Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

270 Excellent

About maynragh

  • Rank
    MF Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

288 profile views
  1. Home Automation

    Thanks for the first hand info. A bit more to google around in that lot. I may be back with more questions.
  2. Another MLC in court

    I was surprised by this. I recall a short exchange I had with Juan not that long ago where he advised me that something I was considering doing would be problematic with regards data protection - that was entirely my own risk. I've also always thought he was someone who was a bit anal about rules and regs - he would certainly have been aware of the requirements at the very least. So I find the idea that he has been caught apparently so far in the wrong a bit odd. The cynic in me thinks there is someone who very publicly bit the hand that's been feeding him (very well) not so long ago. Is this a very public smack down before he's shoved out the door?
  3. Well we can live in hope I guess, but what gives you the idea that there are 'seismic' changes taking place in Europe? I wish there were, but as far as I can see it's only really Iceland where that has and is taking place. Can you sight a policy?
  4. Not at all. You've made a point about a person you allege to be a criminal. If there were evidence of such in terms of his dealings with the IOM he would have been turned away. The current position really does nothing to prove that he is or isn't, it simply asks as series of questions that pretty much everyone else asks. The IOM Government could increase it's level of investigation before allowing people to bring money in, but on what basis would they do that seeing as it would then put us a competitive disadvantage (in the eyes of those who set such policy - if not actually in reality)?
  5. And none of that matters so long as the voters of those jurisdictions are happy with it - happy enough to not force their own governments to change it, or force them to try and change someone else's rule set.
  6. You think they'd have us? Maybe if we promised to behave.
  7. I think the point PK was making was with regards the 'bottom of morality' but maybe I misunderstood. How could we get lower on that regard? And do enough people care? Either you're missing my point or ignoring it. If there were proof that the gains were ill-gotten we wouldn't be discussing it - the system in place would have filtered it out. Or are you suggesting a change to the filter on the grounds of morality? It really doesn't matter how seedy it looks, because apparently the majority of people on the IOM don't care so long as they remain comfortable in the short term. Do you think it would make any difference at all if the entire thing were on public display? Surely the most important thing is the balance of comfort for the majority of voters in the jurisdictions that are receiving the money?
  8. Car Rallies - Tim Baker

    The problem is you are conflating two separate groups. There are people who choose to engage in organised motorsport. Generally these people are well behaved drivers when on public roads, because if they aren't they're risking being banned from competing - this is the responsible thing to do. There are also people who drive like complete knobs on the open road. These people may or may not be fans of motorsport, but either way that is irrelevant - watching motorsport is not what is making them drive like knobs. The point is that everyone should be forced in the strongest possible way to behave on public roads whether there is an event on or not, and it should be as easy as possible for people to take risks if they want to in an environment that protects them from those who don't want to. I think I've said it on here before but for example, during the TT the mountain road 'one way' system should be a paid toll road (paying to enter becomes an acknowledgement of the risk acceptance as well as generating income), where you enter entirely at your own risk and have to carry additional insurance to pay for scraping you off the road if the worst should happen - whether it's your fault or not. The rest of the entire road network should be zero tolerance - 1 mph over, one bit of reckless driving, and you and your vehicle are escorted to the ferry. It's the only logical solution. Could work well for other events too.
  9. Huge Meat Plant Loss

    Who the farmers or the politicians? There's no doubt Farming has been too soft a ride for those at the top (which has included a number of politicians) for a long time, but I guess the problem they've got is they're going to struggle to keep it quiet in this day and age. People know how much money is being spent, they know animals are being live exported and they know local small retailers are getting shafted. That's my take on why this has blown up in the first place, but if they think just reshuffling the deck and changing nothing is going to smooth things for very long then I guess they really are out of their depth. Without protecting the market the industry is stuffed, but presumably that is not a palatable option for the top dogs because it would mean levelling the playing field - against them!
  10. I agree with you completely, and I think we're already pretty much at the bottom aren't we? If you or I were sitting in the benevolent dictator's chair we could be turning it around tomorrow, and to hell with anyone who started crying about loosing their share of ill gotten gains. But back in the real world the question is how do we move upward when the majority of the population on the IOM would place their own comfort ahead of trying to morally filter the money passing through the IOM? Moral outrage changes nothing, as the Panama and Paradise Papers prove.
  11. Car Rallies - Tim Baker

    The first thing that I can say is if this ever happens to you again make a note of the exact time and location and report it to the organisers. It doesn't even matter if you get a reg or competition number. If you know the exact time and location the organisers will be able to work out fairly accurately who it was likely to be and penalise that person - the movement of every car is scheduled through the entire event and on some events they are carrying transponders. For this reason this type of behaviour is generally very rare as far as competitors are concerned - though I do accept that occasionally some people get caught up in the moment, exactly as they can at any other time. Inform the organiser that you expect a response, and if you don't get one you will forward the matter to the MSA. You will get a response. Motorsport doesn't boost testosterone as such, it provides an avenue for people who are naturally inclined to seek out the "high" derived from inducing the production of adrenaline and dopamine. This is an addictive activity like any other similar drugs, and as with other drugs some people are more strongly affected than others. In theory it is possible to train people to seek this from other forms of stimulus (because you won't change their natural inclination), but without a significant effort to socially engineer that what do you think would happen if we shut down organised motorsport? It is likely that as the next generation gradually drive themselves less and less there will be a natural reduction, but to cut it off without address the possible consequences would be extremely reckless.
  12. Huge Meat Plant Loss

    Presumably it doesn't change because a certain number of people with the power to influence things don't want it to change. It's not a lose if it ends up the right pocket sort of thing, which sort of makes you wonder why they allowed it to become a story in the first place? Why do so if ultimately you're not going to change it? Or is it a case of the fact that the story went beyond their control with the export situation, and this is the best rug lift sweepy sweep they can think of?
  13. This is the problem though isn't it. If the ill-gotten nature were proven then the situation would be different, but presumably unless someone else tells the IOM that it is ill gotten then there is no case to answer, and the public of the Isle of Man are happy with that. Is there any other way to look at it?
  14. Huge Meat Plant Loss

    I must admit I'm struggling to understand this myself. How exactly is it going to be different to the model they already very publicly acknowledged had failed? Of course, they did not admit it failed due to government incompetence.
  15. I guess that depends what you think the people behind the paradise papers were hoping to achieve. It certainly seems to have been more of moral crusade than a legal one. Thinking about it more cynically, it is quite well understood that the tax avoidance industry is not as abhorrent to those in positions of power as it might be portrayed as being to the majority of ordinary working Joe's. So could it be that this was actually a play to push business one way or the other, rather than achieve some moral improvement for the plebs? Still, as Mr Pie observed, it's unlikely to actually change anything, so what's the point?