Messages

My list has room, it turns out, for both Frankie Boyle and also for people who don't like Frankie Boyle.

[YOU]

Well, he comes across as a complete narcissist although that description and movie producer usually go together like bread and butter.

And this line..

"It's all right. I'm 29 years old, I've made 10 movies, whatever."

....is typical of many producers.  YOU made those movies did you?  YOU?  No, the crew make movies, you promote, and make noise ABOUT those movies.  A change of producer would mean no real difference to the artistic value of a decent film, so it doesn't really matter who they are.  Which is unfortunately why just about anyone with a fistful of cash can become a producer.

Arf!  I know a couple of producers: they most certainly do make a difference to their projects.  As do most people involved.

Anyone who thinks that Godwin's Law is an actual law that can be invoked to shut down discussion, rather than an amusing observation that attests to the historical significance of the Nazi regime to discussions of right and wrong in a post-industrial and supposedly post-religious world.

UKIP.

It's not something that I ever thought about that much but I suppose I refer to the plural as Lego rather than adding an S.  But now this make me wonder what is the correct singular term?

It would be en Legen in the original Danish.

Not feeling the love for that episode at all really - Capaldo good as per and enjoyed the dimensionally shifty TARDIS but um... Bristol doesn't have an underground train network.... it just doesn't. Yes graffiti. No underground. The whole thing felt very cheap and tacky for me - it just screamed "we're trying to save the budget this week".

What about the Clifton Down tunnel?  It's been a while since I last took it but I remember being underground for ever.  (Mind you, I was 8 at the time).  Nowhere near where the exterior shots were filmed, admittedly...

The student who yesterday told me I'm too old to have a first name.  He is most definitely on my list.

People who think "Haters gonna hate" is a meaningful contribution to discussion.

No one is saying that UKIP should be "silenced"

Though wouldn't it be lovely?

Looks like the net result of this referendum will be that Scotland gets the powers it wants, but at the expense of Scottish MPs having a say on English/Welsh/N. Irish affairs, and quite possibly also at the expense of the Barnett formula.  The result of which will be that the main economy of the UK will be run by the Conservatives in perpetuity.  Holyrood will have to set up its supposedly more Scottish large welfare state in direct competition with an England dedicated to low tax - meaning all businesses that can will flee south at very little cost.  This was never going to end well - and it hasn't.

The turnout, if anything, showed that despite what we are often told, people care passionately about politics. They just don't care about politicians.

I'm not even convinced it even shows us this. What it shows us (IMO) is that when you put an actual choice before the electorate, they engage, debate, become enthused and turn out.

When you present them with a selection of parties whose manifestos are all peddling broadly the same neolib, free market, austerity agenda with a few minor concessions to their traditional support base around the edges... well, why would you get enthused? You want to know why UKIP are getting so much support even though their policies are BARKING MAD? It's because they're the only party* not promising more of the same.

I've linked to it before, and I'm going to keep linking to it because it's so desperately relevant — if you've already read it, my apologies, but voter apathy is a direct result of the focus-group-driven political model that's given us the Beige Dictatorship.

Cheers

Jim

*Well, there's the Greens, with whom I have a lot of sympathy and whose complete lack of media coverage speaks to systemic bias in the media.

Absolutely agree with you - if I were dictator the first thing I'd do would be to outlaw all forms of opinion polling. 

Well, the first thing after the death of my enemies and the lamentations of their women, anyway.

Have to say very impressed with the turn out, 85% has got to be some sort of record.

Not even close - South Sudan had something approaching a 95% turnout, in far more difficult conditions.  East Timor had over 98% turnout. Even Montenegro had 86%. Over 15% of Scots couldn't be arsed to vote even on a country-altering issue with a knife-edge prediction, even with conveniently positioned polling stations.  Not a cause for self-congratulation.

Are you deliberately trolling now?

No.

I am genuinely trying not to get angry here but your general tone is not helpful.

Sorry, but as long as people are not making personal attacks or deliberately lying, they get to continue talking.  Even if the points they make don't line up with your views.

Have to say very impressed with the turn out, 85% has got to be some sort of record.

Not even close - South Sudan had something approaching a 95% turnout, in far more difficult conditions.  East Timor had over 98% turnout. Even Montenegro had 86%. Over 15% of Scots couldn't be arsed to vote even on a country-altering issue with a knife-edge prediction, even with conveniently positioned polling stations.  Not a cause for self-congratulation.

"Politicians take note. If people believe their vote will count, they will cast it."

Not a big surprise, really - reinforces my conviction that, contrary to the anarchist/nationalist/Marxist/fascist analysis of a population just waiting to have a better voting system and better media coverage before voting for (insert preferred option here), the low voting figures in general elections reflect a population broadly satisfied with the Westminster consensus.

[If we have our hands on the levers of economic decision-making]

Nicola Sturgeon today:

"If we have our hands on the levers of economic decision-making, if we have access to our own resources, then we are able to design an economic policy to suit our needs.

But surely without their own currency, they WON'T have their hands on those levers - even less than they do now.

I read one commentator that thought Salmond has really shot himself in the foot with the the way he's handled the whole currency question - if he'd said from the outset "we'll have a Scottish pound, pegged to the British pound" it would never have become such a decisive issue, but his reluctance to give a plan B (and then to give three), and his insistence that Westminster and the BoE will simply change it's mind after a Yes vote, have simply been a gift to the BT campaign.

Again- you misunderstand entirely what is happening. WE ARE NOT VOTING FOR THE SNP FFS. That is their plan. YES SCOTLAND IS NOT A POLITICAL PARTY- they have no fiscal policy- they don't need one as THEY ARE NOT A PARTY. When you misunderstand what is happening at such a fundamental level, and continue along this line, you are making a fool of yourself and it makes me glad that you don't get to vote on this.

The SNP will be the party in power throughout the independence negotiations and for the first few months of independence.  You are voting for them to have full charge of negotiations and to set all terms of reference for the future country, serious and significant commitments (such as currency union) that no future Scottish government will be able to change without breaking international treaties.