pap

Interesting piece from late last year on the subject.

Yeah, I was going to ask about that. How close are those two?

It's all getting a bit tasty in the South China Sea. China has apparently warned their Phillipines-resident nationals that they are not safe in the country. Chinese state media is warning of war. Have to admit, only discovered this story myself today - didn't realise it had been rumbling on for a while. Is it really that serious? Is this just the rhetoric of a country that knows their smaller neighbour could be cowed by threats of war or a signal that China is ready to start flexing its muscles on the world stage?

Are you masturbating?

Bill Hicks was preacher and reprobate combined.

pwn3d, more like

I can see why you'd find some you list irritating, but that doesn't mean they're not funny. Elton's influence was all over the Blackadder series beyond the first, and that show was excellent for its time. He was also involved in the Young Ones, another massively influential show - so many sitcoms that followed riffed on the "anything can happen" angle. I like most people on that list. Bill Hicks is my all-time fav, and I loved that he had something to say. I'm not really onboard with the idea of comedy as a politically inert thing. It can be, but a wry joke can have more impact on public opinion than an essay. What do people remember about John Prescott? Two Jags, or two jabs Ok, the fact that he punched an assailant does come into it, but the joke stuck in the public mind better than any of the analyses produced at the time.

I'm not really sure I'd call it dry wit. More like interminable junior grade antagonism, facilitated through the wonder of the Internet. I agree partially with your sentiments about dune making himself a target, but to be honest - I want no part of your sexual fantasy. You and dune need to work it out between you. Where I think we'd agree is that if someone is consistently and deliberately being a d!ck, they're fair game.

I like dune's posts. They are short and easy to read. You don't have to go digging for some secret hidden purpose when he starts threads. I also like the way he chops and changes his opinions depending on timeframe and/or who he is arguing with. Too often people on this forum just carry on banging the same drum, being consistent in their views, etc. That doesn't generate traffic. I for one applaud dune's heady fusion of ignorance, sneering, playground behaviour and brevity. You just don't get him.

I love the way that dune gets left-wing mixed up with liberal.

I've never ignored anyone. Rough with the smooth and all that. I think if you are going to ignore someone, it's bad form to announce it on the forum.

Not the question I asked, tbf. I'll rephrase. What can Liverpool City Council do to make this right ( or fairer ) that they aren't actually doing? Pay back all of the money, as Alp suggests? Or would you like them to do more?

Respect to you Alps for at least having a f**king position.

I'm doing nothing of the sort, merely summarising the opinions so far. But let me put this back on you. What would constitute an acceptable resolution? You've spent several pages moaning about it, so let's hear what you think should happen.

So you're now concerned about the EU being paid back? And the fact that Liverpool don't fancy paying a load of money back to the EU is a surprise? Great stuff, Alps. Council doesn't fancy paying back millions of pounds shocker.

This sort of thing happens all the time, isn't constrained to Liverpool and much of the time, the funding is never paid pack. So we started out with "theft", now we've negotiated down to a form of "dishonest", which is incidentally being used across the country to coerce private industry into undertaking infrastructure projects.

I think they will. Joe Anderson has already gone on record.

As I've said before, my preference would be for them to pay back all of the money - and that may still happen. An independent arbiter will decide the amount that Liverpool will need to pay back. At the end of that process, when Liverpool has paid back the money, what complaints are you going to have left?

Time will tell on whether any business is "stolen", or whether there is enough demand to have two cruise ports. Would you still object if all the public money was paid back?

Not actually sure that's an unreasonable statement, Alps. Perhaps you can illuminate us with all the visitor attractions in Teeside, Dover and Southampton. Y'know, maybe try to prove an argument wrong before you dish out the insults

My personal preference would be for Liverpool to pay all of the money back to the government, a preference I've expressed before. That would remove this taxpayer cash argument and the cities would be able to compete on a level playing field. As for other port cities objecting - part of that is down to the taxpayer funding, but only part. I suspect the main problem from all competing ports is that when stacked up against Liverpool as a visitor attraction, all of the places you mention look decidedly ordinary by comparison.

I have no idea if this was the plan from the start, but honestly wouldn't be surprised if it was. See this sort of thing all the time in business - a small project being used to smuggle in larger long-term objectives. Frankly, I would be amazed if this wasn't at the back of their minds when they took the funding. I believe they have paid funding back to one of the parties. I'm not so sure how this shafts Southampton out of its cruise liner facilities. It's not like the two ports are very close together, and it wouldn't be a bad thing to have a point of departure in the North. I suppose the only way that Liverpool could actually shaft Southampton's business is if all the people who would have gone from Southampton suddenly decide to go to Liverpool instead. Do you think that is likely to happen?

Chaps, I sit corrected. Not sure that diminishes my overall point though

I'm quite happy to admit that I have met people who have fit some of the stereotypes pretty neatly, but they're few and far between. So all things being equal, what do I assess my opinion on? The vast number of decent personal and professional relationships I have cultivated in the 18 years I've been here, or the few nutters that tick all of the scouser stereotype boxes? As to your second question, the answers are myriad - and certain Liverpudlians (e.g. Derek Hatton) have their share of the blame in the p*ss-poor reputation that the city has developed. However, I think they have a right to be equally vocal about the way that they have been treated, especially over Hillsborough. The poisonous stories about Liverpool FC fans looting from their dead did incalculable damage to the reputation of the city. I have to wonder if any city would escape such charges unreviled. Can you honestly say that the portrayal in the media was balanced, especially in the 80s? You could either have a destitute scouser ( Yosser, Boys from the Black Stuff ), a family of benefit-scrounging scousers ( Bread ) or a whole estate full of permed, destitute, murdering and religious cult scousers ( Brookie RIP ). Let's not forget that the Government considered evacuating the place after the 1981 riots. I'm not saying that they haven't brought some of this upon themselves, because there were always different choices to be made. But equally, they have been crapped on, either through economic irrelevance after dock containerisation, massive cover-ups like Hillsborough or to be so irrelevant to a government's interests that shutdown was apparently an option. There is an element of pre-judgment that goes on with Liverpool that doesn't happen in the other places you mention, people actively looking to confirm the stereotype. If we were being truly even handed, and judging cities on the relative heinousness of their population's acts, that'd be one thing. People are getting murdered left right and centre in London and Birmingham - yet we don't make assumptions about inhabitants of those cities. Yet something happens in Liverpool, like the Jamie Bulger murder, and it all seems to go into the "Liverpool is sh*t and full of scumbags" ledger. Whatever, the antipathy is largely unjustified and based on very little experience, imo.

Ah, c'mon - it proves a couple of claims wrong right off the bat - namely, that all scousers have a chip on their shoulder or that they wallow in self-pity and victim status. Rickie's an isolated example picked because he's in our team and the hugely successful golden-booted elephant in the room. Without wanting to turn this into an interminable enumeration of little Liverpool urban achievers, this point specifically is smashed by all the Liverpudlians who have risen to the top of their field. Look up famous people from Liverpool. There are a lot of them, and you'll be amazed that some are even scousers.