Jump to content

Wanderer Vagabond

Patron Donate to Canal World
  • Posts

    3238
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    84

Everything posted by Wanderer Vagabond

  1. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  2. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  3. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  4. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  5. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  6. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  7. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  8. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  9. There is no 'big picture' here. It is not in the remit of judges to cure the housing problem, neither is it in the remit of CRT. I'd be interested to know exactly how you overcome the principle of supply and demand, do you get everything you need at exactly the price you'd like to pay for it, like housing for instance?
  10. They put drug dealers in prison, so we no longer have a drug problem do we? market forces mean that if you lock up enough drug dealers the price will rise, you will never overcome that particular market force by legislation. You might destroy the market by changing the social acceptability of drug use (much the same as smoking is becoming socially unacceptable) but that requires social persuasion. Despite all of the rhetoric, locking up drug dealers doesn't really achieve much since in the market place there will always be another one along in a minute whilst ever there is money to be made. Please explain what market force is involved in getting a woman pregnant? You might as well say they intervene when black people get sacked for being black, nothing to do with market forces unless you want to propose that women are more expensive to employ than men (a proposal not held up very well by the current pay inequality). What they are intervening in is prejudicial behaviour which doesn't really come under the heading of market forces.
  11. And how pray is any judge going to do anything to override market forces? This is the basic law of supply and demand, if something is in short supply the price goes up and if there is a glut the price falls. Are they going to make market shortages (like housing) illegal? They can only enforce legislation already in existence, they cannot make their own.The only solution to this particular problem lies with Government, judges are an irrelevance in the debate.
  12. Specify who or what these external forces are and I might offer an opinion. Both Government and CRT are influenced by market forces which could be regarded as external but if the suggestion that these 'external forces' are people then we need to know who they are.
  13. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
  14. Without presenting evidence of any sort to support your personal view, why should your personal view be held in any higher regard than someone who believes Lizards and the Bilderbergers run the planet. You are the one making the proposition, the onus is upon you to supply the evidence, not on others to 'disprove' something that you haven't proven in the first instance. I made the suggestion that you should name these people which you seem to have chosen not to do,Why?
  15. To be honest, until we have a viable opposition, public opinion counts for nothing. If they don't like what the Government are doing (or in this case, not doing) what are they going to do? Vote them out at the next election? then what? For those who celebrate the demise of the Labour Party, this will become the 'Brave New World', frankly a Government that can do just what it wants. There have been complaints about Government inaction over City air pollution from traffic for a number of years, even when threatened by the EU nothing has happened, once out of the EU I expect even less to happen about it.
  16. This wouldn't be the Court Case brought by Client Earth for the Government failing to meet the requirement of EU Directives would it? If so, 2 years down the road are they going to be bovvered?? don't forget we're 'taking back control' so they can change the law and stuff those poor saps dying from pollution
  17. Having re-read all of my previous posts on the matter, I cannot see any 'personal attack' anywhere, perhaps you'd like to identify what you feel was a personal attack or recant your allegation. The closest I could find was an attempt to gently point out that you had not expressed yourself very well. Since you wish to introduce these people from 'behind the scenes' who control CRT and Government, I would suggest that you should not be shy and name names. I will quite happily name the people who, in my view, hold power above their station, Rupert Murdoch being a particular pet hate of mine and of course the extremely wealthy editor of the Daily Mail, Paul Dacre. Both of these people have an unjustified hold over British politicians, Christians tend to ask the question 'What would Jesus do?' whereas politicians tend to ask 'What will Rupert Murdoch/Paul Dacre say?' and live in fear of it. Neither of these 'players' however have the slightest interest in Canals, Canal-boating, CRT or liveaboards so come on, give us your evidence, name the 'background' people that you claim are 'in control'?
  18. To be honest, I've not been particularly keen to post birthday's (my own) onto a public forum, much the same as I wouldn't put my address here, or mobile phone number. It has always been the attraction over Facebook et al that such information is only requested, not demanded. I have faith in the Forum members but this is a public forum into which anyone can look as a guest, and I don't trust those who might be looking in for nefarious reasons (it happens).
  19. As a comment from someone who has brought no real point of value to the table, that is sweet
  20. I was (quite gently I thought) pointing out your poor use of English. Did you perhaps mean, There is no intelligence, when you have no argument to offer,in accusing people of conspiring. Just asking
  21. I don't remember saying that you had no argument to offer, but I'm willing to run with the notion
  22. Sorry, I have no intention of playing 'conspiracy theory' games where 'the elite' are out to get me, my name isn't Trump
  23. So CRT, an innocent bystander in this debacle, should be the one to bail the Government out, is that what you are saying?
  24. This post cannot be displayed because it is in a forum which requires at least 10 posts to view.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.