wow, he put that well.
though i have to say, i hear his voice and all i can think of is him covered in dirt going on about turnips.
(
miss fortunate everyone you knew was sniffing glue on, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 15:47,
Reply)
For me, before I had even heard of Baldrick, there was
'Odysseus: The Greatest Hero Of Them All'
(, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 15:52, Reply)
Yup
but's that another story
(
The Scrunt PA to Miss F CEO of Tropicana, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 15:55,
Reply)
He reads the Discworld audio tapes
As such it's kind of odd hearing Granny Weatherwax raging about bankers.
(
Extinct Jesus Dossier BRB...gotta penis..., Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:23,
Reply)
Yay Luton!
(
redazril pcmechanic 4ver in ar harts, goodnite sweet angle,, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 15:54,
Reply)
The next question was
"Does anyone on the panel have a cunning plan which could get us out of this financial mess?"
(
monkeon schmonkeon www.monkeon.co.uk, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 16:09,
Reply)
Wow!
He tore them a new one!
I think it's pretty simple, really, they know we can't do anything about it, so they don't have to give a shit and can just do whatever they like, and have a high old time on our money without needing to do fuck all in return.
Kinda the same reasoning as your average chav, really.
(
WiL Pantheist Bi Polar Polyamoric Pansexual, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 16:16,
Reply)
I think that was the case but now the banks are finding themselves in a tricky spot
They're inner dealings are getting more and more exposed and I sense a "Leveson" style inquiry coming for them in the next year.
They've made the mistake of pissing off Mervyn King.
The bank of England can make things very uncomfortable for them.
Adding these two situations together and mixing that with a more militant share holdership in our banks I think we're going to see some interesting things.
(
Amadeus I care not for your thoughts on grammer, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 16:38,
Reply)
Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Oh oh oh Amadeus.
Come on, rock me Amadeus.
(
Tab Hunter You used to call me sadness...., Sun 1 Jul 2012, 16:54,
Reply)
Well that's about 2 years free of falco ruined!
(
Amadeus I care not for your thoughts on grammer, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 16:59,
Reply)
Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Oh oh oh Amadeus.
Come on, rock me Amadeus. You terrible comment deleter.
(
Tab Hunter You used to call me sadness...., Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:02,
Reply)
Oh oh OH oh oh, ohohoho, oh oh OH oh oh, ohohoho, oh oh OH oh oh, ohohoho, oh..
COME ON N ROCK ME AMADEUS!!!11!!
*rocks*
(
WiL Pantheist Bi Polar Polyamoric Pansexual, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:04,
Reply)
*instrumental break*
Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Oh oh oh Amadeus.
COME ON, ROCK ME AMADEUS!!!
(
Tab Hunter You used to call me sadness...., Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:06,
Reply)
Oh you pair of scamps..... *mutters*
You can make amends by pointing me in the direction of a good source of sheet music in PDF format.
In particular "a whiter share of pale"
(
Amadeus I care not for your thoughts on grammer, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:29,
Reply)
...That is a classic tune.
(
Turquoise Hexagon Sun has just dropped acid on, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:33,
Reply)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVikZ8Oe_XA
Reminds me a bit of Faith No More's 'Epic', vocally.
(
Turquoise Hexagon Sun has just dropped acid on, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:36,
Reply)
Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Amadeus, Oh oh oh Amadeus.
Come on, rock me Amadeus. This is my new thing. Do you like my new thing?
(
Tab Hunter You used to call me sadness...., Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:36,
Reply)
#Key change!
Yes, I'm going to trawl through some 80's classics now. I think 'Vienna' might be next.
(
Turquoise Hexagon Sun has just dropped acid on, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:37,
Reply)
This means nothing to me
(
WiL Pantheist Bi Polar Polyamoric Pansexual, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:41,
Reply)
Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh, Vienna!
Tune.
(
Turquoise Hexagon Sun has just dropped acid on, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:43,
Reply)
Ahhhhhh from the days when lyrics really meant something!
;)
(
WiL Pantheist Bi Polar Polyamoric Pansexual, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:29,
Reply)
Its not the banks, it's the fucking government that lets them do it!
FFS!
(, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:44, Reply)
Don't be daft,
"the government let me do it" isn't an excuse for anything.
(
Moon Girl Technologies don't take my word for anything, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:49,
Reply)
wtf are you serious?
(
Moon Girl Technologies don't take my word for anything, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:56,
Reply)
yes
it's up to the government to regulate them. Otherwise, if they do what they do, and continue to have customers who don't care either way, why stop?
you can still buy cigarettes, does it make every newsagent in the land an immoral monster for selling a (likely) lethal and (definitely) addictive drug? no, because they are well within their rights to do it, until a government makes it illegal, or regulates their behaviour until they stop.
(, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:02, Reply)
Why stop?
Because it's immoral, that's why. It's that simple. If you have power, you have responsibility, and if you shit people over you're morally culpable whether you found a legal loophole or not.
The government may also be at fault for not regulating this or that, but they can hardly be expected to foresee every possible abuse, and even if the government is at fault, that doesn't mean that the bankers aren't also at fault.
Or let me use a really graphic allusion. If it were legal to stamp on babies, it would still be wrong to stamp on babies. The law is not, and should not be, the only guide to behaviour. For most people it isn't, because most people aren't psychopaths, which is nice, otherwise any attempt at government would be utterly futile. At some point you have to be able to trust people to conduct themselves civilly.
(
Moon Girl Technologies don't take my word for anything, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:09,
Reply)
AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HA HA!
you mental.
(
Tab Hunter You used to call me sadness...., Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:12,
Reply)
Have I entered the twilight zone?
(
Moon Girl Technologies don't take my word for anything, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:14,
Reply)
so why apply it to banks
and not sellers of cigarettes or alcohol?
and anyway, who's morals exactly are we talking about here? yours? mine? whose? how was it decided? where is it written?
(, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:14, Reply)
I'd apply it to everyone,
I think the tobacco industry is morally culpable and they should stop it. But regulating it away would cause a shitstorm because there are too many addicts who think they are entitled to it, so it's not expedient.
Whose morals exactly? Hmm, well, presumably if you think the government SHOULD regulate them somehow, YOURS.
(
Moon Girl Technologies don't take my word for anything, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:16,
Reply)
if you really think
that Banks are going to change their ways because we all say that they are not being very nice and they should jolly well stop it, you really do need to get a grip
(, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:21, Reply)
no I don't think that,
but it doesn't make them blameless, does it? They're not robots or animals or children, they are adult human beings and as such are morally culpable for their actions.
(
Moon Girl Technologies don't take my word for anything, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:23,
Reply)
if they are acting within the law, then yes, they are 'blameless'
all this shite does is lessen the responsibility of the only body that can actually do anything about it.
Take tax avoidance, for example. Jimmy Carr avoids some tax, Cameron come s out and says 'well, its immoral, the terrible man!', when instead, that cunt should be closing the loophole that lets it happen, because that's his fucking job! but no, the idiot masses wander around tutting and nothing changes.
(, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:33, Reply)
Look I'm not saying "don't regulate"
of course the government has to regulate or some people will take advantage. But no, nobody is "blameless" if they do something immoral just because they can get away with it.
Otherwise, right, answer me this, why should anyone pay any attention to the law other than to avoid the punishment? Where does the law get its authority from? Here you are saying "that cunt should do this or that," why does moral responsibility apply to him and not to everybody else?
If something is morally wrong, yes it should be illegal. But if it's illegal, that doesn't make it right, otherwise how do we decide what laws to make? It has to be immoral first, and illegal second, otherwise all law is a non-starter.
(
Moon Girl Technologies don't take my word for anything, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:40,
Reply)
I'm too tired
and you're too stupid, goodnight
APOLOGIES: I'm tired and drunk, and this will just go around in circles.
I really need to sleep, left my original impolite comment up, because if I'm being and arsehole, I should suffer the consequences and not be a lame arsehole and delete the comment
(, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:43, Reply)
Hey Ginge, arguing with idiots/mentals on the internet is as pointless as engaging religious nutters.
Don't engage- it's not worth the brain-ache.
(
Tab Hunter You used to call me sadness...., Sun 1 Jul 2012, 19:10,
Reply)
Surely they're both to blame.
The Banks clearly performed morally deficient actions and profited by them (and have done so continuously). Meanwhile any government has basically tried to work with it and not wholly oppose them, most of the time seemingly hoping any controversy caused by them will disappear eventually or sometimes trying to ignore any problems for the most part. Although some attempts at interference from government has come into play recently it certainly hasn't curtailed any of the banks' actions. Personally I'm curious if they ever would fully go for that and how that hypothetical regulation would work.
Edit: And outside of any objections to the tangibility of morality, you can hardly say that the recent crises have been created solely by the government and not bankers working dodgily.
(
Christian's Bolt and Ski, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:39,
Reply)
Well said
It's like they've forgotten how not to be cunts.
(
Extinct Jesus Dossier BRB...gotta penis..., Sun 1 Jul 2012, 19:41,
Reply)
protip:
"bankers" doesn't work as a generic term.
(
JamTallons Sokath, his eyes uncovered!, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 22:27,
Reply)
Well it is kinda like the whole way our economy functions and therefore the basis of everything the government could ever stand for
So let's face it, how exactly do you do anything to them they could give a fuck about? Not use them? Fine them? They are our money, they are the economy, they are everything everything else rests upon, so nobodies gonna say 'Get it right or we'll go someplace else!' or whatever are they?
Even the ruling classes have to bow to the folks who own all the money, in fact, one's pretty much the other in a lot of ways, so when there's nobody higher, then y'know, what do you do if they decide to fuck us all for shits n giggles?
You say, 'How much of your stinky cock must our arses take till you are happy again oh masters!?' I guess...
(
WiL Pantheist Bi Polar Polyamoric Pansexual, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 17:59,
Reply)
exactly
the consumer is pretty powerless, so governments must regulate
(, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:06, Reply)
Bollocks is the consumer powerless.
The consumer is apathetic, is what he is. Largely because he's been sold the lemon of identifying as "a consumer" and thinks that putting himself in the position of having to go without a new television would be terrible.
(
Moon Girl Technologies don't take my word for anything, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:12,
Reply)
I guess the only real threat you could give them by way of any consequence they could give a fuck about
Would be to take them out of the equation, remove them from their position of power and riches if they do a shit job!
Can they do that? How much power does she government have over them? If any?
(
WiL Pantheist Bi Polar Polyamoric Pansexual, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:20,
Reply)
It is possible with a large enough movement of people
who are willing to sacrifice their easy and comfortable lives for it. Which looks set to happen in any case to be honest.
(
Moon Girl Technologies don't take my word for anything, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:24,
Reply)
quite a few governments have done it actually
China is a prime example, maybe not a model to follow, but yes, governments can shut down banks and provide a nationalised alternative while formulating legislation and a tight regulatory structure that the next generation of banks must follow.
it is entirely possible, and indeed the ONLY way to do anything about it.
Proposing that we rely on the Banks goodwill and some kind of sense of shame is naive in the extreme
(, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 18:25, Reply)
Considering how pushed we apparently are for funds as a country
And how much is being pissed away n lost by the very folks whose job it is to look after it, maybe we should do that then!
Better option than taking it off the young n disabled IMO.
(
WiL Pantheist Bi Polar Polyamoric Pansexual, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 20:14,
Reply)
Well put
I wonder why voting and comments are disabled for the video on Youtube
(
Photoshop Bitch jacked your sperm on, Sun 1 Jul 2012, 19:26,
Reply)