Eu Referendum

[Stuart Dickson]

3 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

I stumbled across this beauty too when flicking through stories

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/683755/Nicola-Sturgeon-SNP-Scottish-independence-EU-referendum-Brexit

Edited July 20, 2016 by Stuart Dickson

[Kendo]

11 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

I didn't bring Armaggedon into this - the IMF did. 

Here's what Christine Legarde had to say about Brexit before the referendum

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36284200

It appears that "pretty bad" to "really bad" is actually steady economic growth at a pace that is greater than most of the economies anywhere else in the world. Legarde's pre referendum prediction has been used countless times by nationalists and anti Brexit left wingers to claim the demise of the UK economy - yet here we are 1 month on with the economy still not in recession, still not showing much sign of a slowdown, with unemployment reaching new record low levels and with the IMF now in complete reverse gear on it's predictions. Even the Nationalists who initially claimed the world was caving in because of the fall in the value of the pound are now claiming that nothing will happen until Article 50 is invoked. 

Yes the same fear campaign that predicted Armageddon should Scotland be daft enough to vote for independence.

[Bud the Baker]

21 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

I didn't bring Armaggedon into this - the IMF did. 

Here's what Christine Legarde had to say about Brexit before the referendum

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36284200

It appears that "pretty bad" to "really bad" is actually steady economic growth at a pace that is greater than most of the economies anywhere else in the world. Legarde's pre referendum prediction has been used countless times by nationalists and anti Brexit left wingers to claim the demise of the UK economy - yet here we are 1 month on with the economy still not in recession, still not showing much sign of a slowdown, with unemployment reaching new record low levels and with the IMF now in complete reverse gear on it's predictions. Even the Nationalists who initially claimed the world was caving in because of the fall in the value of the pound are now claiming that nothing will happen until Article 50 is invoked. 

I didn't see any mention of Armageddon in that report - you exaggerate the tone of the statement and then use this exaggeration to condemn any and all comments that suggest Brexit might have negative effect on the UK economy. On May 13th IMF said "pretty bad to very bad" yesterday they said "Brexit throws 'spanner in the works' of global growth" - I wouldn't call that "complete reverse gear", I'd say it was fairly similar, and to repeat what I said in my previous post whatever success the UK economy is currently enjoying has been achieved within the EU, the majority (and not just left-wing) opinion including is that the UK economy will suffer outside the EU.

While I don't doubt some people have gone OTT on the immediacy of the effects that Brexit will have on the UK economy you're hardly an example of accuracy and restraint.

[Stuart Dickson]

2 hours ago, Kendo said:

Yes the same fear campaign that predicted Armageddon should Scotland be daft enough to vote for independence.

Really? You mean like the £15Bn budget deficit, the falling oil price massively hitting Scottish tax revenues, a Finance Minister who claimed the first thing Scotland would do with Independence is borrow even more, and the only part of the UK where economic growth is non existent and where unemployment is rising. 

I think your claim is risible. 

[Stuart Dickson]

1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

I didn't see any mention of Armageddon in that report - you exaggerate the tone of the statement and then use this exaggeration to condemn any and all comments that suggest Brexit might have negative effect on the UK economy. On May 13th IMF said "pretty bad to very bad" yesterday they said "Brexit throws 'spanner in the works' of global growth" - I wouldn't call that "complete reverse gear", I'd say it was fairly similar, and to repeat what I said in my previous post whatever success the UK economy is currently enjoying has been achieved within the EU, the majority (and not just left-wing) opinion including is that the UK economy will suffer outside the EU.

While I don't doubt some people have gone OTT on the immediacy of the effects that Brexit will have on the UK economy you're hardly an example of accuracy and restraint.

The latest IMF report seems to think we'll suffer less outside of the EU than Germany and France will within it. Compare that with Christine Legarde's ridiculous agenda fuelled pre referendum predictions. 

The truth is the world continues to spin, the sky hasn't fallen down and the UK economy will continue to grow at a steady and reliable pace. The only thing that has changed is that the last Prime Minister landed up chucking it 3 years earlier than planned and Theresa May took over from him 3 years earlier than expected and the Conservative Party now look stronger right across the UK as a result. We can see the Labour Party eating itself with two woeful leadership candidates to pick from. The Lib Dems are spent as a political force. UKIP don't have anything to stand for these days. And the SNP have been shown up for the doom at all cost power hungry wankers they truly are. Even their own party membership is in open revolt these days about the dictatorship within the party. 

If I'd known it would all have worked out this well I wouldn't have voted to Remain. 

[oaksoft]

15 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

 

Yeah true. The report I misread talked about us being third in a group of 7 of the world's strongest economies. Certainly the IMF believes we will out perform Germany and France.

Great news today also from the Chancellors office. Another record high of people in work, a new record low of economically inactive people in the UK, fewer people on benefits, full time workers working more hours and earnings are up well ahead of inflation. What a fantastic place the UK is. No wonder half of Europe wants to move here.

 

Funny enough if an SNP MP had made the mistake of not actually reading what they were quoting before making an ill informed you would have spent years trolling their twitter feed and a 100 page thread would have appeared on here.

I really dont know why everything in life makes you so angry.

[oaksoft]

2 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

The latest IMF report seems to think we'll suffer less outside of the EU than Germany and France will within it. Compare that with Christine Legarde's ridiculous agenda fuelled pre referendum predictions. 

The truth is the world continues to spin, the sky hasn't fallen down and the UK economy will continue to grow at a steady and reliable pace. The only thing that has changed is that the last Prime Minister landed up chucking it 3 years earlier than planned and Theresa May took over from him 3 years earlier than expected and the Conservative Party now look stronger right across the UK as a result. We can see the Labour Party eating itself with two woeful leadership candidates to pick from. The Lib Dems are spent as a political force. UKIP don't have anything to stand for these days. And the SNP have been shown up for the doom at all cost power hungry wankers they truly are. Even their own party membership is in open revolt these days about the dictatorship within the party. 

If I'd known it would all have worked out this well I wouldn't have voted to Remain. 

See if you used all this energy you are pissing away on this sort of utter tripe on constructive things, it really is possible you could have genuinely achieved something of real value and importance in your life instead of being an internet pest.

Its sad really.

Edited July 21, 2016 by oaksoft

[Bud the Baker]

8 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

The latest IMF report seems to think we'll suffer less outside of the EU than Germany and France will within it. Compare that with Christine Legarde's ridiculous agenda fuelled pre referendum predictions. 

The truth is the world continues to spin, the sky hasn't fallen down and the UK economy will continue to grow at a steady and reliable pace. The only thing that has changed is that the last Prime Minister landed up chucking it 3 years earlier than planned and Theresa May took over from him 3 years earlier than expected and the Conservative Party now look stronger right across the UK as a result. We can see the Labour Party eating itself with two woeful leadership candidates to pick from. The Lib Dems are spent as a political force. UKIP don't have anything to stand for these days. And the SNP have been shown up for the doom at all cost power hungry wankers they truly are. Even their own party membership is in open revolt these days about the dictatorship within the party. 

If I'd known it would all have worked out this well I wouldn't have voted to Remain. 

So you can't produce any example of Legrande using the term Armageddon, like I said just another case of you exaggerating.

The truth - a mixture of speculation and your ridiculous agenda.

We'll see how the unity in the Tory Party holds up when it becomes clear that as far as May is concerned Brexit mean never having to invoke Article 50. I predict another Farage comeback..............

Edited July 21, 2016 by Bud the Baker

[salmonbuddie]

Those pesky Spanish, threatening a veto again

http://chronicle.gi/2016/07/spain-could-veto-brexit-talks-margallo-says/

[salmonbuddie]

StuD's been interviewed

http://newsthump.com/2016/07/22/brexiter-annoyed-by-people-pointing-out-that-thing-they-were-told-would-happen-is-happening/

[FTOF]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36864273

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36877568

 

[salmonbuddie]

The weird thing is that those are the types of things he's been saying even though he claims to have voted Remain.

That's why it thought it was him...until cockles pointed out what was lacking

[emoji4]

[nosferatu]

10 hours ago, Slartibartfast said:

The weird thing is that those are the types of things he's been saying even though he claims to have voted Remain.

 

even weirder is someone thinking that the public debt is funded by selling premium bonds

[nosferatu]

On ‎21‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 4:30 AM, oaksoft said:

See if you used all this energy you are pissing away on this sort of utter tripe on constructive things, it really is possible you could have genuinely achieved something of real value and importance in your life instead of being an internet pest.

Its sad really.

coming from the guy who spent his entire Xmas day posting on this forum!

you lonely fat bastard!

[nosferatu]

4 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:

 

 

That's why it thought it was him...until cockles pointed out what was lacking

 

and what you r lacking is a brain

stick to mocking the disabled you disgusting, fat, thick coffin dodger!

[salmonbuddie]

and what you r lacking is a brain[emoji38]

stick to mocking the disabled you disgusting, fat, thick coffin dodger!

Mocking?

ETA Is this one of those cybernat attacks? To quote Denis Healey, it's like being savaged by a dead sheep.

#thichasfcuk

[Stuart Dickson]

even weirder is someone thinking that the public debt is funded by selling premium bonds[emoji38]

He's no very bright especially on matters to do with the economy. He also spent ages trying to show how currency fluctuations wiped out the benefit of lower yields on UK debt because he reckoned interest on Sterling Gilts would be made in $US.

I almost pity him

[oaksoft]

16 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

 

He's no very bright especially on matters to do with the economy. He also spent ages trying to show how currency fluctuations wiped out the benefit of lower yields on UK debt because he reckoned interest on Sterling Gilts would be made in $US.

I almost pity him

 

Neither you nor nosferatu have any business laughing at anybody's grasp of economics.

You are the textbook definition of a dilletante.

Edited July 26, 2016 by oaksoft

[Stuart Dickson]

19 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said:

 

They can claim what they want, all they are really doing is showing that they don't understand
(1) basic grammar,
(2) plain English,
(3) simple percentages and
(4) primary school arithmetic;

and also lack the ability to comprehend
(1) when they have been proven wrong,
(2) when folk are laughing at them and not with them,
(3) when other posters are bumming them up just so they will continue to make fools of themselves,
(4) that repeating the same lie(s) does not make them true and
(5) that they are both #thichasfcuk and the sort of people that the phrase "I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you" was invented for.

They are mildly amusing though (in a point and laugh sort of way), so don't discourage them too much.

Oooh, brave attempt but nah, it hasn't worked. You really did make an absolute c**t of yourself talking about UK Government Gilts. Would you like me to repost it for you?

[Stuart Dickson]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Neither you nor nosferatu have any business laughing at anybody's grasp of economics.

You are the textbook definition of a dilletante.

So says the man who couldn't grasp the notion that self employment meant having to work to suit your customer, rather than suiting yourself....:rolleyes:

[oaksoft]

2 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

So says the man who couldn't grasp the notion that self employment meant having to work to suit your customer, rather than suiting yourself....:rolleyes:

Stop deflecting. I have spent over 10 years as self employed so I know what the hell I am talking about and that wasnt what I was claiming anyway as you well know.

You seem to forget that someone who is actually doing something rather than reading about it on wikipedia can spot a faker a bloody mile off and you reek of dilletante on virtually everything you post.

I do remember your ridiculous post though where you claimed to have been forced to sit through a football match because "your client told you to".  You could easily have paid someone to do that for you. You could alternatively have decided that you COULD do maths and realise you would lose money and return the clients money and tell him it wasnt worth your time. No employee can exercise that level of flexibility. A good business will as a matter of course turn business down from time to time because there isnt profit in it or it is something which is more hassle than it is worth. All of this was your choice and you werent being told to do it by a single person other than yourself. That is the point you missed. If you had ever genuinely run a successful business you would know this. Your response gave you away as someone who has not been successful in self employment.

Edited July 26, 2016 by oaksoft

[Stuart Dickson]

Stop deflecting. I have spent over 10 years as self employed so I know what the hell I am talking about and that wasnt what I was claiming anyway as you well know.

You seem to forget that someone who is actually doing something rather than reading about it on wikipedia can spot a faker a bloody mile off and you reek of dilletante on virtually everything you post.

I do remember your ridiculous post though where you claimed to have been forced to sit through a football match because "your client told you to".  You could easily have paid someone to do that for you. You could alternatively have decided that you COULD do maths and realise you would lose money and return the clients money and tell him it wasnt worth your time. No employee can exercise that level of flexibility. A good business will as a matter of course turn business down from time to time because there isnt profit in it or it is something which is more hassle than it is worth. All of this was your choice and you werent being told to do it by a single person other than yourself. That is the point you missed. If you had ever genuinely run a successful business you would know this. Your response gave you away as someone who has not been successful in self employment.

You were claiming that being self employed gave you the freedom to work the hours you wish. I was pointing out you that freedom came with money....not self employment and it appears from this post that you agree with me. How? Well if I couldnt afford to hire someone that night the fact I was self employed did not mean I was enjoying freedoms precisely because I lacked the money.

You are obviously too stupid to grasp the fact you've killed your own point.

BTW I would have had to have been bonkers to have knocked back that single customer that night. Can you imagine a fledgling business that has just started marketing itself to around 8,000 potential customers proving without doubt it didn't have the ability to run the service as sold? You'd have to be a really shite businessman not to have grasped that.

Was I a success? Probably not. However the four start ups I've been involved with all made profit. I'm told that's a good strike rate. That particular business landed up making a clear profit per text of 15p on the lowest margin I had. A 0-0 draw was worth 4 text messages per subscriber.

[oaksoft]

4 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

 

You were claiming that being self employed gave you the freedom to work the hours you wish. I was pointing out you that freedom came with money....not self employment and it appears from this post that you agree with me. How? Well if I couldnt afford to hire someone that night the fact I was self employed did not mean I was enjoying freedoms precisely because I lacked the money.

You are obviously too stupid to grasp the fact you've killed your own point.

BTW I would have had to have been bonkers to have knocked back that single customer that night. Can you imagine a fledgling business that has just started marketing itself to around 8,000 potential customers proving without doubt it didn't have the ability to run the service as sold? You'd have to be a really shite businessman not to have grasped that.

Was I a success? Probably not. However the four start ups I've been involved with all made profit. I'm told that's a good strike rate. That particular business landed up making a clear profit per text of 15p on the lowest margin I had. A 0-0 draw was worth 4 text messages per subscriber.

 

You certainly did fail at running your own business. Thats clear from your lack of a grasp of basic economics. If you had been successful you wouldnt be an employee now. Its not enough just to make a profit -any idiot can do that. That doesnt make you a success. Making ENOUGH profit to live on is the only thing that matters. Thats not the issue though.

The issue is you prancing around arrogantly pronouncing how self employment works to those who HAVE successfully struck out on their own. You dont KNOW how self employment works until you have made a success of it. You fail at things because your understanding of anything is paper thin, your ability to critically self evaluate is non existent and your willingness to accept personal responsibility is close to zero. I suspect your resilience to failure is very low as well. None of these are personal characteristics routinely found in successful people. 

Come back when you have overcome these personal obstacles and I will gladly accept your advice on business.

[oaksoft]

4 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

 

You were claiming that being self employed gave you the freedom to work the hours you wish. I was pointing out you that freedom came with money....not self employment and it appears from this post that you agree with me. How? Well if I couldnt afford to hire someone that night the fact I was self employed did not mean I was enjoying freedoms precisely because I lacked the money.

You are obviously too stupid to grasp the fact you've killed your own point.

BTW I would have had to have been bonkers to have knocked back that single customer that night. Can you imagine a fledgling business that has just started marketing itself to around 8,000 potential customers proving without doubt it didn't have the ability to run the service as sold? You'd have to be a really shite businessman not to have grasped that.

Was I a success? Probably not. However the four start ups I've been involved with all made profit. I'm told that's a good strike rate. That particular business landed up making a clear profit per text of 15p on the lowest margin I had. A 0-0 draw was worth 4 text messages per subscriber.

 

What f**king business? You didnt have a business. You had a single client and lost money on the deal. Without making enough to live on you simply had a hobby.

Like I said, there is no shame in this. The shame comes from you pretending to be an expert in something you have failed at.

[Stuart Dickson]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

What f**king business? You didnt have a business. You had a single client and lost money on the deal. Without making enough to live on you simply had a hobby.

Like I said, there is no shame in this. The shame comes from you pretending to be an expert in something you have failed at.

Oh dear. Come back to me when you can read and I'll gladly help you with your business....:rolleyes:

I had 4 businesses in total. As I've said I was making a clear profit of 15p on every text message sent, the minimum profit on a match day per customer was 60p. We covered all 92 senior English Clubs, all 42 senior Scottish Clubs, several Junior clubs, loads of juvenile clubs, the senior German and French leagues, and we had deals in place for the MLS, MLB and for the NFL when we sold.

It didn't give me a Donald Trump or a Alan Sugar type return, but I can confirm we had more than one customer....:rolleyes: However, even if it was just that one Colchester client paying me on a long dark Friday evening, I still turned a profit. No loss was ever made.

Edited July 26, 2016 by Stuart Dickson