HumanPenguin

Or he is not willing to accept blame for the huge fuse regime made of it.

His mistake has 700k views. And is entirely understandable for someone who dose not use staff to police his shares. He was afterall just tagged in a huge collection of photos of an event. He did attend.

But reforms choice to select a single photo. Of someone else wearing an inappropriate t-shirt.

When the t-shirt. The original post and the huge draw of attention to it. Are not anything to do with him.

Then yes. All he is really required to do. Is a crypto he should have been more careful. And express he doesn't support the message the othererson is wearing

Absolutely the only people. Considering him responsible for the actual message. Are folks looking to turn it into a media attraction to defend reform from financial headlines.

More so when you consider the free speech reform overtly stands for, includes setting fire to occupied hotels. That happened after the call. And the poster plead guilty and was sentenced for. Reform then invite to speech and receive support at their conference.

No apologies to reform are not needed. Just an acceptance that the picture was inappropriate and he should have checked for it. Is morally all he needs to do. Reform dose not have the right to expect an apology for their own use of the post to stir support.

118k is just above the minimum for debate.

Given governments have ignored millions. Absolutely nothing was ever expected to happen.

The only way to have any effect. If 10s of millions directly writing to MPs stating the conflation with Israels actions and Jewish people. Is unacceptable.

Only when MPs have a clear indication. Their power is on the line. Will any pay any attention to it.

And ATM. No matter how much social media etc. makes it clear anti genocide and accusing Israel of genocide in not anti Semitic. Their bank Ballance. And UK media. Is pointing them.

To this opinion being a small vocal group and not the majority.

Only with millions taking direct action and telling their MPs. No stop this shit or lose you job.

Do any of them think they have anything to fear.

Add this to the fact. They still refuse to take the one party expressing this view seriously. As do many voters.

And they are in part correct to think. The opposition to this view. Is not supported by any risk of electoral defeat.

No you do not.

The idea that any marriage meets some pre difiend rules about spending. Is just a mythical unicorn.

Many men and women by cars without consulting the other party. This is very common when both parties are high income professionals.

They would involve each party arranging independent loans. Or in this case being a criminal arsehole.

Sorry to tell you this. But your understanding of marrage money management. Is a hold over from the pre 1974 period. Where women were not legally allowed to own or borrow money. Without a husbands permission.

Yes many many couple still think of money as a joint responsibility. More so with lower income couples. Because it is harder not to.

But it is far far from exclusive to all marriage's. And many independent career women. Simply would not tolerate it.

As an old fart myself. Yep I'd find it uncomfortable living in such an environment. Even when I had a high income. I still had the ideas of someone raised working class. But me ex wife most definitely did not feel the same way. And her stepfather's abusive history had a lot to do with that.

Bit she is an extremely example. The idea of independent financial management between 2 married career people. Is far from uncommon.

400k over 12 years. 33k a year.

Yeah seems huge to most low income families.

But 2 people earning about 150k each a year.

10+% extra annual income. Is less noticeable. I can see why the police did not laugh. Just investigate and Look for evidence she was directly informed.

I mean honestly as a left of centre voter. I'd be a bit hypocritical. Not to acknowledge.

A family on 300k a year will be way less likely to notice an extra 30k.

Then a family on 30k a year will 3k.

We on the left make this claim all the time on progressive taxation etc. it applies to this as well.

For now I'll ignore. How much of a bigger arsehole he is. Then the low income family stealing 3k to feed children. I'm only pointing out the busy wife is not as obviously expected to notice. As one who wonders where the extra baby milk came from.

Exactly. While few of us can honestly claim we would have done better in her situation.

She was the leader of the party. And the theft literally happened under her nose.

Yes we can all understand. She was busy. Not an accountant. And in her own words they were both high earners.

400k over 12 years. 33k a year. Is likely less noticeable then lower income families would have.

But she was the head of the party. And anyone else would expect to be held at least in part responsible. Even if they understand the missing of the actions.

As dose most PC over clocking practically. It is just allowing chips to run at higher temps by removing the limitations on power designed to keep them managed.

Mobiles may be more strict. Due to battery life. But all over locking is considering the compremises and adjusting the priority.

With smart phones. The compromise is normally battery life rather then heat.

Desktops it's adding extra cooling and shortening the design lifetime of chips in exchange for Greater CPU cycles.

As they should.

No billionaire spend huge investments on something. To increase Thier labour expenses.

Any one old enough to remember the days of early robotic automation. Where the government and billionaires claimed it would creat new higher paying jobs. And not reduce working hours.

Can also remember how much easier it made moving those jobs to lower income nations,

Same billionaires claimed the internet would create huge numbers of skilled jobs. Again moving them to cheaper nations as soon as was possible.

The only reason AI can possibly be worth those same billionaires investing. Is to remove the few jobs left in high cost nations. And to start to remove the lower cost nations employment.

It is utter fantasy to think any single billionaire. Is going to stop and worry about who earns enough to bu their shit. While competing to gather as much wealth as possible. Against only other billionaires. They will just compete against each other. Until ones get to call themselves king.

Caring about workers. Just as much as their cared about the serfs that worked their land.

And while being mentally unstable. Is a very valid and important reason to not practice medicine.

Making a news article about it. Is just horror porn. So the article writer has little to harp on about.

Doctor did dumb stuff to himself proving he was not suited to practice medicine. Is far from a nessesery need to inform the public. And doing so is just an excuse to remove his medical privacy.

Even if you question the consent in porn. IE consider economic issues forcing people into porn. Less consential then we would like.

I'd still trust someone with that interest. More then someone taking a person's mental lllness and making money from exploiting it.

You may be correct. I'm on 12 but it's been a while since I installed.

Hypnotherapy for any form of physical issue is bollocks.

But it is a valid science assepted method for therapy. It is basically directed meditation. And that is how most non stage bollocks. Hypnotherapists use it.

As he used it.

As for being a Charlton. I'd trust him more then a ex banker who still believes in trickle down economics. Like farrrage.

At least I know he is not being paid for his political opinions.

Cannot see why anyone would use calendar days. Unless they were trying to distinguish from working days.

So yes that would mean weekend and bank holidays.

You mean the video where he openly says.

I did not ever believe that. It was a sun journalist idea. I should not have gone along with it. And have apologised.

IE a sun journalist convinces a non politician fresh out of uni. To talk shit for media fun. And shock value.

Or are you again making interpretations on the whole interview. Based on a few mins of comments. From an openly biased media source.