President Elect's 'top team'

[Delaney]

Just opened that list; and straight in (#1) is a complete misunderstanding of EU membership. The UK benefitted more in trade from our membership than the cost of our contributions.

Having quickly scrolled through a few others, it mostly seems to contain the usual long debunked nonsense (such as the misleading claims about sanitary products).

We did not pay more to trade with the EU than we got back by actually trading with it.
We’d be bankrupt.
You should have a chat with matey’s nephew economists.

 

[sploo]

We did not pay more to trade with the EU than we got back by actually trading with it.
We’d be bankrupt.
You should have a chat with matey’s nephew economists.

Not sure what your point is there, as it reads like you're agreeing?

 

[Chris152]

debating

That's what you think you're doing? You think you're 'debating'?!

Given how much material there is to think about, I'm surprised at how little consideration people give to trump's top team, and what such a selection means for the US and the rest of the 'free' world.

 

[Chris152]

Not sure what your point is there, as it reads like you're agreeing?

Yes, I read it a few times and gave up.

 

[sploo]

Here is how you know this would be a waste of time.

1) Normal people know that Starmer is a compulsive liar. So anyone challenging that, is either someone who knows nothing about him, or someone who is not a ‘good faith’ interlocutor.

2) It is clear that Hypnotic does know who Starmer is, so he is likely then not a good faith actor (hence experience online teaches you who plays tricks and who doesn’t).

3) The typical trick used by a bad faith actor in a debate is to require evidence to a fact. Once you go through the hassle of doing so, Instead lf saying “ah yes it seems you were right”, they wil instead say something like “ahh well that is only one example, I bet you can’t find another one”? If you then find another one, they will deflect and bring in another topic of debate, to try and move off it. Robin did this earlier when I confronted him over the Trump Nappy accusations. I let him off to allow him to save face (just as I’m doing here with Hypnotic)

4) On receiving evidence, instead of disputing the amount not being worthy enough, the quality of the evidence will be brought into question “oh you got that from the Telegraph, or that youtube channel is bias (even though it is video evidence of a lie).

5) Deny that the lie is a lie, even though it is.

6) Straight to deflection.

Do we really have to go through all that?

So the answer to providing any evidence to back up your claims is "no".

Normal people know that Delaney is a compulsive liar.

Is that OK for me to say? No. I'd hope not. I have no evidence to support the above claim - but it appears you're OK with people making such strong statements without evidencing them. That's a dangerous path.

 

[mudman]

Just opened that list; and straight in (#1) is a complete misunderstanding of EU membership. The UK benefitted more in trade from our membership than the cost of our contributions.

Having quickly scrolled through a few others, it mostly seems to contain the usual long debunked nonsense (such as the misleading claims about sanitary products).

It's not talking about the balance of trade and membership costs, it's a factual amount that Britain has gained by not being a member. Yes, there will be a loss of trade but that should be in your '75 losses dues to Brexit' we can then derive a final amount and compare the two.

 

[mudman]

So the answer to providing any evidence to back up your claims is "no".

The answer is actually 'What's the point?' for all the reason's Delaney gave.

 

[ey_tony]

I expect he would have turned up to Cobra meetings, unlike Boris (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...nson-cobra-meetings-uk-response-a9472631.html), or maybe not funnelled quite as much public money into their mates' pockets for dodgy PPE (https://transparency.org.uk/report-...tion-red-flags-153-billion-uk-covid-contracts). But again, basing opinions on factual reality isn't your strong point is it Tony.

All he had to do when got into power was to deal with the economy.. There was no crisis like Covid or recessions and what does he do, he even screws that job up by hamstringing recovering businesses with taxes they they can ill afford which will inevitably increase inflation and risk job losses....for goodness sake Labour can't even identify who is a worker...reality isn't your strong point is it sploo?
I'd like to know how many businesses you left wing guys with all the answers have actually built up from scratch and run throughout your lives...it would sure be interesting to find out!

 

[ey_tony]

At the peak of the UK's membership of the EU, the trading deficit in favour of the EU was around £70bn now it's around £90bn which accounting for inflation would seem about right.

If there was the same parity of the EU-UK trading relationship as there is with the UK's trade with the rest of the world then I'd maybe support rejoining the EU but until that disparity is addressed and balanced out then not a chance.

Right now the EU needs us as much as we need them particularly as the German flagship economy and car manufacturing is under the cosh so we're in a strong bargaining position to re-evaluate our trading relationships with the EU but unfortunately we have muppets in charge of the country with no business experience who are utterly clueless and a bunch of rEMAINERS who are equally clueless spreading discontent so we're in a no win situation unless we can get rid of this shower quickly and preferably encourage the remainers to emigrate to their desired homeland as they're just millstones we don't need.

 

[sploo]

The answer is actually 'What's the point?' for all the reason's Delaney gave.

The "point" is evidencing claims made. Unless we can all agree it's fine to make up whatever we feel like?

 

[sploo]

All he had to do when got into power was to deal with the economy.. There was no crisis like Covid or recessions and what does he do, he even screws that job up by hamstringing recovering businesses with taxes they they can ill afford which will inevitably increase inflation and risk job losses....for goodness sake Labour can't even identify who is a worker...reality isn't your strong point is it sploo?
I'd like to know how many businesses you left wing guys with all the answers have actually built up from scratch and run throughout your lives...it would sure be interesting to find out!

If you're considering the current state of the handling of the UK to be comparable to Johnson's time in power then I'd suggest only one of us has difficulties with reality.

 

[sploo]

It's not talking about the balance of trade and membership costs, it's a factual amount that Britain has gained by not being a member. Yes, there will be a loss of trade but that should be in your '75 losses dues to Brexit' we can then derive a final amount and compare the two.

That's like saying you "gained" £2.50 by not buying a plaster to cover a wound. And ignoring the thousands you lost due to the infection created by not covering the wound.

 

[sploo]

Right now the EU needs us as much as we need them particularly as the German flagship economy and car manufacturing is under the cosh so we're in a strong bargaining position to re-evaluate our trading relationships with the EU but unfortunately we have muppets in charge of the country with no business experience who are utterly clueless and a bunch of rEMAINERS who are equally clueless spreading discontent so we're in a no win situation unless we can get rid of this shower quickly and preferably encourage the remainers to emigrate to their desired homeland as they're just millstones we don't need.

Again, this is complete hallucination. Might I suggest you offer your services as a trade negotiator; given that you appear to know something that all others do not.

As "Femi" pointed out recently on Twitter: "In the 8 years since the referendum, there have been 3 general elections, during which, 6 different prime ministers, have come up with 4 different Brexit deals, none of which the Brexiters like."

 

[Hypnotic Chimera]

If I got you the citations you required, you would simply move the goal posts.

Would I?
Try it and let's find out, shall we - have the courage of your convictions that there is credible evidence that substantiates your claims. Yawn.

You keep saying that you are a man of facts but you consistently base your theories on your political bias.

Yep. That is true. I hinge absolutely everything on verifiable facts. Show me something that refutes this claim. I am free of political bias. Although I freely admit I am biased against unlawful, improper, unfair, and disgusting human behaviour. If you call that a "bias" then so be it. But it isn't a political one. Nor an ideological one. It is based out of morality and humanity and nothing else.

You just called Tony a vanishing minority, literally after the only metric you have to support that, is the recent election whereupon Trump won the popular vote, the electoral college, the house and the senate.

Are you in possession of some other data, that would render this real fact, untrue?

You know those "dirty tricks" that you accused me of? It would appear that you are a hypocrite. Straight up hypocrite, if I'm not mistaken.

The discussion happened like this:

Me: "This is not hatred of Trump - it is disgust of his actions and the results of his policies"
tony: I see it differently
(implying that others think that people in the conversation "hate Trump" instead of "Trump's actions" or "Trump's policies")
Me: I expect you are in a vanishing minority.
(because I doubt there are many reading this that actually believe the words written show a "hatred of Trump" - and I'd go further in saying that tony is being disingenuous when he enlists his made-up support of his made-up claim that people are displaying a "hatred of Trump". It's preposterous.)


So, for one: the discussion wasn't referring to tony as a minority as a supporter of Trump. Suggesting as such is one of your dirty tricks = taking out of context. Cherry Picking is a specific Logical Fallacy, don't you know?
For two: I didn't call tony a vanishing minority - the full quote contained the words I expect you are. Again, compounding the dirty trick by removing even further from context.
I credit most people here with a bit more critical thinking, more reading and comprehension skill and less obstreperous and stubborn blinkeredness, such that they actually understand what folks type on here. So when we say "Trump is an adjudicated rapist, and convicted felon and serial misogynist", that isn't a "hatred for Trump", it is simply a disgust at his actions. It also implies a certain incredulity at people's allegiances when they freely support an adjudicated rapist, etc. Not hatred. Get that bit straight. It isn't hatred. It's a confusion, or a suspension of disbelief at how some people can juggle their moral judgement and come out in support of an individual who acts in such a comprehensively disgusting manner. Not just one off impropriety, but a series of immoral and unlawful behaviours. It is an admission that I cannot understand and will never be able to understand people's support that they want this person to shape the rules that binds "himself".


Over to you to provide your citations.

 

[RobinBHM]

I'm still waiting to see how you personally would approach dealing with the wealth inequality that you brought up! You're remarkably silent on that one.

You arent still waiting, I provided the answer in the form of a video which explains it



If you bothered looking at the video you would see that wealth inequality is a result of assets and debt...........the wealthy own property, commercial property, public utilities, NHS private contracts businesses, railways, gas and electricity networks and they ordinary working people have large amounts of debt to the wealthy.

the solution is
A) tax wealth the same as income
B) increase taxes on the wealthy
C) reduce private ownership and create more public ownership
D) bring contracts back in house.....council are doing this
E) a mass council house building programme
F) increase opportunities for people by education
G) increase subsidy of childcare

but the real way to transform this country is to regulate the press properly so that billionaire owners of the Daily Mail ands Telegraph are no longer able to manipulate the general public

and stop wealthy lobbyists giving money to govts in exchange for policy influence


USA has the same problems as the UK in terms of wealth inequality

there is plenty of quality information available..............but you have to have an open mind eh Tony, so you will be too scared to watch it.

 

[RobinBHM]

At the peak of the UK's membership of the EU, the trading deficit in favour of the EU was around £70bn now it's around £90bn which accounting for inflation would seem about right.

If there was the same parity of the EU-UK trading relationship as there is with the UK's trade with the rest of the world then I'd maybe support rejoining the EU but until that disparity is addressed and balanced out then not a chance

Tony you dont understand basic economics, trade deficit is not necessarily a bad thing




The evidence demonstrates that there is no clear negative relationship between a trade imbalance and a country's optimal economic performance

https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/trade-investment-are-not-balancing-act

from CATO institute (right wing)

 

[Hypnotic Chimera]

You arent still waiting, I provided the answer in the form of a video which explains it



If you bothered looking at the video you would see that wealth inequality is a result of assets and debt...........the wealthy own property, commercial property, public utilities, NHS private contracts businesses, railways, gas and electricity networks and they ordinary working people have large amounts of debt to the wealthy.

the solution is
A) tax wealth the same as income
B) increase taxes on the wealthy
C) reduce private ownership and create more public ownership
D) bring contracts back in house.....council are doing this
E) a mass council house building programme
F) increase opportunities for people by education
G) increase subsidy of childcare

but the real way to transform this country is to regulate the press properly so that billionaire owners of the Daily Mail ands Telegraph are no longer able to manipulate the general public

and stop wealthy lobbyists giving money to govts in exchange for policy influence


USA has the same problems as the UK in terms of wealth inequality

there is plenty of quality information available..............but you have to have an open mind eh Tony, so you will be too scared to watch it.

I am a fan of Gary - he is poacher (once the highest earning stock trader in a London firm) turned gamekeeper (advisor of stopping wealth flowing upwards and stopping asset collection by the very wealthy) simply to help the general public - from whence he came.

 

[RobinBHM]

Trump nominated Dr. Jay Bhattacharya for the health department

he is a covid sceptic who was behind the BS Great Barrington declaration


The pick for the Food and Drug Administration, Dr. Marty Makary, and for surgeon general, Dr. Janette Nesheiwat.

they are frequent Fox News contributors, a channel known for lying


I feel sorry for Americans, they are going to have a truly incompetent government with a malign influence.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

If it is a true statement that the UK is £100billion poorer, each year, then it is not a whinge. It's a statement of fact. And fact has no feelings. my personal view is that it would be best not to label those that bring evidence and receipts as "whingers", because that would be, in itself, a disincentive to bring facts and substantiated evidence to any discussions. And that would be a bad thing. <- That last sentence is not an opinion. It's a statement of fact. We require credible evidence from which to base our opinions, decisions and choices. Opinions don't stack up if they originate in a vacuum.

The finance industry is in complete agreement that Brexit is costing the UK around £100billion each year. And it is quite rare for such a broad agreement amongst the finance industry.

For me, it therefore ought to be repeated, intermittently, in order that we base our discussions upon the reality within which we find ourselves. Perhaps it might even act as a future warning so that the same or similar mistake is not enacted again?
For those that "don't like facts", I'm not really bothered whether anyone thinks the earth is flat or not, or whether they keep repeating their bogus claims - I'll keep bringing the credible evidence to illustrate that the opinion of the earth being flat is completely and utterly wrong. There's absolutely no hatred or malice in that endeavour. None at all. Even if flat earthers claim that I'm full of hatred towards them (perhaps because they don't like to be "shown up in public" or some such other infantile and immature emotional response). That's just as bogus as their claim of the earth being flat. It's likely a projection of the hatred that they feel when they fell they are "being schooled by a more knowledgeable individual". Which also isn't true. Just in their imagination.
It's just that a fact is a fact is a fact and no amount of bile or spewing of claims of hatred can change them.
ymmv.

It is not a "fact" that the UK is £100bn poorer because of Brexit - we actually don't know what would otherwise have happened. The best that can be said is that £100bn is the consensus assessment of informed and able economists.

I have seen little or nothing from the Brexiteer camp that their aspirations have been delivered - foreign trade improvements, economic growth, reduced immigration, etc. "Take back control" hasn't even been a damp squib - just a memorable utterly meaningless slogan.

BUT - there is ZERO merit in repetitive criticism of what was a completely flawed decision and those who endorsed it. It drives conflict and defensive behaviours. It is ultimately destructive.

A positive action is to collectively identify how the deficiencies now identified can be effectively addressed to improve future outcomes. There may be disagreement along the way - but constructive debate with a common goal trounces playing the blame game.

 

[TRITON]

As for lies. for starters he bigged up his stance on free university education and now it appears they're increasing fees next year.

You mean the pledges from the 2019 manifesto ? As in those of not the 2024 election there but the previous one.
Which means because that wasnt in this election manifesto can hardly be relevant for the 2024 election.

You said 'lies' this is a plural, so lets hear the rest.