads where [you] have the temerity to ask someone to back up an empty opinion/rhetorical statement with a little bit of actual REASON. In doing so you don't bring anything whatsoever apart from a healthy dose of smug twattery”
But I would be accused of plagarism, of course! I suggest you check the colour of your kettle before spouting forth such an obvious self-criticism!
I don’t think the attitude of “I only did it because the bigger boys told me to!”, or resorting to swearing, really works for someone claiming your level of intelligence, Sput. If you want to continue to appear childish then do so; it’s a reflection on you and anyone who might find it amusing rather than me, don’t you think?Sput wrote:Oh your last bit there, you're just as bad as me, effectively calling Nini a dog at every opportunity with your repeated use of the word "Muzzle" so fuck off on that front.
User removed
