Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,287,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

*** OFFICIAL BREXIT SUNLIT UPLANDS and #MEGA THREAD ***

Page 26 of 27 FirstFirst ... 1624252627 LastLast
Results 1,876 to 1,950 of 2023
  1. #1876
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Chortle.
    yeah, looks like the DM is in on the Remainer conspiracy too, that left wing rag.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ly-crisis.html

    How many newspapers are reporting on the empty shelves in France? You'd think the DM would be all over that if it were true, or even if it weren't.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Prove to me that chemical companies are refusing to sell us what we need. Show me this is a supply problem.
    It's all over social media...

    Seriously, this is just something heard, not proven. But, it makes sense that if you're selling chemicals you don't want the extra hassle of sending them through customs barriers, and when you anticipate those barriers coming up, you're going to start looking for other customers.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I would imagine these companies are under contract, and I would also imagine they would like to keep their customers because it's long term repeat custom. I don't even know what chemicals we need, where they can be sourced, if we can source them ourselves. Do you know?
    Like chlorine I guess. Doesn't Germany have a big chemical industry? I'm pretty sure they aren't being made here, or someone would have thought to fucking prioritise not having raw sewage in our rivers over something a bit less critical.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I was basing it off the million letters the government have sent out asking HGV drivers to consider returning to the sector.
    There wasn't 1m drivers who all quit, 'cause there were never more than about 300k active drivers in the whole country. It's mostly people who are qualified HGV drivers but didn't take it up. And I doubt it's really that high a number as a million. And most of those people never took it up because it's a shit job with shit hours with shit social life, and you might be replaced by a self-driving lorry in ten years anyways. £30k a year doesn't make that all worthwhile to most people, especially if you've left the UK and to come back you have to jump through all sorts of hoops or face Cruela Patel's firing squad.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  2. #1877
    #TurdReich trending on twitter.

    #MEGA
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  3. #1878
    #StoolBrittania now trending lol.

    So the Tories seem to have figured out which way the wind was blowing on this, and voted for the amendment to stop the free flow of shit into waterways. The question now is where are the businesses going to get the chemicals to comply?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  4. #1879
    Brexit twice as bad for UK economy as a global pandemic, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility. #MEGA

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics...demic-obr-says
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  5. #1880
    Are we finally about to see the back of Boris "You leave 'im alone, 'e's doin' 'is best!" Johnson?

    DM turning on a Tory PM can't be a good sign for him.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-shambles.html
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  6. #1881
    Good thing there's all those vacancies in other jobs.

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/p...paign=sharebar
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  7. #1882
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  8. #1883
    Better enjoy the few years of sovereignty we're gonna get before they reverse Brexit.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...mx5QlIJNx208mE
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  9. #1884
    We already spoke about this. Low sample size, doesn't give any indication of the demographic breakdown of those polled. Worthless.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  10. #1885
    If we had effective leadership in this country, shit like this wouldn't happen. This is fucking embarrassing.

    https://twitter.com/EUMarauder/statu...46794885705730
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  11. #1886
    Yesterday - Pakistani cricketer opening up about racist abuse he suffered when playing for Yorkshire, complaining about institutional racism within cricket.

    Today - same cricketer apologising for anti-Semitic tweets.

    Fucking hilarious.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  12. #1887
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Yesterday - Pakistani cricketer opening up about racist abuse he suffered when playing for Yorkshire, complaining about institutional racism within cricket.

    Today - same cricketer apologising for anti-Semitic tweets.

    Fucking hilarious.
    The more I see this kind of thing (people going back ten years to when the person was a teenager), the more smug I feel about deciding to not do any social media.

    Does make me wonder though. If I don't like somebody at work, I can now just go back through their posts and get them fired for something they said when they were 18.
  13. #1888
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,646
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by The Bean Counter View Post
    The more I see this kind of thing (people going back ten years to when the person was a teenager), the more smug I feel about deciding to not do any social media.

    Does make me wonder though. If I don't like somebody at work, I can now just go back through their posts and get them fired for something they said when they were 18.
    I mean... depends on the employer and what they did.
    Just make sure that not only your own online presence is squeaky clean, but that all your friends at the time didn't post anything that could be incriminating on you enough to get yourself fired.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  14. #1889
    I usually have sympathy for people who get pulled up on historical tweets and comments, but in this case, where he's publicly crying, literally, about historical racism, I can't help but see the funny side.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  15. #1890
    Yeah, someone obviously wanted to play gotcha with the guy. I'm just glad social media and/or mobile phones with cameras weren't around when I was 18, saying and doing stupid shit nearly every day.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  16. #1891
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  17. #1892
    Step 1. Leave EU, making it harder to send refugees back to EU countries.

    Step 2. Complain EU isn't cooperating enough on refugees.

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/statu...71605356437504

    Missed a few steps in-between there, like sending jetskis out to deter refugee boats (the idea here that it's hard to rescue a dozen drowning people on one jetski), make plans to use a wave machine to push refugee dinghies back to France, pass a law making it illegal to rescue drowning people if you know they're refugees, and of course the classic try to pass a law where anyone responsible for drowning a refugee is immune from prosecution.

    #MEGA
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  18. #1893
    Today on "Boris": Boris attends a get together with his old newspaper chums, and gets asked about married life, to which he cracks that he's experiencing "buyer's remorse." The quote gets repeated in the New European, after which Boris' Director of Communications calls the NE and threatens to sue them. TLDR: They tell him to fuck off and the next day the PM's office reports that they deny the story but don't intend to sue (which is pretty much tantamount to admitting it's true and there's no basis for suing).

    Well played, Team Boris.

    https://twitter.com/hashtag/remorseg...=hashtag_click
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  19. #1894
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  20. #1895
    Goddamn Eurolibtards! Sending us a naked xmas tree after we saved their ass in WWII*

    https://twitter.com/mywestldn/status...56733723521025

    * Fun fact: The UK was days away from invading Norway when the Germans beat them to it. If we had packed our bags a bit sooner, Norway would now be sending a tree to Germany every xmas.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  21. #1896
    Lucky for the French they left the EU so they could exercise their sovereignty. Oh wait...

    https://twitter.com/BBCChrisMorris/s...68847331029000
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  22. #1897
    The Prime Minister of our great country, ladies and gentleman. Playing dress-up again.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  23. #1898
    I really don't understand why you look at that picture and think "I know who'll be interested in this, the three people on FTR who don't give a fuck about British politics, and the one British person who doesn't give a fuck about Boris".
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  24. #1899
    I don't even understand why it's interesting to you.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  25. #1900
    #HoboCop trending on twitter lol
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  26. #1901
    I mean, there's a potential scandal happening, possibly involving Boris, where MPs are taking cocaine in parliament, and you're talking about him dressing up as a cop.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  27. #1902
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I mean, there's a potential scandal happening, possibly involving Boris, where MPs are taking cocaine in parliament, and you're talking about him dressing up as a cop.
    When is there not a scandal going on? We're still on the xmas party scandal - so we'll have to clear that up before we get to the coke in HoP scandal.

    Oh, and yeah, nothing to see there


    https://twitter.com/i/status/1467909351545442312
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  28. #1903
    He looks pissed there. Not exactly a great example to set, but also not worthy of my outrage. I don't really give a toss about the xmas party "scandal" either. It's not worth getting upset about.

    If they're taking cocaine in parliament though that's a problem for me. I wouldn't care if it was in private, their business, but in the chamber where they decide that cocaine is illegal? Nah, that's outrageous. That's a resignable matter.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  29. #1904
    I do get why the xmas party issue is a problem for people. Most of the population did as they were told and stayed at home. I didn't though. I went to Mom's, saw my family, basically ignored the rules. It would be incredibly hypocritical of me to be outraged about anyone else doing their thing.

    You can only be pissed off about the xmas party thing if you're been 100% sticking to the rules. In which case, fair enough.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  30. #1905
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    He looks pissed there. Not exactly a great example to set, but also not worthy of my outrage.
    He's looks pissed, how? He looks hopped up and fidgety to me.

    Even if he's "only" drunk, most jobs you get fired for showing up at work drunk.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I don't really give a toss about the xmas party "scandal" either. It's not worth getting upset about.
    If I were someone whose relative was dying in hospital and I couldn't go see them because of the rules they set, I'd be pretty pissed to find out they were having parties at the same time. Even if I just had to cancel my own party I'd be pissed. Even just the idea that's what they did is fucking annoying.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  31. #1906
    He's looks pissed, how? He looks hopped up and fidgety to me.


    Even if he's "only" drunk, most jobs you get fired for showing up at work drunk.
    He looks like he's struggling to stand up. Coke doesn't have that effect.

    And people don't get fired for turning up drunk unless it affects their job, or they're a teacher or something like that. They tend to be warned, and offered counselling for alcoholism. It's not something I care about. Being drunk isn't illegal.

    If I were someone whose relative was dying in hospital...
    This is just the usual moral bullshit that people suffer from these days. Indignant outrage over something that is actually not worth being outraged over. I do understand why, when people didn't go to funerals and weddings, why they would be outraged. It's the "one rule for us, another rule for them" attitude. But ultimately, they just went to a party. I don't give a fuck.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  32. #1907
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This is just the usual moral bullshit that people suffer from these days. Indignant outrage over something that is actually not worth being outraged over.
    What is bullshit is making excuses for why it "doesn't matter" when it obviously does. The problem here is very clear and simple - asking the public to make sacrifices of their liberty while making exceptions for themselves. If that's not a moral issue I don't know what is.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I do understand why, when people didn't go to funerals and weddings, why they would be outraged. It's the "one rule for us, another rule for them" attitude. But ultimately, they just went to a party. I don't give a fuck.
    So you understand the moral objection I just mentioned, but you personally don't share it. Fine, whatever. Don't be angry. But don't complain that others are angry when you can easily articulate why they should be angry.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  33. #1908
    I choose not to waste emotional energy getting upset about people attending a party a year ago. Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not going to vote for anyone who tells the public to do one thing and then does precisely what they just told everyone else not to do. This kind of behaviour makes someone unvotable, but it's not worth me shouting on social media.

    It's the Dominic Cummings thing all over again. I didn't give a toss about him going for a drive, either, assuming he wasn't being a dirty corrupt little bastard doing dodgy deals with big pharma, anyway.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  34. #1909
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,646
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    The problem here is very clear and simple - asking the public to make sacrifices of their liberty while making exceptions for themselves. If that's not a moral issue I don't know what is.
    This just in: Politicians are making laws to curtail other people's behavior, but not their own.
    Film at 11:00.

    I'm not in disagreement that this behavior is outrageous.

    I'm calling BS on the notion that this one instance stands out above the literally 100% of other instances.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  35. #1910
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    This just in: Politicians are making laws to curtail other people's behavior, but not their own.
    Film at 11:00.
    They didn't make laws that specified they only applied to the public and not themselves. They made laws that applied to everyone, that severely limited everyone's freedoms, then broke them.



    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    I'm calling BS on the notion that this one instance stands out above the literally 100% of other instances.
    We're not talking about a member of government getting out of a parking ticket.

    They were having parties while they had the country in a lockdown. And the head of gov't was by all accounts at some of them. And it's not the first time this kind of thing has been found out. So there's a bit of a straw-camel's back thing going on here. People are sick of this shit happening over and over and over.

    Don't assume Ong and I are representative of the entire population of the UK either, as if 50% are outraged by this and 50% don't care. It's been in the news for 10 days straight now, so obviously it's striking a chord with people here in general.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  36. #1911
    Poop is right that we don't represent the population, but it's impossible to know if there's a majority who are outraged. Maybe the silent majority don't give a fuck, or at least don't care enough to vocalise their opinion. What's in the news is not a reflection of how the nation in general feels about a topic, it's how the media want us to feel about a topic.

    We'll find out how much people care when there's an election. Maybe people care more about economics than parties. I suspect that's why Labour never get close to power, because the majority don't trust them to manage the economy. Quite why people trust the Tories is another matter.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  37. #1912
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    What's in the news is not a reflection of how the nation in general feels about a topic, it's how the media want us to feel about a topic.
    There's different patterns of reporting that goes on though.

    When a story gets picked up by one newspaper and presented with a particular angle, or when a story gets picked up by two opposite-wing papers and presented from opposite angles, it's fair to say that that's the press trying to manipulate opinion (or alternatively, trying to reflect and/or reinforce the already-existing opinion of their readership).

    OTOH, when the same story gets reported in identical fashion in the entire press across the whole political spectrum, it's hard to argue they're all conspiring to go 1984 on us. More likely it's that they each recognise it's a story of broad interest and that public opinion is likely to be both strong and fairly universal. That's what a lot of these Tory scandal stories have been like, from Dominic Cummings to MPs holding sleazy second jobs, and now to this. Even the DM hammers the Tories on these things. And you can hardly argue they're trying to make people anti-Tory.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    We'll find out how much people care remember when there's an election.
    fyp. Generally, this is the problem. People's attitudes tend to be shaped more by "what are you promising me?" than "what did you do three years ago?"

    However, the party who's in power does change over time, and things like an endless calvalcade of scandals are the kinds of thing that make those changes happen.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  38. #1913
    Here's the press corps practising their responses to getting quizzed about the parties.

    https://www.itv.com/news/2021-12-07/...y-later-denied

    This isn't going away. At least not until they find a big stash of coke under the benches in parliament. Or Priti Patel shoots a refugee in the face with a spear gun. Or whatever the next scandal is.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  39. #1914
    Caught playing quizmaster during last year's xmas lockdown, after claiming he followed all the rules and knew nothing about any parties. Note the bin bag covering up the cctv.





    He's done. Bye bye Boris.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  40. #1915
    In b4 Ong argues Starmer would do the same thing if he were PM.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  41. #1916
    Isn't this on zoom?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  42. #1917
    He's still done. Two years of being an abso-fucking-lutely useless twat of a PM would be bad enough, but add the rule-breaking and corruption on top of it and even the French landing in Cornwall tomorrow wouldn't save his lard ass.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  43. #1918
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    In b4 Ong argues Starmer would do the same thing if he were PM.
    I doubt very much you'll pay the slightest bit of attention to Starmer if he ever sees the inside of 10 Downing Street. He'll be the next Biden. Nothing to see here.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  44. #1919
    If Starmer gets in, I'll be sure to post some more about that scandal where he gave his mum some land for a donkey sanctuary.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  45. #1920
    Boris threatens suspension of cancer treatment for people who don't get vaxed.

    But parties.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  46. #1921
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Boris threatens suspension of cancer treatment for people who don't get vaxed.

    But parties.

    You know if the NHS gets swamped with covid those cancer patients' treatment gets suspended anyways right?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  47. #1922
    How many people have died of the Omicron variant globally? How about cancer in that time?

    What do you think is a more serious threat to public health? Covid or cancer?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  48. #1923
    What is your actual problem with getting a vaccine? Too much trouble?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  49. #1924
    How is that even relevant to my question?

    What's more serious? Covid or cancer?

    As for your question, no it's not "too much trouble". I don't trust government, media or pharmaceutical companies. I'm surprised you do.

    One of two things is happening...

    1. The entire pandemic is a hoax,
    2. The pandemic is being exploited.

    Take your pick. Which one do you think is more likely? Or do you choose

    3. The virus is 100% natural and there's no exploitation from government.

    I'm undecided between 1 and 2, but I've ruled out 3. So that's why I'm not interested in the vaccine.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  50. #1925
    btw I use the word "hoax" in a looser sense. Like 9/11, which I believe to be an inside job rather than, idk, some CGI nonsense. By "hoax" I mean the narrative is false. So an artificial virus created for the purpose of vaccination corruption would fall into this category.

    I believe there is a virus, a "hoax" in the "not real" sense is not what I meant to imply.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  51. #1926
    Whether or not someone is making money off something has little to do with it being a good idea or not.

    Someone makes money when you buy a jug of milk. I don't hear you raising moral objections to buying milk.

    But, you're objecting to getting a free vaccine because someone else gets paid when you get your dose. Does not compute.

    Scientists are saying, and have proven beyond any reasonable doubt, that vaccines protect against infection and serious outcomes, including the covid vaccines. This is why vaccines exist in the first place.

    So your choice is to either take it and protect yourself and those you come in contact with, or refuse to take it and give up some of your priveleges. And frankly, if someone is too much of a paranoid to take a vaccine that's proven to be beneficial not just to you but to society at large, I have no problem with removing some of your priveleges.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  52. #1927
    But, you're objecting to getting a free vaccine because someone else gets paid when you get your dose. Does not compute.
    It's not about "someone getting paid". Remember when Cummings went to test his eyesight? At the time I was screaming he was doing dodgy government business with GSK but you brushed it off as tin hat stuff and proceeded to lap up the narrative that he was going for a family drive.

    This isn't about a doctor getting paid his salary. This is about corrupt businesses making billions if not trillions. And we have corrupt politicians and corrupt media driving this narrative. Your blind trust is perplexing, considering how aware you are that the government are indeed corrupt. That's what fear does. Control by fear is a tactic that power-hungry people have used for millennia, religion being a prime example.

    We're seeing freedoms being stripped across the board, under the guise of a health crisis, and you're saying "get the jab dickhead".

    So your choice is to either take it and protect yourself and those you come in contact with, or refuse to take it and give up some of your priveleges.
    Coming from the same person who hates the Tories, this is quite alarming to be honest. There's no critical thinking here whatsoever.

    Have the jab or effectively be under house arrest.

    Do you really not see how a corrupt, fascist government can exploit this? Why is this not the remotest concern for you?

    And frankly, if someone is too much of a paranoid to take a vaccine that's proven to be beneficial not just to you but to society at large, I have no problem with removing some of your priveleges.
    Like I say, it's perplexing that you don't share this paranoia. It's blind trust in people you don't trust. Crazy.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  53. #1928
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post

    This isn't about a doctor getting paid his salary. This is about corrupt businesses making billions if not trillions.
    They're selling a product that works. How much they should be making off it is another question, and quite orthogonal to whether or not your or I or anyone should accept the product. If they were selling snake oil you'd have a point.

    btw, just to put this in perspective, they've spent an order of magnitude less on the vax rollout for a product that works than they did on the test and trace system that doesn't work.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Your blind trust is perplexing,
    My trust isn't "blind," it's based on the fact that scientists are saying it's a good idea, scientists who dedicate their lives to knowing this stuff. If scientists were saying "well, this vaccine looks pretty dodgy, don't get it", I wouldn't.




    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    We're seeing freedoms being stripped across the board, under the guise of a health crisis, and you're saying "get the jab dickhead".
    You want the freedom to fail to do your part in a public health measure. That's like wanting the freedom to drive over the speed limit because you don't trust the gov't to set the correct limit.




    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Have the jab or effectively be under house arrest.

    Do you really not see how a corrupt, fascist government can exploit this? Why is this not the remotest concern for you?
    I accept that the purpose of this specific policy is for the greater public good. That doesn't mean I accept any or all of their protester-jailing, refugee-drowning, MP-slash-lobbyers, or other, fucked up policies.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Like I say, it's perplexing that you don't share this paranoia. It's blind trust in people you don't trust. Crazy.
    Like I say, I trust the scientists, not the gov't. When the two happen to agree, I'm still listening to the scientists. It's just that the gov't is actually listening to the scientists too that is unusual.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  54. #1929
    They're selling a product that works.
    This isn't a statement of fact. It's an opinion. Do you really believe that two jabs is not enough to fight Omicron but two jabs plus a booster is?

    How much they should be making off it is another question, and quite orthogonal to whether or not your or I or anyone should accept the product.
    Another opinion, and once even more clear. How much money a company makes from vaccines most certainly does factor into my decision. Let's just say for argument's sake it's a million pounds. Clearly this is economically unsustainable and would have much more severe impacts than simply not having the jab. So how much is too much?

    btw they should be making nothing from it. Zero profit. They can make money in lots of other ways, and indeed do so. This is not a critical aspect of their business model. But again, that's an opinion, not a fact.

    btw, just to put this in perspective, they've spent an order of magnitude less on the vax rollout for a product that works than they did on the test and trace system that doesn't work.
    Points out massive corruption, proceeds to argue in favour of government and pharmaceutical companies.

    My trust isn't "blind," it's based on the fact that scientists are saying it's a good idea, scientists who dedicate their lives to knowing this stuff. If scientists were saying "well, this vaccine looks pretty dodgy, don't get it", I wouldn't.
    This "trust the science" thing is very misguided. Science is often wrong. Science is not about fact. It's about understanding as best we can, which requires hypothesis, experiment, all these kind of things. And science is very often wrong, especially when conclusions are drawn prematurely. The science could be saying something completely different tomorrow.

    I trust the moral integrity of the vast majority of scientists and doctors. That's not the same as trusting the vaccine.

    You want the freedom to fail to do your part in a public health measure. That's like wanting the freedom to drive over the speed limit because you don't trust the gov't to set the correct limit.
    Nonsense. I want the freedom to decide what goes into my body. That's not the same as the freedom to go as fast as I can.

    Let's say there's a serious population decrease and the government legalises rape as a means to increase the population. You're ok with this, right? It's for the greater good, in fact it's a moral duty to be fucked, right?

    I accept that the purpose of this specific policy is for the greater public good.
    You just answered that for me.

    That doesn't mean I accept any or all of their protester-jailing, refugee-drowning, MP-slash-lobbyers, or other, fucked up policies.
    But you still trust them to make decisions based on the "greater good" when we both know they only make decisions that benefit themselves.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  55. #1930
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This isn't a statement of fact. It's an opinion.
    It's been proven to a scientific standard, a very high one. That's why they agree on it. I would reckon the likelihood of the vaccines being effective vs. not being effective is greater than a 10000:1 by this point. It's not really disputable.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Do you really believe that two jabs is not enough to fight Omicron but two jabs plus a booster is?
    On that score I don't think we have enough information yet. But I do believe that it's clear 3 jabs > 2 jabs, and how much better is the only question that remains.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Points out massive corruption, proceeds to argue in favour of government and pharmaceutical companies.
    Argues that if you disapprove with one action an entity has taken, you must therefore also disagree with everything they do, ever.




    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This "trust the science" thing is very misguided. Science is often wrong. Science is not about fact. It's about understanding as best we can, which requires hypothesis, experiment, all these kind of things. And science is very often wrong, especially when conclusions are drawn prematurely. The science could be saying something completely different tomorrow.
    I would say science is about reducing uncertainty. Sometimes that uncertainty is reduced so much that we can take it as a given. E.g., we can be sure enough of the basic laws of physics that we can build a bridge that won't collapse.

    Or, the uncertainty can remain high. We can't say right now whether string or putty theory or whatever physics theory is correct. We don't have enough info to do that.

    On the vaccines' effectiveness, I think we're much closer to the bridge-building end of uncertainty than we are to the string-theory one. And the epidemiologists and virologists that I respect to know the topic better than I do, agree with that assessment, and have the evidence to back it up.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I trust the moral integrity of the vast majority of scientists and doctors. That's not the same as trusting the vaccine.
    It is when the scientists and doctors are saying you should trust the vaccine.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Nonsense. I want the freedom to decide what goes into my body. That's not the same as the freedom to go as fast as I can.
    Your freedom is in competition with my freedom to go out and not have to risk infection from some numpty who won't get vaxxed. It's been decided in most countries that the latter freedom has higher priority. Sorry mate.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    But you still trust them to make decisions based on the "greater good" when we both know they only make decisions that benefit themselves.
    Of course, that is almost always their calculation. It just happens that they are making a decision that benefits themselves here, but that also benefits the rest of us. It's rare, but it does happen.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  56. #1931
    It's been proven to a scientific standard, a very high one. That's why they agree on it. I would reckon the likelihood of the vaccines being effective vs. not being effective is greater than a 10000:1 by this point. It's not really disputable.
    The vaccine might well be effective against the original virus, but there's no evidence yet it's effective against variants like Omicron. In fact the government had basically said it isn't.

    On that score I don't think we have enough information yet.
    So you're very much aware of this, yet you still tell me to get jabbed or stay home.

    But I do believe that it's clear 3 jabs > 2 jabs,
    Can you provide examples of other viruses that require three vaccinations? Not saying they don't exist, but it'll be interesting to look into them.

    Argues that if you disapprove with one action an entity has taken, you must therefore also disagree with everything they do, ever.
    This is kinda like "but Hitler's art was pretty good".

    I would say science is about reducing uncertainty.
    Sure, but reducing that uncertainty takes time, and that's not something we've applied in this case like we would other vaccines. Of course I understand why that's the case, but that should reduce confidence.

    It is when the scientists and doctors are saying you should trust the vaccine.
    Put yourself in their shoes for a minute. What options do they have? If they speak out about their concerns they put their reputation and career on the line. Who's telling me to trust the vaccine? Which scientists and doctors? The ones the media give airtime to, that's who. The ones who speak out don't get media coverage, certainly not positive media coverage.

    Your freedom is in competition with my freedom to go out and not have to risk infection from some numpty who won't get vaxxed.
    Your risk of infection is probably higher from a vaccinated person who thinks they are "clean". Complacency sets in when people think like this. And if you had any faith in the vaccine, you wouldn't need to concern yourself about infection. The fact you're worried about me demonstrates that you don't have faith in the vaccine. So you don't trust the science, do you?

    It just happens that they are making a decision that benefits themselves here, but that also benefits the rest of us.
    I don't believe this for one single second.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  57. #1932
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    The vaccine might well be effective against the original virus, but there's no evidence yet it's effective against variants like Omicron.
    It's less effective against variants vs. the original strain it was designed for. That's standard for any vaccine.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    In fact the government had basically said it isn't.
    They're saying 3 jabs > 2 jabs. You can take their 75% vs. 0% numbers as preliminary (and I do), but 3>2 jabs is also standard vax science.




    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    So you're very much aware of this, yet you still tell me to get jabbed or stay home.
    Yes.





    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Can you provide examples of other viruses that require three vaccinations? Not saying they don't exist, but it'll be interesting to look into them.
    A lot of vaxxes' protection wanes with time. This isn't disputed. The booster jab re-invigorates that protection. Moreover, when the booster mixes one vax with another (e.g., your first two were AZ, and third is Pfizer), the benefits are greater.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Sure, but reducing that uncertainty takes time, and that's not something we've applied in this case like we would other vaccines. Of course I understand why that's the case, but that should reduce confidence.
    How many millions of vaccinations and millions of covid cases and hundreds of thousands of deaths and hospitalitazations would they need to analyse for you to be satisfied the vaccines reduce risk of infection and serious outcomes?



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Your risk of infection is probably higher from a vaccinated person who thinks they are "clean".
    Your risk of making things up to support a weak argument seems a lot higher.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    And if you had any faith in the vaccine, you wouldn't need to concern yourself about infection. The fact you're worried about me demonstrates that you don't have faith in the vaccine.
    See above.

    I don't believe the vaccine makes you immune, and no-one ever said it did. Reducing risk != eliminating risk.




    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I don't believe this for one single second.
    Believe what you want about their motives, it doesn't change the fact it's a good idea to get as much of the pop. vaxxed as possible.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  58. #1933
    It's less effective against variants vs. the original strain it was designed for. That's standard for any vaccine.
    So the vaccine becomes less effective with time.

    They're saying 3 jabs > 2 jabs.
    Technically correct, because they're actually saying 2 jabs is not enough, but 3 jabs is. So you're right, if somewhat lacking in important context.

    Boris - "And I’m afraid it is now clear that two doses of vaccine are simply not enough to give the level of protection we all need."

    A lot of vaxxes' protection wanes with time.
    Sure. But these covid vaccines are not new and improved vaccines, they're just the same ones being topped up. The vaccines are not being improved to fight new variants. If they were' they'd be telling us to wait for the booster until it's been proven effective against Omicron.

    How many millions of vaccinations and millions of covid cases and hundreds of thousands of deaths and hospitalitazations would they need to analyse for you to be satisfied the vaccines reduce risk of infection and serious outcomes?
    Loaded question. You're putting all your faith in what you're being told by government and media here.

    And besides, I'm not actually disputing the effectiveness of the vaccine with regards to the original virus. I'm disputing the need for everyone to be vaccinated at any cost.

    Believe what you want about their motives, it doesn't change the fact it's a good idea to get as much of the pop. vaxxed as possible.
    I'm not going to dispute this either, but it simply has to be a choice. And when you're saying "you can choose to stay at home and not have a life" that is not a choice for the vast majority of people. I'm in a very small minority of people that doesn't give a fuck about not going to the pub or the football or whatever. They're also not saying that these restrictions will be over when the pandemic is over. So how long do you think unvaccinated people should be told to stay at home for? Forever?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  59. #1934
    Yeah, but we got £13b pounds worth of sovereignty in October. Take that, Eurolibtards!

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ade-in-october
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  60. #1935
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,254
    Location
    Finding my game
    Most vaccinations require boosters. Flu shots (against coronaviruses) are taken annually, same with almost all childhood vaccinations.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  61. #1936
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    Most vaccinations require boosters. Flu shots (against coronaviruses) are taken annually, same with almost all childhood vaccinations.
    I think the influenza virus is a different type of virus than coronaviruses (which are generally associated with colds, not 'flus), and the reason 'flu shots are yearly is because there is a different strain that predominates each year, and the vaccine gets customised to that strain.

    There are certain vaxxes that are good for life because the immune system has a better memory for certain antibodies than for others. Coronaviruses are a type of virus the immune system has a poor memory for, and this is why we benefit from having frequent boosters. It's also why you never become fully immune to colds the way you do to, say, chicken pox or mumps; even after multiple infections your immune system does not remember colds. But chicken pox or mumps it remembers for life, so you get them once and that's it.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  62. #1937
    Big Pharma trying to force more life-saving medicine on us.

    https://twitter.com/devisridhar/stat...03247053307906
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  63. #1938
    Does anyone else find it stunning that a Tory hater has turned into a cheerleader for Big Pharma?

    I mean fuck me, they say "hooray for us" and poop is all "hooray for Big Pharma".

    Pharmaceutical companies is as filthy as capitalism gets. You're a socialist aren't you? How in the fuck is it me saying they shouldn't make any profit? How is it me saying they can't be trusted to act in the best interests of the public? You should be saying it.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  64. #1939
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,254
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    I think the influenza virus is a different type of virus than coronaviruses (which are generally associated with colds, not 'flus), and the reason 'flu shots are yearly is because there is a different strain that predominates each year, and the vaccine gets customised to that strain.
    Ah yes yes true true, brain fart. Many of the common colds are caused by coronaviruses, influenza by the influenza viruses. My point was just that vaccinations that are good for life are rather the exception than the norm, most of them require boosters. Diphtheria, polio, tetanus, hep b, measles, mumps, rubella...
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  65. #1940
    ^^ At least that's what scientists (or as Ong calls them, "Big Pharma") wants us to think.

    Also, lol at someone's head exploding that a lefty supports public health measures.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  66. #1941
    Hand hygeine, wat??? Obviously Big Soap has got to this guy.

    https://twitter.com/DrTedros/status/1470836835647725581
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  67. #1942
    Also, lol at someone's head exploding that a lefty supports public health measures.
    You're supporting a capitalist company corruptly profiting from a health crisis.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  68. #1943
    I'm comfortable with the financial incentives at play with vaccines to a large extent. Competition should be a good thing for quality and price.

    Pfizer and Moderna are more expensive because they're more effective. AZ and J&J are (or were until recently) offering covid vaccines at cost price or close to it. Pfizer and Moderna were selling at cost price to the developing world.

    Pfizer and Moderna have both have done very well out of the vaccine. In both cases, the profit ends up back in the government coffers pretty quickly in state and federal taxes, employers and employees taxes, taxes on dividends and taxes on the pension pots those dividends are paid into.

    What I'm not comfortable with is pharma exploiting a monopoly position and offering perverse incentives to purchasing decision makers, like we've seen with the opioid problem in the US.
  69. #1944
    Apparently 85% of unvaxxed people in the UK are ethnic minorities.

    But voter ID for elections discriminates against these very same people apparently.

    Nothing to see here.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  70. #1945
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,646
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    I think the influenza virus is a different type of virus than coronaviruses (which are generally associated with colds, not 'flus), and the reason 'flu shots are yearly is because there is a different strain that predominates each year, and the vaccine gets customised to that strain.
    Influenza, rhinovirus, and coronavirus are 3 different viruses.

    Coronavirus is not some kind of cold, it's a different virus. Some of the symptoms overlap with symptoms of the cold. The association is based on symptoms, not on the actual virus itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    There are certain vaxxes that are good for life because the immune system has a better memory for certain antibodies than for others. Coronaviruses are a type of virus the immune system has a poor memory for, and this is why we benefit from having frequent boosters. It's also why you never become fully immune to colds the way you do to, say, chicken pox or mumps; even after multiple infections your immune system does not remember colds. But chicken pox or mumps it remembers for life, so you get them once and that's it.
    This is incorrect, as I understand it. The issue isn't memory, it's mutation. You're immune to every cold you've ever caught, but the rhinovirus mutates at a decent pace and tends to be mostly unrecognizable by your immune system within about 10 - 18 months after your last cold.

    You are immune for life to everything you've ever developed an immunity to. That cold you got in '97? Immune. That different cold you got in '98? Sill immune.

    The immune system doesn't have a memory; you have a memory. Your immune system is a bunch of unthinking chemicals and chemical processes.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  71. #1946
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,646
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    Ah yes yes true true, brain fart. Many of the common colds are caused by coronaviruses, influenza by the influenza viruses. My point was just that vaccinations that are good for life are rather the exception than the norm, most of them require boosters. Diphtheria, polio, tetanus, hep b, measles, mumps, rubella...
    See above. Coronavirus is not rhinovirus. COVID-19 is not a form of the cold.

    Also, Vaccines are good for life against the thing you were vaccinated against. If that thing mutates to the point where your vaccine is no longer relevant, then that can certainly happen.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  72. #1947
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    The issue isn't memory, it's mutation.
    Not how I understand it. Antibodies are specific to specific proteins on the virus. Not all antibody instructions or blueprints or whatever you want to call it ("memory" in lay terms) stick around in your system for a lifetime. Very simplified secondhand version of what I heard, so take with pinch of salt.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  73. #1948
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    See above. Coronavirus is not rhinovirus. COVID-19 is not a form of the cold.
    There's more than one type of coronavirus. They've been around a long time. Covid-19, just like SARS and MERS, belongs to the same family of viruses (coronaviruses) as the ones that can cause the common cold. It's just potentially a lot nastier.

    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/gene...formation.html

    Rhinoviruses also cause cold-type symptoms, but afaik have never mutated into anything deadly the way coronaviruses sometimes do.

    Influenza causes 'flu. The 'flu virus mutation also vary from relatively mild to Spanish-flu-we're-fucked intensity.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  74. #1949
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,254
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    See above. Coronavirus is not rhinovirus. COVID-19 is not a form of the cold.
    "Well over 200 virus strains are implicated in causing the common cold, with rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, adenoviruses and enteroviruses being the most common."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_cold
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus#Common_cold"
    Last edited by CoccoBill; 12-16-2021 at 08:56 AM.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  75. #1950
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,646
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    There's more than one type of coronavirus. They've been around a long time. Covid-19, just like SARS and MERS, belongs to the same family of viruses (coronaviruses) as the ones that can cause the common cold. It's just potentially a lot nastier.

    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/gene...formation.html

    Rhinoviruses also cause cold-type symptoms, but afaik have never mutated into anything deadly the way coronaviruses sometimes do.

    Influenza causes 'flu. The 'flu virus mutation also vary from relatively mild to Spanish-flu-we're-fucked intensity.
    Minor correction. COVID-19 is not a virus, it's the collected symptoms of the virus replicating and the physiological consequences thereof.
    COVID19 = Coronavirus Disease (discovered in) 2019.

    The virus is SARS-CoV2 (Sudden Acute Respiratory Syndrome - Coronavirus 2).
    The first SARS wasn't too, too long ago, and was a big deal in China, but was not taken seriously in the West.


    Pointless link that has nothing to do with the statement you made is pointless.


    Thanks to you and cocco for the similar correction that the cold is a collection of symptoms and not the rhinovirus that causes those symptoms.

    I hadn't linked the fact that 2 different viruses with similar symptoms may be bannered under the symptoms as causing the same disease.

    In fact, having read cocco's links, I'm actually shocked that so many different things cause what I've considered 1 thing. TIL.
    Last edited by MadMojoMonkey; 12-16-2021 at 11:59 AM.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •