Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: male
Age: 20
Date Signed Up:1/15/2012
Last Login:10/24/2016
Content Thumbs: 744 total,  1129 ,  385
Comment Thumbs: 5251 total,  5505 ,  254
Content Level Progress: 50% (5/10)
Level 74 Content: FJ Cultist → Level 75 Content: FJ Cultist
Comment Level Progress: 41% (41/100)
Level 246 Comments: Doinitrite → Level 247 Comments: Doinitrite
Content Views:54320
Times Content Favorited:20 times
Total Comments Made:703
FJ Points:5389
Favorite Tags: These are not th (3) | There Are No Tag (2) | You (2)
I am a person on the planet the locals call Earth.

latest user's comments

#35 - I don't like Russel Brand  [+] (31 replies) 12/17/2014 on Mr. Brand +53
#118 - anon (12/18/2014) [-]
I have to disagree with you sir, but I will accept your critique with respect for your sublime use of the Puffin.
User avatar
#80 - rhc (12/17/2014) [-]
who gives a shit?
User avatar
#68 - mooproxy (12/17/2014) [-]
Hardly an unpopular opinion.

I mean he was alright a while back, but he's just a bit preachy and self-important.
User avatar
#67 - byobgraffpro (12/17/2014) [-]
ehhh, he has his moments. I'm on the fence with him
User avatar
#42 - nocta (12/17/2014) [-]
i also dont like him
User avatar
#37 - mrwalkerfour (12/17/2014) [-]
how come?
User avatar
#50 - inkfox (12/17/2014) [-]
A lot of people dislike his comedy,seeing as it's not all that great.I like him as a person and as an activist but his comedy's just a bit shit.
User avatar
#52 - inkfox (12/17/2014) [-]
On another note,I don't much like his political views but at least he's trying,and he did this so,swings and roundabouts really.
User avatar
#85 - questionableferret (12/17/2014) [-]
Well his views are closer to the right path than Farage's at least. I think Brand's issue is that he is really, really bad at thinking before he acts, so he makes bad comedy and he isn't very articulate. He does strike me as the kind of guy who never really grew out of being a teenager. His behaviour, dress sense, choice of language, and deeply-held want to affect change in the world all seem very rooted in a somewhat less than mature mentality, but not necessarily a bad one.

I think that's why I don't mind him. He seems like he has a will to do good but he lacks the means to really do that.

Comedy-wise though he doesn't match up to the rest of what the UK has to offer. Seriously... the UK has some fucking astounding comedians... and Michael Macintyre... whose appeal I have never nor will ever understand.
User avatar
#95 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
May I ask where specifically he is closer to the right path than farage?
User avatar
#108 - questionableferret (12/18/2014) [-]

Atop all that I just said, whilst cutting ties with the EU might help some things it would also mean we no longer have to agree with their legislation and regulations such as the food-standards laws that the EU put in place and other stuff that generally improves quality of life and regulates companies. I personally do not trust Farage to put those regulations back in place upon leaving the EU, which would give companies even more free reign.

Farage also wants to gut the BBC. He had legislation up that would essentially turn the BBC into a system that just bought shows from overseas, cutting the television licence that people have to pay to enjoy the state-run broadcasting systems in the UK.

He also plans to abolish administrations that are in charge of culture/arts etc, cut green subsidies and encourage more fracking/fossil fuels... just generally trying to turn the clock back on the UK.

Oh, and Brand is a jackass but Farage is, in everything I've ever seen him do, an astonishing cunt. If you look at the way he debates his opponents will say things and he'll be chuckling and shaking his head and saying "No, no, no." and stuff in the background which is just astonishingly disrespectful and demonstrates the kind of man Farage is, namely, not one I would ever want to afford any measure of executive power to.

(Though that last part is really down to my tastes. Apparently drinking beer is enough to get people to think you're not a total cunt these days... but hey, fuck me for having standards, right?)

Basically, the next election comes down to the Conservatives and UKIP, both are wasted votes because neither demonstrate that they actually care about the people of the UK and both are two-faced organisations that prey upon people's hot-button issues whilst secretly having corrupt backers.

I plan to vote for the Green Party, who seem to be the only people left in the country who give a fuck. *sigh* What a place we've found ourselves in, eh?
User avatar
#163 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
Firstly, Farage does not blame immigration for the crisis, or for the shit economy. He says excessive immigration is a factor that is causing other major problems that need to be solved. Problems such as a severe lack in schooling places, rapid increase in NHS waiting times, and a depression of working class wages to below the living wage.

The media likes to make people think he believes if we get rid of immigrants and get rid of the EU, all our problems are going away. He and anyone who supports him know that this is not the case, and not what he is arguing.

Now, I agree that recently there has been too much focus on immigration, but I think that can be attributed to the media focus he has had. During interviews, the issue is always bought up more than any other, as it is the most controversial issue they proposed. I really hope that in the coming months the debate in British politics turns to other things.

As to the EU, you are talking to a government that supports the rich and neglects the poor, but the EU has an economic regulatory system where only the biggest businesses benefit from being a member, and most small businesses struggle massively. This is a ridiculous policy for a government that claims to enrich its citizens. Big companies always want to maintain their market and reduce competitors, which is contrary to the benefit of society. Small business is where the growth comes from.

User avatar
#168 - questionableferret (12/18/2014) [-]
Your arguments are, for the most part, well made and correct, and I appreciate how well you made them. However you've picked up the wrong things from what I said and got your wires a little crossed. I never said we shouldn't leave the EU, by all means that cancerous waste of space is far beyond what it should ever have been and is in many ways an absolute disaster. My point was that there are regulations in the UK that exist in their current form (that are quite good for the British people... though yes there are some dumb ones too) that will be pawed over and I don't trust Farage to deal with that in a way that is befitting the people (though as I admitted, that part is just my personal distrust of the man.)

When it comes to the EU you and I seem to agree pretty much across the board, but all of those problems you brought up are not actually problems that should exist in the first place, not because the immigration is so bad, but because of the way in which the UK deals with it's economy. (I'm an accountant and let me tell you the tax fraud in the UK is fucking disgraceful and we're doing very little to curb this absurd situation.)

A lack of schooling places comes from an underfunded education system (which is archaic in a number of respects like grouping children by age and not by aptitude but that's a story for another time).

NHS waiting times are increasing because of the austerity cuts and because the NHS and other public services did not receive the proper quality-control or funding even prior to the bubble burst so things have gotten very out of hand as lay-offs and redundancies become more common.

The depression of wages comes from an overpopulated job market (you can pay people less for more work if they don't have job security) which is the result of the outsourcing and mechanisation.

The mass immigration is merely exacerbating other pre-existing issues that need individual addressing. (Cont...)
User avatar
#169 - questionableferret (12/18/2014) [-]

I agree that nuclear energy is BY FAR the cleanest form of viable energy in the UK at the moment... however cutting the efforts to produce clean, green energy like Farage wants to do is a very poor choice. We should be aiming to become an entirely green nation sooner or later (which will be difficult with our current energy-usage) though it is a minor point and something that is fine to work for in the background whilst more immediate issues are dealt with. Cutting those green initiatives though is an awful idea that has us regressing both technologically and culturally.

Atop all of what has been said already there's the issue of the people who back Farage. For one, a worrying number used to back the Conservative party, who did an awful lot for them with regards to taxation and regulation. That they would jump ship to UKIP is very troubling and I'm not convinced that they're doing it because they want him to bring about positive change for the 99%... because if they did they'd not be Conservative backers in the first place.

There's also the continual racism controversies that spread throughout UKIP which doesn't afford me much faith in many of their MPs. On a personal level I reject the idea of giving a lot of the UKIP MP Candidates any sort of power over other people.

There's also a biiiig divide within UKIP between the people who want to actually affect positive change in the UK and those who evidently do not, with many UKIP members having actually left to form their own parties who you may have seen as candidates on the vote for EU representatives.

Just a quick search online of "reasons not to vote UKIP" yields a massive result of very poignant issues like this one: metro.co.uk/2014/05/12/the-tweet-police-officers-ask-blogger-to-remove-ukip-jibe-after-eurosceptic-party-complains-4725809/

If you want to do yourself and the country a favour at least check out the Green Party's values. greenparty.org.uk/values/
User avatar
#170 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
There is definitely a problem with tax fraud, but let me tell you that simply increasing taxes will not help that but make it worse. Instead of having a system that relies on the slippery but wealthy rich people's funding, we should focus first on having a sustainable budget, which will give us time to fill in the loopholes and tax avoidance possibilities, instead of just slapping more taxes on people. A moderately wealthy person paying all of his taxes today will have less than half of it for his own use, so while I irationally perhaps would never partake in tax avoidance myself, you can see why there are economic and social incentives for people to do so, including the hostility between classes.

I agree immigration did caused these problems, and rather just adds extra strain to these, but I don't see any party offering any good solution except UKIP. There is too much bureaucracy in the NHS leading to massive inefficiencies, as well as the looming ageing population looking to cause a debt crisis. There is a way to cut spending on the NHS while increasing quality of care, but the other parties are scared of trying to do this because cutting funding is unpopular.

It is true that our schooling system is archaic and needs to get with the times, and I think schools need more independence and less exams. Again none of the parties are presenting any policies that will change anything that I believe in aside from simply spending more, which doesn't even guarantee more places or more quality. I think UKIP's proposal to bring in Grammar schools for all of England will make good education much more accessible to low income families and reduce the need for private education in order to do well.

User avatar
#173 - questionableferret (12/18/2014) [-]
The rich would have to give up a lot of their wealth after tax, and you know what... that's exactly the way it's meant to be. They didn't grow that money. It doesn't belong solely to them. That's the issue with capitalism, it's an astonishingly right-wing form of economics that incentivises the self over the other which is good and all but is entirely unsustainable in a global culture because, as we have seen, shy of proper taxation all of the money just ends up in the same hands. It's not like the currency they accrue isn't already vastly above everyone else, even after tax, and that money also isn't new money. For the most part that money is actually pre-existing money. The more it is hoarded by the wealthy the less of it is left in circulation to go around for the rest. That is why they need to be properly taxed, because if they're not then there's no money left for everyone else.

Atop that, the taxation of companies and corporations is lax, filled with loopholes, and should be based on where the money is earned AND where the money heads. If it is earned overseas then it should be taxed at one rate. If it is earned in the UK then it should be taxed at another. If the currency is heading to companies not located in the UK then the taxes on them should be higher than on ones that ARE based in the UK, actively negating the negative impact upon the nation that is felt by Tax Havens.

Immigration 'does' add strain to the issue, but at the same time whilst UKIP offers solutions to one problem, they cause massive problems elsewhere, as I've gone over. What is more, their solution to this one problem isn't something they alone can offer, but something that every party at the moment is considering.

As for Grammar Schools... (Cont.)
User avatar
#174 - questionableferret (12/18/2014) [-]

Grammar Schools operate by picking and choosing who gets into them based on a number of factors. They were largely phased out of the education system because of their poisonous effect on class in the UK, something that has lessened (though clearly not disappeared) after they disappeared. Grammar Schools will offer no more places of education than the construction of regular comprehensive schools and their quality of education will not increase unless the country changes it's approach to education funding on a fundamental level.

UKIP is attracting backers that are ultra-wealthy, ultra-nationalist, and/or ultra-racist. Yes, there are other backers, but the eagerness for those specific groups to flock to back UKIP is troubling at least. The Conservative party has done well by its backers, giving them a massive amount of freedom and basically making life pretty damned good for them. I have a hard time imagining these people flocked to UKIP because they want to instil prosperity into the working classes. For the most part these people got their money through exploiting the poor.

I find it impossible to trust UKIP. I don't trust their MPs. I don't trust their leader. I don't trust their backers. I don't trust them. Yes, they have some good ideas, I'm man enough to admit that. I just can't get over their bad ideas and the mountain of evil that seems to stalk them on the outside and the inside:


I think ultimately it comes down to this. You don't trust the Green Party to properly handle the economy. I don't trust UKIP to properly handle anything. I don't generalise UKIP voters or UKIP members because that's not how shit gets done, but I distrust enough individuals associated with them and within their ranks that I can't stomach the idea of what evil (and yes, I'm using that term un-ironically) they could bring to the UK.

#175 - questionableferret (12/18/2014) [-]

Finally... I might want out of the EU, but I think a referendum on that issue is essentially inevitable now, regardless of which party gets into power. Such overwhelming support has been shown to it and is being shown to it throughout countless other member-states in the EU that no party would get away with brushing the issue off casually.

Other than the EU thing I just disagree with so much else of what UKIP say... it comes across to me as draconian and as trying to solve problems by removing things that don't work instead of fixing them, and replacing them with things that we wanted rid of in the first place because they didn't work, like the Grammar schools.

Anyway, I don't think we'll be making any headway in convincing each other here. I'm happy to go on debating so long as it doesn't end up in a feudd (hue).

And because I've got some lying around, here's a funny picture of the Queen. Long live 'er maj'.
#176 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
Yeah at the end of the day, we won't end up convincing each other, but it was a good discussion. My opinion is that while UKIP has some shady backers and members, I trust them more than I trust the status quo parties, partly even because I think debate needs to be bought back to Westminster, and UKIP to me are bringing that debate back. I understand if you don't support them because you don't trust them, that's a personal decision, just as I choose not to support the Green Party because I consider them part of the status quo.

And while I believe a euro referendum is inevitable, I have very little faith it will be done in the next parliamentary session without UKIP forcing the hands of other parties, as I feel the other parties could continue to ignore the need for it, as they do with the debt, as they do with public sector wage freezes, etc.

UKIP will not win the election next may, but I wouldn't want Nige as PM, and neither would he. He is too controversial and populist He will be resigning for the general election after that, in which case I expect him to be replaced by Suzanne Evans, who I believe would make an excellent party leader and Prime Minister. However, I do believe Nigel would make one of the best deputy PMs and that is what I hope we achieve next year.

That is a very nice picture, in return to which I offer this picture of Ed Milipede
#177 - questionableferret (12/18/2014) [-]
"Shall we put someone with charisma in charge? Nah, just get one of the Milbands to do it. Nobody will care." - Labour Party. What a fucking joke of a man.

Now... the Royals? They're keeping it real as you can see in this compilation of entirely authentic photographs.
User avatar
#178 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
Haha I love those pictures of Prince Charles

Have you seen David Cameron's insane rap tho?
Cassetteboy - Cameron's Conference Rap
#179 - questionableferret (12/18/2014) [-]
One does not become politically aware without knowing about Cassetteboy.

But what about Tim Minchin?

Song For Wossy by Tim Minchin
User avatar
#180 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
haha I've never heard of him he's brilliant!
User avatar
#181 - questionableferret (12/18/2014) [-]
He also happens to be one of the most proficient pianists I've ever come across, able to play both the instrument and the crowd at the same time.



User avatar
#171 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
The former Tories who now vote UKIP are the people who used to support the Conservatives because they preferred them over Labour, much like how voting is in the US. It is not wrong to change parties when you realise there is an alternative that is better for the country. Also UKIP picks up a heck of a lot of votes from people who have never voted before, which I think can only be a good thing.

The continual racism is an issue that is being dealt with, but the media portrays it much more than it is happening. Most of the cases of actually racism has been from former members of the BNP trying to discredit UKIP in order to regain support for their own party. There have been some other cases of strong political incorrectness as well from real party members but these members have been disposed of very quickly. However bigotry is NOT specific to UKIP, it is just more reported when it does happen because I think people are irrationally scared of the rise of the party.

UKIP does not intend to cut progress towards clean energy, it wants to cut the specific direction we have been taking. There is more than one way to be green, and having experimented with wind energy, I think it's time to say that method doesn't work. We would pollute less with fracking than under the current wind energy model. Also and important issue is the price levels for those that earn less than the living wage. Any green tax is a regressive (or at least flat) tax and it is very important to keep that in mind. I think we need a way to pollute less without making it harder for those that are most in need.

It is true that there are different types of ukippers and I have definitely met some members that I do not like, but I have met far more people that are willing to have a civilised two-sided discussion within the party than without.

User avatar
#172 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
Especially green party members that I have met have been exceptionally hostile to the idea that I support a 'racist' party, and except from you, have been incredibly unwilling to debate with me. UKIP members are often victim to the extreme bigotry that they are accused of giving out. There are many instances where non-native UKIP supporters have been called racial slurs a black activist where I lived was labelled as being the "token nigger" and many members of the party have lost their jobs due to the support of the party. UKIP events are always being cancelled as well, which show how highly people hold the value of free speech.

I have looked into the Green Party very extensively and have decided it is not the party for me. They refuse to oppose the EU, to admit that wind and solar energy are not sustainable, which are two issues that I think are very important. I also don't believe they understand the severity of the debt crisis that we will see in the next two decades, when a rising percentage of the population will retire and rely on pensions and NHS. I agree that now is not the time to cut spending, but it seems to me that the Green Party is ideologically opposed to spending cuts in any form, while arguing that we need to spend more in long term projects. I personally think it is dangerous to pursue policies that will lead us to historically unprecedented levels of debt. I think the Green Party is good in many of its policies, but on the ones I consider most important, I think they are aimed in the wrong direction.
User avatar
#164 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
As to the EU's content to poor people, you have to look my homecountry, Spain, where 18-24 year olds are resorting to burgling assaulting and killing old people to provide for themselves, in a Depression worse than the Great Depression. This Depression was almost entirely caused by the euro monetary experiment, which failed catastrophically, and led to an incredibly bubble in Spain, Ireland, Greece. This undoubtedly collapsed, creating a horrible depression, but then the EU government blamed the countries themselves, despite them having no power to control interest rates, and played the role of the "saviour" through some absolutely ridiculous carepackages

Let's just talk a bit more about the care packages. They were a bailout for the financial system, which was definitely needed in Spain (but i think wasn't needed in the UK), this this came with the ridiculous demand for extreme austerity. So basically, any stimulative effect this care package had, was more than offset by the amount the government had to cut. Now austerity is definitely needed in prosperous times, but any economist will tell you that recession is NOT the time for austerity. Anyway the austerity went through because our government hoped it would work, and it failed miserably. However, the European Commission claims that they saved countries like Spain and Greece from their own devices. You can watch this ridiculous propaganda video by the EC that shows how out of touch they are www.youtube.com/watch?v=0B3zNcFYqj0 . Levels of Depression in Spain and Greece are worse than they ever were in the US during the Great Depression. That is not succesfull policy.

There is also the blatant disregard for democracy, where they ignored Irish, French and Dutch referendas, and don't allow voters to have any power, except to vote on what the rubber stamp (the European Parliament) looks like.

User avatar
#165 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
Neither I nor Farage are saying the EU is responsible for the crisis in the UK, we are wanting to leave it as it doesn't want change, doesn't respect democracy, and is a blatant propaganda producer (just look at the EC's youtube channel).

As to the 'basic standard' laws they provide, most of them applied to former soviet countries that didn't have an efficient regulatory system, and most of them were already in place in the UK, before they were put through in the rest of the continent. However, for example if you look at pesticide regulation, every firm using pesticide in Europe had to pay a large fee to get their pesticides approved under EU regulations, even if they had already been approved by more strict national government regulation. This cost a lot of money to food production firms, and delayed production. Furthermore some of the 'basic' regulations they provide grant protection to the large multinational corporations at the expense of local businesses, as I have said above. Tariffs and restrictions on imports are also a part of these regulations, and these have a direct effect of increasing food prices to protect France's agricultural sector at the expense of cheaper alternatives that will help develop self sufficiency in developing countries.

User avatar
#166 - feudd (12/18/2014) [-]
Leaving these regulations won't give companies free reign, it would allow the British electorate to choose which regulations are worthwhile, and which we disagree with, rather than having all of them dictated upon us. As to green subsidies, the excessive money we have invested into windfarms has been for nothing, as we are relying on coal plants to make up for when windfarms don't produce energy. Green subsidies can also be seen as subsidies to land owners, or the richer parts of our society. Our dependence on high pollutant fossil fuels has increased as a result. We should be moving towards nuclear energy as it doesn't pollute and is sustainable (we are not likely to get any large tsunamis in mainland UK). Fracking is also a very green alternative, with incredibly low levels of carbon emission. Not zero levels, that's true, but far lower levels than the EU is currently emitting through the failure of environmental policy and the subsequent dependence on coal plants. Just look at Germany, increasing the amount of coal plants this year.

You don't have to agree with me on everything or anything I say, but it would be nice if you at least read my arguments with an open mind, and try to understand where I am coming from.
User avatar
#104 - questionableferret (12/18/2014) [-]
Farage blames immigration. Immigration is certainly causing problems but only because the government doesn't have the funds to deal with them and there aren't enough jobs. There aren't enough funds because the government has continually cut taxes on the richest whilst increasing austerity measures that affect the poorest, thus phasing jobs out of the job market. Atop that more and more jobs are lost each year to outsourcing to cheaper nations and automation replacing human workers with robots, etc. Atop even that many companies are cutting corners and having their employees be overworked because they know there's nowhere else to go and they could be replaced in a moment. They pay them for the work of one person but make them do the work of two which, if it was a standard method of man-management, would effectively halve the job market.

Brand is closer to the truth because he realises the people who are the problem are not really the EU or the immigrants, but our own government who value the rich and not the poor. If the rich were taxed more there would be more money to support the economy and the people living in the country. If the companies were properly taxed there would be yet more money. If the companies were properly regulated people would not be overworked, there would be more jobs, there would be less outsourcing, etc.

Farage acts like a common man but his backers are massively indulging in the benefits wrought by the Lib-Lab-Con's horrific abuse of the democratic system in favour of the rich so it's hard to imagine Farage would actually affect the change that would really help the economy in the long-run. Immigration is just another part of overpopulation and we're only overpopulated in the job-market because of what I explained earlier and people in the UK are still gonna give birth to more kids, compounding the problem.

Basically, Brand is closer to being right because he knows where the problem lies, but he's kind of a tard and not good at voicing it.
User avatar
#36 - themandacow (12/17/2014) [-]
I don't know if that is an unpopular opinion, but I don't like him either.
#787 - >> #774 , >> #760 testing testing  [+] (1 reply) 12/04/2014 on Multi-reply feature +1
User avatar
#820 - richardastley (12/04/2014) [-]
I'm just suggesting.
#118 - As seen in the comment section  [+] (1 reply) 12/01/2014 on The new lightsaber has many... 0
#119 - urapooper (12/01/2014) [-]
never seen it in .gif before