Skip to content

Richard Murphy says:
July 26 2015 at 8:41 pm
Thanks Tim but no researcher is objective

The pretence that they are is a neoliberal economists delusion

86 thoughts on “Gosh”

  1. Yes, indeed, licens to sweep away all those inconvenient facts . . . but only when one finds them inconvenient, I mean.

    And that is perfectly consistent, because I do not make a claim to any sort of “objectivity” when I cite inconvenience. You see, words mean exactly what I wish them to mean.

  2. At first glance, a baffling and pretty weird comment.

    However, we are now one step closer to understanding what a neoliberal is.

    1) Believes that researchers can be objective.

    It’s a start.

  3. I think Ritchie is assuming that because some activists are researchers, all researchers are activists.

    (Did I accidentally bocado syllogism?)

  4. “no researcher is objective

    The pretence that they are is a neoliberal economists delusion”

    A perfect example of Ritchiebollocks.

    Of course some researchers are objective.

    I doubt that anyone has ever claimed that all researchers are objective.

    And if claims are being made that some researchers are objective when they aren’t, such claims are as likely to come from the left as they are from ‘neoliberals’ (whatever they are).

    The man is delusional and the worry is that too many are buying into the delusions.

  5. “No researcher is objective – apart from me.”

    He’s priceless, isn’t he. His mind is so small that it’s actually incapable of understanding just how small it really is.

    He’s like the first fish in a “There’s always a bigger fish” diagram. Unaware that there are a never ending series of giant teeth behind him.

    I wish he had a YouTube channel. Oh dear God, that would be funny.

  6. The Meissen Bison

    Stuck-Record: I wish he had a YouTube channel. Oh dear God, that would be funny

    What a good idea. Why not pop over there and suggest it in a fawning comment of cringe-worthy sycophancy and he might buy it.

  7. Ho ho! For a “leading expert” or whatever he claims to be, the number of views is pitifully small!

  8. Bloke in North Dorset

    As always there’s a kernel of truth in what he says which is why we have the peer review process, which isn’t infallible, and there is a move towards making all data used in public policy decision making put in to the public domain. Nothing like a bit of publicity to focus people’s minds.

    Perhaps he could start by making all his data available?

  9. Stuck-Record>

    “No researcher is objective – apart from me.”

    You have that the wrong way up. Murph-a-minute is saying ‘since no researcher is objective, I don’t have to even try to be’.

  10. Just how many times can one individual be hoisted by his own petard without ending up with a neck like a giraffe? Unless the neck is solid brass of course.

  11. Unfortunately in this case Richie is correct – no researcher can possibly be objective since researchers are human and by their nature have a set of values which automatically influences them often subconciously.

    At the very least we should recognice that we suffer from selection bias; i.e. we give greater credibility to research that supports our curent theory than to data that contradicts it. We all do it because it is impossible to avoid.

    That is the reason for those fiendishly expensive ‘double blind’ clinical trials, in open trials it was clear that patient expectations introduced a systematic bias in the data, but when the trials were redone with ‘blinded’ subjects who didn’t know what treatment they were on it was found that bias was still introduced by the medics conducting the trial. Double blind trials are now de rigeur where no-one involved with the treatment regime knows who is recieving what.

  12. So, Richard Murphy shows he doesn’t know what ‘objective’ means.

    It doesn’t mean not going in with pre-conceptions.

  13. Noel,

    thank you for that.

    Unfortunately it isn’t funny at all.

    He’s one of those men who is so convinced that he’s right he never bothers with all that tedious stuff like having to look up facts. He learned at an early age to speak quickly and confidently and brook no suggestion whatsoever that he might, in fact, actually be a complete arsehole.

  14. “Arthur Dent

    Unfortunately in this case Richie is correct – no researcher can possibly be objective since researchers are human and by their nature have a set of values which automatically influences them often subconciously.”

    But if someone is researching something he or she doesn’t give a rat’s arse about or maybe something where the outcome has no effect on the individual then it’s perfectly possible to have objective research.

    OR suppose the research is into something definitive, such as ‘how many companies have actually been found by HMRC to be masquerading as dormant whilst actually trading’. Such research cannot be affected by inbuilt bias (there are probably better examples than this – such as research into how many goals were scored by players wearing a number 7 shirt last year in the Premier League).

    As such there is plenty of scope for objective research. And even then there are levels of subjectivity. Murphy’s subjectivity on the tax gap extends to counting perfectly legal deductions as part of it and the extrapolation any number he thinks of by a factor of a large second number he conjures out of either thin air or his arse.

    He is attempting to tar all research with the same mucky brush as applies to himself and such attempts must be resisted.

  15. The man is more than a little insane. Take this extract from his latest effusion of pomposity:

    In my opinion three things are necessary. The first is that all companies owning land in the UK must be deemed to be UK resident for tax and accounting purposes. That means they would have to put their accounts on public record and file tax returns with HMRC. If they did not do so they consequence would be that the company would be wound up and their property would pass to the Crown by default: I think other options should be removed.

    http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015/07/28/if-the-government-is-serious-about-tackling-dirty-money-in-the-uk-it-has-to-do-a-lot-more-than-a-property-register

  16. More to the point, blaming everything on “neoliberalism” is becoming ludicrous.

    Obviously my teenage struggles with girls were the fault of neoliberalism (it was the early days of Fatch), as are my continuing issues good slow bowling.

    Hang on a minute, he’s right.

  17. He believes that researchers being objective is a neoliberal delusion.
    He believes Public Choice Theory is a neoliberal delusion.
    He may think that most things are a neoliberal delusion.

  18. Wow…the Murph-meister also writes peotry (not poetry).

    http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015/07/28/book-review/

    If you go to the bloke’s website stevepottinger.co.uk you can find examples of his peotry. It is suspiciously similar to the LHTD’s writing style. It covers all the same areas with exactly the same viewpoint as the LHTD. What is not to like? I thought about searching for the expression “neo-liberal” but I was getting too bored by the infantilism on display.

  19. ‘Objectivity’ is a slippery term. It can mean ‘the third-person point-of-view’ – as in the ‘hard’ sciences – or it can mean ‘impartial’ – as when a manager or judge rules on a matter without taking his personal views or concerns into account.

  20. (steve pottinger), looking cool in brackets.

    Roses are red
    Maggie was blue
    now she is dead
    they’re having a do.

    They’re airbrushing history
    re-writing the past
    Big Ben’s falling silent
    the flag’s at half mast.

    In a time of austerity
    they’ve money to burn
    for the pomp of her funeral
    but the lesson we’ve learned

    is they secretly know
    she’s not loved by the nation
    her grave wouldn’t be safe

    so they plumped for cremation.

  21. Have to say I am impressed with him though – now 4 days and still no comments allowed. Once the door is open I predict the likes of Sue Queef will reappear as he finds something else upon which to fixate.

    As for the comment – another in a long line of straw men – perhaps their creation is part of ‘the Green New Deal’

    Nothing as yet from ‘Lawrence in Guernsey’ defending his idol here either?

  22. Jack C – can’t you just imagine the stately tones of the LHTD droning out those platitudes?

  23. VP – he is probably busy reading the Profanisaurus to ensure he doesn’t get caught out by Dirty Sanchez, or See You Next Tuesday, or even Adrian Chiles and his Chalfonts. Either that or he is doing the illustrations for his forthcoming wank classic The Joy of Tax, the fruit of his publishing contract with Random House. I wonder where the profits, if any, will be taxable….

  24. Here’s interesting….Murphy has just announced his funding from Friends Provident Foundation and on the Foundation’s website we find (an extract):

    What we will NOT fund:

    •Individual or sole trader applicants.
    •Activities to promote a specific political party.
    •Activity that has already happened.

    Now we all know that Murphy’s LLP is an artificial construct. His wife is the only other member and receives just 1% of income. She is a retired NHS doctor with no tax knowledge and has produced nothing. The LLP is in reality just him.It’s the sort of artificiality which would have Murphy squawking and stamping his little feet if it was being used by others for tax avoidance but apparently it’s fine if it’s being used by him to obtain grants from a charitable trust.

    Meanwhile Murphy explains that one of the reasons he’s getting the grant is so that

    “The book ‘ The Joy of Tax’ should be published”

    But hasn’t the book been finished? Isn’t this “activity that has already happened”?

    Anyway, that ‘political party’ point explains why Murphy continues won’t commit himself to actually saying ‘vote Labour’ despite hobnobbing with Labour politicians and Labour supporting unions.

    It’s all a bit iffy and, again, the sort of sophistry Murphy bleats on about when others do it…..

    What a hypocritical cnut he is.

  25. Bloke in North Dorset

    “Diogenes
    July 29, 2015 at 1:04 am
    It looks as if he is engaging in neo liberal tax evasion”
    Tax is do worthy things like giving out random amounts of tax payers money to kids or writing blogs and books pointing out how great the Couragous State is and how joyful it is to pay tax.

    So therefore if you are already doing these things then you must be obeying the spirit of tax law so you cannot be a tax evader, avoider or even neo liberal by definition.

    Frankly you are a neo liberal sophist and clearly out of your depth.

  26. “What a hypocritical cnut he is”

    Of course, as pointed out elsewhere, the man who insists everything in business should be on public record, now says this:

    “I have also been offered a grant of £25,000 a year from a private trust that has asked that I do not publicise their name because of the number of requests for funding that otherwise follow and the burden that this imposes. In the circumstances that have been explained to me I have accepted this constraint.”

    We are not to know this is the KENNETH MILLER TRUST and the KENNETH MILLER TRUST must not be mentioned anywhere as funding Richard Murphy as the KENNETH MILLER TRUST does not want to be approached for funding by random people. So don’t mention the KENNETH MILLER TRUST.

  27. I’m reposting my comments from the other thread:

    I just Googled the Kenneth Miller Trust (I believe that’s the name that you said isn’t it – the Kenneth Miller Trust?)

    Anyway, Anne Miller of the Kenneth Miller Trust is a signatory to a letter to the Telegraph in 2012 objecting to the proposed cap on charity tax relief:

    “None of us view tax relief as a primary motive, although it may substantially increase our donations. But it is an important signal that the decision to use wealth to help others, rather than to enrich ourselves, is recognised, encouraged and supported by society.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/9203761/Proposed-cap-to-charity-tax-relief-will-damage-philanthropy.html

    I seem to remember Ritchie vociferously denouncing the likes of Bill Gates for using their wealth to help others, and using tax relief as part of that charity. Perhaps he should have a word with his new benefactor to put them right about the evils of tax relief?

    In fact, Ritchie has opined on this very subject!

    ” I am not persuaded that tax incentives play a useful role in philanthropy. Those tax incentives might cost up to £2 billion a year in the UK, with much of the use of that money inevitably being dictated by donors rather than those in need. If that annual sum was instead dedicated to relieving poverty – by, say, funding a microfinance bank in the UK – might it not do more to relieve poverty than giving it in tax relief to those not in need of it?”

    http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2013/12/12/tax-power-and-philanthropy-2/

    I’m looking forward to him “speaking truth to power” and telling Ann Miller of the Kenneth Miller Trust just how wrong she is.

  28. I was wondering Tim if you might like to approach the Kenneth Miller Trust and ask them if they would like to finance some research you wish to conduct into how effectively to hide your income from the Portuguese taxman.

    You could say that you are an acquaintance of R Murphy who had told you that the trust could probably be relied upon for 20k pa or so?

  29. “So, Richard Murphy shows he doesn’t know what ‘objective’ means.”

    Of course he does. He’s objective. Everyone who agrees with him is objective. Everyone who disagrees isn’t.

  30. The Murph is wittering on about railways today and includes this classic line.

    “It never ceases to amaze me that people are so resourceful when not being paid to do something, and yet are so often asked to perform well below their potential when employed.”

    Does this altruistic sentiment extend to the work Murph himself does? Clearly not as he insists on taking money from charities in order to fund his output.

    He doesn’t even realise when he’s sending himself up.

  31. AndrewC

    The entire article really is a doozy:

    ‘The point is we have moved a long way. Capital no longer takes risk. Real enterprise is all too often found in the voluntary sector. It is the state who has to fund much innovation because business prefers financial speculation.’

    The state run economies he so admires (places like North Korea, Cuba and Belarus) are economic basket cases – indeed all 3 countries have I believe taken to a degree of partial liberalisation in an effort to fund innovation, so even in ‘Courageous states’ the trend is counter to his thinking

    ‘And despite this we are told it is markets that are our salvation and too many people believe that is true. I have to wonder why this belief continues and keep concluding that it is only the power or propaganda that sustains the argument when the evidence suggests that a cooperative model of engagement within the broader economy can deliver so much more for us all.’

    As far as straw men go this is a monster – I think it was the ever superb Bloke In Costa Rica, or possibly Steve who said if you look at the Wikipedia page for ‘list of fallacies’ you could go through the first five pages of Tax Research UK on any given day and find all of them used, frequently more than once. As Frederick said, the (fat) git that keeps on giving. A monstrous aberration of a man.

  32. I found it interesting when reading the post about railways that:

    – A lot of capital was put in when they were built
    – Unpaid labour does better than paid
    – The work has been achieved largely because the public purse has put a lot of capital in

    The conclusion seems to be that major infrastructure projects are best done by the Government buying the kit and then leaving volunteers to get on with it.

    I’m not sure that this is a sound basis for project management. At least, not for anything much larger than a school camp…

  33. It’s unpaid labour, he doesn’t specify volunteers. I suppose he admires that railway in Burma and Thailand that was made with unpaid labour too.

  34. Murphy on the Welsh preserved railways is amusing. He lauds the fact people are more resourceful doing unpaid than paid employment, forgetting the railway volunteers are doing what they love and then he suggests this could be a solution to the productivity problem.

    Now while senior lawyers and software engineers being platelayers for a weekend is fun for them, it is hardly the most productive use of their talents. Fine for a couple of weeks a year playing trains, not all year round.

    He also points to the millions invested by local authorities in the Welsh Highland Railway as a great use funds, forgetting when it was first built in the 1920s the local authorities invested massively in it then and took a huge hit as it went bust within a matter of years. Took them decades to get over it (there was an extra charge on the rates to pay off the debts) which is why the Ffestiniog faced such hostility when the volunteers tried to reopen it in the 1950s

    Love of steam trains is probably the only thing I agree with him on but he just can’t get that stuff right.

  35. DevonChap

    He talked at one point of a ‘Great Leap forward’ – could he be looking to Maoist China as the inspiration for the Courageous states. Take the intellectuals and make them work in the fields?

    Never forget for him, the slight adaptation of the Louis XIV quote is that: ‘L’etat, c’est tout’ – all should be subordinated to it and it should control (at worst indirectly) all aspects of life. Who cares if a senior lawyer would be better employed in matters legal – get them working on a building site for ‘the Green New deal’ – Civil Society demands no less. Anyone opposing these sentiments can safely be described as ‘on the margins of the political debate’ or ‘neoliberal’ and ignored

  36. The Meissen Bison

    Capital no longer takes risk […] because business prefers financial speculation.

    Comments are closed otherwise Egon Krenz would have asked him how this works.

  37. Murph seems to be an example of what DeBono called a “self-organising landscape”. Such as where rainwater finds a channel at the lowest point and gradually cuts it deeper–and the deeper it is the more the water runs there etc.

    I think he started as a paid hack looking for a gig. Accountancy seems an odd profession for an ardent leftist anyway. But he has talked so much bollocks that his ego is drawing him in more and more. He can’t turn his arse on the whole mess without massive ego-humbling so he just keeps getter deeper and deeper into bullshit.

  38. The Meissen Bison

    Zhou Enlai was looking to try his luck as well, and will be on the fringes looking to add his support when his ego can no longer allow the ‘trolls to be given a holiday’……

  39. Would Tim be able to make a separate post for each piece of Richie’s magic that we can discuss here. Then no-one ever need to go to Tax Research apart from Tim.

  40. Of course, as Ritchie is an economist, he clearly recognises that there is a market in volunteering as well. And also that “reward” doesn’t just mean money.

    So nice enjoyable activities like heritage steam railways have waiting lists for people to volunteer there.

    Unfortunately he doesn’t recognise that it’s markets that have made people rich enough to have the time to spend on volunteering and hobbies.

  41. I’m reading “Comments are closed” in a similar way to “Jeffery Barnard is unwell”, only rather than being drunk Ritchie is heavily sedated due to his increasing paranoia.

  42. VPA

    Sounds more like the Khymer Rouge than Maoist China. They also had a “Green New Deal”. Didn’t work that well.

  43. If a few teasing posts causes Murphy to stop allowing comments just imagine what a deluge of them could do.

    The absence of posts at least stops his moronic followers from licking his ego which can only be a good thing.

    Stopping his blog would be little short of a public service. I wonder if anyone has ever considered a ‘denial of service’ attack on the fat oaf.

  44. Would Tim be able to make a separate post for each piece of Richie’s magic that we can discuss here. Then no-one ever need to go to Tax Research apart from Tim.

    Yes, it would also be useful if each commentator could copy and paste the same opinion five times a day on each of those posts. Maybe interspersed with facts about; his house; his wife; his mental health; North Korea; trolls; and how, somehow, Murphy is the most evil person on earth.

    Smelling salts for Von Trapp please.

  45. @BraveFart: “hoist with his own petard” means “blown up with his own bomb.” The word has the same root as “peter”, the French for ” fart”, brave or otherwise. (There should be an acute accent on “peter”, but this tablet won’t give me one.)

  46. @Arnald

    I see what you did there. Change my name for humorous effect.

    Very funny, very clever, I’m sure. Although I confess I don’t understand it.

    If the music career doesn’t work out you could try stand-up.

  47. The Meissen Bison

    Arnie:
    …his house; his wife; his mental health; North Korea; trolls; and how, somehow, Murphy is the most evil person on earth.

    Yes, all good topics but you’ve missed out how his neck is too fat for his shirt collar which is truly fascinating.

    Jez is not only scrawny but he eschews neckware: what an example he is to those of us who are getting a little tubby as we get older.

  48. Arnald,
    Did you get points for your squealing, by the way?

    And do you feel guilty about being the genesis of the comment ban?

    At least you can say what you like here.

  49. ‘Lawrence from Guernsey’

    How are you coping with the absence of fawning comments on his site by the way – keep taking the medication!

  50. Lawrence

    I hope as Jack C suggests you feel a pang of conscience about forcing a comments ban on poor old Murphy – if you hadn’t squealed on the supportive comment of Beria (who would have been an enthusiastic supporter of the Courageous State I think) then none of these would have happened! Nice work!

  51. Chris

    Thanks for the etymology pointers on petard. I had not realised it derived from the French word for fart. That useful factlet will be filed away to be used in an appropriate social gathering, but I will try not to break wind at the same time.

  52. “Chris

    @BraveFart: “hoist with his own petard” means “blown up with his own bomb.” The word has the same root as “peter”, the French for ” fart””

    I’m sure I read somewhere that it’s not so much blown up with your own bomb as being stuck with the smell of your own fart.

    I guess either interpretation gets the point across.

  53. Arnald=”Lawrence of Gurn-Sea”?

    See Arnald paddle out of the blue channel waters, his trousers rolled up and a knotted hanky on his head as the David Lean music swells.

    Emotionally overwrought (at the failure of his island-wide search to find a Turkish Pasha willing to beat and sodomise him ) Arnold draws his blank pistol–

    “No prisoners” he bellows to his imaginary camel-riding Courageous State legions “No prisoners”

    Victory, glorious leftist victory is his.

    Now his only problem is keeping his balance on his train roof walk to glory:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM6wvBWCeAs

  54. @Arnald

    We start with the economics. Once that is dealt with we have a bit of a laugh because Murphy is a joke and it is surprising that you cannot see that. Someone like Jolyon can be argued with and will make his point and address your point and eventually there will be agreement or an agreement to disagree.

    Murphy dismisses comments that criticise him with a buffonesque high handedness that is offensive and ridiculous. He is a fool and if you don’t see that then so are you.

    We rarely mention his wife except in relation to the fact that she is a partner in his LLP which makes no sense and seems like a tax wheeze.

    And unlike you we have a sense of humour.

  55. Frederick

    +1

    This point about Jolyon (and of course others) is precisely the point.

    Intelligent people can have useful discussions with those with whom they (even quite strongly) disagree, and without indulging in the almost child like nonsense that Richard resorts to, which all too often amounts to nothing more than “you are disagreeing with me, hence, you’re banned / a troll / a neo liberal (yawn)”.

    Arnald, if you think it’s childish, well yes, but Frederick does put it into context perfectly, it’s simply an “in kind” response, either on here or over at his blog.

    Richard doesn’t seem to have the intuitive ability to perhaps just ignore those he may believe are talking rubbish. On that score, at least, he could take lessons from Tim (he simply ignores most of us most of the time!).

    You never know, if he had the confidence to back off, others over there might actually defend his arguments on his behalf and it might turn into a useful forum? But, therein lies part of the problem – quite a lot of what he says doesn’t always stand up to that kind of scrutiny – too many hospital passes to his regulars?

    On top of that, his complete lack of any intuition whatsoever gets shown up in his inability to have the first clue of what is happening around him. In fairness to you, Arnald, and no desire to after the earlier nonsense, but you do at least seem to have quite a lot more awareness than Richard in this context. You spot stuff that Richard seems utterly blind to (and not just earlier anagrams etc), and perhaps more interestingly you have enough curiosity to engage here, despite bashing your head a lot against ‘your’ prevailing wind, and surprisingly continue to despite the “turd” that got laid a couple of weeks ago.

    Back to the great man himself… No 1 Economics blogger apparently – come on, admit it, does that not amuse you? There are many more worthy candidates. And no, visiting the EU – and being addressed as Professor Murphy, and then later suggesting on his blog, when challenged, that perhaps the EU Chairman “knew” something (did we hear anything more!) – doesn’t make any of it any less comical…

  56. PF

    Excellent comment – and agree completely. The man’s pooterish self regard and his prickly response to any criticism is a standing joke. I did chuckle when news of his newfound sources of income came through, and his ‘salary negotiations’ had agreed his income ‘should be that of a university professor’ – he was then unaware of the name ‘Lavrentiy Beria’ which almost suggests he needs to learn some history before aiming for that equivalence.

    One thing – as regards ‘Lawrence from Guernsey’ I’ve tried a more reasoned argument and recognising he might have a kernel of a point – it’s a futile exercise. He responds much as his idol, with bluster, invective and abuse – usually with a video of Tony Benn as ‘definitive proof’ of his contention…..

  57. AndrewC/ The Meissen Bison

    It will be interesting to see which historical figures make the cut on his ludicrous first post after the ‘holiday for the trolls’

  58. Hopefully we can induce such a level of paranoia in him that genuine sychophant supporters get banned because their names are slightly suspicious. The revolution devours its children!

  59. From the Murphaloon’s latest ramblings:

    “measures designed to tackle this issue [tax havens] , in no small part designed by and introduced under pressure from civil society”

    What does this even mean? He now seems to want to claim that any tax measures introduced by anyone are probably all down to ‘civil society’ which he seems to think basically means him.

  60. AndrewC

    ‘Civil Society’ = mythical dictatorship run along lines approved of by Richard Murphy. I even found mention of it in the news service of the leading exemplar of civil society – if you google ‘KCNA Civil Society’ you might see whence Murphy derived his conception of the term…..

  61. By the way – anyone know where Tim is? – unusual period of radio silence and his Twitter feed has also not been posting for a couple of days? Perhaps ‘Civil Society’ has got to him?

  62. Tim seems to have gone quiet.

    Has he decided that after this post there can be nothing more worth saying about Murphy?

  63. Distracted by one or more of:

    1) Cocaine and Hookers
    2) The 3rd Test
    3) The Portuguese Steam Train Museum

  64. Does anyone know anything about the Kenneth Miller Trust? It ihas no website of its own and s not listed on the Charity Commission website.

    Just the type of organisation to fund Ritchie’s campaigns for transparency!

  65. @SamJones

    Now, it isn’t illegal top be funded by shadowy Trusts but three things are clear.

    Firstly there are questions to be answered.

    Secondly, those questions have not yet been answered.

    And thirdly, when are we going to get those answers?

    The case is clear. I have also commented on this elsewhere, which vindicates my position. They said I was wrong, but as always happens I have proved myself to be right.

  66. Sam Jones:

    The Kenneth Miller Trust was formed after a falling out in the Alan Parsons Project over a neoliberal drum solo.

  67. Bloke in North Dorset

    “@GlenDorran.

    Dear God, someone else who has heard of the Alan Parsons Project.”

    I used to have one of their LPs but never got round to buying a CD when I downgraded and ditched my LPs.

  68. @Frederick (and PF/others)

    “We start with the economics. Once that is dealt with we have a bit of a laugh because Murphy is a joke and it is surprising that you cannot see that. Someone like Jolyon can be argued with and will make his point and address your point and eventually there will be agreement or an agreement to disagree.”

    Exactly right. I spend yesterday at Edgbaston watching day two of this new surrealist cricket they’ve introduced in the company of one of my oldest friends, a raving leftist who wants a U.S. of Europe, is an AGW fanatic, thinks Michael Gove is evil incarnate and would agree with much of what Murphy says (despite running his own business, living in a big house in Toryshire and sending his kids to private school).

    We spent a very enjoyable day discussing all of the above, in between wondering Truemanlike what was going off out there, but had not a single cross word.

    So it can be done.

    Just not with cunts.

  69. We spent a very enjoyable day discussing all of the above, in between wondering Truemanlike what was going off out there, but had not a single cross word.

    Funnily enough I was at day one with my best mate who is also something of an AGWer and thinks JC is the best man for the job, like you we had a brilliant day. Possibly the best day’s cricket I have ever seen and I’ve been watching since 1963. There are things in life that are way more important than politics.

Leave a Reply

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