Xander King

Full, runaway meltdown. You love to see it.

And @nadiawhittomemp.bsky.social was on here before breakfast saying “let me list the myriad ways in which my party is evil and shit”, but they never actually jump. No idea what’s going on with John McDonnell either, but it feels like they’ve now given up on any party discipline.

We don’t want foreign companies buying public assets, dipshit.

When are you going to provide one of those then?

Post sober next time. Might make more sense.

Standard accountancy practice says you’re full of shit. Just go away, you half-informed berk.

The human right to keep leeching off the taxpayer. Ffs. Away.

You have failed to provide any case law to the contrary.

No. My argument is that the appropriate compensation for a loss making asset would be zero. Just like with water companies.

The best possible market valuation of loss-making assets is zero. This is why loss making companies are often sold for a nominal fee.

You are not very good at understanding things.

No complaint was upheld. The case law you cited does not prove your case.

You really are very dumb.

a man is holding an umbrella and smiling with the words now comes the part written on his face . ALT: a man is holding an umbrella and smiling with the words now comes the part written on his face .

The case law you cited supports my view, idiot.

a man with a beard is talking to another man and says congratulations you played yourself ALT: a man with a beard is talking to another man and says congratulations you played yourself

So they found that there was no violation of any aspect of the ECHR by the UK government in respect of nationalising these industries.

Quack. Quack. Oops.

5. Holds by sixteen votes to two that there has been no violation of the said Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) on any of the other grounds advanced by the applicants;

6. Holds by fifteen votes to three that there has been no violation of Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention.

4. Holds by fourteen votes to four that there has been no violation of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention on the ground that Sir William Lithgow had no individual access to an independent tribunal in the determination of his rights to compensation;

2. Holds by seventeen votes to one that there has been no violation of the said Article 1 (P1-1) on any of the other grounds advanced by the applicants

3. Holds unanimously that there has been no violation of Article 14 of the Convention, taken in conjunction with the said Article 1 (art. 14+P1-1)

You read the verdict?

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT
1. Holds by thirteen votes to five that there has been no violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1) on the ground that the 1977 Act contained no provisions making allowance for developments between 1974 and 1977 in the companies concerned;

It’s definitely in the public interest. So there we go.

Predictably, some sensibles are attempting to tone police this immaculate mic drop.

But what only Polanski has worked out is that the terminally online generation is now pushing 50 and all ages below, and so these words are so much more effective than 100 weird Top Gun takeoffs.

We really need to find this horse that’s going around kicking “sensible” centrists in the head. It’s getting out of hand.

Dry up, misery guts.

Oh I know. I’m just having some fun at her expense.

I think you’ll find that this approach to valuation is precisely what these companies rely on to keep their tax bill nice and low.

Which human right do you think it would violate?

@lucympowell.bsky.social - just to let you know, the bit I’ve circled here is where the lessons arrive. If you actually want to learn anything, you may want to switch this feature on?

My least favourite genre of politician is the helpless observer. I hate them even more than the actively evil ones. They just post “this is bad” on social media. Dammit, I can do that. You’re walking the corridors of power. Get in the room and stop the bad thing. I don’t need a damn narrator!

But they keep telling us they can’t make any money without subsidies, so the asset is worthless. We shouldn’t be paying social security for crappy companies.

Have to admit, I didn’t read back for one of my responses above. Thought you were still wanging on about Gaza.

No, of course it wouldn’t breach anyone’s human rights, you twerp.

They have already had their “compensation”.

He’s gone extremely blocky. I’d bookmarked one of his posts to come back to today but he blocked me before I could get there.

What?