Jump to content

ChrisJones

Members
  • Content Count

    9,285
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    39

ChrisJones last won the day on March 29

ChrisJones had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6,874 Excellent

About ChrisJones

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    At Desk. Next To Window
  • Interests
    Pictures and Arguing.

Recent Profile Visitors

9,335 profile views
  1. Wouldn't that depend on your action? If someone came screaming obscenities of any kind, at my kids when they were younger they'd be paid in kind. Freedom of speech should be absolute but that doesn't mean it doesn't have consequences. Fair. Of course the next step is define where the line between abuse and criticism is. Easier to just make the individual responsible for their own speech.
  2. Only the extreme examples will use the extremes. The individual gets to decide what the abuse level is, and act accordingly, but I'm firmly in the belief that limitations on speech shouldn't exist. Speak your piece. You'll receive your own peer review!
  3. Fair. My own naivety would expect someone that actually wants to improve the lives of his fellow countrymen. My own reality wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them. I suppose I'm looking at this wondering why someone would want to repeat those mistakes then it dawns on me that a lot of people don't think that it was a mistake. Why wouldn't you have the right to act on it? The freedom of speech should be absolute. The government roll should be to protect the right not to promote any view other than that of the individual. Anyone here can speak as they please. Anyone else can speak against that. It may cause problems but not allowing it is also causing problems. Ironically in the name of equality.
  4. But this is fighting bullsh*t with bullsh*t. Replacing an arguably corrupt system with another isn't a remedy, IMHO. Especially when you sprinkle on what at the current view appears to be a unhealthy seasoning of authoritarianism. It remains to be seen but this isn't an improvement. They're already sub-dividing their system with anti-antisemitism if indeed that is what they're doing. Not at all. You reset the system and uphold that right to free-speech. You break a system by removing individual rights. You can't fix it by simply turning it on it's head. If this was to be a successful venture into a nationalist government it's already taken a dark turn, no? Agreed but the danger is making free speech a weapon. I can't argue that the UK and the EU are utterly wrong in their political correctness venture but to replace it with a stronger, more authoritarian version, is f*ck*ng bonkers! I said earlier in the thread about subdividing within itself. If just a few days it wanted a strong Hungarian identity (Ethnic values) and now, if that article is correct pushing for a religious division. It's already pushing against the issues we agreed would lead it fail and all of this is done under the rule of a prime minister who now has absolute power. Can't disagree with any of that but immediately instituting the very things that have caused the problems in the first place, to insulate the them from the fundamentals of free speech, is exactly the same as what we're all concerned about. The problem with hammers is that if it's the only tool you have every problem starts to look like a nail. This isn't removing the intellectual gloves it's dissolving the hands in a vat of acid!
  5. How many conspiracies are rolled into that? I'm off until Monday but that's a lot of mental gymnastics!
  6. Parts 6-10 compiled are an hour and a half! WTF is all that about?!
  7. @WILF what do you think of Hungary's new education curriculum that Orban has just released? Personally I have no issue with some of the nationalist rhetoric but pushing propaganda, revising past mistakes and removing them all together? Isn't that exactly what we're saying was Britain's problem in the last few decades?
  8. I'm the same but the realist in me is a pain in the arse! I'm sure there's an option in there that would allow a domestic manufacturer to operate but also increase substantially under emergency conditions but not working in that kind of industry I wouldn't know what that blend is. I'm supplied PPE in my industry but I do my research and usually replace it with my own gear. It's usually more expensive but I justify that against the quality/longevity ratio. Also my life depends on it and I'm sure many of the THL regs will understand 'Your Best Gear Is Made By The Lowest Bidder.' Taking from that, my thoughts would be along the line of kitting myself out in the medium to long term with the equipment that will available once the demand subsides. I'm a big believer in the individual being responsible for their own security and for a future pandemic, and there will be, having an adequate supply of this kind of gear on hand would reduce the demand in the future. At least for the individual. Of course that doesn't help now but no one took a global pandemic seriously even last Christmas.
  9. Same mate! THL has had some belters over the years too! Problem here is people are dying over some of this misinformation and it's coming in from everywhere. I'm sure some people here are panicked too whether they'll admit it or not. My concern levels are certainly a lot higher than they were a month ago and will go up when I have to return to my essential industry on Monday morning. The point is we shouldn't be feeding this particular conspiracy at this time. Sh*t posting about aliens and the moon landing is one thing but maybe try and dig for actual facts about this illness from quality sources as opposed to the charlatans. But then of course I'd say that because I'm part of the conspiracy...
  10. Heard ya loud and clear then, mate! And I agree. Like I replied to you that can only happen if our respective governments are willing to lower the costs of running business and the price that the consumer is willing to pay. Everyone hates price gouging but it's an interesting study into how much something is worth when it's value suddenly increases. A company selling surgical masks, bottled water, and hand sanitzer in the last few months could charge 1000 times what they did the middle of last year. When the perceived crisis ends so will the amount that people are willing to pay for it. To return to domestic manufacturing you have to weigh up just how much of a market you'll have in the future as well as the present and whether you'll get the cost of that investment back. If the government do it it'll be a money pit that all nationalized industries have shown since the industrial revolution. There is a balance but everyone is on the back foot at the moment.
  11. Posted this one on the other thread...
  12. Depends which insurance company you ask. In the 70's Ford introduced the Pinto in the States. They compromised safety with efficiency and profit maximization. The result was a cheaper made petrol tank that was found to explode on low impact collisions. It was $11 cheaper than a tank that wouldn't. Where it got worse was that they weighed the cost of a recall against the cost of an insurance claim from a dead/injured customer's family. They weighed that insurance claims would be the cheapest option and left the car in circulation refusing the recall. The cost per life in this case was $11. They're probably going to re-draw that line after this one but a month ago no one was interested. Now the demand has gone through the roof the market is trying to adapt.
  13. Posted on the Corona Vaccine thread... It's not man made. It's not caused by 5G.
  14. Amazon. I've since bought it I was that impressed!
×
×
  • Create New...