Economics.

[transam]

So dismiss facts. Do you like living in LaLa Land?

facts according to you

yes La La land has its advantages

 

[JohnD]

it's rumoured that as part of his ambition to become PM, Buffoon is trying to engineer a split with Theresa so that when Brexit goes horribly wrong, he can claim it wasn't his fault. The other leading Brexit campaigners are running away at top speed so they can claim they were stabbed in the back.

He'll need a lot of support among the Daily Fail readers, though, because none of the Tory MPs want him. That's because they've met him.

 

[Brigade77]

it's rumoured that as part of his ambition to become PM, Buffoon is trying to engineer a split with Theresa so that when Brexit goes horribly wrong, he can claim it wasn't his fault. The other leading Brexit campaigners are running away at top speed so they can claim they were stabbed in the back.

He'll need a lot of support among the Daily Fail readers, though, because none of the Tory MPs want him. That's because they've met him.

So, what you're saying is . . .The majority of our electorate reads the Daily Fail. And they're all going to vote 'Boris' at the next opportunity?

 

[JohnD]

So, what you're saying is . . .The majority of our electorate reads the Daily Fail. And they're all going to vote 'Boris' at the next opportunity?

Majority?

All?

Your imagination is causing you to hallucinate.

 

[Deleted member 63160]

it's rumoured that ......

 

[Notch7]

We have one of the finest democracies money can buy. No wonder the rich and powerful are funding a relentless campaign to smear Corbyn. They're terrified of him.

Buying the votes. What they paid:

1. Arron Banks — £8,106, 375
Multi-millionaire Banks was a co-founder of pro-Brexit group Leave.EU and gave over a million pounds to the UK Independence Party while it was led by his friend Nigel Farage. He was the chief executive (CEO) of Southern Rock Insurance Company in 2014 and claims to control interest in a South African diamond mine.

2. Peter Hargreaves — £3,200,000
Hargreaves, who is now retired having founded the Hargreaves Lansdown financial services company donated £3.2 million to the Leave.EU group

3. Jeremy Hosking — £1,691,296
Hosking made his millions through investment and private equity and is currently a shareholder in Premier League football club Crystal Palace. His net worth is estimated to be £330 million.

4. Lord Edmiston — £1,000,000
Robert Norman Edmiston became a millionaire through his company IM Group, an importer of cars.

5. Crispin Odey — £873,288.15
Odey is a London-based hedge fund manager who played a major role in funding the Brexit campaign. He voted for Brexit but warned his clients just a few months later to prepare for a recession and higher inflation in wake of the shock Leave vote.

6. Lord Bamford — £673,000
Lord Bamford is an English businessman and currently the chairman of managing director of JCB

7. Peter Cruddas — £350,000
Cruddas is the founder of online trading company CMC Markets. He was at the centre of a political scandal in 2012 when it emerged that he offered then Prime Minister David Cameron donations in return for access to government policy-making.

8. Michael Freeman — £348,000
Brexit donor Freeman co-founded property developer group Argent in 1981. His estimated net worth is £135 million.

9. Lord Farmer — £300,000
Michael Farmer is a businessman, House of Lords life member, and treasurer of the Conservative Party.

10. Tim Martin — £212,000
JD Wetherspoon boss Tim Martin has not only been one of Brexit's biggest financial backers but one of the business world's most vocal supporters of it.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/twent...gn-2017-5/?r=US&IR=T/#10-tim-martin-212000-12

A list of successful, intelligent business men that want to leave Europe.

Intelligent people on the leave side.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

A list of successful, intelligent business men that want to leave Europe.

Intelligent people on the leave side.

Success does not come only to intelligent people.
It can come to those with inherited wealth, the crafty, the under-handed, the criminal elements, the fortunate, etc.
Then success is at the cost to the poor, the weak, the under-privileged, the under-represented.

 

[Gerrydelasel]

Oops

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

They cannot take money by force from the 'poor'.

Mo-one is forced to go to the casino, no-one is forced to go to the bookies, no-one is forced to smoke, no-one is forced to buy things that they do not need, no-one is forced to be born into a privileged position, etc, etc.

 

[Notch7]

Success does not come only to intelligent people.
It can come to those with inherited wealth, the crafty, the under-handed, the criminal elements, the fortunate, etc.
Then success is at the cost to the poor, the weak, the under-privileged, the under-represented.

Which makes posting a list of wealthy people that campaigned for leave pointless. The argument about priviliged position also accounts for all the priviliged rich on the remain side as well.

Then success is at the cost to the poor, the weak, the under-privileged, the under-represented.

Not necessarily.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

.......

Not necessarily.

It can come to those with inherited wealth, the crafty, the under-handed, the criminal elements, the fortunate, etc.
Then success is at the cost to the poor, the weak, the under-privileged, the under-represented.

Then used as a coordinating conjunction?
I will admit that I ought to have added an "etc" on the end of my original comment.

 

[SirGalahad]

No it isn't. We live in a largely free capitalist economy; their success can only come if they provide something people want to buy, or if the state gives them handouts (in which case the fault lies with the state). They cannot take money by force from the 'poor'. Only the state can do that.

I suggest you learn how money is created in the system and realise how the system is skewed in favour of finance. As long as you have a rudimentary understanding of economics you will think it's simply a question of supply and demand.

 

[Notch7]

Then used as a coordinating conjunction?
I will admit that I ought to have added an "etc" on the end of my original comment.

Thank you, but I fully understood the conjunction.

The statement is still incorrect. It is skewed to promote the socialist argument. In other words Rhetoric

Yes of course what you say is correct in some circumstances, but the direct correlation is not fully considered.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

Thank you, but I fully understood the conjunction.

The statement is still incorrect. It is skewed to promote the socialist argument. In other words Rhetoric

Yes of course what you say is correct in some circumstances, but the direct correlation is not fully considered.

So the statement is not incorrect! I would suggest it is more often correct than not.
When you start putting both sides of the argument in your posts, you can point to my 'biased' comments.

 

[Notch7]

So the statement is not incorrect! I would suggest it is more often correct than not.
When you start putting both sides of the argument in your posts, you can point to my 'biased' comments.

Yes it is incorrect.

You would suggest it is more often correct than not -thats just an unqualified statement and therefore utterly meaningless.

You are saying inherited wealth and those fortunate is at the cost to the poor. Soapbox socialist rhetoric, prove the correlation......