Ed V Dave - 9pm on C4 & Sky News

[blueinsa]

You've got that completely the wrong way around. But again, I'm not surprised.

It's up to those claiming a hypothesis to prove it.

Guessing you've never been big in science.

It's there to be knocked down, do it or shut up.

I don't know how to break this down in any simpler form for you.

If you make a claim, and an outlandish claim at that, it is up to you to provide a link or source or any evidence of any kind to back that up, otherwise it's just bullshit.

As an example I spent last night enjoying a threesome with Megan Fox and the doly bird off Countdown.

Prove I didnt.

You slept with a rag???

 

[SWP's back]

So, we're back to class envy and hating the rich? It always ends up there when guys like you are stumped.

I support all sorts of legislation that doesn't effect me, I support legislation that does effect me in my pocket, but then my pocket doesn't define me in the way it clearly does with you.

It sounds like the politics of envy alright.

You're in support of a rule that would cost the taxpayer billions to spite some at the very top.

We're back to accusations of class envy again.

Prove it!!....LOL

You post but you have nothing to say.

Prove which bit? That it would cost the taxpayer money?

Ok, the IFS say that increasing the top rate back to 50p on high earners will provide between 0-2bn GBP to HMRC.

Now imagine stopping anyone earning more than a million from receiving that cash at 50p in the point tax revenue.

On my counting that would cost HMRC £100m per year from the City squad alone.

 

[SWP's back]

It's there to be knocked down, do it or shut up.

I don't know how to break this down in any simpler form for you.

If you make a claim, and an outlandish claim at that, it is up to you to provide a link or source or any evidence of any kind to back that up, otherwise it's just bullshit.

As an example I spent last night enjoying a threesome with Megan Fox and the doly bird off Countdown.

Prove I didnt.

You slept with a rag???

Back doors etc...

 

[blueinsa]

I don't know how to break this down in any simpler form for you.

If you make a claim, and an outlandish claim at that, it is up to you to provide a link or source or any evidence of any kind to back that up, otherwise it's just bullshit.

As an example I spent last night enjoying a threesome with Megan Fox and the doly bird off Countdown.

Prove I didnt.

You slept with a rag???

Back doors etc...

As you were.......

 

[stonerblue]

Maybe we could talk about how wages, as a proportion of the value added process, have been in steep decline while the proportion taken in profit has risen, or perhaps we could talk about our terrible record on productivity? our chronic short termism, our lack of investment and our mountain of personal debt.

Maybe we could talk about job creation , 1.85m and rising , endorsement by 100 business leaders of this Government today , the Socialists answer to this is to raise taxes.

The Usual Suspects

And if the jobs are so low paid that the recipients pay little or no tax and they subsequently receive a subsidy from the tax payer in top ups?

Of billionaire Mike Ashley's 17,000 zero hours employees, how much in top ups does it cost us all? Tell me that and we've got a debate.

Yeah but that bloke off of strictly dancing den has signed it as well so it must be right

 

[The perfect fumble]

You've got that completely the wrong way around. But again, I'm not surprised.

It's up to those claiming a hypothesis to prove it.

Guessing you've never been big in science.

It's there to be knocked down, do it or shut up.

I don't know how to break this down in any simpler form for you.

If you make a claim, and an outlandish claim at that, it is up to you to provide a link or source or any evidence of any kind to back that up, otherwise it's just bullshit.

As an example I spent last night enjoying a threesome with Megan Fox and the doly bird off Countdown.

Prove I didnt.

I don't care, nor do I suspect there is evidence to prove it one way or another.

There is plenty of evidence of out of control bonuses, rampant executive pay, failed executives awarding themselves golden handshakes and share holder revolts over executive pay.

I don't have to prove the sun rises in the morning by the same token I don't have to prove the existence of excessive executive remuneration, it's for you to disprove it.

It is called refutation, your opponent makes a point (me) and you refute it, if you don't, it stands.

That is why when the Tories make a point, Labour refutes it, if they don't or the refutation is weak, then the Tory statement stands.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

It's there to be knocked down, do it or shut up.

I don't know how to break this down in any simpler form for you.

If you make a claim, and an outlandish claim at that, it is up to you to provide a link or source or any evidence of any kind to back that up, otherwise it's just bullshit.

As an example I spent last night enjoying a threesome with Megan Fox and the doly bird off Countdown.

Prove I didnt.

You slept with a rag???

In all conscience, he cannot be rebuked for that particular act.

 

[M18CTID]

Labour killed itself and ended any form of socialism in this country. They have completely lost Scotland and imo, will never be in a position to form a majority government again as things stand.

Rather than directing all their anger at the Tories, traditional labour voters of which im one needs to be asking real questions about the state of our own party and the direction it has took.

Sorry but your comments are far too sensible for the lunatics posting on this thread.

I'm hardly the world's biggest expert but for me, politics in this country has changed irrevocably over the past 20-25 years or so. We now live in an age of increasing voter apathy and blurred lines between the main parties. I don't believe there is such thing as a traditional Labour or traditional Conservative party these days - many will see that as a bad thing and to an extent I'd agree but what this also does for me is make it easier to show impartiality because they both have their good and bad points, as do the Lib Dems.

 

[mcfc1632]

Yes. That would be a genius idea. Let's reduce the yield from income tax with a spiteful maximum wage policy.

Give over! Executive pay has ballooned, with little or no connection to performance!

Of course, when anyone mentions this it s spiteful class envy, all left wingers hate entrepreneurs, we'll do anything to produce a nation of pitiful drones blah, blah, blah.....

Perhaps you could respond to my comment rather than making up comments? Please tell me how a maximum wage would not be harmful?

Fuck me mate - you have either too much time on your hands - a warped sense of humour or are so committed to the care of others you undertake Mother Teresa level missionary work.

That you are able to respond rationally and with patience to posts that are 'genuinely' suggesting that a maximum wage would work in any country such as the UK, speaks volumes to your patience - but sorry, surely even a martyr can spot when peoples arguments are so fatuous you just have to dismiss as utter bollocks, shake your head and walk away.

It would not even work in China, or any of their beloved socialist states. In fact it would not work anywhere - it is so stupid a comment that it beggars belief that anyone could seriously put it forward - surely they would realise how it speaks to the quality of their ability to discuss.

Actually - I may be OTT there. It might work in an Amish community or some potty ideological commune. Perhaps it may be 'made' to work in N. Korea - if they fancy moving there - but beyond that??

 

[blueinsa]

I don't know how to break this down in any simpler form for you.

If you make a claim, and an outlandish claim at that, it is up to you to provide a link or source or any evidence of any kind to back that up, otherwise it's just bullshit.

As an example I spent last night enjoying a threesome with Megan Fox and the doly bird off Countdown.

Prove I didnt.

You slept with a rag???

In all conscience, he cannot be rebuked for that particular act.

Agreed.