Jump to content

mormont

Board Moderators
  • Posts

    42,534
  • Joined

  • Last visited

5 Followers

About mormont

Profile Information

  • I thought we were an autonomous collective
  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    St Andrews, Scotland

Recent Profile Visitors

43,642 profile views

mormont's Achievements

Council Member

Council Member (8/8)

  1. They're not stealing the silverware: that's largely gone, though if they can they'll take what's left. Rather, they're placing a huge bet and paying for it on the credit card, in the belief that it will either pay off (in which case they win) or will fail (in which case they get kicked out and someone else cleans up the mess).
  2. To avoid any misunderstandings, the Kwarteng/Truss economic 'policy' doesn't have popular support - even among their own voters.
  3. I agree. If people have directly relevant to topic points to make involving Afghanistan, Iraq etc. that's fine but discussion of whether those conflicts were in themselves justified isn't directly relevant. There is, so far as I know, no evidence that Putin has justified the war in Ukraine by reference to the Iraq war and while people are free to assume that this played a part (or not) there seems no point to further discussing whether that assumption is justified. Move on.
  4. Now, that's this Mark Fullbrook? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/21/labour-sounds-alarm-over-fullbrook-in-letter-to-civil-service-head
  5. No money for the public sector at all. Nothing for pay rises that match or even approximate inflation: nothing for nurses, doctors, all the people that rescued us during the pandemic. Nothing to fix the court backlog, nothing for students in mental health crises, nothing for schools. Nothing for the housing crisis, nothing for the disabled, nothing for carers. Nothing for the environmental crisis, nothing to prevent future pandemics, nothing for science. 'Growth' will pay for all of that, apparently. When and if it comes, and of course only after the usual people at the top have taken their share of the proceeds to pay for a new home in California and a yacht. Dead on arrival.
  6. Yes, but Isildur's motive there is pretty clearly to get the lantern away from Pharazon's son, who is intending to set light to the oil. I understand why that's risky, but not why it's stupid. What else was he to do: leave the arsonist holding the flame?
  7. The character works fine for me and many others. I think you mean the problem is that the character doesn't work for some viewers, apparently including you. And that's fine. There are few characters that work for everyone.
  8. I would think that a writer who actually fought at the Somme would be very sympathetic to the idea that even acting out fight scenes can be traumatic. As a person who watches a lot of fight scenes and also spends his weekends teaching people to handle a sword (in a safe but audience-friendly way), the fight scenes in this series are mostly fine. Lots of folks think they know about this stuff. They aren't all as correct as they imagine.
  9. Kwasi Kwarteng really stood up there and convinced himself it was 1983, huh? Worst budget I've ever seen in my life, and I've seen Norman Lamont.
  10. Andor can certainly be a more mature Star Wars, but in the end it's going to have the Empire be evil and the Rebellion be good. That's not in question. It's never going to be even comparable to Breaking Bad or anything like that, shows with protagonists who are genuinely bad people who do genuinely bad things. Star Wars likes anti-heroes and even villains well enough as protagonists, it always has - but it will always make sure to redeem them. It's not a setting that will wander far from its moral centre.
  11. See, this is the thing. People tend to think that conservative voters don't have a sense of fairness or don't care about fairness. But that's not true. Instead, what happens is that their sense of fairness has been essentially 'hacked': they've been fed distorted ideas about what's 'fair'. So they focus on why a person who is very poor shouldn't be treated in a better way than a person that's only somewhat poor, because they're told that's 'unfair', while ignoring the much better treatment the very rich receive: or they hyper-focus on examples of individual unfairness towards members of advantaged groups over the systemic unfairness shown to marginalised groups. These things are taught to them using 'fairness' as the lever, not as an obstacle.
  12. What I'm wondering is why, if you want these people to work more hours, the answer is to punish them if they don't: rather than rewarding them if they do?
  13. Tory ideology, folks. Rich people are incentivised by giving rewards, poor people are incentivised by punishment.
  14. And just in case you harboured some idea that this was about balancing the books, saving money, etc., the Chancellor has helpfully just handed a massive tax cut to people earning over £150,000 per year.
×
×
  • Create New...