Rowan Williams and Richard Curtis are lying

Sorry, but that\’s the only way to describe this piece about the Robin Hood Tax:

The plan is to tax certain transactions between financial institutions. It would not burden the high street banks or the private currency transactions of holidaymakers, but would target the hundreds of billions that flow between the big players in the financial industry.

The problem is that it would affect, even if that is not the target aimed at, high street banks and the private currency transactions of holidaymakers.

Clearly two such eminent men cannot be ignorant therefore they must be lying.

7 thoughts on “Rowan Williams and Richard Curtis are lying”

  1. The funniest thing about Curtis last film was the way he rewrote history, cant have the nice mr Wilson being tainted with brush of trying to sink radio Caroline can we?

    No Tim you are wrong they are not liars, a liar will be aware of the facts and say and do otherwise, these two individuals have never had to deal with facts in their lives or indeed balance an account book, only nasty people like us do such demeaning things. Stupid is as stupid does.

  2. You’re saying an archbishop can’t be as thick as two short planks when it comes to economics? You know how bad bishops are, right? And you remember the Peter Principle?


  3. No, they’re just naive, priveledged irrational lefties. Which, when they’re doing their jobs works out just fine.

    But just as I don’t want Alan Greenspan writing poetry, I also don’t want these fuckers involved in subjects fit for rationalists.

  4. J. Tagaki:

    I’d a whole lot rather Alan Greenspan had spent his time writing poetry than fucking with the money supply. Who knows–maybe he did both at the same time?

  5. The Archbishop of Canterbury presumably knows that the CoE is a substantial owner of property assets in this country, not to mention other, non-physical assets. The value of that portfolio runs into the billions of pounds. His organisation has a fiduciary responsibility, I would have thought, not to back campaigns to tax and regulate economic affairs in a way that might endanger that property, and hence, the ability of the CoE to spread its message.

    My two cents.

  6. What is so offensive about this campaign is the intellectual dishonesty that underpins it.

    Mr Curtis and chums are deliberately abusing their status to manipulate public ignorance to their advantage.

    Also his films are rubbish.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *