Post Archive

Region: The Confederacy of Free Nations

History

Post self-deleted by Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth.

Minerva Diplomat wrote:Under thatcher both inflation and unemployment dropped spectacularly in the UK.

https://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/04/daily-chart-5

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKqXu-5jw60

Jaslandia, Percyton

Post self-deleted by Nuremgard.

Nuremgard wrote:Protecting paedophiles too. Yeah, she was a great gal. And she also destroyed entire communities by getting rid of the major industries and throwing countless people on the doll.

You Cons are so funny.

You don't know what you're talking about. She didn't destroy any community - coal, ship-building and steel were already dying! And not just in Britain, but across the west! Ever heard of cheap labour? Third world manufacturing? China? Outsourcing? Please Google those terms. She led the successful transition to a service economy and since you're throwing out emotional assertions I assume you have no empirical facts behind you. Don't answer that - you can't, because in almost every measure Britain and the UK was better off than when she came in.

And I'm more of a libertarian than a conservative, but thanks anyway.

Nuremgard wrote:No one cares about your views on Obama's economic policy, honey.

Because you can't defend them?

Nuremgard wrote:Stop using the right wing cliches of envy.

Except that's exactly what it is. It's a mainstay of economics - hell, Keynesian economics - that increasing taxes reduces circular flows of income, and there's mounting empirical evidence that high government spending is counterproductive, but people like you choose to ignore it. I assume it's envy, but if you want to throw out another explanation for your willful ignorance, I'm all ears.

Nuremgard wrote:You might worship at the feet of free market demagogues but don't think you're somehow superior for doing so.

Gotta love rightists. They think they are so intelligent and better than everyone else.

No, I don't think I'm superior, I just think that my beliefs are motivated by factual evidence as opposed to emotion, that's all. Nothing personal kid.

Cesorion, Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Moldegaard wrote:Uh oh. Heated debates. Not a fan of that!

Did you just assume my discussion type?

United Continental States, Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Nuremgard wrote:Did I say it was? I was addressing the fact he was being so flippant about her destroying industries and making people unemployed.

But hey, he wasn't affected by it so she was pure amaze balls.

Alright might just stay out of this one then

Percyton

Nuremgard wrote:Did I say it was? I was addressing the fact he was being so flippant about her destroying industries and making people unemployed.

But hey, he wasn't affected by it so she was pure amaze balls.

"haha thatcher what a bish, die in a hole you loser haha im i right lads!"

"Thatcher's economic policies were logical and necessary"

"bloody tories dissing our miners, how can they be so cruel??"

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:You don't know what you're talking about. She didn't destroy any community - coal, ship-building and steel were already dying! And not just in Britain, but across the west! Ever heard of cheap labour? Third world manufacturing? China? Outsourcing? Please Google those terms. She led the successful transition to a service economy and since you're throwing out emotional assertions I assume you have no empirical facts behind you. Don't answer that - you can't, because in almost every measure Britain and the UK was better off than when she came in.

And I'm more of a libertarian than a conservative, but thanks anyway.

Because you can't defend them?

Except that's exactly what it is. It's a mainstay of economics - hell, Keynesian economics - that increasing taxes reduces circular flows of income, and there's mounting empirical evidence that high government spending is counterproductive, but people like you choose to ignore it. I assume it's envy, but if you want to throw out another explanation for your willful ignorance, I'm all ears.

No, I don't think I'm superior, I just think that my beliefs are motivated by factual evidence as opposed to emotion, that's all. Nothing personal kid.

Okay, let's go for balance then. Here are a list of successes and failures of Thatcher's tenure. Some of the successes could be argued as failures depending on your politics, but here's a bit of balance for once.

Successes

[spoiler]Privatisation did lead to efficiency gains for some industries. Helping lead to lower prices for telecoms, airlines and at times electricity.

Deregulation of key industries led to greater competition within industries which were formerly monopolies. This competition helped create incentives to be more efficient and cut costs.

Reduction in power of organised Labour. In the 1970s, UK industry was paralysed by strikes and industrial confrontation. During the 1980s, industrial relations improved. Though this was partly due to much higher unemployment levels.

Growth of new service sector and financial sector industries.

Inefficient firms no longer received state support, but had to be competitive and go out of business. Although it was a painful process, arguably it was necessary for long-term growth

Rise in home-ownership helped more people feel they had a stake in economy.[/spoiler]

Failures

[spoiler]The 1980s saw a return of mass unemployment – levels not seen since the 1930s.

Two recessions were caused by deliberate policies. Although inflation needed controlling in 1980, arguably the government deflated the economy too much – chasing money supply targets which were unreliable. The cost was unemployment and social disorder, which need not have been so deep.

Growth in north – south divide and regional inequality. Unemployment particularly affected former industrial areas; the government were slow to help deal with problems of structural unemployment.

The Lawson boom was a missed opportunity. The government deliberately allowed a boom and bust which caused an unnecessary and painful recession of 1991. For all Mrs Thatcher’s claims to see the importance of keeping inflation low. It was ironic, the government made such a mistake in allowing an inflationary bubble in the late 1980s. Part of the reason is that they really felt they had created a supply side miracle – which hadn’t actually occurred.

The rise in home-ownership was good for those who could buy, but has increased wealth inequality in the UK. The supply of council homes is limited because many have been sold off.

Large rise in inequality during the 1980s.

Financial deregulation of the 1980s laid framework for credit bubble of 2000s and subsequent credit crisis. For example, privatized building societies like Northern Rock, and Bradford & Bingley pursued risky growth strategies which eventually needed government bailouts in the aftermath of the 2008 recession. Financial deregulation was good for some, but arguably created greater financial instability in the long-term.

Thatcher reduced the power of trades unions, but arguably at the cost of alienating many working class because of the fierce nature of her conflict.

Privatisation involved selling off state assets at an undervalued price. Many who could afford to buy shares, saw immediate gains. This was politically popular, but another missed opportunity to use nations resources to invest in the future.

Thatcher made little attempt to deal with environmental issues during a decade of increased concerns over global warming, pollution and environmental degradation.[/spoiler]

Yukona wrote:As much as I agree with you, we must also recognise that the way in which she dealt with both the mines closing (as much as I think they should have been closed) as well as the poll tax were both terrible. Also, it's important to recognise that there were drawbacks to her leadership, and treating the Falklands as resurrecting Britain's international image is exactly why the Argentinians wanted to take the islands (although it just so happened to work the other way for them).

The poll tax was a horrendous idea. The mine closures were a long time coming and had to be done. My gripes with Thatcher are for not balancing the budget sooner and not helping the north transition away from heavy industry easier. The Argentines' claim to the islands are based purely on proximity.

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Nuremgard wrote:Okay, let's go for balance then. Here are a list of successes and failures of Thatcher's tenure. Some of the successes could be argued as failures depending on your politics, but here's a bit of balance for once.

Successes

[spoiler]Privatisation did lead to efficiency gains for some industries. Helping lead to lower prices for telecoms, airlines and at times electricity.

Deregulation of key industries led to greater competition within industries which were formerly monopolies. This competition helped create incentives to be more efficient and cut costs.

Reduction in power of organised Labour. In the 1970s, UK industry was paralysed by strikes and industrial confrontation. During the 1980s, industrial relations improved. Though this was partly due to much higher unemployment levels.

Growth of new service sector and financial sector industries.

Inefficient firms no longer received state support, but had to be competitive and go out of business. Although it was a painful process, arguably it was necessary for long-term growth

Rise in home-ownership helped more people feel they had a stake in economy.[/spoiler]

Failures

[spoiler]The 1980s saw a return of mass unemployment – levels not seen since the 1930s.

Two recessions were caused by deliberate policies. Although inflation needed controlling in 1980, arguably the government deflated the economy too much – chasing money supply targets which were unreliable. The cost was unemployment and social disorder, which need not have been so deep.

Growth in north – south divide and regional inequality. Unemployment particularly affected former industrial areas; the government were slow to help deal with problems of structural unemployment.

The Lawson boom was a missed opportunity. The government deliberately allowed a boom and bust which caused an unnecessary and painful recession of 1991. For all Mrs Thatcher’s claims to see the importance of keeping inflation low. It was ironic, the government made such a mistake in allowing an inflationary bubble in the late 1980s. Part of the reason is that they really felt they had created a supply side miracle – which hadn’t actually occurred.

The rise in home-ownership was good for those who could buy, but has increased wealth inequality in the UK. The supply of council homes is limited because many have been sold off.

Large rise in inequality during the 1980s.

Financial deregulation of the 1980s laid framework for credit bubble of 2000s and subsequent credit crisis. For example, privatized building societies like Northern Rock, and Bradford & Bingley pursued risky growth strategies which eventually needed government bailouts in the aftermath of the 2008 recession. Financial deregulation was good for some, but arguably created greater financial instability in the long-term.

Thatcher reduced the power of trades unions, but arguably at the cost of alienating many working class because of the fierce nature of her conflict.

Privatisation involved selling off state assets at an undervalued price. Many who could afford to buy shares, saw immediate gains. This was politically popular, but another missed opportunity to use nations resources to invest in the future.

Thatcher made little attempt to deal with environmental issues during a decade of increased concerns over global warming, pollution and environmental degradation.[/spoiler]

Ok, I'll give you credit for that post. Perfect government, after all, is an oxymoron. I'll go over a few.

High unemployment was an unfortunate but unavoidable side effect of the early 80s recession, in both the UK and the US. Malinvestments all across the economy, most notably state subsidies for heavy industry, were keeping employment artificially high and prevented the efficient reallocation of resources. And it took until the 90s for unemployment to get down to a low level - true.

What makes you think the government intentionally caused a bust? From what I've read it was Lawson's fault for the early 90s recession because he raised interest rates in anticipation of joining the European Exchange Rate Mechanism, which Thatcher actually opposed. Right to buy was a great thing for the poor, because it gave many working people a leg up into the middle classes and, as you said, increased rates of home ownership. Inequality is an inherently neutral statistic. It can be good, it can be bad. In developed countries it's usually good because real compensation and incomes for the poor have still increased - even if they've grown at a faster rate for the wealthy.

Deregulation did not cause the recession. The 'ownership society' policies pursued by the Bush and Blair governments, aided by their respective central banks, caused the recession. Deregulation is a convenient boogieman that begets the fact that in the decade before 2008 financial regulation increased significantly in both countries.

The unions had far too much power and literally toppled a government in the 70s. An individualist, flexible labour market has been much better for Britain in becoming more competitive.

The rest of the criticisms I will accept.

Cesorion, Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:Ok, I'll give you credit for that post. Perfect government, after all, is an oxymoron. I'll go over a few.

The rest of the criticisms I will accept.

For the sake of remaining civil, the most that can be said of Thatcher is that she is a divisive figure. Some people absolutely adore her and others absolutely hate her guts.

As Tyrion said in Game of Thrones, "no ruler who ever lived had the support of all of the people."

Nuremgard wrote:For the sake of remaining civil, the most that can be said of Thatcher is that she is a divisive figure. Some people absolutely adore her and others absolutely hate her guts.

As Tyrion said in Game of Thrones, "no ruler who ever lived had the support of all of the people."

That is also true.

The only universally liked politician I can think of is JFK, because he died before he could do anything controversial. Now every man and his dog thinks that he was really 'on their side' and has some conspiracy theory to justify it.

Nuremgard wrote:For the sake of remaining civil, the most that can be said of Thatcher is that she is a divisive figure. Some people absolutely adore her and others absolutely hate her guts.

As Tyrion said in Game of Thrones, "no ruler who ever lived had the support of all of the people."

Nurem here makes a valid point. Debate, though, as long as it remains civil, is good.

And for the Record, I belong to the first category..

Percyton, Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:That is also true.

The only universally liked politician I can think of is JFK, because he died before he could do anything controversial. Now every man and his dog thinks that he was really 'on their side' and has some conspiracy theory to justify it.

JFK was no angel but you're wrong about him being universally liked. He was the first Catholic POTUS and many feared he would do the bidding of the Pope. And he wasn't very much liked by the Chicago mafia either as he was cracking down on them.

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:Ok, I'll give you credit for that post. Perfect government, after all, is an oxymoron. I'll go over a few.

High unemployment was an unfortunate but unavoidable side effect of the early 80s recession, in both the UK and the US. Malinvestments all across the economy, most notably state subsidies for heavy industry, were keeping employment artificially high and prevented the efficient reallocation of resources. And it took until the 90s for unemployment to get down to a low level - true.

What makes you think the government intentionally caused a bust? From what I've read it was Lawson's fault for the early 90s recession because he raised interest rates in anticipation of joining the European Exchange Rate Mechanism, which Thatcher actually opposed. Right to buy was a great thing for the poor, because it gave many working people a leg up into the middle classes and, as you said, increased rates of home ownership. Inequality is an inherently neutral statistic. It can be good, it can be bad. In developed countries it's usually good because real compensation and incomes for the poor have still increased - even if they've grown at a faster rate for the wealthy.

Deregulation did not cause the recession. The 'ownership society' policies pursued by the Bush and Blair governments, aided by their respective central banks, caused the recession. Deregulation is a convenient boogieman that begets the fact that in the decade before 2008 financial regulation increased significantly in both countries.

The unions had far too much power and literally toppled a government in the 70s. An individualist, flexible labour market has been much better for Britain in becoming more competitive.

The rest of the criticisms I will accept.

Nuremgard wrote:For the sake of remaining civil, the most that can be said of Thatcher is that she is a divisive figure. Some people absolutely adore her and others absolutely hate her guts.

As Tyrion said in Game of Thrones, "no ruler who ever lived had the support of all of the people."

Can't we just all agree that debates about British politics are obnoxious.

Cesorion, United Continental States, Nuevo Pevvania, Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Cesorion wrote:Nurem here makes a valid point. Debate, though, as long as it remains civil, is good.

And for the Record, I belong to the first category..

I think we know that.

Cesorion

Magnatronia wrote:Can't we just all agree that debates about British politics are obnoxious.

Politics is obnoxious, as are most politicians and their voters.

Magnatronia wrote:Can't we just all agree that debates about British politics are obnoxious.

If you guys want some good Debate, go in the First Embassy I established, International Debating Area. Embassy posting available. Also, a Thacherite is available, along with opposition parties.

Cesorion wrote:If you guys want some good Debate, go in the First Embassy I established, International Debating Area. Embassy posting available. Also, a Thacherite is available, along with opposition parties.

Since you said you were Greek, who is your favourite Greek god or goddess?

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:Ok well celebrate her death as much as you want, I've heard it all before, but you can't kill her achievements: reshaping Britain into a free market democracy, shifting the political consensus to the right, restoring Britain's international image, resurrecting a dead economy. Productivity doubled, GDP per capita tripled, income growth amongst lower income quintiles the highest for decades - shall I go on? Thatcher has an almost indisputable record as a successful prime minister and is consistently ranked in the top five and top three by historians and academics. And your outrage at her 'destroying muh jobs' is purely selective, since Harold Wilson and Ted Heath both closed more coal mines than her. Britain's death as an industrial power was inevitable, and she deserves full credit for putting the heavy industries out of their misery. I'm sure your grandfather was a nice guy, but sorry, his job had to go.

Long live the Iron Lady.

Thank you for replying and being frank, I can see that this is a passionate subject for you. You seem however, to have come under the false impression that I was attacking Thatcher and everything she had done for the UK and therefore me and my family's supposed "hate" stemmed from that. Make no mistake, despite what I personally think about Thatcher, I believe she DID do a lot of good for the UK.

However, she did not do good for Scotland.

"Muh jobs" is not an especially good retort, considering when discussing Scotland's issues with Thatcher, as it was Scotland where her policies hurt the most AND resulted in the most closures of industries in Scotland. The steel industry, the car factories, shipbuilding and engineering and oversaw the demise of the communities which had built their livelihoods around them. Wilson and Heath had nothing to do with that. Her economic policy as well, didn't bring inflation under control at the time and unemployment skyrocketed. Which, guess what, hit Scotland the hardest. On top of that she guinea pigged Scotland with the poll tax, an action so widely reviled up here that modern Tories are still viewed as being toxic in Scotland. On top of that, she was also abhorrently against the devolution of power to a Scottish Parliament. She didn't want Scotland to be in control of it's own issues and went against the potential of a devolved democracy in Scotland.

My grandfather was nice, so were the other hundreds of thousands of countless people laid off due to her actions in Scotland, so I'm sorry too but me and you will always have stark differences in our opinions over Thatcher. One thing I actually do appreciate her for is that due to her Poll Tax, she rallied Scotland against the conservatives and we got our Parliament. I can definitely thank her for that.

Long live Scotland.

Nuremgard, The Empire Of Handland, Kalaron

Nuremgard wrote:JFK was no angel but you're wrong about him being universally liked. He was the first Catholic POTUS and many feared he would do the bidding of the Pope. And he wasn't very much liked by the Chicago mafia either as he was cracking down on them.

I don't mean at the time. He won the 1960 election very narrowly. But I mean that today I'd imagine his approval ratings are very high and most people, left and right, look back fondly on him.

Lex Caledonia wrote:

Long live Scotland.

She should have thanked the Scots profusely since the North Sea oil paid for the benefits all those unemployed people needed. I hate her mostly because she was so anti-Scottish.

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:I don't mean at the time. He won the 1960 election very narrowly. But I mean that today I'd imagine his approval ratings are very high and most people, left and right, look back fondly on him.

Probably. I don't know very much about him but I do find his presidency interesting.

Lex Caledonia wrote:

Long live Scotland.

The Scottish Parliament. One of Blair's biggest blunders. They thought it would kill Scottish nationalism stone dead.

;)

Lex Caledonia wrote:Thank you for replying and being frank, I can see that this is a passionate subject for you. You seem however, to have come under the false impression that I was attacking Thatcher and everything she had done for the UK and therefore me and my family's supposed "hate" stemmed from that. Make no mistake, despite what I personally think about Thatcher, I believe she DID do a lot of good for the UK.

However, she did not do good for Scotland.

"Muh jobs" is not an especially good retort, considering when discussing Scotland's issues with Thatcher, as it was Scotland where her policies hurt the most AND resulted in the most closures of industries in Scotland. The steel industry, the car factories, shipbuilding and engineering and oversaw the demise of the communities which had built their livelihoods around them. Wilson and Heath had nothing to do with that. Her economic policy as well, didn't bring inflation under control at the time and unemployment skyrocketed. Which, guess what, hit Scotland the hardest. On top of that she guinea pigged Scotland with the poll tax, an action so widely reviled up here that modern Tories are still viewed as being toxic in Scotland. On top of that, she was also abhorrently against the devolution of power to a Scottish Parliament. She didn't want Scotland to be in control of it's own issues and went against the potential of a devolved democracy in Scotland.

My grandfather was nice, so were the other hundreds of thousands of countless people laid off due to her actions in Scotland, so I'm sorry too but me and you will always have stark differences in our opinions over Thatcher. One thing I actually do appreciate her for is that due to her Poll Tax, she rallied Scotland against the conservatives and we got our Parliament. I can definitely thank her for that.

Long live Scotland.

Well I went over the unemployment thing above, it's just one of those things that was unavoidable. There's a good Ron Swanson quote about a dying deer - do you continue to keep it alive as it bleeds out, or do you slice its throat and properly utilise its pelt and meat? I won't argue about the Scottish-specific issue because that's not something I know much about. I can agree that the poll tax was a dumb, disastrous idea. I must correct you on inflation though - it fell from about 17% in 1979 to about 4% in 1985. Her monetary policy was brutally effective, and probably the principle cause of the death of steel and so forth. It went back up to around 8 or 9% at the turn of the 90s but has scarcely crept above 5% since then. We can definitely thank her for incorporating Friedmanite thinking into national monetary policy.

Lex Caledonia, Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:Well I went over the unemployment thing above, it's just one of those things that was unavoidable. There's a good Ron Swanson quote about a dying deer - do you continue to keep it alive as it bleeds out, or do you slice its throat and properly utilise its pelt and meat? I won't argue about the Scottish-specific issue because that's not something I know much about. I can agree that the poll tax was a dumb, disastrous idea. I must correct you on inflation though - it fell from about 17% in 1979 to about 4% in 1985. Her monetary policy was brutally effective, and probably the principle cause of the death of steel and so forth. It went back up to around 8 or 9% at the turn of the 90s but has scarcely crept above 5% since then. We can definitely thank her for incorporating Friedmanite thinking into national monetary policy.

So the unemployment was tolerable? I'm guessing you nor your family were negatively affected by Reagan or Thatcher's policies.

FYI: People who lost their jobs and livelihoods do not care about all the theory and evidence behind your beliefs. They care about the fact they lost their means to make a living and were thrown to the wolves.

People's political views are coloured by their experiences in life. Try to remember that the next time you go "lol but mah job" eh?

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:Well I went over the unemployment thing above, it's just one of those things that was unavoidable. There's a good Ron Swanson quote about a dying deer - do you continue to keep it alive as it bleeds out, or do you slice its throat and properly utilise its pelt and meat? I won't argue about the Scottish-specific issue because that's not something I know much about. I can agree that the poll tax was a dumb, disastrous idea. I must correct you on inflation though - it fell from about 17% in 1979 to about 4% in 1985. Her monetary policy was brutally effective, and probably the principle cause of the death of steel and so forth. It went back up to around 8 or 9% at the turn of the 90s but has scarcely crept above 5% since then. We can definitely thank her for incorporating Friedmanite thinking into national monetary policy.

Honestly, I believe she could have done better in Scotland. Some would argue that it's mutual incomprehension at work though between Scotland and Thatcher. Ah, I was arguing on the Scottish-specific side as I myself am Scottish along with my family. I'll give you that, inflation was reduced but it still left Scotland in a hell of a state, 1/6 of the population of Scotland was rendered unemployed, this took decades to fix. The GDP of Scotland around this time too suffered. I've got libertarian leanings myself so I do understand the appeal of what she did but what she did still hurt my country and she could have done better for it.

Lex Caledonia wrote:1/6 of the population of Scotland was rendered unemployed

Christ, sorry to hear that mate. :(

Lex Caledonia, Percyton

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:The poll tax was a horrendous idea. The mine closures were a long time coming and had to be done. My gripes with Thatcher are for not balancing the budget sooner and not helping the north transition away from heavy industry easier. The Argentines' claim to the islands are based purely on proximity.

You completely missed the point I made. I don't think you realise I'm the post pro-Falklands person in this region lol. I also fully support the closures but the way she handled post support for the mining areas was not good. My point is as much as the Argentine Junta wanted to do it as a popularity boost it also inadvertently boosted Thatcher's popularity.

Lex Caledonia wrote:Honestly, I believe she could have done better in Scotland. Some would argue that it's mutual incomprehension at work though between Scotland and Thatcher. Ah, I was arguing on the Scottish-specific side as I myself am Scottish along with my family. I'll give you that, inflation was reduced but it still left Scotland in a hell of a state, 1/6 of the population of Scotland was rendered unemployed, this took decades to fix. The GDP of Scotland around this time too suffered. I've got libertarian leanings myself so I do understand the appeal of what she did but what she did still hurt my country and she could have done better for it.

A former Tory mate of mine said Scots hated Thatcher because they did not like being told what to do by an Englishwoman.

But he is an arse licking unionist so of course he would say that. Had nothing to do with the horrendous effects her policies had on Scotland. Apparently it was because she had a fanny and spoke with a posh accent.

Yukona wrote:You completely missed the point I made. I don't think you realise I'm the post pro-Falklands person in this region lol. I also fully support the closures but the way she handled post support for the mining areas was not good. My point is as much as the Argentine Junta wanted to do it as a popularity boost it also inadvertently boosted Thatcher's popularity.

Can we be honest? Does anyone really give a f*ck about the Faklands or any of the sheep shaggers on it? And I don't mean give a f*ck in the Thatcherite "we must protect their right to Britishness" faux caring, I mean actually giving a f*ck.

I know I don't. But I guess I'm just not very patriotic. ;)

Penguania And Antarctica wrote:Huhu

Hey Pengu

Jaslandia, Penguania And Antarctica, Percyton

Yukona wrote:You completely missed the point I made. I don't think you realise I'm the post pro-Falklands person in this region lol. I also fully support the closures but the way she handled post support for the mining areas was not good. My point is as much as the Argentine Junta wanted to do it as a popularity boost it also inadvertently boosted Thatcher's popularity.

My mistake, I misread that. Yes I agree, more could have been done.

Yukona

Kalaron wrote:Christ, sorry to hear that mate. :(

I remember a story my granddad told me about that period of time, he lived in Falkirk (my home town) and when he came home from being made redundant he went to the pub. It was there he met his childhood friend who had been made redundant too, they started to drink and the pub started to fill up. By midnight the pub was packed and everyone in it was a laid off worker, they started to dance. Not because they were happy but because they did so in defiance of those who rendered them redundant.

My granddad would dance with me and my mum and it became a tradition for us. We danced whenever something bad happened in defiance, we danced whenever something good happened in joy.

Nuremgard, Jaslandia

Lex Caledonia wrote:I remember a story my granddad told me about that period of time, he lived in Falkirk (my home town) and when he came home from being made redundant he went to the pub. It was there he met his childhood friend who had been made redundant too, they started to drink and the pub started to fill up. By midnight the pub was packed and everyone in it was a laid off worker, they started to dance. Not because they were happy but because they did so in defiance of those who rendered them redundant.

My granddad would dance with me and my mum and it became a tradition for us. We danced whenever something bad happened in defiance, we danced whenever something good happened in joy.

You cant keep a good Scotsman down!

Nuremgard wrote:So the unemployment was tolerable? I'm guessing you nor your family were negatively affected by Reagan or Thatcher's policies.

FYI: People who lost their jobs and livelihoods do not care about all the theory and evidence behind your beliefs. They care about the fact they lost their means to make a living and were thrown to the wolves.

People's political views are coloured by their experiences in life. Try to remember that the next time you go "lol but mah job" eh?

Friend, as you well know I was not the only one using flippant and careless language. But I digress. No, I wasn't negatively affected. My parents both immigrated to the UK in the height of the boom and probably benefited from it, but I've never really thought about politics in the mold of my persona life, so it hasn't really influenced my thinking. Either way, take that as you will. As Henry Hazlitt said, in economics we shouldn't just look at the seen consequences, but also at the unseen consequences of a given policy. I'm sure for you folks that's a hard pill to swallow. But we can play pick apart the issue all day. My point is in general her economic policies left the UK, on net, better off.

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Lex Caledonia wrote:Honestly, I believe she could have done better in Scotland. Some would argue that it's mutual incomprehension at work though between Scotland and Thatcher. Ah, I was arguing on the Scottish-specific side as I myself am Scottish along with my family. I'll give you that, inflation was reduced but it still left Scotland in a hell of a state, 1/6 of the population of Scotland was rendered unemployed, this took decades to fix. The GDP of Scotland around this time too suffered. I've got libertarian leanings myself so I do understand the appeal of what she did but what she did still hurt my country and she could have done better for it.

You must like Ruth Davidson, lol.

Nuremgard wrote:Can we be honest? Does anyone really give a f*ck about the Faklands or any of the sheep shaggers on it? And I don't mean give a f*ck in the Thatcherite "we must protect their right to Britishness" faux caring, I mean actually giving a f*ck.

I know I don't. But I guess I'm just not very patriotic. ;)

So if your country got attacked you wouldn't support protecting it? Alright when you go independent I'll wheel up with the British Army and just reconquer you cus really who gives a f*ck about a bunch of Nessie shaggers am I right? If you don't support the right to self determination and sovereignty you can't be a Scottish nationalist.

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:Friend, as you well know I was not the only one using flippant and careless language. But I digress. No, I wasn't negatively affected. My parents both immigrated to the UK in the height of the boom and probably benefited from it, but I've never really thought about politics in the mold of my persona life, so it hasn't really influenced my thinking. Either way, take that as you will. As Henry Hazlitt said, in economics we shouldn't just look at the seen consequences, but also at the unseen consequences of a given policy. I'm sure for you folks that's a hard pill to swallow. But we can play pick apart the issue all day. My point is in general her economic policies left the UK, on net, better off.

There you go. You weren't affected and your parents probably benefited, hence your views are shaped by that. Other people got laid off and felt betrayed and abandoned so felt bitter.

If you think they're somehow stupid, envious or should just get over it, that's your prerogative. Have a bit of empathy.

Yukona wrote:So if your country got attacked you wouldn't support protecting it? Alright when you go independent I'll wheel up with the British Army and just reconquer you cus really who gives a f*ck about a bunch of Nessie shaggers am I right? If you don't support the right to self determination and sovereignty you can't be a Scottish nationalist.

They can do whatever they want, mate. They can remain British until the Sun explodes or they can join the Argies. What I was saying was, does anybody actually -care?- Thatcher only cared because it boosted her popularity.

Nuremgard wrote:They can do whatever they want, mate. They can remain British until the Sun explodes or they can join the Argies. What I was saying was, does anybody actually -care?- Thatcher only cared because it boosted her popularity.

No because they attacked our country and they were invaded by a junta and they didn't want to be Argentinian.

Yukona wrote:No because they attacked our country and they were invaded by a junta and they didn't want to be Argentinian.

Meh.

Nuremgard wrote:Meh.

What I thought lol, if you're gonna value self determination then value it, not just when it sorts your narrative bud.

Magnatronia

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:You must like Ruth Davidson, lol.

Lol. Clearly you've never met a Scottish nationalist. We're not exactly Ruthie's biggest fans.

Nuevo Pevvania wrote:You must like Ruth Davidson, lol.

I actually used to like her tell the truth :L

She used to be a compassionate person who did seem like a Tory who cared, especially about Scotland, she can be attributed for the rise of the Scottish Tories in recent years.

However, lately she's lost that compassion and would throw Scotland under a bus if she could get a shot at being in the UK parliament. I do feel sorry for her though, being openly LGBT whilst her party leader makes deals with the anti-LGBT DUP. Oh lordy.

Yukona wrote:What I thought lol, if you're gonna value self determination then value it, not just when it sorts your narrative bud.

I just get irritated when Brits pretend to care about people who live thousands of miles away on tiny islands. And Thatcher's cynical exploitation of the war to boost her popularity was irritating. The general British mindset of "we own that" is irritating because it harks back to the empire.

Lex Caledonia wrote:I actually used to like her tell the truth :L

She used to be a compassionate person who did seem like a Tory who cared, especially about Scotland, she can be attributed for the rise of the Scottish Tories in recent years.

However, lately she's lost that compassion and would throw Scotland under a bus if she could get a shot at being in the UK parliament. I do feel sorry for her though, being openly LGBT whilst her party leader makes deals with the anti-LGBT DUP. Oh lordy.

I don't feel sorry for her. She openly courted the homophobic Orange Order. She only cares when something personally affects her. Like when she was moaning to May that having the DUP helping the government better not stop her from marrying her fancy piece.

I absolutely loathe her.

Nuremgard wrote:I just get irritated when Brits pretend to care about people who live thousands of miles away on tiny islands. And Thatcher's cynical exploitation of the war to boost her popularity was irritating. The general British mindset of "we own that" is irritating because it harks back to the empire.

Lol but you do own that

Yukona

Nuremgard wrote:I don't feel sorry for her. She openly courted the homophobic Orange Order. She only cares when something personally affects her. Like when she was moaning to May that having the DUP helping the government better not stop her from marrying her fancy piece.

I absolutely loathe her.

I understand why you would feel that way Nurem. Its only in recent years where she's done this and I don't support what shes done.

I still hope that one day she'll do a Episode VI and show her compassionate side again.

Nuremgard wrote:I just get irritated when Brits pretend to care about people who live thousands of miles away on tiny islands. And Thatcher's cynical exploitation of the war to boost her popularity was irritating. The general British mindset of "we own that" is irritating because it harks back to the empire.

Lol, suit yourself then. It's part of my country and I'll die for it. They are British citizens and they are my compatriots. Just because it doesn't suit your narrative in this situation you suddenly don't support the people's right for self determination and sovereignty. Ironic, he could save others from death but not himself.

Magnatronia, Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:Lol but you do own that

British Overseas Territories are just hangovers from the imperial days. The whole lot of them could all go independent tomorrow and it would not make one iota of difference to anybody's lives on this island. Except for those who would whine that Britain is no longer the boss.

Lex Caledonia wrote:I understand why you would feel that way Nurem. Its only in recent years where she's done this and I don't support what shes done.

I still hope that one day she'll do a Episode VI and show her compassionate side again.

The fact that she and Dugdale are high profile gay politicians almost makes me ashamed to be gay. The fact we are represented by those two mutants makes me shudder.

Yukona wrote:Lol, suit yourself then. It's part of my country and I'll die for it. They are British citizens and they are my compatriots. Just because it doesn't suit your narrative in this situation you suddenly don't support the people's right for self determination and sovereignty. Ironic, he could save others from death but not himself.

I never said I don't support their right to self-determination. I just said I don't care.

You'd die for them? Lol, whatever cooks your pudding, bud.

Continental Commonwealths wrote:Inserting a table of contents into my nation's overview factbook was hella fun, I'll tell you what. /s

All the same, if you want to check it out you can here.

Also new is the Governance section. Trying to think what else I should include. Religion isn't big in my nation, so that's not likely a go. Suggestions?

I may be a bit biased, but what about a bit on Continental Commonwealths' transportation system or public transport options?

Speaking of Factbooks, me and the Bureau of Historical Information just put out a new one: We haven't talked about Sodor's history recently, especially its earlier history, so we decided to put out a Factbook on Sodor's early (standard gauge) railways. Here's the link if you're interested: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=percyton/detail=factbook/id=871423

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:Do you guys like my new flag?

It looks great, Neo (I can call you that, right?)!

Penguania And Antarctica wrote:

- 1864 – American Civil War: Battle of Globe Tavern: Union forces try to cut a vital Confederate supply-line into Petersburg, Virginia, by attacking the Wilmington and Weldon Railroad.

That's one of the many things I hate about war: Railways are often caught up in the war and have to do wartime duties (whether it be transporting food to soldiers or transporting weapons), and since we can't really do much without our Drivers and Firemen, we basically have no choice but to do the war work and help the war effort, whether we agree with it or not. In addition, because we're so essential in delivering supplies, us and our infrastructure (stations, tracks, water towers, etc.) are frequently targeted during wars; even if we personally don't support the war, we're made to suffer for it.

Gordon: Such is life, little Percy. Such is life.

Andromitus wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKqXu-5jw60

Even though that's an American cartoon, me and the other engines actually saw that one sometime in the 70s. Understandably, Bert of the Arlesdale Railway got the most enjoyment out of it, and he would refer to himself as 'the Turtle' for quite a few weeks afterwards.

Penguania And Antarctica wrote:Huhu

Hello, Peng! How are you today?

Jaslandia, Andromitus, Penguania And Antarctica, United Continental States

Nuremgard wrote:British Overseas Territories are just hangovers from the imperial days. The whole lot of them could all go independent tomorrow and it would not make one iota of difference to anybody's lives on this island. Except for those who would whine that Britain is no longer the boss.

The fact that she and Dugdale are high profile gay politicians almost makes me ashamed to be gay. The fact we are represented by those two mutants makes me shudder.

Yeah but do they want independence?

Nuremgard wrote:I never said I don't support their right to self-determination. I just said I don't care.

You'd die for them? Lol, whatever cooks your pudding, bud.

Then that's why we fought for the islands. I doubt you'd like to be invaded by an English military junta

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:Yeah but do they want independence?

Naw, so whatever makes them smile.

Post self-deleted by Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth.

Yukona wrote:Then that's why we fought for the islands. I doubt you'd like to be invaded by an English military junta

The way your country is going that's a real possibility.

Nuremgard wrote:The way your country is going that's a real possibility.

Nice to see you're resorting to petty digs

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Nuremgard wrote:Naw, so whatever makes them smile.

Well, it's the duty of the government to protect it's people from other nations and their expansionism/irredentism

Yukona

Hey guys! I've finished the map for the New Albion RP and I might even get them up on the NS forums this evening! If you wanna join, I urge you to PM me now!

Lex Caledonia, Yukona, Percyton

Yukona wrote:Nice to see you're resorting to petty digs

Just a bit of bantz.

But aye, I admit I was in the wrong there. I see your point about self-determination and not wanting to be invaded by a foreign power and what not.

Mind you, Thatcher was not entirely averse to juntas. She was very fond of Pinochet's.

I don't really know what I'd find scarier as a Falklander: the Argies or Thatcher sailing over waving a union jack.

Nuremgard wrote:Just a bit of bantz.

But aye, I admit I was in the wrong there. I see your point about self-determination and not wanting to be invaded by a foreign power and what not.

Mind you, Thatcher was not entirely averse to juntas. She was very fond of Pinochet's.

I don't really know what I'd find scarier as a Falklander: the Argies or Thatcher sailing over waving a union jack.

Lol trying to find another reason to hate Thatcher

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:Well, it's the duty of the government to protect it's people from other nations and their expansionism/irredentism

Especially if a good war will boost your popularity ratings.

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:Lol trying to find another reason to hate Thatcher

I'm just making a joke, babe. No need to get your right wing knickers in a twist just because I'm not kissing her arse.

Nuremgard wrote:Especially if a good war will boost your popularity ratings.

You mean a war where she is defending the citizens of her country?

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:Call me Lib, it's what I was called when I had another nation

Sure thing, Lib!

Jaslandia, Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:You mean a war where she is defending the citizens of her country?

Oh, you make it sound so noble. I'm sure her reasons for starting the war were strictly selfless and solely in the interests of the Falklanders.

Lol.

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:Lol trying to find another reason to hate Thatcher

Oh trust me, up here in Scotland, we've got lots. We're thinking of fuelling our butt-hurt into a form of renewable energy :L

Nuremgard

Lex Caledonia wrote:Oh trust me, up here in Scotland, we've got lots. We're thinking of fuelling our butt-hurt into a form of renewable energy :L

That would last forever then.

Well there is one less reason for hating Thatcher now. She stopped breathing. :P

Nuremgard wrote:Just a bit of bantz.

But aye, I admit I was in the wrong there. I see your point about self-determination and not wanting to be invaded by a foreign power and what not.

Mind you, Thatcher was not entirely averse to juntas. She was very fond of Pinochet's.

I don't really know what I'd find scarier as a Falklander: the Argies or Thatcher sailing over waving a union jack.

Yeah because you don't consider yourself unequivocally British unlike the islands my good lord -_- . I've already said Thatcher popularised off it the issue is why do we care for them.

Nuremgard wrote:Since you said you were Greek, who is your favourite Greek god or goddess?

Neptune or Pluto. I also like Athena

Nuremgard, Jaslandia, Lex Caledonia

Percyton wrote:Speaking of Factbooks, me and the Bureau of Historical Information just put out a new one: We haven't talked about Sodor's history recently, especially its earlier history, so we decided to put out a Factbook on Sodor's early (standard gauge) railways. Here's the link if you're interested: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=percyton/detail=factbook/id=871423

Very good, Percy! I like it. I always find it interesting how you manage to blend Railway Series continuity, TV series continuity, and your own continuity and reconcile them together.

Percyton wrote:It looks great, [B]Neo[/B] (I can call you that, right?)!

Neo-Icelandic/Lib is The One.

https://images.moviepilot.com/image/upload/c_fill,h_470,q_auto:good,w_620/xzs0ssndrgzqibhaxgep.jpg

https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11113/111134171/4134793-neo+of+matrix.jpg

Percyton

Yukona wrote:Yeah because you don't consider yourself unequivocally British unlike the islands my good lord -_- . I've already said Thatcher popularised off it the issue is why do we care for them.

Does having someone like me live on the same island as you never make you question your British nationalism, Yuk? :P

Cesorion wrote:Neptune or Pluto. I also like Athena

I think they're all cool except Hestia who is boring and Zeus who is a c*nt. I'd probably say my fave is Apollo.

Jaslandia

Ah. I think it's actually a bit too late to put it up today, so I'll see if I can get it going tomorrow!

Andromitus

Nuremgard wrote:Oh, you make it sound so noble. I'm sure her reasons for starting the war were strictly selfless and solely in the interests of the Falklanders.

Lol.

You mean when Argentina invaded the islands?

And Galtieri did it because he wanted to divert attention from their stagnant economy

Cesorion

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:You mean when Argentina invaded the islands?

And Galtieri did it because he wanted to divert attention from their stagnant economy

He was only doing what the British had been doing for centuries.

Nuremgard wrote:He was only doing what the British had been doing for centuries.

I don't give a shít what he was doing, you said Thatcher was in the war for herself when in fact she was defending the people of her country.

Yukona

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:I don't give a shít what he was doing, you said Thatcher was in the war for herself when in fact she was defending the people of her country.

So it's only okay when Britain go around invading and taking over other people's countries? But when someone else does it to them, ooh no, cant have that.

Kalaron wrote:Hey Pengu

Percyton wrote:Hello, Peng! How are you today?

Hey Percy and Kal. I'm doing good. I'm very exhilarated. Was at the movies and saw a comedy film. Was very good and very funny.

How about you ?

Percyton

Penguania And Antarctica wrote:Hey Percy and Kal. I'm doing good. I'm very exhilarated. Was at the movies and saw a comedy film. Was very good and very funny.

How about you ?

I'm doing pretty good, Peng. I'm doing my nightly mail run, and it's going pretty well! No delays or incidents so far, and the Stationmaster at Crosby even gave my crew some tea!

Penguania And Antarctica, United Continental States

Penguania And Antarctica wrote:Hey Percy and Kal. I'm doing good. I'm very exhilarated. Was at the movies and saw a comedy film. Was very good and very funny.

How about you ?

I'm good, still designing the Nyx-Hemera :P

Jaslandia, Penguania And Antarctica, Percyton

Percyton wrote:I'm doing pretty good, Peng. I'm doing my nightly mail run, and it's going pretty well! No delays or incidents so far, and the Stationmaster at Crosby even gave my crew some tea!

When do you sleep ?

Jaslandia, Percyton

Nuremgard wrote:So it's only okay when Britain go around invading and taking over other people's countries? But when someone else does it to them, ooh no, cant have that.

You clearly don't know the history of the Falkland Islands but lets go through the records

In 1690, an English captain named John Strong discovered the islands.

In 1764 the French established Port Louis, and in 1766 the British established Port Egmont. Historians debate on whether they knew of one another.

In 1766 the French surrendered their claim on the islands to Spain, and the colony was renamed Puerto Soledad.

In 1770 the Spanish captured Port Egmont but gave it back to the British one year later to prevent war. This is known as the Falklands Crisis.

The Spanish and British coexisted peacefully until the British left voluntarily in 1774, So Spain was the sole owner of the islands, and turned their colony into a prison camp.

In 1806 the governor decided to evacuate the islands because of the Napoleonic wars, where France and Spain were on the same side. Fishermen remained on the Islands though.

The status of the Islands was undisputed until 1820 when Colonel David Jewett, an American privateer working for the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata, informed anchored ships about Buenos Aires' 1816 claim to Spain's territories in the South Atlantic.

In 1832 the British reasserted their claim on the islands, and occupied it, and in 1840 the Falkland Islands became a crown colony.

So it is true that the history of the British Empire is bloody, but your claim that they took the islands from Argentina is not the entire truth

Nuremgard, Jaslandia, Yukona, Percyton, Cesorion

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth wrote:You clearly don't know the history of the Falkland Islands but lets go through the records

In 1690, an English captain named John Strong discovered the islands.

In 1764 the French established Port Louis, and in 1766 the British established Port Egmont. Historians debate on whether they knew of one another.

In 1766 the French surrendered their claim on the islands to Spain, and the colony was renamed Puerto Soledad.

In 1770 the Spanish captured Port Egmont but gave it back to the British one year later to prevent war. This is known as the Falklands Crisis.

The Spanish and British coexisted peacefully until the British left voluntarily in 1774, So Spain was the sole owner of the islands, and turned their colony into a prison camp.

In 1806 the governor decided to evacuate the islands because of the Napoleonic wars, where France and Spain were on the same side. Fishermen remained on the Islands though.

The status of the Islands was undisputed until 1820 when Colonel David Jewett, an American privateer working for the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata, informed anchored ships about Buenos Aires' 1816 claim to Spain's territories in the South Atlantic.

In 1832 the British reasserted their claim on the islands, and occupied it, and in 1840 the Falkland Islands became a crown colony.

So it is true that the history of the British Empire is bloody, but your claim that they took the islands from Argentina is not the entire truth

I could tell by the delayed response this would be a long message but thanks for the history lesson.

Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Nuremgard wrote:Does having someone like me live on the same island as you never make you question your British nationalism, Yuk? :P

I think they're all cool except Hestia who is boring and Zeus who is a c*nt. I'd probably say my fave is Apollo.

It makes me want to kill myself half the time, questioning my own patriotism isn't even close.

Nuremgard, Magnatronia

Yukona wrote:It makes me want to kill myself half the time, questioning my own patriotism isn't even close.

;)

Funnily enough my new nation is an island one and it's flag is the Argentinian one.

Jaslandia, Percyton

Nuremgard wrote:So it's only okay when Britain go around invading and taking over other people's countries? But when someone else does it to them, ooh no, cant have that.

So because the now English originally invaded and pushed out the original Saxon owners for the most part - they don't have a right to their country nowadays? That's all dead and buried now. Regardless of the Falklands not even being a product of invasion, history happened and we can't change it. What it also doesn't change is the right to self-governance, self-determination and sovereignty. If that holy trinity lines up, then you can't stop Britain owning somewhere, nor can you Argentina, nor can you Scotland, nor can you bloody France for all I care.

Nuremgard

Nuremgard wrote:;)

Funnily enough my new nation is an island one and it's flag is the Argentinian one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glzf4lUyyRs

Yukona wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glzf4lUyyRs

Genuine question: imagine history turned out in such a way that England and Scotland were still separate states today. Would you be in favour of unification?

Nuremgard wrote:Genuine question: imagine history turned out in such a way that England and Scotland were still separate states today. Would you be in favour of unification?

Dunno really, it's entirely dependent on context and what's going on I think, so I don't think I can answer that question.

Nuremgard

Nuremgard wrote:Genuine question: imagine history turned out in such a way that England and Scotland were still separate states today. Would you be in favour of unification?

WELL SONNY, LET ME GENTLY SEUGE THIS ONTO ANOTHER, TOTALLY UNRELATED TOPIC IN A VERY SMOOTH, NON-PUSHY WAY

JUST SO HAPPENS THAT THAT'S ALSO THE PREMISE OF MY BRAND NEW RP NEW ALBION™

SIGN UP TODAY

Nuremgard, Lex Caledonia, Yukona

Penguania And Antarctica wrote:When do you sleep ?

It depends. Sometimes I sleep in the morning if I don't have a morning train. Sometimes I'll finish early and sleep during the night and very early morning hours. And occasionally I'll just take short naps between jobs throughout the day.

Jaslandia, Penguania And Antarctica

Yukona wrote:Dunno really, it's entirely dependent on context and what's going on I think, so I don't think I can answer that question.

Mind you my island nation is a tad different. The emperor on it is worshiped as a god but it does have an empire and a strong naval tradition.

Jaslandia

The only thing I got from the above conversation is that I found a new hatred for people who only stand for values when it fits their narratives, otherwise they couldn't care less.

This is my view as a citizen, not a constable. So don't get your nipples in a twist.

Clemodecralia, Penguania And Antarctica, Yukona, Neo-Icelandic Commonwealth

Magnatronia wrote:The only thing I got from the above conversation is that I found a new hatred for people who only stand for values when it fits their narratives, otherwise they couldn't care less.

This is my view as a citizen, not a constable. So don't get your nipples in a twist.

You hate me? Yay!

Nuremgard wrote:You hate me? Yay!

No no, I'm a constable. I have to be neutral. I just happen to hate that quality that you happen to have.

Magnatronia wrote:No no, I'm a constable. I have to be neutral. I just happen to hate that quality that you happen to have.

I never claimed to be perfect.

I mean, I'm a Scottish nationalist and all for Scotland being independent but when it comes to Game of Thrones, I'm an ardent unionist. In the sense that I think Jon Snow ought to bend the knee and submit the North to their true queen, Daenerys.

Nuremgard wrote:I never claimed to be perfect.

I mean, I'm a Scottish nationalist and all for Scotland being independent but when it comes to Game of Thrones, I'm an ardent unionist. In the sense that I think Jon Snow ought to bend the knee and submit the North to their true queen, Daenerys.

You lost me at 'ardent unionist'.

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.