OV9

The worst is that if you pitched a politician who learned a trade and ran their own successful business they would be all over it.

But she’s a green and a woman so that’s all they see.

The way people attacked her for suggesting that getting pissed at work is bad was gross.

They aren’t an existential threat to Labour, it’s good that people are starting to see that there is a party who will push for the things that Labour have forgotten about with their push right though

That’s funny because there’s a concerted online campaign to try and claim Polanski’s Greens have given up on the environment to focus on “alphabet soup wokism”

It will surprise no one that it’s lobbying that stops the government improving food.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/ng- ... food-firms

I think we can all agree she’s an odd one


Why can news not be positive for a while, just some nice comments. A bit like the Noel Edmond's radio station.

It's like having friends over for a BBQ and reminding them of the statistics they'll die from a car crash on the way home.

Dave!


Her ...

The reform candidate did a good job of highlighting (once again) how rubbish reform candidates are though.

I think we can all agree she’s an odd one

I think that’s one of the main issues with what they want to do.

How do you tell people that the app you use as your main way to communicate with your voters is so dangerous that kids shouldn’t be able to access it, without looking like a massive wanker?

I’m not ultimately against better control of the internet, it’s not great that all of our social media (and old media now) is owned by sociopathic tech bros and we should be able to manage the funnel of shit they have pointed at us.

This kind of sweeping legislation isn’t the answer though imo.

Actually that’s a fair point, it is the pattern with these things.

We should be able to do better here though, with drink driving and seatbelts the solution was offered with the stick (public transport and seatbelts).

There’s no solution here, just something else a kid can’t have because we say so.

You’re the one who compared SM to crack.


It was to demonstrate a that offering a free choice to choose something less addictive is probably not all that effective.

That was the purpose of the analogy. But I think you understood that.


It’s better than offering nothing and punishing folk ...

It would be better if we spent money on giving the kids support and social engagement off their phones rather than just sending subsequent generations back to the 80s for an arbitrary amount of time.


We've been "educating" people on what's best for them in terms of diet and exercise for ...

I would prefer a start that didn’t suddenly make large parts of the internet that we all use inaccessible to teenagers tbh.

I can’t see age gating like this working in the way they want.

You’re the one who compared SM to crack.

There has to be some thought to it, I agree.

It’s my main problem with this. It’s kneejerk policy that is going to be invasive to implement and there’s been no thought about what happens after.

As with actual crack, which has also never disappeared with prohibition. It’s always going to be there, I think giving people something better to do is a better plan than just saying you can’t have it and leaving a big it shaped void.

Yeah, Scotland’s first game was a bit of a dud but a win’s a win and I’ve been enjoying seeing the fans shenanigans in Boston :lol:

Cape Verde put up a hell of a performance against Spain.


The scottish fans found an off license called Jobi Liquor.

Unsurprisingly it's been very popular. :lol ...

Like, it’s not hard to see why kids feel disillusioned, we give them fuck all and take away anything they use as an outlet.

It would be better if we spent money on giving the kids support and social engagement off their phones rather than just sending subsequent generations back to the 80s for an arbitrary amount of time.