hypochondriac

OK then but if we are saying that the government had no choice but to settle last year in order to prevent a summer of industrial action, what substantial change has there been that would mean that there will be other options available this year? Yes things may playput differently but you clearly have something else in mind.

Seize the means of production. Did you vote for Corbyn?

I can see a clear benefit to funding Ukraine. What's the benefit of making the UK a less attractive place for wealthy people and how does it outweigh the negatives consequences?

How do you propose that the upcoming industrial action that the junior doctors have voted for is prevented? Will it differ from how they were ended last year do you think?

I never said nor claimed that. You said that the priority was preventing a summer of strikes and industrial action from the doctors. My stance was that being a soft touch was simply delaying the problem which would be worse next time around. If we now get a load of strikes and industrial action this year due to the poor negotiation from last summer then how has that solved the problem?

With respect that wasn't answering the question. If we have large numbers of millionaires and billionaires leaving and that means we bring in less tax revenue that means we are going to have to either spend less or raise the tax revenue from the remaining poorer population. Yes? So having lots of wealthy people leaving the UK all at once isn't going to lead to anything positive unless you want the wealth gap to smaller so everyone can feel a sense of comradary when more people are all poor together.

Do you think the mass flight of millionaires from the UK will have a positive impact on overall standard of living for everyone? Do you accept that Labour's position from a year ago regarding the junior doctors did not actually solve the problem?

Yet more great news. The adults are back in the room for sure.

If capitulatibg and giving in to their demands is solving it then the Tories were imbeciles for not solving it sooner. I wonder if the reason they didn't is because they knew exactly what they'd be facing a year later. It's a common tactic I've seen though. We've had Labour being praised for sorting this and then when the inevitable happens and the doctors come back for more they blame the junior doctors. We've had similar with the rich people when it was dismissed as a myth that loads were leaving and then when it's proven that they are leaving they get blamed for being precious and not tough enough to take it. It couldn't possibly be the policies that are at fault.

Just so long as we accept that the original tactic of immediately folding and giving them what they ask for wasn't worthy of much praise given that it didn't actually solve the problem and simply postponed it for a year whilst making them realise that Labour will basically give them what they want if they make enough noise. Presumably you will want to avoid strikes and industrial action again this year so do we give in to the latest demands? What about the year after that?

Some people were pointing out the flaw of immediately caving last time while others were praising their negotiating tactic. Didn't you also consider it a myth that all those high net worth individuals were going to leave the UK and that it was scaremongering from the right wing media?

That went well then. No consequences to "caving in" at all...

Plus the club will definitely have life insurance which means most or all of that cost will be covered.

He was absolutely fucking shite and I couldn't be more delighted that he has left.

Of course they don't but they are perfectly entitled to give an initial opinion based on the available evidence.

Yep. It's for the club to come up with options not some random supporter on a Web forum and Google.

Although I'm not big on conspiracies in general, it does seem extremely suspect that the FBI have now concluded that there was no client list from Epstein. That just seems like an outright lie.

My opinion on losing some of these players has a lot to do with if we can keep Fernandes for a season or not. I'd happily junk almost all the players if it meant we managed to do that. It's obviously more like that we do sell Fernandes and then this extra money from the likes of Edozie had best be put to good use to get one of the best AM in the division as well as adequate replacements for positions like Edozie where we are a bit light.

I made a follow up post just below that one.

Having said that, this is all fine if losing all these fringe players for decent fees helps us to keep some of the big four.

Hmm. Losing Sulemana, Edozie and SAA in a year isn't great. We'd really need a top quality winger to compensate.

As a striker?

Sainz will be in the prem. I'd have liked Sargent but we haven't been linked.

I'm not sure we can view Downs as a negative yet until he's actually shown what he can do. He hasn't proven himself yet but he hasn't disproven himself either.

Indeed and it's a good point worth mentioning. Maybe we won't have the same level of control that we had in some matches either but hopefully we will score a few more and overwhelm teams in a manner that we didn't under tippy tappy.