Britain will come out of this recession before Euroland...

[EternalOptimist]

I doubt it as he doesn't think, just babbles away with his verbal diarrhea. Luckily I can't see what bollux he's wittering about now.

I think Bootle's most telling point is the fact that if we had the Euro in 1999, the credit explosion (and therefore subsequent bust) would have been even more spectacular with the much lower Euro rates.

I remember listening to Bootle about three years ago, predicting an imminant house price crash.
A year and a half ago he was asked to comment on the situation again, he said 'I refuse to comment because I got it so wrong last time'
I was sort of impressed by his honesty

[EternalOptimist]

I don't talk about economics in there

good
that was my point. keep it zipped and let it all out on CUK

[AtW]

Not an inch of ground conceded. So vital is it for you to "stand firm" that you resort to making the most ridiculous assertions

What concession do you expect on yes/no question? My view is solid that UK should join euro and that's it.

The arguement could be around what is the final exchange rate for pound should be - now that's a very difficult question to answer and there I have no exact answer whether it should be parity, or 1.1 euro for 1 pound.

In a way this is not indifferent to failed company which is being acquired by a stronger, bigger one - you can try to continue go it alone and face bankrupcy, or you can try to negotiate good price for your shares (currency in this case).

[AtW]

good
that was my point. keep it zipped and let it all out on CUK

Why do you think I've got so many posts on here?

Me and sas in pub stay mum, when he drinks I also drink

[sasguru]

I remember listening to Bootle about three years ago, predicting an imminant house price crash.
A year and a half ago he was asked to comment on the situation again, he said 'I refuse to comment because I got it so wrong last time'
I was sort of impressed by his honesty

Bootle has consistently been one of the better commentators. He's been in the business a long time and I recall reading his articles in the last recession, about 1991. If I remember rightly he was one of the first to say that getting out of the ERM would be a good thing, and so it was.

[EternalOptimist]

Why do you think I've got so many posts on here?

Me and sas in pub stay mum, when he drinks I also drink

weird accent and a dual personality, Birmingham must seem like home to you

[Doggy Styles]

There is no contradiction, even though I may not have phrased it well.

What I meant is that Dodgy's motivation in my view is to look for any arguement that can help him justify his views, where as my views are formed on the basis of arguements.

That is gobbledegook. Everyone uses arguments to support their view. You are trying to split hairs.

[AtW]

Everyone uses arguments to support their view.

Nazi race doctrine was formed without any scientific arguements, however after they had it formed they tried to justify it using science or some other "rational" arguements. That's about sums up Dodgy's approach in this case.

Is that clear to you now or do I have to use my turkey voice again?

[AlfredJPruffock]

Nazi race doctrine was formed without any scientific arguements, however after they had it formed they tried to justify it using science or some other "rational" arguements. That's about sums up Dodgy's approach in this case.

Is that clear to you now or do I have to use my turkey voice again?

Errm , no there was a fair bit of Nazi 'scientific' knowledge put forward to justify it.

Winston Churchill too was interested in this nasty bit of work.

Ever heard of Eugenics or Social Darwinism ?


Nazi eugenics were Nazi Germany's racially-based social policies that placed the improvement of the race through eugenics at the center of their concerns and targeted those humans they identified as "life unworthy of life" (German Lebensunwertes Leben), including but not limited to the criminal, degenerate, dissident, feeble-minded, homosexual, idle, insane, religious, and weak, for elimination from the chain of heredity. More than 400,000 people were sterilized against their will, while 70,000 were killed in the Action T4.[1]


More evil -


The future leader considered that Germany could only become strong again if the state applied to German society the basic principles of racial hygiene and eugenics. Hitler believed the nation had become weak, corrupted by the infusion of degenerate elements into its bloodstream.[citation needed] In his opinion, these had to be removed as quickly as possible. He also believed that the strong and the racially pure had to be encouraged to have more children, and the weak and the racially impure had to be neutralized by one means or another.

The concepts of racist ideas of competition, termed social Darwinism in 1944, were discussed by European scientists, and also in the Vienna press during the 1920s, but how exactly Hitler picked up these ideas is uncertain.[2] In 1876, Ernst Haeckel had discussed the selective infanticide policy of the Greek city of ancient Sparta.[3] In his Second Book, which was kept unpublished during Nazi Germany, Hitler also praised Sparta, adding that this was because he considered Sparta to be the first "Völkisch State". He endorsed what he perceived to be an early eugenics treatment of deformed children:

Sparta must be regarded as the first Völkisch State. The exposure of the sick, weak, deformed children, in short, their destruction, was more decent and in truth a thousand times more humane than the wretched insanity of our day which preserves the most pathological subject, and indeed at any price, and yet takes the life of a hundred thousand healthy children in consequence of birth control or through abortions, in order subsequently to breed a race of degenerates burdened with illnesses.[4][5]

[Doggy Styles]

Nazi race doctrine was formed without any scientific arguements, however after they had it formed they tried to justify it using science or some other "rational" arguements. That's about sums up Dodgy's approach in this case.

Is that clear to you now or do I have to use my turkey voice again?

No, not clear at all.

You are saying that Dodgy should not use rational arguments to support his view.

What should he use instead?