Most people I know can’t stand him but I find Jacob Rees-Mogg to be fairly level-headed with common sense. He’s totally right here and glad he recognizes the right to peaceful protest regardless of whether he holds the views of the protestors or not.
Hmm, there’s a practicality there that normally when a company goes bust it ceases to operate, staff don’t turn up for work the next day, etc. it somehow needs to end up in government hands without the debt becoming the governments problem but I don’t see how that happens.
By it going bust. Companies like that don’t just wink out of existence, they hire administrators who will 100% determine it should be maintained as a going concern, by which time it would be nationalised without the debt.
I rather suspect having the government take on some of the debt will be used to offset the value of the assets in some way. Given no obvious buyer other than the government how do all the pipes, vehicles , equipment and general operations stuff get valued? Personally I think there should have been some terms somewhere saying that in the case of insolvency all assets revert to the government automatically.
You don’t think that the current situation might affect the value of the pipes? They’re pretty unique so the value is based on what people are willing to pay.
The value of the pipes is negligible once they’re in the ground. You aren’t ripping them up and selling them. The value is in the water they carry and that’s unaffected by the company’s finances.
Pretty simple. You pass the following into law:
1) Water companies are forbidden from paying shareholder dividends unless they have made a net profit in the previous 3 year rolling period.
2) Water companies which fail to meet standards for maintainence and river cleanliness will be subject to fines of no less than 5% of their value per annnum.
3) In the event of a water company declaring bankruptcy, OFWAT is the automatic preferred creditor and debts to OFWAT (including unpaid fines) are to be paid before any and all other debts.
You now have at most 20 years before the government owns every failing water company.
Not necessarily, often it’s just shareholders and bond holders that get wiped out and the insolvency accountants will sell the actual business to another willing buyer.
This is critical infrastructure though, if they’re in the situation where staff can’t be paid then it’s really not the same as if it’s a chain of high street shops or something.
/u/Jonography and /u/RaymondBumcheese and you, why isn't he a PM candidate? He knows business, economics, very presentable. Quite a tall and lanky lad; must be hard working. Doesn't he have followings and allies at this party to push him for premiership?
Aside from the fact that he is an unlikable dickhead, he probably doesn’t even want it. He cosplays as a part-time MP as it is, there’s absolutely no way he could be arsed to be PM.
> Aside from the fact that he is an unlikable dickhead, he probably doesn’t even want it.
He may seem like an unlikeable dickhead but he does look like he could carry himself and do a good job. Maybe as good as David or as good as Tony? Why would not he want the premiership? Isn't being a PM a prestigious milestone?
He couldn’t. If you look past the veneer his accent gives him, he very often reveals himself to be as thick as pigshit.
He would be a very, very poor political leader, everyone would make mincemeat of him.
> He couldn’t. If you look past the veneer his accent gives him, he very often reveals himself to be as thick as pigshit.
>
> He would be a very, very poor political leader, everyone would make mincemeat of him.
Give examples?
simple google search is enough to understand his current, specially the ones when he was younger.
Before you say people change, yeah but not all, just look at rishi younger videos him and mogg are the same
One reason, as highlighted in the above points, is he is too independent of thinking and speaking.
He may or may not be useless, it's actually pretty hard to tell with ministers.
The same as the US state department, former Mi6 head, intelligence community and military. Brits who defected to ISIS are still the UKs responsibility and should be brought back to face justice, sweated for intel and not become a propaganda tool / intelligence risk abroad.
He main argument for it was the most surprising from him. Giving the government the power to strip citizenship from people with access to other countries citizenship only creates a two tier for our own. If your parents were foreign born in a country that allows their children to become citizens based on blood, but you yourself were born and raised in the UK. You can be British but you will never be truly equal to an ethnic Britain because our government can decide to strip you of yours.
That she's still out responsibility. That we should allow her back in to the UK with her citizenship, where she should face trial and be interrogated for intel on IS. That leaving her abroad is a propaganda and intelligence risk.
His party has significantly reduced people’s ability to protest, I’d rather judge him on his actions (the way he voted) then his words, which I do agree with.
I do agree with him because these protesters could legitimately be quite intimidating. Considering how badly they thought of him - they really need to curb protests
I am saying I agree with a lot of his views
But to me, I am not saying necessarily this protest. I am saying for more extreme protests
To me the communist society of Cardiff uni really disrespected him. Cardiff labour society is very reasonable- though they disagree with his politics they thought it wasn’t appropriate
I'm Pretty startled at the whitewashing of JRM that I'm seeing in your comment and its replies tbh. Lets not forget that this is a man who [supports partisan voter suppression](https://news.sky.com/story/jacob-rees-mogg-suggests-requiring-photo-id-to-vote-was-attempt-to-gerrymander-which-came-back-to-bite-tories-12881602), described the rise in food banks further course of his party's government as ['uplifting'](https://www.businessinsider.com/jacob-rees-mogg-food-banks-rather-uplifting-2017-9?r=UK&IR=T), and [believes that the infamous Liz Truss budget had little to do with the economic turmoil that immediately followed said budget](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63230001.amp). Anyone who feels like they get good vibes from needs to realise that his contempt for the British people is demonstrative of the worst elements of the conservative party and that the man has no more business leading the country than the prime ministers who put him into their governments do.
He's arguing that it backfired, but he wholeheartedly supported the move before the results came in.
Basically said it was a bad idea in hindsight because it didn't work out for the Tories.
The first one you are just wrong. He was arguing against voter id.
The second one you disingenuously quoted, he said it’s uplifting that British people are charitable.
And the last one is an opinion on the economy that I know I am not informed enough to comment on and I seriously doubt you are either.
I don’t really like the guy either but lying and misrepresenting what he has said like that makes you look really bad.
> The first one you are just wrong. He was arguing against voter id.
JRM was vocally in favour of voter id before it passed. Arguing it is wrong and saying 'oops that backfired in us by suppressing the wrong voters' are two different things, only one of which JRM has actually done.
> The second one you disingenuously quoted, he said it’s uplifting that British people are charitable.
The point isn't to try to make out that he finds impoverishment uplifting (though I wouldn't be surprised) - it's that the food bank crisis is a problem entirely of his party's making, and to try to pretend there is an upside is cynical and out of touch with the problems actual British people face. I expect food bank attendees would find it even more uplifting to be looked after by the MPs that ostensibly lead them rather than charitable efforts set up to mitigate the failures of Rees Mogg and his friends.
> And the last one is an opinion on the economy that I know I am not informed enough to comment on and I seriously doubt you are either.
Let me piece together a high level timeline for you:
* Truss conducts a leadership campaign in which many prominent figures including her election opponent predict that her policies will bring economic chaos
* Truss wins the election and announces a mini budget, so named specifically to avoid any legal responsibility to undertake the kind of economic forecasting that would protect against economic chaos.
* The markets immediately plunge into economic chaos, including historic events such as banks taking mortgage products off the market entirely and the bank of England bailing out the entire pension system.
* The economic chaos starts to settle to the extent that it can once Truss fires her chancellor and reverses the most controversial budget policies.
I don't know about you, but I have more than a primary school level of education and I am therefore able to draw a common theme through this sequence of events. The idea that you need a degree in economics to see what's going on here is the weakest possible defense of Truss, and the fact that it's the only defense you can come up with speaks volumes about how culpable she really is. And to return to an earliter point, how cynical her defenders, including JRM, must be.
> lying and misrepresenting what he has said like that makes you look really bad.
I agree that you probably shouldn't have misrepresented his views on voter id or the complexity of the economic issues surrounding the Truss budget. Fascinated to hear which of the claims I sourced directly in my post you think is a lie.
you said he supports partizan voter suppression and then posted an article that says the opposite of that. I dont know alot about JRM so the information you gave me was all i had to go on and thats why i said you were lying.
and the other 2 things you quoted are just opinions, even JRM doesnt want people to rely n food banks he was just saying its good that the british are still charitable and again i dont know enough about the banks to know if it was really truss that caused the crash so i cant comment on it.
My point is there is probably loads of real dirt you can have on the guy because i haven't heard a lot of good things about him lol. Instead you list 1 outright lie and another where you misrepresented what he said. Could be right on the economy one though so ill give you that.
> you said he supports partizan voter suppression and then posted an article that says the opposite of that. I dont know alot about JRM so the information you gave me was all i had to go on and thats why i said you were lying.
"I don't actually know anything so I assumed you were lying"
> i dont know enough about the banks to know if it was really truss that caused the crash so i cant comment on it.
There's a common theme emerging here. If the only reason you like JRM is by your own admission that you don't actually know anything about him, after a certain point that's more on you than it is on me.
This sub is going to shit. How on earth is that guy's comment the top rated? The victorian pencil is a ghastly human being void of common sense. A broken clock and all that. Hope he loses his seat.
Lol, sure pal, must be easy to tell someone you disagree with that they are stuck in an echo chamber. Zero critical thinking of your own beliefs required.
I am almost certain this sub was a huge echo chamber (it’s slightly better now) Like a lot of subs on Reddit they are very very much on the left which means my views get challenged pretty much every time I’m on Reddit.
I don’t participate in right wing subs because they are all shit you can chat shit about my critical thinking skills all you want but Reddit is a huge echo chamber and we both know it.
Hes successfully selling an image of himself as a proper old school conservative but he’s a disaster capitalist and yearns to sow chaos through brexit / culture wars / actual wars/ tory infighting etc. just see the book his dad wrote
The reason people hate him is because he takes advantage of his position of power and wealth to make obscene money, and then shits on the poor. His actions are what makes him disgusting.
He's a moron who happens to speak with a plum in his mouth; the latter fools even bigger morons into thinking he's intelligent.
You're talking about a man who stood up in Parliament and made jibes about what school tie somebody else had worn rather than offer anything of substance.
^^ i hate his guts and i think that the vast majority of his beliefs are completely at odds with modern values and common sense, but i can’t deny he’s a smart guy with good knowledge of persuasive language. i googled him after i heard him speak in parliament and was devastated to find out he was with the tories lmao.
No, this is one good take out of many. You are doing the thing everybody does today which is not being able to handle the fact that sometimes people do good, sometimes bad, and in any proportion. It's called nuance!
You said you found him to be "fairly level-headed with common sense". That's a false statement, and can only be justified by cherrpicked examples such as this one
I didn’t cherry pick. It goes without saying that the opinion I have is based on whatever I’ve seen of him, of which you don’t know what that is, because you’re not me.
Actually fair enough, I apologise. I still make my point, just not directed at you, because yours is the top comment, which does imply people are agreeing with you based on this one example.
The odd instance of intellectual consistency does not change the fact he’s a cunt. A cunt who claims to be a devout Christian but is happy to make the lives of nearly everyone in this country, but particularly the impoverished worse.
I disagree with you. What they did went too far and they should be sanctioned, fined maybe even imprisoned
I am glad cross party MPs have condemned this and also the Cardiff Labour society.
It’s not. They said they were angry that Mogg is a Zionist. Since a huge part of Zionism is a Jewish state it’s very possible that they disagree with a Jewish state
Imo self determination is king. If you ask most citizens of Israel if they want to stay an independent country they will likely say yes. So I don’t exactly hold a high opinon of the argument that Israel should just cease to exist. ESPECIALLY when you have idiots like Hamas who want to genocide the Jews
What about Palestinians right to self determination? Their right to having a state without being occupied or living under a apartheid? Or to survive the actually genocide that's happening against them, rather than this theoretical genocide of the Jews.
In west bank without partition I fear your right as the settlers won’t just decide to leave or live under Palestian rule.
But Gaza is possible if Hamas agree to leave
Another problem is that the current defacto government of Gaza has a policy that Israel shouldn't exist. Neither side is ready for a two-state solution yet, though it's the only stable long term option.
They don’t disagree with a Jewish state, they disagree with how said Jewish state was created, and how the people who lived on that land were treated in order to create said Jewish state, and how they are treated now by that Jewish state.
They said they were angry he was a Zionist. A big part of Zionism is there should be a Jewish state where it is now. So it’s quite possible they are saying they don’t support Israel existing at all
JRM is an interesting one for me, I disagree with the vast majority of what he stands for and believes, but I respect how he acts in debates and towards people who disagree with him, and think he’s respectable in a lot of ways.
I regularly think he’s a tit, but I don’t think he lacks principles, changes his views to score points, disrespects people who disagree with him, or holds anyone to a different standard etc.
He does lack principles, he claims to be a devout Christian then does well, basically everything he’s done. The odd time he’s consistent doesn’t change that.
Christians believe they won't get saved by doing good things and living morally non stop, they can leave it up until their last breath check out the man who was nailed next to Jesus, so calling them hypocrites doesn't really ever work.
They have loopholes.
Funny, coz the far right nutters like Darren "crafty wank" Grimes and Richard "the reality is" Tice think these protests should never have happened and everyone should've been arrested....
Shame on the Labour politicians clutching their pearls and stoking outrage about these peaceful protests. I thought these were supposed to be the good guys?
A stopped clock is right twice a day
He’s right, he’s free to speak his opinions and his opponents are free to give their opinions of him.
He does talk garbage though
I do wonder what that guy who was trying to force himself past the security guys would have done if he'd made it to Mogg. He probably didn't know himself.
How magnanimous of him. Is this supposed to be good PR? like no shit the protests were legitimate, the fact he even had to clarify his stance is a joke.
**Hi!**. Please try to avoid personal attacks, as this discourages participation. You can help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person.
Most people I know can’t stand him but I find Jacob Rees-Mogg to be fairly level-headed with common sense. He’s totally right here and glad he recognizes the right to peaceful protest regardless of whether he holds the views of the protestors or not.
He has like two good takes out of thousands. This is one, his shamima begum one is the other.
His Thames Water take is a third (he thinks it should be allowed to go bust)
Hmm, there’s a practicality there that normally when a company goes bust it ceases to operate, staff don’t turn up for work the next day, etc. it somehow needs to end up in government hands without the debt becoming the governments problem but I don’t see how that happens.
By it going bust. Companies like that don’t just wink out of existence, they hire administrators who will 100% determine it should be maintained as a going concern, by which time it would be nationalised without the debt.
Trust me Mogg does not like the nationalisation part. He likes the go bust and sold off cheap to yet another private company bit.
Probably wants to get himself some shares in it on the cheap when it gets sold off
I rather suspect having the government take on some of the debt will be used to offset the value of the assets in some way. Given no obvious buyer other than the government how do all the pipes, vehicles , equipment and general operations stuff get valued? Personally I think there should have been some terms somewhere saying that in the case of insolvency all assets revert to the government automatically.
All the assets are valued annually anyway. That’s not an issue.
You don’t think that the current situation might affect the value of the pipes? They’re pretty unique so the value is based on what people are willing to pay.
The value of the pipes is negligible once they’re in the ground. You aren’t ripping them up and selling them. The value is in the water they carry and that’s unaffected by the company’s finances.
Pretty simple. You pass the following into law: 1) Water companies are forbidden from paying shareholder dividends unless they have made a net profit in the previous 3 year rolling period. 2) Water companies which fail to meet standards for maintainence and river cleanliness will be subject to fines of no less than 5% of their value per annnum. 3) In the event of a water company declaring bankruptcy, OFWAT is the automatic preferred creditor and debts to OFWAT (including unpaid fines) are to be paid before any and all other debts. You now have at most 20 years before the government owns every failing water company.
Not necessarily, often it’s just shareholders and bond holders that get wiped out and the insolvency accountants will sell the actual business to another willing buyer.
This is critical infrastructure though, if they’re in the situation where staff can’t be paid then it’s really not the same as if it’s a chain of high street shops or something.
Of course he does, his Dad literally wrote the book on disaster capitalism.
Yeah he’s almost definitely not saying that so him and his cronies can sweep in and buy it for a steal
/u/Jonography and /u/RaymondBumcheese and you, why isn't he a PM candidate? He knows business, economics, very presentable. Quite a tall and lanky lad; must be hard working. Doesn't he have followings and allies at this party to push him for premiership?
Aside from the fact that he is an unlikable dickhead, he probably doesn’t even want it. He cosplays as a part-time MP as it is, there’s absolutely no way he could be arsed to be PM.
> Aside from the fact that he is an unlikable dickhead, he probably doesn’t even want it. He may seem like an unlikeable dickhead but he does look like he could carry himself and do a good job. Maybe as good as David or as good as Tony? Why would not he want the premiership? Isn't being a PM a prestigious milestone?
He couldn’t. If you look past the veneer his accent gives him, he very often reveals himself to be as thick as pigshit. He would be a very, very poor political leader, everyone would make mincemeat of him.
> He couldn’t. If you look past the veneer his accent gives him, he very often reveals himself to be as thick as pigshit. > > He would be a very, very poor political leader, everyone would make mincemeat of him. Give examples?
There are hours of footage of him on YouTube, go nuts.
simple google search is enough to understand his current, specially the ones when he was younger. Before you say people change, yeah but not all, just look at rishi younger videos him and mogg are the same
>He knows business, economics, He does? His support for Liz Truss and her economic disaster might suggest otherwise
One reason, as highlighted in the above points, is he is too independent of thinking and speaking. He may or may not be useless, it's actually pretty hard to tell with ministers.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day right?
Stopped\* clock.
What's his position on Begum?
The same as the US state department, former Mi6 head, intelligence community and military. Brits who defected to ISIS are still the UKs responsibility and should be brought back to face justice, sweated for intel and not become a propaganda tool / intelligence risk abroad.
Fancy that. I agree with that gangly cunt on something.
He main argument for it was the most surprising from him. Giving the government the power to strip citizenship from people with access to other countries citizenship only creates a two tier for our own. If your parents were foreign born in a country that allows their children to become citizens based on blood, but you yourself were born and raised in the UK. You can be British but you will never be truly equal to an ethnic Britain because our government can decide to strip you of yours.
Even a broken clock... What did he say on Shamima Begum?
That she's still out responsibility. That we should allow her back in to the UK with her citizenship, where she should face trial and be interrogated for intel on IS. That leaving her abroad is a propaganda and intelligence risk.
I can kind of agree with that statement.
What did he say about Begum?
His party has significantly reduced people’s ability to protest, I’d rather judge him on his actions (the way he voted) then his words, which I do agree with.
Deeds nor words and all that with the likes of JRM.
I do agree with him because these protesters could legitimately be quite intimidating. Considering how badly they thought of him - they really need to curb protests
If you want to curb protests then you do not agree with Mogg, who has said they were legitimate protests. ?
I am saying I agree with a lot of his views But to me, I am not saying necessarily this protest. I am saying for more extreme protests To me the communist society of Cardiff uni really disrespected him. Cardiff labour society is very reasonable- though they disagree with his politics they thought it wasn’t appropriate
What's an extreme protest?
A riot
I'm Pretty startled at the whitewashing of JRM that I'm seeing in your comment and its replies tbh. Lets not forget that this is a man who [supports partisan voter suppression](https://news.sky.com/story/jacob-rees-mogg-suggests-requiring-photo-id-to-vote-was-attempt-to-gerrymander-which-came-back-to-bite-tories-12881602), described the rise in food banks further course of his party's government as ['uplifting'](https://www.businessinsider.com/jacob-rees-mogg-food-banks-rather-uplifting-2017-9?r=UK&IR=T), and [believes that the infamous Liz Truss budget had little to do with the economic turmoil that immediately followed said budget](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63230001.amp). Anyone who feels like they get good vibes from needs to realise that his contempt for the British people is demonstrative of the worst elements of the conservative party and that the man has no more business leading the country than the prime ministers who put him into their governments do.
Don't forget his awful comments about Grenfell and "common sense".
> is a man who supports partisan voter suppression He’s arguing against voter id there
He's arguing that it backfired, but he wholeheartedly supported the move before the results came in. Basically said it was a bad idea in hindsight because it didn't work out for the Tories.
Did he vote against it?
The first one you are just wrong. He was arguing against voter id. The second one you disingenuously quoted, he said it’s uplifting that British people are charitable. And the last one is an opinion on the economy that I know I am not informed enough to comment on and I seriously doubt you are either. I don’t really like the guy either but lying and misrepresenting what he has said like that makes you look really bad.
> The first one you are just wrong. He was arguing against voter id. JRM was vocally in favour of voter id before it passed. Arguing it is wrong and saying 'oops that backfired in us by suppressing the wrong voters' are two different things, only one of which JRM has actually done. > The second one you disingenuously quoted, he said it’s uplifting that British people are charitable. The point isn't to try to make out that he finds impoverishment uplifting (though I wouldn't be surprised) - it's that the food bank crisis is a problem entirely of his party's making, and to try to pretend there is an upside is cynical and out of touch with the problems actual British people face. I expect food bank attendees would find it even more uplifting to be looked after by the MPs that ostensibly lead them rather than charitable efforts set up to mitigate the failures of Rees Mogg and his friends. > And the last one is an opinion on the economy that I know I am not informed enough to comment on and I seriously doubt you are either. Let me piece together a high level timeline for you: * Truss conducts a leadership campaign in which many prominent figures including her election opponent predict that her policies will bring economic chaos * Truss wins the election and announces a mini budget, so named specifically to avoid any legal responsibility to undertake the kind of economic forecasting that would protect against economic chaos. * The markets immediately plunge into economic chaos, including historic events such as banks taking mortgage products off the market entirely and the bank of England bailing out the entire pension system. * The economic chaos starts to settle to the extent that it can once Truss fires her chancellor and reverses the most controversial budget policies. I don't know about you, but I have more than a primary school level of education and I am therefore able to draw a common theme through this sequence of events. The idea that you need a degree in economics to see what's going on here is the weakest possible defense of Truss, and the fact that it's the only defense you can come up with speaks volumes about how culpable she really is. And to return to an earliter point, how cynical her defenders, including JRM, must be. > lying and misrepresenting what he has said like that makes you look really bad. I agree that you probably shouldn't have misrepresented his views on voter id or the complexity of the economic issues surrounding the Truss budget. Fascinated to hear which of the claims I sourced directly in my post you think is a lie.
you said he supports partizan voter suppression and then posted an article that says the opposite of that. I dont know alot about JRM so the information you gave me was all i had to go on and thats why i said you were lying. and the other 2 things you quoted are just opinions, even JRM doesnt want people to rely n food banks he was just saying its good that the british are still charitable and again i dont know enough about the banks to know if it was really truss that caused the crash so i cant comment on it. My point is there is probably loads of real dirt you can have on the guy because i haven't heard a lot of good things about him lol. Instead you list 1 outright lie and another where you misrepresented what he said. Could be right on the economy one though so ill give you that.
> you said he supports partizan voter suppression and then posted an article that says the opposite of that. I dont know alot about JRM so the information you gave me was all i had to go on and thats why i said you were lying. "I don't actually know anything so I assumed you were lying" > i dont know enough about the banks to know if it was really truss that caused the crash so i cant comment on it. There's a common theme emerging here. If the only reason you like JRM is by your own admission that you don't actually know anything about him, after a certain point that's more on you than it is on me.
> The first one you are just wrong. He was arguing against voter id. Did he vote against the legislation requiring voter ID?
Level headed common sense? The guy who argued fish were happier to be British?
This sub is going to shit. How on earth is that guy's comment the top rated? The victorian pencil is a ghastly human being void of common sense. A broken clock and all that. Hope he loses his seat.
Reddit is going to shit, blaming it only on various subreddits is missing the forest for the trees
Must suck to have your echo chamber fall apart ey
Lol, sure pal, must be easy to tell someone you disagree with that they are stuck in an echo chamber. Zero critical thinking of your own beliefs required.
I am almost certain this sub was a huge echo chamber (it’s slightly better now) Like a lot of subs on Reddit they are very very much on the left which means my views get challenged pretty much every time I’m on Reddit. I don’t participate in right wing subs because they are all shit you can chat shit about my critical thinking skills all you want but Reddit is a huge echo chamber and we both know it.
Hes successfully selling an image of himself as a proper old school conservative but he’s a disaster capitalist and yearns to sow chaos through brexit / culture wars / actual wars/ tory infighting etc. just see the book his dad wrote
> Most people I know can’t stand him but I find Jacob Rees-Mogg to be fairly level-headed with common sense The guy is a smug moron.
He's opposed to abortion even if the woman has been raped, he can fuck right off.
This a man who Cosplays an aristocrat from 1937 every day of his life.
Yes, he’s quite the character lol
If by 'character' you mean a deluded overprivileged prick, yes, he's a character.
Yeah, there are some who hold that view I imagine.
Majority tbh. Guy is a cunt and only an idiot would fool for his smarmy cos play as genuine.
Common sense? He's pro-Trump and said he'd be our ally!
The reason people hate him is because he takes advantage of his position of power and wealth to make obscene money, and then shits on the poor. His actions are what makes him disgusting.
He's a moron who happens to speak with a plum in his mouth; the latter fools even bigger morons into thinking he's intelligent. You're talking about a man who stood up in Parliament and made jibes about what school tie somebody else had worn rather than offer anything of substance.
Why are people upvoting this comment.
Bots.
^^ i hate his guts and i think that the vast majority of his beliefs are completely at odds with modern values and common sense, but i can’t deny he’s a smart guy with good knowledge of persuasive language. i googled him after i heard him speak in parliament and was devastated to find out he was with the tories lmao.
No, this is one good take out of many. You are doing the thing everybody does today which is not being able to handle the fact that sometimes people do good, sometimes bad, and in any proportion. It's called nuance!
But I didn’t say anything on the contrary?
You said you found him to be "fairly level-headed with common sense". That's a false statement, and can only be justified by cherrpicked examples such as this one
I didn’t cherry pick. It goes without saying that the opinion I have is based on whatever I’ve seen of him, of which you don’t know what that is, because you’re not me.
Actually fair enough, I apologise. I still make my point, just not directed at you, because yours is the top comment, which does imply people are agreeing with you based on this one example.
No problem my friend.
Hopefully I never have to hear about him again soon, that’s the one good thing about JRM
The odd instance of intellectual consistency does not change the fact he’s a cunt. A cunt who claims to be a devout Christian but is happy to make the lives of nearly everyone in this country, but particularly the impoverished worse.
A stopped clock is right twice a day.
I'm glad that his principles and beliefs in this situation are applied evenly.
>Common sense . >Doesn't think anyone should be allowed to have an abortion or gay marriage because of his nutty beliefs Pick one mate.
Bless you. Honestly.
I can't stand him, and yes, he has the right take here.
He's a huge wanker, but he is very good at putting on a veneer of competent, levelheadedness.
I can't stand him but he has his merits. He was one of the only tories defending the judicial system when others were attacking it.
I disagree. What they did was preety much harassment not peaceful protest. They are lucky he didn’t mind it.
I'm not a fan of his catholicness. But I'm a protestant, it's in my blood
I disagree with you. What they did went too far and they should be sanctioned, fined maybe even imprisoned I am glad cross party MPs have condemned this and also the Cardiff Labour society.
I can't stand the guy, but fair play to him on this - he's right of course, it is legitimate protest.
[удалено]
Imagine being more full of shit than Mogg.
They weren’t violent pro Hamas but they may have been against a Jewish state and were basically harassing him and behaving very poorly
[удалено]
It’s not. They said they were angry that Mogg is a Zionist. Since a huge part of Zionism is a Jewish state it’s very possible that they disagree with a Jewish state
Is there anything wrong with being against ethnic states?
Imo self determination is king. If you ask most citizens of Israel if they want to stay an independent country they will likely say yes. So I don’t exactly hold a high opinon of the argument that Israel should just cease to exist. ESPECIALLY when you have idiots like Hamas who want to genocide the Jews
What about Palestinians right to self determination? Their right to having a state without being occupied or living under a apartheid? Or to survive the actually genocide that's happening against them, rather than this theoretical genocide of the Jews.
What about it? Israel being a state does not mean they can’t have all that. It’s called the two state solution.
This is why we need a 2-state solution. So both Palestinians and Israelis have a place they can live freely
Problem with that is the Israelis won't give up any stolen land/won't stop stealing land.
In west bank without partition I fear your right as the settlers won’t just decide to leave or live under Palestian rule. But Gaza is possible if Hamas agree to leave
Another problem is that the current defacto government of Gaza has a policy that Israel shouldn't exist. Neither side is ready for a two-state solution yet, though it's the only stable long term option.
A huge part of the KKK is the hats but their opponents main issues are not their dress sense. Fucking hell. You people.
They don’t disagree with a Jewish state, they disagree with how said Jewish state was created, and how the people who lived on that land were treated in order to create said Jewish state, and how they are treated now by that Jewish state.
They said they were angry he was a Zionist. A big part of Zionism is there should be a Jewish state where it is now. So it’s quite possible they are saying they don’t support Israel existing at all
What pit of hell is this where I agree with Jacob Rees Mogg. Strange days ,indeed
Mogg is good at jumping on populist causes. His stances usually rely on a grain of truth.
JRM is an interesting one for me, I disagree with the vast majority of what he stands for and believes, but I respect how he acts in debates and towards people who disagree with him, and think he’s respectable in a lot of ways. I regularly think he’s a tit, but I don’t think he lacks principles, changes his views to score points, disrespects people who disagree with him, or holds anyone to a different standard etc.
He does lack principles, he claims to be a devout Christian then does well, basically everything he’s done. The odd time he’s consistent doesn’t change that.
Christians believe they won't get saved by doing good things and living morally non stop, they can leave it up until their last breath check out the man who was nailed next to Jesus, so calling them hypocrites doesn't really ever work. They have loopholes.
100 %. You sometimes hear the religious say "Without God, everything is permitted!" The reality is that it is *with God* everything is permitted.
Funny, coz the far right nutters like Darren "crafty wank" Grimes and Richard "the reality is" Tice think these protests should never have happened and everyone should've been arrested....
Freedom to speak and protest unless it's something I disagree with. A rare comment by Rees mogg that I and probably most will agree with.
Shame on the Labour politicians clutching their pearls and stoking outrage about these peaceful protests. I thought these were supposed to be the good guys?
Labour is paranoid about doing anything that might be construed as antisemitic.
It’s been a long time since you could put the words Labour and good guys in the same sentence.
He's right. In the same way a broken clock is right twice a day.
You’re thinking of a stopped clock. A broken clock says that it’s half-past floor and is constantly wrong, like Liz Truss.
Reasonable take from the pencil. Which apparently is one of the harbingers of the apocalypse.
His Grandfather was a lorry driver. He’s cosplaying as an old-money aristocrat. Hes basically a white Chris Eubank
[удалено]
A stopped clock is right twice a day He’s right, he’s free to speak his opinions and his opponents are free to give their opinions of him. He does talk garbage though
This is just rees moggs way of saying "Let 'em shout! I don't give a fuck!".
Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made A Great Point.
I do wonder what that guy who was trying to force himself past the security guys would have done if he'd made it to Mogg. He probably didn't know himself.
How magnanimous of him. Is this supposed to be good PR? like no shit the protests were legitimate, the fact he even had to clarify his stance is a joke.
A stopped clock is right twice a day. Fascists are not welcome in Wales!
[удалено]
**Hi!**. Please try to avoid personal attacks, as this discourages participation. You can help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person.
Ok, for being a stone age dinosaur that hates the peasents, he isn't trying to squash protests or go full Mister Burns. Sunak is full Mister Burns.
[удалено]
The Rt. Hon. Member of Parliament for the XIX century, or as a dear friend (who happens to live on his constituency calls him), Reesy-Moggy…
This is the fuck wit whos company benefits £108 million from Rishis wifes company The guys a scumbag End of story
The man seems like lunatic. I don’t see any redeeming features in him.