Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
P.s food inflation… around 10% at the moment and perversely around 15% on what they call “budget lines “ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Let me help you and resurrect it and see if the lefties spot it at the second time of asking 
You used the inaccurately boring 'Pat' trope so it's a wonder it bypassed the capitalists posing as socialists but there we go
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Such a nuke, precisely nobody followed it up
Let me help you and resurrect it and see if the lefties spot it at the second time of asking
You used the inaccurately boring 'Pat' trope so it's a wonder it bypassed the capitalists posing as socialists but there we go
"We’ve all be waiting for you to reply to Fabio’s points as they were directed at you not us! I’ll go make a cuppa... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke "Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke "You have demonstrated on more than a few occasions that you are unable to identify how and why the FTSE 100 has any relevance to either the performance of the UK economy or UK pension funds, let alone inflation. Consequently it's easy enough to infer you not wanting to "dignify with an answer" actually means that you do not know how to answer. You just carry on regardless, Pat. Fight the bad fight. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour."A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here? You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever. "I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core. I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts."That's a coincidence. I've been thinking the same about your posts in relation to certain Conservative politicians. You started 3 threads on Zahawi alone and in one of them accused him of 'failing to comply with laws' This was deemed carelessness. But you do you and smear people who point out the facts and who just happen to have a different political outlook to you. I realise it's unusual on here to be right of centre, but it is allowed. It's rather childish to say such posters are 'blatant trolls' or have a 'nastier edge' or belong to the Nasty party etc etc. You can and should do better than that  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts."I did actually receive a private mail from Pat (I hope he won't mind me saying so). It is quite inappropriate of you to dismiss what seemed to me to be a decent, pleasant man, who happens to hold right of centre views, as a 'blatant troll' In fact, some would say it's plain malicious and nasty. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts.
I did actually receive a private mail from Pat (I hope he won't mind me saying so). It is quite inappropriate of you to dismiss what seemed to me to be a decent, pleasant man, who happens to hold right of centre views, as a 'blatant troll'
In fact, some would say it's plain malicious and nasty.
"You do get a lot of private mail from forum posters and ex-forum posters don’t you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts.
I did actually receive a private mail from Pat (I hope he won't mind me saying so). It is quite inappropriate of you to dismiss what seemed to me to be a decent, pleasant man, who happens to hold right of centre views, as a 'blatant troll'
In fact, some would say it's plain malicious and nasty.
"This never happened  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts.
I did actually receive a private mail from Pat (I hope he won't mind me saying so). It is quite inappropriate of you to dismiss what seemed to me to be a decent, pleasant man, who happens to hold right of centre views, as a 'blatant troll'
In fact, some would say it's plain malicious and nasty.
"how someone comes across in DMs versus how they come across in forums can be very different. You can't say someone is a troll based on that. After all, a troll is an act. Good to know he/she is still lurking (I've just realised Ive always assumed they are male, but can't actually recall their username to check!) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts.
I did actually receive a private mail from Pat (I hope he won't mind me saying so). It is quite inappropriate of you to dismiss what seemed to me to be a decent, pleasant man, who happens to hold right of centre views, as a 'blatant troll'
In fact, some would say it's plain malicious and nasty.
how someone comes across in DMs versus how they come across in forums can be very different. You can't say someone is a troll based on that. After all, a troll is an act.
Good to know he/she is still lurking (I've just realised Ive always assumed they are male, but can't actually recall their username to check!)
"Male. And has had multiple concurrent profiles in the past. Seems to have gone quiet lately. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts.
I did actually receive a private mail from Pat (I hope he won't mind me saying so). It is quite inappropriate of you to dismiss what seemed to me to be a decent, pleasant man, who happens to hold right of centre views, as a 'blatant troll'
In fact, some would say it's plain malicious and nasty.
You do get a lot of private mail from forum posters and ex-forum posters don’t you "Dear Dierdre.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts.
I did actually receive a private mail from Pat (I hope he won't mind me saying so). It is quite inappropriate of you to dismiss what seemed to me to be a decent, pleasant man, who happens to hold right of centre views, as a 'blatant troll'
In fact, some would say it's plain malicious and nasty.
You do get a lot of private mail from forum posters and ex-forum posters don’t you "I've heard from 2 ex-forum posters and 3 'present' forum posters. Not sure if that counts as 'a lot'? It was a pleasure to hear from 4 of them, the 5th was abusive. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts.
I did actually receive a private mail from Pat (I hope he won't mind me saying so). It is quite inappropriate of you to dismiss what seemed to me to be a decent, pleasant man, who happens to hold right of centre views, as a 'blatant troll'
In fact, some would say it's plain malicious and nasty.
This never happened "I've heard politely from 2 ex-forum posters and 2 'present' forum posters
So it happens  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts.
I did actually receive a private mail from Pat (I hope he won't mind me saying so). It is quite inappropriate of you to dismiss what seemed to me to be a decent, pleasant man, who happens to hold right of centre views, as a 'blatant troll'
In fact, some would say it's plain malicious and nasty.
You do get a lot of private mail from forum posters and ex-forum posters don’t you
Dear Dierdre..
"She hasn't written! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The point still stands… if you are going to try and use a stat about inflation but leave out what most people would consider to be the most important elements (you kinda need food and electricity/gas to survive) then is it not right to call it out…. I notice pat and Cheshire are both skirting the fundamental issue….. " Who are you to dictate what can be written? I considered it appropriate in the context of that thread. Core inflation represents the long run trend in the price level. In measuring long run inflation, transitory price changes are excluded. Core inflation has been measured by successive Govts and is important because it's used to determine the impact of rising prices on consumer income. Perhaps you better write to the Govt if you don't like to hear about it? And then provide us with a list of what we can and can't post about in case it comes across as a 'nuke' and unsettles you? Few here were bothered at the time tho. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The point still stands… if you are going to try and use a stat about inflation but leave out what most people would consider to be the most important elements (you kinda need food and electricity/gas to survive) then is it not right to call it out…. I notice pat and Cheshire are both skirting the fundamental issue….. Who are you to dictate what can be written? I considered it appropriate in the context of that thread. Core inflation represents the long run trend in the price level. In measuring long run inflation, transitory price changes are excluded. Core inflation has been measured by successive Govts and is important because it's used to determine the impact of rising prices on consumer income. Perhaps you better write to the Govt if you don't like to hear about it? And then provide us with a list of what we can and can't post about in case it comes across as a 'nuke' and unsettles you? Few here were bothered at the time tho. " The context was against the cumulative inflation over the last year having barely compensated for with wages. The reality being run down savings and debt for many people. The core inflation figure exists why? To exclude short term variations in food and energy that can skew results. Except for the last year they have been amongst the primary drivers of inflation so central to any discussion about the cost of living. You do seem to generally quote a lot without any more than a perfunctory cut and paste and no thought given because you are just trying to "win" an argument against people who you believe to be "lefties". The problem is you end up looking foolish because you demonstrate your lack of knowledge by loudly repeating it. I shall wait for your repetition of some boring insult in reply. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm sorry that you see it this way. I will take on board your feedback and act as appropriate going forward. " That would be a very positive change. A more positive discussion would be welcome. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He asked but one daft question "When did you stop paying for food and living without gas/electricity" followed by 5 question marks. I didn't dignify with an answer. More of a damp squib than a nuke
Your replies are the damp squib. Trying to hide behind, meak humour.
A meak is a scythe. What on earth are you trying to say here?
You've confused me I think with another user a little further north from me, who uses bladed items for humour. It's not big and it's not clever.
I used to think you were another account of Pat's. I don't any more. Pat came across as a blatant troll engaging in a ridiculous brand of satire that was just silly at its core.
I don't think you're interested in satire. And I get the feeling there's a nastier, more malicious edge to your posts.
I did actually receive a private mail from Pat (I hope he won't mind me saying so). It is quite inappropriate of you to dismiss what seemed to me to be a decent, pleasant man, who happens to hold right of centre views, as a 'blatant troll'
In fact, some would say it's plain malicious and nasty.
This never happened
I've heard politely from 2 ex-forum posters and 2 'present' forum posters
So it happens "Did you lose one between the reply to me and this post  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Lose one what? " You said to me “I've heard from 2 ex-forum posters and 3 'present' forum posters.“ but in the next post it was “2 present forum posters” so did you lose one? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've had private mail from 2 ex-forum posters and 3 current forum posters. It was a pleasure to hear from 4 of them, the 5th was abusive. All of which resulted in me saying I've heard politely from 2 ex forum posters and 2 current forumites. QED I've heard impolitely from 1 current user. I think you've added 2 and 2 and come up with 5 "It wasn’t clear but fair enough kind of makes sense. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"After all the time he was in here albeit using five different consecutive profiles that Pat has suddenly lost the ability to stand up for himself which given the inconsistency of his position he has done on numerous occasions over the last decade.. Hope he's well.. Whichever new profile he's adopted.." He tells me he's well down in southern England
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"After all the time he was in here albeit using five different consecutive profiles that Pat has suddenly lost the ability to stand up for himself which given the inconsistency of his position he has done on numerous occasions over the last decade.. Hope he's well.. Whichever new profile he's adopted.. He tells me he's well down in southern England
"He’s a regular in Cap D’Agde | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Down 292.66 today " It's a good job that further up this thread and on the previous one we learn that the FTSE 100 is not related to the UK economy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Down 292.66 today " Global worries about the banking sector after the two banking failures this week along with some profit taking. Not good but take care to attribute rises and falls to every factor. ....and recognise that speculators look at the short term. Investors look at the longer term. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Down 292.66 today It's a good job that further up this thread and on the previous one we learn that the FTSE 100 is not related to the UK economy. " Yep, that’s true | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Down 292.66 today It's a good job that further up this thread and on the previous one we learn that the FTSE 100 is not related to the UK economy. " Ha ha! Class response! It's a Lineker moment of hypocrisy. The left are always at it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Down 292.66 today It's a good job that further up this thread and on the previous one we learn that the FTSE 100 is not related to the UK economy. Ha ha! Class response! It's a Lineker moment of hypocrisy. The left are always at it. " ...or you missed the point being made. Do you think that it is or is not a bad thing for the UK? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Down 292.66 today It's a good job that further up this thread and on the previous one we learn that the FTSE 100 is not related to the UK economy. Ha ha! Class response! It's a Lineker moment of hypocrisy. The left are always at it. " I'm glad this forum has agreed the FTSE is, at best, a weak indicator if how the UK is going. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Down 292.66 today It's a good job that further up this thread and on the previous one we learn that the FTSE 100 is not related to the UK economy. Ha ha! Class response! It's a Lineker moment of hypocrisy. The left are always at it. I'm glad this forum has agreed the FTSE is, at best, a weak indicator if how the UK is going. "Yep this is my take from this thread and the previous one. Apparently no matter how much up or down it goes, it has no relevance to the UK. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
