“Gentlemen, gentlemen, gentlemen.

Who are you replying to?

What posts are you commenting on?

Anyone would think the Post hadn't ugraded its servers and that over the last few days even more polite, reasoned and well evidenced and logically argued posts had been lost in bad sectors of its decaying had drives!”

“Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I wonder if Saturday's post will score (at least) "minus 10" ?!?!?!”

“I thought you had figured it out by now, BJ: no-one counters your "arguments" because they speak entirely for themselves.”

“bj/mark

the reason most people keep voting you down is primarily because of who you are and how you act

theres probably 3 people on this website that even read what you write and one of them is you

its not a conspiracy, youre just a hateful, petty, blustering fool, that repels everyone he meets”

“BJ, in his new guise, is now entering the final flings of going way over the top and becoming extremely offensive. We are about at the point where his inexcusable behaviour gets him banned yet again.”

“""First they came for the communists,..." -- BJ Mann

No, no, no. I will not stand for this. Mostly your ridiculous posturing is so caricatured that it comes across as comic. But attempting to equate yourself with one of the minorities oppressed by the Nazis, to which the poem originally referred, is just too disgusting and offensive even for someone with your issues to get away with. There is a whole universe of suffering between wholesale mass murder and the inequity of other people getting a better pension than you.”

“First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak out because I was Protestant.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me..................”

“by Neo_MadBadger Sunday, January 15 2012, 10:46AM

"Bogus-h is suggesting that people in the private sector have worse pensions than those in the public sector. Bogus-h has never heard of Fred The Shred and his ilk."

Ahhhh, yes, that ilk of millions.

Every public servant with half a brain is in the gold plated public sector scheme, or the even better diamond encrusted police of fire schemes, or the even more betterer parliamentary scheme.

Whereas most in the private sector haven't got any scheme, or they are in a defined contribution scheme, or, for a very few, they are in a much poorer than the public sector defined benefits scheme, or, for the "ilk", a Shred type scheme (compare that with typical NHS or Council big-wig pension pay-offs).


by Neo_MadBadger Sunday, January 15 2012, 10:48AM

"Bogus-h has never heard of private sector 'pension contribution holidays' either, it would seem."

This would be where the government told companies that if their schemes were overfunded at any particular good time, and they carried on ("over")funding them through the good times, the schemes would be hit by punitive levels of taxation, so they had no option but to stop funding the schemes until their books balanced (colloquially known as taking a 'pension contribution holiday' by those with no understanding of what was happening), despite the fact that this would mean that, by definition, come the bad times, companies would struggle to make good the shortfall.

And your "point" was?”

“Mark, let me respond to your points made in your last posting.

I am certainly not PC, to me a PC is an abbreviation for personal computer.

Why do you use the term "argument" when often it is a debate in which people make points to add to the debate, often these are manipulated by those with opposing views to suit their point of view. In many cases there is no right or wrong point of view merely varying points of view which can be very subjective.

We are all hypocritical to some extent, again this is subjective because it is often how an individual portrays their view, and how others interpret that posting based on their own views. Nothing in life is black and white as many subjects or issues have many grey areas and its these which mainly give rise to the interpretation/subjectivity/personal viewpoints.

Why would you suggest cliques have formed, would it be fair to say that a number of individuals share a broadly common view and have their own interpretations within that broad view. Based upon my own views i have disagreed with FW, Smith, yourself, and many others opinions on this site on occasions, yet on other occasions i have totally agreed with their opinions. This does not mean they cannot make good, valid points within a debate; even though i may disagree with them in the overal context.

Rude and offensive behavior runs both ways, when one poster is rude to another poster it can be reported and referred to an administrator for an opinion, they have the option to leave, or remove a post; we ALL have the right to report posts. It is only when two or more parties become offensive and rude that a topic becomes degraded to argument and not debate. From my perspective it takes two or more to argue and two or more to take it far more personally than I feel they should.

Agendas!!! we all have them and where our agendas lie is based on many things ranging from our upbringing to our personal lives, our thoughts and perceptions, and even how things affect us in our everyday lives.

Many facts exist in life and it depends once again on an individual perception of "facts" and often where these facts are obtained from. With the internet available to us we have access to many "facts" and from all sources. Facts based upon scientific research, facts which are manipulated or adjusted from people or organisations with specific views or agendas, and even scientific based facts based on flawed research.

Just my views, and aimed to everyone, not just one or a small number of posters.”

“MarkXBSSensor, if "..the censors have been hard at work.", I imagine that they would also be removing the previously banned posters from returning to this site under new identities.”