This isn't actually an option, tefal is just saying it would be a good idea.
Also, you and your family have never voted? Disgraceful.
Brand v Paxman
- Thread starter newbiejim
- Start date
This isn't actually an option, tefal is just saying it would be a good idea.
Also, you and your family have never voted? Disgraceful.
So usually, this is a pretty right wing forum, it's just the way it is. Can I ask some people to justify the Tories actively trying to stop the EU limiting bankers bonuses? How can that be anything more than protecting their buddies in the city?
Brand makes some good points. Unfortunately, I voted Lib Dem in the last election, because I thought they were different and had a bit of momentum behind them, and look how that turned out, I might aswell have voted for the Tories, a party I have literally nothing in common with. I'm sick of the system, a vote for Labour isn't exactly any different, they're all the same people with a slightly different skin.
Brand makes some good points. Unfortunately, I voted Lib Dem in the last election, because I thought they were different and had a bit of momentum behind them, and look how that turned out, I might aswell have voted for the Tories, a party I have literally nothing in common with. I'm sick of the system, a vote for Labour isn't exactly any different, they're all the same people with a slightly different skin.
Last edited:
Brand is excellent, and this is where I like him the most!
As an actor, he is pretty terrible, stand-up is pretty decent but he tries to hard. When it is just himself and his ramblings, that's when he is golden.
All I want for him to do is a weekly podcast with Matt Morgan and maybe Noel, just them rambling on
Their Radio 2 podcasts are golden!
As an actor, he is pretty terrible, stand-up is pretty decent but he tries to hard. When it is just himself and his ramblings, that's when he is golden.
All I want for him to do is a weekly podcast with Matt Morgan and maybe Noel, just them rambling on
Their Radio 2 podcasts are golden!
I think I agree sir, and I liked Bill Hicks muchly.
In addition, people saying he is a hypocrite because he has made a load of cash...........he is allowed to do this under this unfair system yeah?, the very system he wants changed, presumably to his financial detriment. I get the feeling our Russell might be willing to forego his riches like a proper man of the people
.As for his verbosity, good on him, the use of a wider vocabulary aids clarity and why not?, the words are there for all to use for free.
He is fantastically quick of thought and his swirling eloquence has to be admired imo. His wild eyes are a bit concerning though, maybe he's just mental lol.
I get the feeling our Russell might be willing to forego his riches like a proper man of the people
Bwaha
Voting is pointless, id rather we set up a system and voted on issues along with proper scientific and sustainable thinking people in control, why vote for one person or party when you can vote for real change, the current way is slow to change and business as usual, it worked for a time but we can come up with something much better now, capitalism and democracy are flawed and failing us.
In many cases it does the exact opposite.
Fair point, but in this case I don't personally think he does it just for effect. Typically when I encounter a person who uses a wide range of words accurately as he pretty much does I feel that least they have went through life noticing these words and their meanings,and usually they are more intelligent and interesting people.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 4,085
- Location
- Uranus
+1. Paxman did quieten down a lot. A lot of sense from Brand if only it could be implemented.
Andi.
Isn't it funny how we seem to live in a world where many things are backwards.
One is a rich or well off person could buy a home in one go for less than someone who can't as they end up paying more simply because it's done over many years, how is that right?
I think the two main problems with the current system are democracy which doesn't work quickly enough or even at all for many things and capitalism is inherently selfish in nature, it doesn't care about society but the individual, whether its a person or business, we need to move on from these flawed and outdated systems, we've seen what can be achieved when people work together for the benefit of all.
One is a rich or well off person could buy a home in one go for less than someone who can't as they end up paying more simply because it's done over many years, how is that right?
I think the two main problems with the current system are democracy which doesn't work quickly enough or even at all for many things and capitalism is inherently selfish in nature, it doesn't care about society but the individual, whether its a person or business, we need to move on from these flawed and outdated systems, we've seen what can be achieved when people work together for the benefit of all.
Indeed.
But you can't expect someone who is packing box's to earn the same as someone who is closing multimillion pound deals. Within a company, depending on size, it might only be a few people earning bigger money. Are you saying those people don't deserve it? You'd hope in this day and age, everyone has a good opportunity at progressing to the top within a company. It just depends on a lot of factors including a bit of luck. If you start packing box's and within 20 years your ceo, you'd be pretty annoyed at suddenly getting another 20% sliced off.
Last edited:
Of course not and I'd never argue that.
At present, however, we have a system that benefits those with power and wealth massively. You can't live in a society which affords you massive benefits without holding up your own end of the bargain, unfortunately the culture of entitlement means a lot think they can.
Personally I would love to see the whole rotten country go to hell in a handbasket, I for one wouldn't lift a finger to help.
The problem is blanket punishing people, there is plenty of wealthy and powerful people who contribute to society in a positive way.
Thing is, no one needs an excessive amount of money, we could use all that money to create fairly paid jobs for people to create a better society and environment for all of us, at the same time tho imo we should punish criminals more, force people to work and make our country a pleasant place to exist.
utopian I know but there u go.
It isn't about punishment, or at least paying your dues and owning up to your responsibilities to the society that has afforded such lavish lifestyles shouldn't seem like a punishment.
Exactly. It is just such a close minded view of things he has. He just sounds like all the teenagers i knew at high school and in college who had Che Guevara posters on their wall.
Where would we be without some of the massive corporations in this country? Massive corporations (generally) mean massive amounts of jobs. People who cry about Cameron et al helping out large corporations and helping them with profits don't think about the alternative. The alternative is that we punish all the large corporations until they up and leave our country entirely. I can see exactly why we need to keep them sweet. We need to keep this country attractive for big business!
Politicians have the tricky job of balancing out the needs of the people AND the needs of big business.
Yes it isn't ideal and there are some greedy ****ers out there but again no one, especially not Brand has an alternative.
Yes it isn't ideal , but if we all just had a revolution and then shrugged our shoulders once every large business left the country, what would we do?
Last edited: