Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2017 11:22:13 GMT
Our lives Nick - as in everyone, you know, society...
Remember, pensioners need health care professionals, shop workers, factory workers, farmers, utility providers and much as it pains me to say it civi servants and politicians for society to function.
As I said, it's a pretty bleak and one dimensional not to mention selfish outlook you have.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Jan 29, 2017 12:37:04 GMT
So according to Nick all the country's woes are caused by all those anti-social people who have children and those that choose to live on a boat. If you have children and live on a boat your public enemy number 1. Ps I've got some bad news for you Nick, if you pay council tax your already subsidising other people's children.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jan 29, 2017 13:26:04 GMT
So according to Nick all the country's woes are caused by all those anti-social people who have children and those that choose to live on a boat. If you have children and live on a boat your public enemy number 1.Ps I've got some bad news for you Nick, if you pay council tax your already subsidising other people's children. Now you are being extreme and are deliberately being obtuse. that bears no resemblance to his posts and you know it. Nick might be blunt and sometimes a bit (in my view) off course. Can we please keep to arguing about what he has said
|
|
|
Post by kris on Jan 29, 2017 13:29:15 GMT
John what he actually said is people living on boats are doing so because they didn't pay attention at school and consequently haven't done well in life. He also said he doesn't want to subsidies other people's children, I just pointed out he already is doing.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jan 29, 2017 13:36:17 GMT
You still haven't explained what it's got to do with living on a boat on the cut. The implication from nicks comment was that the people causing problems on the cut are academic underachievers. Which is obviously to any sane person a load of bollocks. Sorry this was posted in reply to foxys post above, lollygagger posted while I was writing it. No that was not a rational implication of what I said. The conversation had moved on at that point, to those generally well off and those not. For the record I don't see any correlation between underachievers and cut-problem-causers. People who create problems come from all walks of life ranging from the "I've got nothing to lose" to the "Do you know who I am?". sorry Kris, the quote I used was what I meant. read the quote of his above
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2017 13:37:04 GMT
I don't know John, Kris seems to hold a fairly rounded view on the social requirements of society, Nick doesn't. His views are extremely insular and only centre on what affects him - be that boating or someone else's decision to have kids!
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jan 29, 2017 13:40:12 GMT
I don't know John, Kris seems to hold a fairly rounded view on the social requirements of society, Nick doesn't. His views are extremely insular and only centre on what affects him - be that boating or someone else's decision to have kids! maybe but Kris was saying that he had claimed something when in fact he did not (as per the quote of Nicks in the reply to Kris) I try to only agree or disagree with people about what they have said rather than what other people think they have said
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2017 13:46:46 GMT
I don't know John, Kris seems to hold a fairly rounded view on the social requirements of society, Nick doesn't. His views are extremely insular and only centre on what affects him - be that boating or someone else's decision to have kids! maybe but Kris was saying that he had claimed something when in fact he did not (as per the quote of Nicks in the reply to Kris) I try to only agree or disagree with people about what they have said rather than what other people think they have saidI missed your last post, we must have been typing at the same time! I think if you trawl back Nick suggests something similar to what Kris is saying, I'm not gonna search it out though - lazy cop out I'm afraid!
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Jan 29, 2017 14:01:04 GMT
He also said he doesn't want to subsidies other people's children, I just pointed out he already is doing (that). My friend in the USA doesn't like paying tax (just like Theresa May's husband!!) and said why should she pay for sending other peoples' kids to school? She added that without her chipping in, Americans would be less educated and where would they be then? I think what we said, kris, is that lazy, idle layabouts don't deserve to have it all laid on a plate for them, and that some people study and work hard to achieve something decent for themselves (and everyone else in the process).
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Jan 29, 2017 14:11:49 GMT
Who's the worse, the bottom lazy gits or the top end whose hoarding away of money they simply don't need takes it out of circulation for all. That greedy behaviour knocks on down the food chain preventing many times more honest profitable transactions, reasonably paid jobs and threatens the financial security of swathes of our population.
I can put up with a few lazy gits, the system needs them or it all falls down. It may as well be those who are content to scrape along as people who'd rather dive in and have a go in life.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Jan 29, 2017 14:15:57 GMT
When I said 20% - how about if we do the top 10% and the bottom 10% ? Then everyone is happy!
|
|
|
Post by mildred on Jan 29, 2017 14:16:34 GMT
I wish the forum software numbered the posts in a thread. I am not prepared to quote it, but on page 7 (the way I have my settings) there is quite the nastiest post that I have ever seen on a forum. I believe it is an example of playing the man rather than the ball. I know that this forum is supposed to be self moderating but I don't like to read vitriol. Though at least the subject is here to fight his corner, unlike the person on CWDF who was the object of personal attacks in the very early days of Thunderboat.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Jan 29, 2017 14:20:18 GMT
I read through Page 7. All seems normal to me!
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jan 29, 2017 14:40:12 GMT
I wish the forum software numbered the posts in a thread. I am not prepared to quote it, but on page 7 (the way I have my settings) there is quite the nastiest post that I have ever seen on a forum. I believe it is an example of playing the man rather than the ball. I know that this forum is supposed to be self moderating but I don't like to read vitriol. Though at least the subject is here to fight his corner, unlike the person on CWDF who was the object of personal attacks in the very early days of Thunderboat. Yes .................. Kris on page 7 21 hours ago It was definitely an attack on the poster rather than an attack on the post. and I agree it was certainly "off".
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 29, 2017 14:51:00 GMT
Our lives Nick - as in everyone, you know, society... Remember, pensioners need health care professionals, shop workers, factory workers, farmers, utility providers and much as it pains me to say it civi servants and politicians for society to function. As I said, it's a pretty bleak and one dimensional not to mention selfish outlook you have. Yes we do need children. But we don't need hordes of them to swell the planet's population further, we just need enough to maintain the status quo. A happy medium. Fortunately there are lots of people like you who want to have children, so a shortage of children ain't going to happen. Whilst there is an adequate supply there is therefore no need to actively encourage more people to have more children. And that, if you remember where this discussion all started, is my point. There are enough people having children without the need to encourage more by giving them special treatment which in the context of this discussion, was allowing them to do what they want on the waterways just because that will encourage them to have more children and/or make it easier for them to look after their existing brood.
|
|