Senin, 31 Januari 2011
New Balls!
"iTalk" has been at it again - a full blown attack on George Osbourne in the Daily Mirror. Let's look at what he had to say :
Well, that's all very well, Binky, and it makes a nice soundbite. Where was your government when the shit was hitting the fan? Oh, out spending money we hadn't got because you emptied the coffers. You created this mess. You were responsible or we would not have the scale of problems we have, so to accuse the coalition of not trying to sort it shows a distinct lack of grip on reality.What matters most when times are hard is whether the government is trying to shield you from the storm, or leaving you to fend for yourself.
When Osborne or his Lib Dem lackeys say: “It’s all Labour’s fault, we inherited a mess” .... what they’re really saying to the British people is: “We’re not responsible: don’t ask us for help.”
And "LibDem lackeys"? That's just downright insulting. Name calling is the last resort of an immature mind.
There goes that grip on reality again. Labour destroyed regulation of the banks. Balls himself was the very man calling for a 'light touch' in dealing with financial regulation. The regulation Labour tried to tighten was on small and medium size business who were destroyed by a sea of red tape. It was this red tape that Cameron was referring to, not the banks. Labour let the banks get away with murder. In fact, the first thing Tony Blair did when he left office was to join the board of a merchant bank.
They forget that every time the Labour government tried to tighten regulation, it was the Tories who protested we were strangling enterprise with red tape, and David Cameron who accused Gordon Brown of being The Great Regulator.
If you define 'too much' as money we don't actually have, then that's exactly what Labour did. Cutting spending and raising taxes is the only way to reduce a structural deficit.
That way they can justify drastic cuts in those services in order to bring down the deficit, and say it is all Labour’s fault.
Cameron has been forced to match some of Labour's spending plans in some areas because this is a COALITION, Ed. The LibDem 'lackeys' do actually have some say and are actually more left wing than the Conservatives. It's called prioritisation and compromise, something you seem to know little about.
You didn't regulate the banks properly, then you had to bail them out. The money you threw at the economy was to buy votes. Spending actually did make the deficit worse. That's not even economics - it's called basic housekeeping.
On top of that, we cut VAT for a year, introduced the car scrappage scheme, funded apprenticeships and job creation schemes, and subsidised mortgages – all to stop people losing their jobs, homes and businesses.
That is what caused the deficit, not spending on schools, hospitals and the police.
Actually, the Coalition say that we need to sort it out. The economy was recovering, but not strongly and interest rates at historic lows has crippled the very people who have the disposable income to boost the economy - people living on their investments. It has also helped inflation to rise. It appears we learnt nothing from the Japanese experience of punitively low interest rates.
In reality, they inherited an economy which was beginning to recover strongly, with unemployment falling, interest rates at historic lows, and the public finances better than the Treasury’s forecasts
And just because the public finances outperform the Treasury forecasts doesn't necessarily mean that they are performing well, does it?
Bank lending has strangled investment and caused job losses. That includes the banks you bought and then failed to control. Low interest rates and taxes introduced by you have cause infation to rise, coupled with the false readings in the figures when VAT went back to 17.5% - and let's not forget that you were intending to raise it to 19%. Oh, and then there's those fuel tax rises you introduced. They had no effect on inflation, did they?
You can read his full article by clicking here, but in the words of the song "You say it best when you say nothing at all"...
New Balls!
"iTalk" has been at it again - a full blown attack on George Osbourne in the Daily Mirror. Let's look at what he had to say :
Well, that's all very well, Binky, and it makes a nice soundbite. Where was your government when the shit was hitting the fan? Oh, out spending money we hadn't got because you emptied the coffers. You created this mess. You were responsible or we would not have the scale of problems we have, so to accuse the coalition of not trying to sort it shows a distinct lack of grip on reality.
When Osborne or his Lib Dem lackeys say: “It’s all Labour’s fault, we inherited a mess” .... what they’re really saying to the British people is: “We’re not responsible: don’t ask us for help.”
And "LibDem lackeys"? That's just downright insulting. Name calling is the last resort of an immature mind.
There goes that grip on reality again. Labour destroyed regulation of the banks. Balls himself was the very man calling for a 'light touch' in dealing with financial regulation. The regulation Labour tried to tighten was on small and medium size business who were destroyed by a sea of red tape. It was this red tape that Cameron was referring to, not the banks. Labour let the banks get away with murder. In fact, the first thing Tony Blair did when he left office was to join the board of a merchant bank.
They forget that every time the Labour government tried to tighten regulation, it was the Tories who protested we were strangling enterprise with red tape, and David Cameron who accused Gordon Brown of being The Great Regulator.
If you define 'too much' as money we don't actually have, then that's exactly what Labour did. Cutting spending and raising taxes is the only way to reduce a structural deficit.
That way they can justify drastic cuts in those services in order to bring down the deficit, and say it is all Labour’s fault.
Cameron has been forced to match some of Labour's spending plans in some areas because this is a COALITION, Ed. The LibDem 'lackeys' do actually have some say and are actually more left wing than the Conservatives. It's called prioritisation and compromise, something you seem to know little about.
You didn't regulate the banks properly, then you had to bail them out. The money you threw at the economy was to buy votes. Spending actually did make the deficit worse. That's not even economics - it's called basic housekeeping.
On top of that, we cut VAT for a year, introduced the car scrappage scheme, funded apprenticeships and job creation schemes, and subsidised mortgages – all to stop people losing their jobs, homes and businesses.
That is what caused the deficit, not spending on schools, hospitals and the police.
Actually, the Coalition say that we need to sort it out. The economy was recovering, but not strongly and interest rates at historic lows has crippled the very people who have the disposable income to boost the economy - people living on their investments. It has also helped inflation to rise. It appears we learnt nothing from the Japanese experience of punitively low interest rates.
In reality, they inherited an economy which was beginning to recover strongly, with unemployment falling, interest rates at historic lows, and the public finances better than the Treasury’s forecasts
And just because the public finances outperform the Treasury forecasts doesn't necessarily mean that they are performing well, does it?
Bank lending has strangled investment and caused job losses. That includes the banks you bought and then failed to control. Low interest rates and taxes introduced by you have cause infation to rise, coupled with the false readings in the figures when VAT went back to 17.5% - and let's not forget that you were intending to raise it to 19%. Oh, and then there's those fuel tax rises you introduced. They had no effect on inflation, did they?
You can read his full article by clicking here, but in the words of the song "You say it best when you say nothing at all"...
Minggu, 30 Januari 2011
Easter is coming!
Once in a while, it is good to unearth a story that reveals the true meaning of the christian religion...
Scottish artist Ian Moir has come up with a great way to commemorate Good Friday - he plans to parade a dead rabbit through the streets of Dunfermiline while dressed as a jester and then crucify it!
This is aparently to highlight the "crass commercialisation of Christmas and Easter" and is, of course, nothing whatsoever to do with tasteless self publicity.
Needless to say, the good and the great are up in arms :
Father Michael Henesy said: "I think it will offend a lot of people. It's trivialising the crucifixion.". I shouldn't think the rabbit's too keen either, Mike!
An animal charity commented : "Using the carcass of an innocent rabbit does nothing to encourage reflection about Jesus's message of love and compassion." This is true. It's the exact opposite - but that's the whole point.
Scottish SPCA Chief Superintendent Mike Flynn said: "It is totally tasteless." But nailing a bloke to a cross is OK?
Mr. Moir replied, "It's unfortunate that Christmas and Easter have more to do with boosting the economy than with the birth and death of Jesus. Although I am not a Christian, I find myself repulsed by the rampant commercialism." I think the point is that Christians are even more repulsed by it, aren't they? Well, if not, they should be...
Well this might be offensive, but I could suggest something worse. How about force feeding chocolate to a live animal until it bloats itself to death? Oh no, hang on! - That's called giving the kids Easter eggs...
Easter is coming!
Once in a while, it is good to unearth a story that reveals the true meaning of the christian religion...
Scottish artist Ian Moir has come up with a great way to commemorate Good Friday - he plans to parade a dead rabbit through the streets of Dunfermiline while dressed as a jester and then crucify it!
This is aparently to highlight the "crass commercialisation of Christmas and Easter" and is, of course, nothing whatsoever to do with tasteless self publicity.
Needless to say, the good and the great are up in arms :
Father Michael Henesy said: "I think it will offend a lot of people. It's trivialising the crucifixion.". I shouldn't think the rabbit's too keen either, Mike!
An animal charity commented : "Using the carcass of an innocent rabbit does nothing to encourage reflection about Jesus's message of love and compassion." This is true. It's the exact opposite - but that's the whole point.
Scottish SPCA Chief Superintendent Mike Flynn said: "It is totally tasteless." But nailing a bloke to a cross is OK?
Mr. Moir replied, "It's unfortunate that Christmas and Easter have more to do with boosting the economy than with the birth and death of Jesus. Although I am not a Christian, I find myself repulsed by the rampant commercialism." I think the point is that Christians are even more repulsed by it, aren't they? Well, if not, they should be...
Well this might be offensive, but I could suggest something worse. How about force feeding chocolate to a live animal until it bloats itself to death? Oh no, hang on! - That's called giving the kids Easter eggs...
Sabtu, 29 Januari 2011
5 Langkah Mudah Untuk Menggoda Wanita
Brooo… ternyata menggoda wanita itu ada seni nya loch… bukan asal menggoda aja… salah salah nanti si wanita bukanya tertarik dengan kalian malah jadi ill feel ngeliat kalian… kalian bisa menggunakan tipz and trikz berikut inimenurut eHow, ada beberapa cara sederhana agar kalian dapat menarik hati mereka melalui panca indra.HidungPercaya ngak kalo wanita itu mampu menilai seorang pria berdasarkan
Masker Untuk Si Kulit Kering
Masker untuk Kulit Wajah KeringKering bukan berarti tanpa masalah loch.... Jenis kulit ini termasuk yang susah susah gampang dirawat, karena bila anda tidak rajin merawatnya kulit anda akan cepat berkeriput.Jenis kulit ini biasanya berpori-pori kecil dan sedikit besisik. Jenis kulit ini lebih mudah teriritasi dan lebih banyak memiliki flek-flek hitam dibandingkan dengan jenis kulit normal dan
"Oh, yes it does..."
Take a good look at the above picture because it contravenes the Geneva Convention!
"Oh, no it doesn't..." I hear you cry. Well, sorry but I'm afraid that it does!
Take a good look at Nurse Poltis - that's the one on the left in case you can't work it out for yourself. The Red Cross emblems on her uniform were changed to green crosses after the British Red Cross informed the theatre it was breaking the law and could face prosecution.
Unauthorised use of the emblem violates the Geneva Conventions Act 1957.
The British Red Cross said it had contacted the Pavilion Theatre over the use of a red cross on the nurse's costume in the pantomime.
All I can say is that it's a shame they've got fuck all better to do...
"Oh, yes it does..."
Take a good look at the above picture because it contravenes the Geneva Convention!
"Oh, no it doesn't..." I hear you cry. Well, sorry but I'm afraid that it does!
Take a good look at Nurse Poltis - that's the one on the left in case you can't work it out for yourself. The Red Cross emblems on her uniform were changed to green crosses after the British Red Cross informed the theatre it was breaking the law and could face prosecution.
Unauthorised use of the emblem violates the Geneva Conventions Act 1957.
The British Red Cross said it had contacted the Pavilion Theatre over the use of a red cross on the nurse's costume in the pantomime.
All I can say is that it's a shame they've got fuck all better to do...
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)