I think she’s going for it. By that I mean trying to sit it out in the hope of other news overtaking her stupidity.Helping to spread immunity?
.
I think she’s going for it. By that I mean trying to sit it out in the hope of other news overtaking her stupidity.Helping to spread immunity?
.
What? Play-Didoh.Good point. Slip of the keypad. She’s a twat.
I mean, what was she thinking? Getting on a train in full knowledge that you have Coronavirus. It defies belief. I wonder if the jockey will have any luck tracking & tracing those she’s been in contact with?
Speaking of spreading, reminds me of our old fave, Tom Lehrer.Helping to spread immunity?
.
He said in the debate that he only took it for a couple of weeks!Ideal opportunity to test hydroxychloroquine (with or without antibiotics).
Come to think of it, he already claimed to have taken that for a while. So this undermines any possible claims that it stops you getting Covid-19.
I can't believe that an intelligent person would be fooled like that, or are you just reproducing the media spin without thinking. Either way, you're letting yourself down badly.Or telling the proud boys to "stand by" before telling fox news he "doesn't really know much about them". Its kind of accidentally unplugging his ventilator stuff.
.. what you could afford wax on TOP of the stain!. We just used stain.. and eventually polyurethane paintNot like that. Our floorstain back in the 1940s was just a brown woodstain soaked into the floorboards and when dryed treated to a floor wax coating to seal it, making it easy to sweep and occasionally polish. Basically like furniture is stained and waxed, though to nothing like the same finish.
.
the housing market is such that the price of houses are entirely based on the ability to pay interest. Banks know that people will borrow as much as they would lend them.He isn't. Although I'm opposed to most of Barry's views, he could well be right here.
I bought my first home at the end of 1960, deposit was 25%, the morgtage was 5.3 times salary and was at 6.5%. That was a bungalow for my parents, I had no intention of living there since my own plans on where I was going to settle weren't decided, so I was renting nearer where I worked.
Seven years later I bought my small flat, all I wanted. Thankfully the deposit was only 5%, leaving it at 4.2 times salary, but because I was already lumbered with one full mortage and mortages were very difficult get to get back then, my only option was a commercial mortgage through the Property Owners Building Society. That was at 9%, so the mortgage payments were well over those for the bungalow.
Nobody has paid mortgage rates remotely like those for decades, there's been many assisted purchase schemes which never existed in the past and there are areas with low house prices, compared with the premium ones.
Where Barry is most right is that young people are not prepared to sacrifice to achieve these days. Each of those first two property purchases I made both took immense sacrifice for a while on my part, living at barely existence levels. I even ran out of food one Christmas holiday period.
Many more young people could have got on the property ladder now by similar harsh self deprivation for several initial years with an eye on their future as he and I did each time, but they won't. They want to be able to continue running a car or using public transport instead of walking or riding a bike, buy high end i-Phones or Galaxies, wear branded fashion clothes instead of buying off market stalls and other low cost sources, get fast food delivered because they are too lazy to learn how to cook good but low cost food.
That's their foolish choice, to end up later in life when less able to cope with ever increasing rent, poor living standards and often no more car ownership.
The wiser choice Barry and I made was the opposite, in my case 30 years of early retirement so far with an income far in excess of outgoings, living in more luxury than most without ever having to look at a price before buying and owning six new cars paid for by cash during that 30 years.
Ironically in the present discussion context, perhaps a bit like Covid-19. Take the hit early to benefit substantially later!
.
What does the words "stand by" mean? It certainly does not mean disperse. It means Stand by and be READY. If he wanted them to disperse the term is in standard American STAND DOWN...as any viewer of US military dramas knows.I can't believe that an intelligent person would be fooled like that, or are you just reproducing the media spin without thinking. Either way, you're letting yourself down badly.
His actual quote is, "The Proud boys stand back and stand by". He was saying that when the Proud Boys go to a Rally, they just stand around, and he was going to say that any violence that they're involved in only starts when they're attacked, but he got interrupted.
The word "should" has been added by the media. He never said that. When you Google search for that phrase, you can see all the headlines have added the word "should" to completely change the meaning. Nearly all of them conveniently left out the "stand back" too. As I keep telling you, what the mainstream media tells you is false.
To save you looking it up for yourself, here's Trump actually saying it. If you read the text underneath, you can see that the Washington Post added the word "should", but they cleverly left it out of the quotes. Most people, like you are too stupid to see that:
Stain only same as us actually, but we did have a couple of houseproud neighbours who waxed, one somewhat appropriately named Mrs Pretty... what you could afford wax on TOP of the stain!. We just used stain.. and eventually polyurethane paint
Although I fully agree with the principle of what you posted, not entirely.the housing market is such that the price of houses are entirely based on the ability to pay interest.
Trump appeared to be directing these white supremacists with the following instructions clearly spokenI can't believe that an intelligent person would be fooled like that, or are you just reproducing the media spin without thinking. Either way, you're letting yourself down badly.
His actual quote is, "The Proud boys stand back and stand by". He was saying that when the Proud Boys go to a Rally, they just stand around, and he was going to say that any violence that they're involved in only starts when they're attacked, but he got interrupted.
The word "should" has been added by the media. He never said that. When you Google search for that phrase, you can see all the headlines have added the word "should" to completely change the meaning. Nearly all of them conveniently left out the "stand back" too. As I keep telling you, what the mainstream media tells you is false.
To save you looking it up for yourself, here's Trump actually saying it. If you read the text underneath, you can see that the Washington Post added the word "should", but they cleverly left it out of the quotes. Most people, like you are too stupid to see that:
Yes - he said something like that around the time he was taking it.He said in the debate that he only took it for a couple of weeks!
Given that England's world beating app doesn't work in Scotland and Scotland's rather ordinary app doesn't work in England she'll have nae luck.I wonder if the jockey will have any luck tracking & tracing those she’s been in contact with?
The leader of the proud boys (Tarrio) is the state director of a movement "Latinos for trump". Trump knows about him and the proud boys only too well. I know you knew that. Becoming insulting because you do not have an argument is one thing. Parading contrived fake news is something quite different and unacceptable.I can't believe that an intelligent person would be fooled like that, or are you just reproducing the media spin without thinking. Either way, you're letting yourself down badly.
His actual quote is, "The Proud boys stand back and stand by". He was saying that when the Proud Boys go to a Rally, they just stand around, and he was going to say that any violence that they're involved in only starts when they're attacked, but he got interrupted.
The word "should" has been added by the media. He never said that. When you Google search for that phrase, you can see all the headlines have added the word "should" to completely change the meaning. Nearly all of them conveniently left out the "stand back" too. As I keep telling you, what the mainstream media tells you is false.
To save you looking it up for yourself, here's Trump actually saying it. If you read the text underneath, you can see that the Washington Post added the word "should", but they cleverly left it out of the quotes. Most people, like you are too stupid to see that:
house price inflation causes misery for the majority of our population and harms our economy. The sooner house price crashes the sooner people will feel happier.Although I fully agree with the principle of what you posted, not entirely.
The quality of a property, the area it is in and the employment opportunities in the reachable area make huge differences in prices, and therefore ability to pay at a given price level.
Down at lowest income levels you are largely right, but there are affordable properties for those prepared to accept low grade property or who can work from home in poor employment opportunity areas.
.
I agree. But that would hurt the banks (massive negative equity). Which would in the long run be great. It could refocus our economy away from financial services into a more sustainable meaningful model (eg producing more specialist goods and services). It would also unlock all the capital doing nothing (economically or for society) tied up in economically inactive bricks and mortar. But its a lot easier to swindle the next generation out of a livelihood than to make that painful transition. It's the change in our economic model Corbyn and Macdonald had in mind and that little englanders found so threatening.house price inflation causes misery for the majority of our population and harms our economy. The sooner house price crashes the sooner people will feel happier.
"Should" was not added on any of the places I read the quote.I can't believe that an intelligent person would be fooled like that, or are you just reproducing the media spin without thinking. Either way, you're letting yourself down badly.
His actual quote is, "The Proud boys stand back and stand by". He was saying that when the Proud Boys go to a Rally, they just stand around, and he was going to say that any violence that they're involved in only starts when they're attacked, but he got interrupted.
The word "should" has been added by the media. He never said that. When you Google search for that phrase, you can see all the headlines have added the word "should" to completely change the meaning. Nearly all of them conveniently left out the "stand back" too. As I keep telling you, what the mainstream media tells you is false.
To save you looking it up for yourself, here's Trump actually saying it. If you read the text underneath, you can see that the Washington Post added the word "should", but they cleverly left it out of the quotes. Most people, like you are too stupid to see that:
It’s not me I’m thinking of. This thing has barely affected me or my family.Sorry fingers bu there is a little saying that exemplifies the sort of logic you are expounding
"If you can keep your head when all around are losing theirs
Then clearly you have no idea of the seriousness of the situation."
What is needed isn't just to deny the threat of Covid, but to organise so that there is minimum disruption to all the other treatments that are required for those suffering
And your scornful attitude towards the human flotsam and jetsam
"Sick people who could have been cured will die because we are protecting 80 year olds with pre existing conditions."
pretty much sums up that some of your generation are pretty poor examples of selfish humanity seeking a scapegoat to avoid any personal loss or inconvenience.
Man up fingers! as your voted for leaders would say
We are all in this together
Elderly lives matter too, sunshine!
When you are old you may even agree
I think that's a false dichotomy. It doesn't have to be a dilemma between leaving the old and vulnerable to die - or eternal financially ruinous lockdowns. There are other options. It's the 21st century. Were not, metaphorically speaking, survivors of a plane crash in the Andes who have to decide who to eat. Take a look at Germany or New Zealand. An effective test and trace system followed by a vaccine will not just be a better solution (than allowing the old and vulnerable to die) for now. It will also be for the future. This is the first of many more SARS type pandemics to come.It’s not me I’m thinking of. This thing has barely affected me or my family.
Im just saying this is a numbers game. You have people who may never work again thanks to the insane way this crisis has been managed.
at some point we need to take a step back. Not go deeper and deeper into every politician trying to out covid one another.
and if you have the gall to mention that this is madness and using a sledge hammer to crack a coconut yiu are called a granny killer.
we have to be sensible. Millions of lives now are being ruined and millions more are about to be. Not to mention the debt that will be paid by the selfish, lazy youth today. (C) Barry shitpeas till they die And their children die.
this is madness. 770 students were infected in Northumberland this week. Only ten percent showed symptoms.
this is not the plague.