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

Butterflies

Regulars
  • Content Count

    736
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

477 Excellent

1 Follower

About Butterflies

  • Rank
    MF Addicted

Recent Profile Visitors

586 profile views
  1. The cyclist should be prepared for people acting irrationally and the verdict was correct. However the travesty imo is the blood sucking lawyers fees costing £100,000. The woman knocked down only got 4k but the lawyers get over 20 times that. The sooner lawyers are replaced by computers the better! https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/17/lawyers-could-be-replaced-by-artificial-intelligence.html
  2. Sorry I meant that having that opinion doesn't tie in with having an opinion we should have an all Island speed limit. I am all for low limits within towns and villages where people live, but as a big motorsport and TT fan I do not support an all Isle speed limit (like most of us).
  3. Towns and villages should be 20mph. As it stands the only 20mph town areas are those with posh houses, the flatlands are all 30mph limits eg Mona street, Hillside Avenue, Allen Street. These tiny streets are 30mph?? doesn't tie in with an all island speed limit imo.
  4. Yes. If they want to lose 21% corporation tax from all the UK companies (and non-UK companies making profit in the UK), and gain 0% corporation tax from a handful of offshore businesses pretty unlikely I'd wager
  5. what you think that all of a sudden HMG will be able to set our tax rates? HMG cannot and won't.
  6. That's just ridiculous though. Insurance is personal choice, unless you happen to be driving a large, mechanically propelled vehicle that is highly capable of causing someone serious injury. even then tbh, in my opinion governments should insure the risk. Making something compulsory and then letting private companies (insurance firms) make profit from it is not on, IMO. 3rd party (compulsory) insurance should be covered in your road tax () and if you want to insure further (fully comp) then you can go private. If we all had to insure our toddlers for potential damage caused to others when using their tricycles whilst crossing douglas prom the world would be just that bit sadder and more pathetic. The less compulsory insurance the better. Who ever claims on the damn thing anyway? Most people pay it religiously for 50+ years and never claim. If that money was just put into a government fund for paying out to people who were injured then insurance companies wouldn't be raking off their profit and staff salaries so we could pay less.
  7. Have you conducted a poll? My grandkids use their bikes on the road. You think they should be insured to do so? what about skateboards, rollerblades and sledging? Your classic car doesn't need to be insured for the whole year, you can just insure for the day, week or month. Vehicle tax is another matter though, but IOM Gov know they will lose out a hell of a lot of tax if they allow for monthly vehicle taxation (like the UK) mainly because of the occasional drivers of classic cars, campervans and motorbikes stopping their entire year tax and just paying for the (summer) months they use the vehicle.
  8. If I commented on here every time I saw a bell end car driver driving like an idiot I'd never be off here.
  9. Do you regret being a tool? the article doesn't say the cyclist weren't insured, but if someone hits someone else the injured party don't usually claim on their insurance. They claim on the other driver's. The courts found this driver guilty so why would the injured party need to claim off their own insurance and potentially lose any NCB etc? Cyclists should not have to have insurance, that would stop children from using pedal cycles and what about pedestrians?? This is just a bigoted rant against cyclists with a good measure of homophobia thrown in.
  10. Ah but I suppose you do? Of course
  11. No smoking, drinking, skiing, diving, sailing, cycling or owning a motorcycle of any kind once you're a parent then! Oh and keep fit, no beer bellies or bingo wings allowed Please don't touch red meat, processed foods, salt, sugar or fatty foods either. Better ban all boxers, rugby and football players from being parents, in fact all sportspeople! Fricking idiots. How about people make their own choices.
  12. This makes no sense. So until the whole world stops emitting carbon, you CBA? Thankfully there are other people around who can see that everyone has a part to play. Individually we are small but together we are stronger. GD4XXX, planting trees to reduce carbon is something that is being pushed. Not by our CM though. Not yet anyway. Adding a requirements for tree planting into the free money for rich landowners (AKA countryside care) scheme is a very good idea. suggest people emails their MHKs if they agree.
  13. Here is an article examining the Best arguments from climate science skeptics. doesn't mention a scruffy pamphlet from 1914 at all. Can't think why! https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/jul/25/these-are-the-best-arguments-from-the-3-of-climate-scientist-skeptics-really
  14. More absolute tosh from GD4XXX. Yes I'm sure you know more than 90+% of climate experts. As Declan so elegant puts it, those making vast sums of money have been trying to bury this problem for years because they are making SO MUCH money out of what is irreparably damaging the planet. Still I'm sure some scruffy pamphlet you've saved from 1962 has all the real answers as for someone with 10 kids, disgusting. Any more than 2 should be banned. No child benefit should be paid to anyone for more than one and people should be incentivised to be sterilized after their first .
  15. What a load of tosh. Perhaps read NASA's opinion or Skeptical Science's opinion : "Expert consensus is a powerful thing. People know we don’t have the time or capacity to learn about everything, and so we frequently defer to the conclusions of experts. It’s why we visit doctors when we’re ill. The same is true of climate change: most people defer to the expert consensus of climate scientists. Crucially, as we note in our paper: That’s why those who oppose taking action to curb climate change have engaged in a misinformation campaign to deny the existence of the expert consensus. They’ve been largely successful, as the public badly underestimate the expert consensus, in what we call the “consensus gap.” Only 16% of Americans realize that the consensus is above 90%." Or even wikipedia on the scientific consensus It suits people to deny it so they don't have to feel guilty about doing nothing, do anything that makes them feel uncomfortable or consider denying themselves of the pleasure they currently feel from indulging in wasteful, harmful practices the con trick is the deniers and you may as well be a flat-earther as to deny climate change.
×
×
  • Create New...