Rayvin

Which industry are you in, out of interest?

Aye, sorry about that.

Fair comment but I reckon it's in part down to the fact that half the time most of the league barely remembers they're even in it.

It's really encouraging indeed - plus a full week for any new signings to get up to speed with the team and tactics (to an extent at least), we should see them all play against Everton. If we get 3 points there and another 3 against Villa, we won't see the relegation zone again this season.

In my defence, I'm overtired and not paying a huge amount of attention to anything being said. I just saw it and thought to myself that it seemed a lot like what you read in the Daily Mail and then that was that.

Aye, I saw and edited

What the actual fuck... who are those absolute bellends? I think you could quite comfortably show this to anyone who thinks 'political correctness has gone too far' as evidence that it was necessary tbh. EDIT - sorry, meant to click the politics thread and ended up in here Thought it was real. Was gonna say, don't remember it ever being that bad...!

Thanks for all your efforts and hard work on this place over the years Ant. Please pop in from time to time, it'd be nice to see you - totally understand the decision though. Stay well and take care of yourself.

I'd be fuckin furious if another player did this to our keeper You need to be a special kind of shameless to actually do shit like that.

That was a fun watch tbh, the Leeds crowd seem alright to me

As bad as we've been, if we had not thrown points away against Norwich, Palace, Watford and maybe even Brentford, we'd have 23 points and be 15th. The ability to get out of this is there if we can just get some solidity.

On the contrary, I appreciate the effort. Thanks!

Just what we needed, thank fuck.

Thanks for this, will give it a look. Rough time for the market atm so I hope he planned for that. It's cool though, fair play to him.

I quite miss HF but I doubt we'll ever see him again on here now. Hope he's safe and well.

Apologies for ignorance, what does that mean in layman terms? Sorry, to clarify further - I assume we're talking about taking CO2 out of the atmosphere, but how? And what about the project is a trial? Cost or effectiveness?

Aye, if it's any consolation to idk, anyone on the 'right wing' side of the argument who lurks in here - I got shot down plenty for being on the left of the same group and am now universally recognised as the forum communist despite being fairly pro-capitalist Have had some good debates on here though which is why I enjoy it. Plenty of times I've learned something here and had the opportunity to adjust my view.

I don't understand this from the Tories at all. They must know by now that Johnson is a total liability, surely this is the perfect moment to bin him. The fact that the aren't doing that can only possibly mean that they're entirely devoid of any wider ideas, strategy, or vision. What is it about him that inspires so much loyalty?

Truthfully I read the Guardian mostly because it has the least offensive website of all the non-paywalled media sites. The independent is just ghastly to open up. I do have an FT subscription though so I suppose I could read more of that.

In fairness, the same site has the Telegraph as mixed too, so maybe they just have very high standards? If the Telegraph is on the same level then I think I can support the idea. It is definitely selective at times, and the notion here seems to be that not covering things counts in their assessment too.

Hard disagree on the Guardian being as bad as the Mail. The Guardian's nonsense all comes through their editorials and they are poor there, I agree, but the day to day factual reporting looks solid to me. Dorries literally said what the Guardian reported. Your article is 10 hours old so clearly there's been a change in the narrative since the one I posted. I note the FT also posted that she suggested abolishing it a few days earlier, so really the distinction here is that the Guardian has taken her words as agreed cabinet policy (which I also did on reading it) and No. 10 has then dialled it back. Can't believe I've just defended the Guardian but to compare it to the Mail is just not reasonable. It's more akin to the Telegraph. The Left wing equivalent to the Mail would be Buzzfeed or some student union newspapers. As for the political point about sticking to parties - I mean I agree, I fully intended to vote Green in this election due to their EU stance. But in the end, if we get into a situation where Labour is going to protect the BBC and the Tories are going to kill it, that's another manifesto issue that I have strong feelings on, and is likely sufficient for me to back Labour. That said, the decision for me is more around editorial control. I don't watch terrestrial TV, I only use subscription services like Netflix and Prime, so I haven't paid for a license in years. Thus, maybe it's not my place to even get involved in this one..! I don't care so much about the license fee as I do about the BBC becoming a vehicle for Murdoch style "reporting".

Fair enough but the Guardian seems to think they've said they'll abolish it? https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/jan/16/bbc-licence-fee-to-be-abolished-in-2027-and-funding-frozen

Ugh. Well that's done it then, I was still on the fence for Labour due to all the Brexit shit but the BBC (for all it's fucking uselessness in general) is too important to let the Tories kill it. So I'll be voting Labour, not because of Starmer, not because of any Labour policies, but because of a Tory one.

I've only just noticed that the BBC is going to be without public money from 2027. How is that not causing more of a stir? Or did it cause one and I just missed it? That is surely the battleground the Tories are going to fight the next GE on. "Vote for us and finally defeat the dreaded BBC and all of its experts, deal a killer blow to woke liberal elites, etc" Full culture war shit.

It's an interesting idea, and I can see some of the benefits. I don't have a better one in this particular area (rents and so on). You mentioned believing in the NHS also. I suspect in the US you'd be considered a socialist. I think we could probably agree that, where people have no options or choices for moving forward, they should be helped. The problem is understanding when that is true, and when people are just not taking the decisions needed to move forward as an individual. And I think again, most people here would agree that if someone is capable of moving forward on their own, it is actually better for them to do this than for society to try and enable them not doing so. So the issue in which we disagree I suppose is where the line is. And I don't pretend I know the answer to that tbh, but I do genuinely believe that austerity took us a long way in the opposite direction, and that people died as a consequence. I would rather err on the side of caution. That said, I don't want to enable people to 'fail' to live productive lives either. It's a difficult one to call, but surely we can do better than this. Giving people a sense of progress, a sense of their ability to move forward, is key. But social mobility is incredibly low at the moment, and I would very much like to see that change.