Verbal

Global warming only applies to some people.

I have. your contributions are as usual deeply depressing.

Your presumably wilful misunderstanding of climate change science is so fundamental as to render it impossible to engage with you in any sensible way. You're judging climate change science - all the complexities of atmospheric chemistry - by sticking your head out the window, and looking at the weather.

Moral panic! Moral panic!

Of course, the scientific community is wrong and you are right.

And declared fallible, presumably, by those sensible, well-rounded souls that inhabit Planet Lounge. That's alright then. I'll sleep more easily now. Nighty night.

Badlands Les enfant du paradis All the President's Men

Why does no one on here actually discuss the SCIENCE in any of this - I mean the actual papers written on the subject, published in the respected journals?

It's broad scientific consensus vs Tory-boy conspiracy nuts, trousers. You decide.

Another Guernsey native encouragingly. First name Pepe Le

'Fair' is one of those idiotic terms favoured by LibDem spinners and their like. It is different from notions of 'justice' because it is essentially meaningless - or can be twisted to mean whatever you want it to. Why you should tie it to your life-philosophy of utter hopelessness is perfectly understandable. But did you ever in your life think things were worth changing - or at least trying to change them?

No, you're incapability to understand my point has nothing whatsoever to do with your dyslexia.

Define 'a bit'.

It's really beside the point - and a tad too much clutching at stereotypical straws. The correlation between rates of college/university education and prosperity exists because - in the main - graduates have developed their intellectual skills more than non-graduates in such a way - generally - that they are able to parlay these skills into new businesses, innovation, paying jobs, etc. It's a bell curve argument - and doesn't have a damned thing to do with your or my petty prejudices.

Frankly, you really are hoist by your own petard on this. If you complain about students' educational standards and then post punctuation-free paragraphs, you could easily be accused of not fully understanding the root causes of whatever it is you didn't like about them.

Sorry Nick but companies always used to bear the full cost of apprenticeships. Now they're just corporate welfare scroungers, cadging a few quid off of the taxpayer.

Since you raise it, it always amuses me when the 'where's there's muck there's brass' types start pontificating on here about the heroics of capitalists - because large numbers of capitalist wonderkids are utterly dependent on the public sector. PFI companies are one of the best examples. Another is the dependency of many companies on government to provide funding for apprenticeships. For heaven's sake, the cost is minimal (apprentices are cheap labour) - why the hell do business owners need to go cap in hand to the government to fund their schemes?

A sweatshop full of slave labourers can have high productivity. So no - you need the RMT to be as militant as possible for you to maintain a decent lifestyle. Union activity shares value around of course - leaving a tad less for employers and shareholders.

Dibden you're a sweetheart. Shame that's not my best side.

The socialist republic of chiswick.

And Delldays - life is too short to rummage through all your pithy one-liners, but if bankers went on strike - yes, I'd sack 'em. Replace them with you - and even I'd admit you'd do a better job.

You're afraid it's true, aren't you. Well guess what? It is! Not for the localised inconvenience, but activities that create a high wage economy - of which union action is one - helps sustain your ability to buy your Wii. Honest, it's true. Ask any decent economist, if that's not an oxymoron.

Try this. Instead of criticising them, stand back and applaud loudly. Without our obnoxious unions driving up wage levels, we'd slip back into being some kind of proto-East european low-wage, low-economic-activity dust bowl of an economy. The paradox of aggressive unions - and unions in general - is that we all benefit. It may not seem that way, but we do.

Tax evasion costs the exchequer ten times the amount benefit fraud does, and it's not worse?!

Ah, I see why you're 'special' now. Never mind. You'll wake up in the middle of the night and suddenly see the simple logic of my earlier post. When you do, let me know and I'll send you a welcome pack to Verbal's Universe. It's very nice in here.