Status
Not open for further replies.

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
But I just googled it and I got a million hits. It's probably just your internet bubble that is confirming your prejudices by tricking you into thinking it's being censored and getting you all hot under the collar. Very clever how these things work.

And you're going to comb all million before finding the site that should be sitting at the top?
 

version

Well-known member
Who is 'they' here, exactly? Sounds like you have privileged access to their thinking too.
The people who fund the think tanks.

I don't have privileged access to their thinking. I've just watched how the organisations they've funded have conducted themselves, what they've argued for and against and the results of their favoured policies. These are most likely the same people funneling money into Tufton Street.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Try Bing or DuckDuckGo to see how a search engine should work. Either Google are suddenly incompetent or they're distorting the web to suit their agenda.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
But google is supposed to work by how many links there are to a given site (broadly speaking) rather than which one YOU deem the most important.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
The people who fund the think tanks.

I don't have privileged access to their thinking. I've just watched how the organisations they've funded have conducted themselves, what they've argued for and against and the results of their favoured policies. These are most likely the same people funneling money into Tufton Street.

This is tinfoil hat stuff.
 

version

Well-known member
This is tinfoil hat stuff.
Not really. The IEA etc are very real. They have people on the BBC pretty often. They're always banging on about cutting red tape and "free markets" as though the people benefiting from those policies don't go running to the state when the invisible hand turns against them.
 

version

Well-known member
I'll take these free market types at face value when they do away with lobbying and stop accepting government bail outs.
 

version

Well-known member
My main concern is that it doesn't account for the long-term effects of infection. Let's say the entire population of the UK becomes infected. How many are left with complications? Also, if the majority go back to life as normal, what's the risk of enough people becoming ill enough that the economy grinds to a halt again anyway?
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Their strategy is the same as SAGE's plan (before the government snatched the reins) and chimes with the WHO's recent pleas that politicians should stop using lockdowns as an infection control mechanism.

Furthermore, they are considering the people's health in toto, not merely in terms of covid.

The entire population will not become infected.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Maybe China have worked out that most of the West has a lot of dry tinder about and want to see it go up in flames to spark punishing second national lockdowns - it's possible.
 

version

Well-known member
Totally. There's no way of knowing. For all I know, that Byline Times thing I posted could be complete bollocks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top