blandy Posted October 20, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 20, 2020 4 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said: As someone living in Greater Manchester. Tory words removed. Seconded by someone living in Lancashire. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted October 20, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 20, 2020 1 hour ago, snowychap said: Not half as much as his brother Dave. At least he's not referring to Mr VT. Simon could sue 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted October 20, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 20, 2020 They're prepping for the military already... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted October 20, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 20, 2020 2 hours ago, markavfc40 said: these callus bastards in government. It is disgusting what they have now done out of spite in offering £22 million having hours earlier offered £60 million The thing is, by deciding on that 60 million being an (in their view) appropriate amount, the govt is implicitly saying 60 million is what we deem the people of Manchester need to keep them fed, keep their businesses and jobs alive. Then they go and provide just over a third of what they themselves deemed right and necessary. Utter words removed. That’ll mean people losing their jobs and businesses and unable to pay rents and stuff. Callous scum. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post snowychap Posted October 20, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted October 20, 2020 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chrisp65 Posted October 20, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted October 20, 2020 1 minute ago, blandy said: The thing is, by deciding on that 60 million being an (in their view) appropriate amount, the govt is implicitly saying 60 million is what we deem the people of Manchester need to keep them fed, keep their businesses and jobs alive. Then they go and provide just over a third of what they themselves deemed right and necessary. Utter words removed. That’ll mean people losing their jobs and businesses and unable to pay rents and stuff. Callous scum. It’s almost like we have a government full to the brim with people that can’t negotiate, can’t think one move ahead, and don’t give a shit. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted October 20, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 20, 2020 58 minutes ago, snowychap said: I liked this, but now of course I have that song stuck in my head for the rest of the evening and I don’t know all the words so that line is on repeat. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted October 20, 2020 Share Posted October 20, 2020 What an idiot Boris is. Easy win to offer the 60m (that was willing to at 12.00) regardless of us Mancs walking away. Then you switch the focus to we did all we could, from, we are petty vengeful bastards. All this ‘negotiating’ has gone to his head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted October 20, 2020 Share Posted October 20, 2020 £22m is laughably bad. It’s obvious sooner or later Birmingham will be placed in these restrictions despite what Andy Street has said this evening. Talking about Andy Street.... I noticed his statement said he doesn’t want “drawn out negotiations in the media” if/when the Midlands are put in tier 3 which is an easy cop out. It’s the mayor elections next year I think, people will not forget if the Midlands are plunged into tier 3 with very little financial support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted October 20, 2020 Author Share Posted October 20, 2020 16 minutes ago, dudevillaisnice said: £22m is laughably bad. It’s obvious sooner or later Birmingham will be placed in these restrictions despite what Andy Street has said this evening. Talking about Andy Street.... I noticed his statement said he doesn’t want “drawn out negotiations in the media” if/when the Midlands are put in tier 3 which is an easy cop out. It’s the mayor elections next year I think, people will not forget if the Midlands are plunged into tier 3 with very little financial support. pah... the future king will step up and help his dear Brum out 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted October 20, 2020 Share Posted October 20, 2020 I imagine the Midlands will be in for a significantly bigger sum of money. If you have any doubts at all that the Tories would tactically offer far more money to areas they hold, check out the fate of the pre-election 'Towns Fund': 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted October 20, 2020 Share Posted October 20, 2020 3 hours ago, blandy said: The thing is, by deciding on that 60 million being an (in their view) appropriate amount, the govt is implicitly saying 60 million is what we deem the people of Manchester need to keep them fed, keep their businesses and jobs alive. Then they go and provide just over a third of what they themselves deemed right and necessary. Utter words removed. That’ll mean people losing their jobs and businesses and unable to pay rents and stuff. Callous scum. Meanwhile fictional PPE companies with zero assets founded by Tory donors are being substantial government contracts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted October 20, 2020 Share Posted October 20, 2020 5 hours ago, blandy said: I dunno why, Snowy - I mean absolutely everything they do is a **** up. True but I was thinking more along the lines of this: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackbauer24 Posted October 21, 2020 Share Posted October 21, 2020 I will drop this in but with minimal comment... What exactly is incorrect about this? Why is it not allowed to be discussed? If it's wrong, I want to know it's wrong with evidence as to why it's wrong. We can go from 1 death to 10 deaths and the number of people dying has "increased 900%" when spun 'correctly' but it's still 'just' ten people. People do die unfortunately. There are some nuts who think it doesn't exist, but there are others, including well renowned scientists, who go "ok, it exists, we were worried to begin with but now we have more data and evidence we can continually reevaluate as all good scientists do and the actions being taken (and that have been taken) are completely disproportionate. Panic and fear of seeming heartless has replaced data, science and analysis from what I can see... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted October 21, 2020 Share Posted October 21, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted October 21, 2020 Moderator Share Posted October 21, 2020 9 hours ago, jackbauer24 said: What exactly is incorrect about this? Why is it not allowed to be discussed? We discussed it many pages back when it was first posted. I'm not going to go back and find it, but the first 30 seconds contains a massive flaw. He says "we know lockdowns have a minimal, if any, real positive effect [on reducing the spread of the virus]" - that's utter rubbish. We know absolutely that the virus spreads through people coming into close proximity with others - via droplets in the air, or via touching infected surfaces and then spreading from th hands to the face. If you prevent people from mixing, then we know this reduces the spread....and so on. It's not that everything he says is wrong, it isn't. It's just that he's basing a lot of his argument on a complete falsehood, so it is biased towards an outcome. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted October 21, 2020 Share Posted October 21, 2020 14 minutes ago, snowychap said: "And if they just pay them straight to me, I'll erm, take care of it" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted October 21, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 21, 2020 29 minutes ago, snowychap said: Less weirdly obsessed with his council tax. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted October 21, 2020 Share Posted October 21, 2020 1 hour ago, blandy said: We discussed it many pages back when it was first posted. I'm not going to go back and find it, but the first 30 seconds contains a massive flaw. He says "we know lockdowns have a minimal, if any, real positive effect [on reducing the spread of the virus]" - that's utter rubbish. We know absolutely that the virus spreads through people coming into close proximity with others - via droplets in the air, or via touching infected surfaces and then spreading from th hands to the face. If you prevent people from mixing, then we know this reduces the spread....and so on. It's not that everything he says is wrong, it isn't. It's just that he's basing a lot of his argument on a complete falsehood, so it is biased towards an outcome. This is a new video of his, it’s looking specifically at the case for a second lockdown in the autumn. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted October 21, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted October 21, 2020 Anyone else noticed the Minister briefing just now in Parliament clicking his pen throughout? It was almost like he clicked it every time he lied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts