Today's random stupidity story...

[Rover the Top]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-55509225

Perhaps we should just build a coal power station instead....

Nah, burn kittiwakes instead.

[Rover the Top]

[Gibbon]

What the fuck?

[Ethiaa]

I know, bit harsh blaming him for the failure of collectivisation.

[Rover the Top]

I'm hoping it's a series, with Chairman Mao, Pol Pot and Pinochet to come next...

[mrblackbat]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... ffice-call

BoJo thinks we've all just been having days off while working from home during the pandemic....

[Gibbon]

My working life hasn’t changed a bit, but my wife has been putting in much longer days since she’s been working from home. He’s such a buffoon.

[Rover the Top]

Very obviously referring to those who've not been able to continue working from home - the people he was addressing know that, the Guardian knows that. No doubt you know it too. But as always, it's much easier to fake outrage by putting an impossible interpretation on someone's turn of phrase than structure an argument against their actual point. Much more worrying in that article is the shadow minister voicing an objection to appeasing libertatians...

[mrblackbat]

Not very obvious at all, not least because those furloughed aren't primarily office based but also because of the government's drive, particularly in London, to get people back into the City to get businesses like Pret back going and prop up the commercial property space sector.

[mrblackbat]

Very obviously referring to those who've not been able to continue working from home - the people he was addressing know that, the Guardian knows that. No doubt you know it too. But as always, it's much easier to fake outrage by putting an impossible interpretation on someone's turn of phrase than structure an argument against their actual point. Much more worrying in that article is the shadow minister voicing an objection to appeasing libertatians...

And it's quite obvious the shadow minister means right-wing libertarians, what with them being in the Conservative party and all. But it's far easier to fake outrage by putting an impossible interpretation on someone's turn of phrase than structure an argument against their actual point.....

[Rover the Top]

Not very obvious at all, not least because those furloughed aren't primarily office based but also because of the government's drive, particularly in London, to get people back into the City to get businesses like Pret back going and prop up the commercial property space sector.

OH MY GOD, I SEE HOW EVIL HE IS NOW WANTING TO GET PEOPLE TO GO BACK TO WORK SO OTHER PEOPLE CAN HAVE JOBS AND EARN A LIVING TOO! What a bastard!

So in your view, he couldn't possibly have meant people who haven't been working as being the ones who've had time off, because he said "office" rather than listing every single other workplace that people could work at? And therefore he must have been referring to anyone working from home as having time off, even though not even an idiot would say such a thing because it's blatantly nonsensical. You're seriously reaching to make a poor attempt at a hatchet job stick.

There's plenty of things to have a pop at him for - refurbishment of Downing St, defending Patel, making unenforceable Covid laws - that there's no need to put impossible interpretations on innocuous comments to make something out of nothing.

Very obviously referring to those who've not been able to continue working from home - the people he was addressing know that, the Guardian knows that. No doubt you know it too. But as always, it's much easier to fake outrage by putting an impossible interpretation on someone's turn of phrase than structure an argument against their actual point. Much more worrying in that article is the shadow minister voicing an objection to appeasing libertatians...

And it's quite obvious the shadow minister means right-wing libertarians, what with them being in the Conservative party and all. But it's far easier to fake outrage by putting an impossible interpretation on someone's turn of phrase than structure an argument against their actual point.....

Doesn't matter if it's a left winger complaining about the right wing, or right winger complaining about left wing, or either about their own side. The point remains the same... it's a serious concern if politicians are favouring an authoritarian approach from their opponents.

[mrblackbat]

as normal, total failure to even acknowledge the point. The majority of people who would work in the City are still working: from home. And the likes of HSBC, Citibank etc are hardly in need of any support.

And don't talk utter bollocks. Libertarianism is the banner under which allow Americans to openly carry assault rifles, removes social protection such as unemployment benefit and healthcare, or free education.

[Rover the Top]

as normal, total failure to even acknowledge the point. The majority of people who would work in the City are still working: from home. And the likes of HSBC, Citibank etc are hardly in need of any support.

And don't talk utter bollocks. Libertarianism is the banner under which allow Americans to openly carry assault rifles, removes social protection such as unemployment benefit and healthcare, or free education.

Cool, so lets continue to crash the economy, force businesses to fold and unemployment to rise, and keep piling on the national debt because Americans have guns. Who are these MPs who are advocating abolishing unemployment benefit, healthcare and "free" education? Another absurd argument. Our freedoms are a basic right many in the world do not have, and should not be surrendered with contempt.


I clearly acknowledged your point, and demonstrated that getting pedantic about the word "office" is misdirection. At the end of January, there were 387k in the administrative and support services sector on furlough; 31k in finance and insurance; 111k in information and communciation; 65k in real estate. That's just picking out the obvious industries where people will work in the narrow interpretation of "office" that you're applying. Many in other sectors will also fall into "office worker" categories, and that's without acknowledging that the word "office" is frequently used to refer to a variety of workplaces and not just a specific kind of building in "the City" as you appear to be implying. That's quite a lot of people not working still.

And back to the point you're still failing to acknowledge: Johnson didn't say "we've all just been having days off while working from home" as you initially claimed - that's just some illogical paraphrasing you and the Guardian have applied to a comment that has a much more likely interpretation.

[mrblackbat]

Are you even reading what I'm writing? You're taking 2+2 and getting seventy million. How does encouraging people who are working to continue working in a different location prevent the economy crashing? I'm not getting pedantic about the word office; I'm taking this in context with all the other spiel from the government, such as Sunak begging companies to reopen their offices or risk losing staff, with a marked skew towards the City ( of London, as you clearly seem to have lost that one too...)

You use the word absurd; the only place it applies is to your warped arguments. The paraphrasing is yours alone: I made no distinction that I felt he was referring to those home working at all, I simply did what most normal human beings do and applied his generic, (and clearly not excluding me) comments to myself.

You, however as usual, seem to want to find any possible way out for the right wing rich elite that bizarrely you love so much. Your viewpoint was that any objection to libertarianism in favour of central control is bad. When presented with the examples that show that's ludicrous once again you attempt to twist out. I'd be nice if you actually just stick to your guns, at least whilst disagreeing with you at least I could acknowledge you had some flawed principles. As for the policies, I think you can happily argue that the degradation of NHS funding, increases in university tuition fees all contribute to the points I making, and for the benefit of the richest over the poor, hence right wing libertarianism. Selfish, in other words.

[Rover the Top]

So every time someone makes a comment about "people" you assume it applies to yourself, even if it you don't fit the criteria of what they're speaking about? At least I can see where you're going wrong now... "Most normal human beings" would recognise there is a group of "people" that have been "having days off" over the last twelve months, and a group of "people" who have continued working, and understand that qualifies who he was speaking about. The fact you've been working rather than having time off literally excludes you from the "people" he was referring to. Strangely, you seem completely unable to see how batshit crazy it is to think otherwise. Your other comments are largely irrelevant because they're based on your false premise. And given how completely intransigent you always are, I'll leave it there.