Jonathan Pie, suitably angry this morning, and saying what needs to be said in a way I can't. I should warn some could be offended:
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
In the spirit of the clip, this is Fucking Brilliant!
Sorry…………………..
Agreed and your ‘sorry’ is unnecessary
Not related to this but just to say in the discounting / accounting discussion Elliot tore you a new one..in fact by the end you effectively admitted you were spouting nonsense throughout the entire discussion
I started reading your blog with admiration..now at times it is comedy gold by the way you make ridiculous statements, enjoy the adulation of those who have no clue & then get embarrassed and backed into a corner by this who do..the discounting thread is up there with those on the virtues of owning 2% yielding 25yr gilts, how sterling will strengthen with a corbyn-like govt embarking on PQE, your blind criticism ETFs (without any insight whatsoever)..and that is without the really tricky replies which don’t make it online..
Your positive work has being completely submerged by the nonsense you spout, it is actually quite sad..and soon you won’t be able to call yourself a “professor” either!!
That’s quite funny really
I have always been told this sort of thing on everything I have ever done
And yet you admit you admire what I have achieved, despite it always provoking the type of comment you have just made
Tax justice would never happen
Country-by-country reporting was impossible
The Green New Deal would never catch on
And so on, and on
And now apparently you think Elliott won: I have to tell you, I’ll win on this too. The accountancy profession is selling fraudulent misrepresentation as if it is meaningful. And the world has had enough of it. You’ve just chosen to be on the wrong side of the debate. I’ve admitted nothing is of merit on what Elliott has had to say: what I admitted was that I had been consistently right throughout the argument, and if it means taking on power yet again, I will keep pursuing that argument until it is won
And my track record is looking pretty good
You should worry. I suspect you are: hence the comment
Skin of a rhino or a little man full of his own self importance..either way you keep doing what your doing..and why should i worry?.. its great entertainment at times..
I have no sense of my importance
I am more surprised than anyone at what has happened
But it does seem my arguments work
And so I will continue to offer them
Now, politely, stop trolling
Sorry ‘Ray’ but I got no sense that Elliott won anything in the post you are referring to. He came to take everything and left with nothing. As someone who seems steeped to be in the world of modern accountancy, that must have been very unusual, yes – very hard for him – bless.
BTW – there is no adulation here from the regulars – what we all excited about are the ideas.
Mind you, your unquestioning adulation of Elliott is obvious.
ray says:
“Skin of a rhino or a little man ….”
Little man always whup a big man if the little man’s in the right and he keeps on a-coming.
Motto of the Texas Rangers if memory serves me well across fifty years. (and without bothering Mr Google to check)
Oh, Yes I think this deserves to be shared further afield.
Brilliant:
“Extinction Rebellion is an international apolitical network using non-violent direct action to persuade governments to act on the Climate and Ecological Emergency.
Government must act now to halt biodiversity loss and reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2025.”
Extinction Rebellion demand. Effectively, this is what they damand, though they do not say so explicitly:
They demand that in five years, this country will achieve a zero carbon emmissions economy.
They demand that within five years, all road vehicles be electric.
They demand within five years, that all houses be made energy efficient.
They demand that within five years, all energy must be sourced from wind farms and solar panels.
They demand that within five years, all housing be clustered around neighbourhood heating centres.
They demand that within five years, all domestic central heating gas boilers be scrapped and replaced bvy ground sourced or air sourced heating systems,.
They demand that, within five years, all people with second homes in the country or abroad, be forced to give up their second homes that have to be heated and driven to at weekends using carbon based fuel.
They demand that, within five years, people will ve required work within a short distance of their workplace, thereby saving on energy expenditures from carbon based fuel.
We damnd that the country no longer measure the success of its economoic policies by measuring “growth”, the expansion of GDP.
They demand that the government, of whatever political persuasion, embark on a massive re-organistion of the infrastructure of society and a fromidable and revolutionary reorientation of the aspirations and life styles of the mass of the people.
These are demands that are perfectly justified. Certainly, there is an ecological and climatic crisis. Global warming. Species exticntion. The imminent approach of doomesday. Our grandchildren inheriting a devastated world.
And they are demands that must me made and met, not policies that must be advocated and put before the people in the democratic electoral process. They are demands for policies that must be thrust upon the nation by a revolutionary 3.5% of the populace, because there is a kind of democratic inertia, an unwillingness among the electorate at large to accept the vast costs and impositions of a revolutionary thorough redesign of the economy and society. It is not so much the dictatorship of the proletariat, as the dictatorship of the ecologotariat. And make no mistake, they are right. We can only save the planet, and postpone the end of mankind and hand on a living heritage to our grandchildren by overriding the “democratic” process.
Thanks for this
I held back in case I used it as a blog, but I risk overloading readers already today
And I am instead promoting a range of demands that are suitable to this site
But thanks all the same
@ mike Ghirelli
In five years they aren’t likely to have any of these demands met, but perhaps they might have some of them established as priorities and that alone would be a major achievement.
It would also be enough to put the UK economy back into gear and that’s the stupid thing. The reactionary forces of the established power structure can only see these demands as a drag on the economy.
Purblind !!
It’s very encouraging to see that so many people are not yet beyond the state of despair and into the realms of fatalistic apathy.
The critics who whine about the inconvenience being caused are so much a part of the problem I want to slap them…..
Let’s be honest – things can be done.
Heat source pumps etc., already exist and I’m pleased to say that we have already met with our architects to pave the way for our next large scheme to have these fitted and that will mean that other affordable housing schemes will follow. It can be done. All it needs is the right people to say so. In my case it was my Director. But the other driver for us is reducing that cost of living to those who need to live in affordable housing such as the retired, low waged and those on social security (but affordable housing is well…..when to come to think of it, is ALL of us!). It also has to be affordable to the planet.
It is not whining to point out the fundamental problem confronting those of us who recognise the moral imperative of ensuring that future generations will not be heirs to a devastated world, while at the same time insisting that effecting necessary changes in our culture and lifestyle is done through the processes of the democratic political system. Peole like their meat. People like their foreign holidays. People like the freedoms of being able to drive out to the country at weekends. People like their second homes. People like their electronic gizmoes, telephones, computers, plastic based lifestyles using goods produced by labour exploitative in countries halfway round the world. People are satisfied by the benefits of a low carbon economy in Britain where the goods they value and lust after are produced by massive carbon emissions safely offshored to faraway economies. It is not going to be easy changing Britain’s whole consumer lifestyle by getting people to vote for political parties that will offer the electorate veganism, no foreign travel, no second homes, and rationed fuel consumption. It will not be easy persuading millions of householders that they should scrap their gas boilers. These drastic lifestyle changes could be more easily imposed by an authoritarian system of governemt. Stalin was able to revolutionise the Soviet economy in the 20s and 30s by enforced insutrialisation and collectivisation. It is not whining to point out that in a democracy, such methods would not be perceived by the electorate as acceptable. It is mere realism to ask how we make these changes through rather than over-riding a democratic political system. Monsieur Macron tried a carbon fuel tax. The result was the Gilets Jaunes. They are not whining.
We don’t have to change
We just guarantee extinction
Is that what you want fur your grandchildren, at the latest?
Really?
Why?
Not offended at all, he is spot on.
Though Simon Wren Lewis is not a favourite economist in this manor, he put well in a recent blog. He suggested that looking back in future, would we be more concerned to have saved the planet or increased the debt a bit.
Regardless of your economic view, the priority ought to be clear.
He is right
Simon and I agree on more than we differ on, I suspect
Robin Stafford says:
“Though Simon Wren Lewis [……] suggested that looking back in future, would we be more concerned to have saved the planet or increased the debt a bit.
Regardless of your economic view, the priority ought to be clear.”
Damn right ! The prospect of there being a future to look back FROM is probably quite important 🙂
When can we expect to see the rebel’s clothing recycling ventures putting H+M etc out of business?
That would be good…
I own pullovers more than 20 years old because they were well made and shirts maybe a decade old for the same reason
What’s the problem?
Our willingness to reverse our shirt collars and darn our socks is for the 99%. Only the 1% can afford clothes that never need repair.
Waggler says:
“Our willingness to reverse our shirt collars ….” How quaint.
I wonder when you did that last. I wonder if it’s even still possible with other than the better quality modern shirts.(?) I remember my mother doing it when I was very young. But not for ….five decades; nearly six.
I reversed the collars of ten of my old shirts this January. The key is to separate the collar from the shirt above its buttonhole so the button remains on the correct side.
It is a small example of what I’d expect our rebels already to be doing.
Any tips of replacing your gas-fired boiler with an electric one?
Waggler says:
“Any tips of replacing your gas-fired boiler with an electric one?”
Not at first hand. I’m all electric; flats built like that in the 70s. I have a neighbour exchanged his antique (so-called) strorage heaters with Fischer Electric stuff and is very happy with it. I hardly use mine…never used the storage heaters in nearly four years. (I have pullovers…..:-) )
PS …and yes I remember shirts where the top button fastened inwards the wrong way round….. Lol.
Waggler says:
“When can we expect to see the rebel’s clothing recycling ventures putting H+M etc out of business?”
I think it unlikely to happen, but if it did you’d regard that as a problem ? I can’t imagine why.
Gosh that was cathartic! Can’t wipe the smile off my face, thanks for sharing.
🙂