Jump to content

Charl91

Member
  • Post count

    4,081
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,548 Excellent

About Charl91

  • Rank
    Key Player
  • Birthday 16/05/1991

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

5,479 profile views
  1. Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

    Why should they be penalised? Funnily enough, that's what current students think. Why should they be penalised? If you're asking current students to essentially pay a graduate tax, why not ask all people who have graduated to pay a graduate tax on their earnings, as long as they are still earning. Surely that's much more fair than just dumping the burden on the current generation (a generation that is financially much worse off than previous generations as it is). After all, the same argument applies; those people have benefited from going to university and receiving higher wages (in a much more lucrative job market, may I add), why would it be wrong to also apply the same standards to them? Great, you can argue "but previous generations didn't sign up for it". Fine, but two points. Firstly, no one signs up for a tax. That would like me saying "well, when I decided to earn £100,000, I didn't expect the tax bands to be changed". Tough shit, you don't get a choice about taxes. Secondly, the current generation don't really have a choice. Well they do, it's 1) Pay extortionate Tuition fees, or 2) Be locked out of many different professions. It's not really a choice, and it's unfair for previous generations, who didn't have to make that choice, to then lump it on to the younger generations to save themselves a bit of cash. Your right, times change and financial situations of countries change. So maybe say to all those people who have graduated "Sorry, we thought we could afford to pay for your education, but it turns out we can't - you're gonna have to contribute something to it". But screw fairness, the younger generation are an easier political target, especially as many of those affected couldn't actually vote. Again, I don't have a problem with the principle of paying tuition fees. Some people disagree, but personally I think if you benefit from University, then you should pay for it. I don't think those people who haven't been to University should contribute towards the education of those who (though I do understand the arguments about it being beneficial for the economy, etc, etc.) However benefiting from free tuition and then pulling up the ladder behind you as absolutely disgraceful. I absolutely think those people who have been to University for free, and are still earning significant amounts of money from it, should contribute. You try telling me how that would possibly be more unfair than the current system
  2. Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

    In principal, I agree. I think it's a fair system; I pay for my tutition fees, and it wouldn't bother me.... .....if it wasn't for the fact that it was implemented by people who had their university education for free. Absolutely brilliant; why don't one of the most well-off generations penalise the younger (statistically already much worse off generation) even more? It's no wonder young people are bitter. Do I see people who went to university in previous years (at the benefit of the tax payer, I may add) also offer to contribute to their university education? No, because apparently that would be unfair The more you think about it, the more of an absolute joke it is. Why not take it a step further. I vote that anyone born from 2001 onwards should pay 50% tax on all earnings.
  3. XCOM 2

    That mission is brutal. I just camped until I had about 12 men, so every time they brought in reinforcements they immediately ended up being overwatched by about 8 people as soon as they landed
  4. XCOM 2

    Not on iron man Had 5/6 of my A team fully ranked up as well. Ah well.
  5. XCOM 2

    Oh, and to top it off.....it's corrupted my save file. Brilliant.
  6. XCOM 2

    Just did one of the main missions. One of my best - 26 kills, including a sectopod. All soldiers returned. No deaths, all enemies killed, and only one soldier wounded.... ....and I failed. Turns out, that when you open the body casket, it doesn't automatically give it to one of your men. I forgot to pick it up.
  7. XCOM 2

    Tbf, Ranger Dwight Schrute was poisoned and dead the next turn. Sacrifices had to be made!
  8. XCOM 2

    Yeah, in hind sight, that was a bad call. Every time I meet a new enemy, I get screwed over in a slightly different way. It's like the game is taunting me. "Oh by the way, when you rescue civilians, they can sometimes turn into faceless men and slaughter you. Sorry we didn't mention that at any point." "Obviously, when you're in the middle of a fire-fight, a Codex is going to appear if you Skulljack that bloke, and jam all your weapons" "Why wouldn't Chrysalids run the length of three battlefields and poison your men as soon as you meet them?" "Good job on killing that andromedon. L0l JK!" "One sectopod not enough? Here, have two. Let's give them three actions, crazy health and the ability to stand up and ignore your cover" "Ooh look, a flying orb..... " Did just have a great assassination missions though (at least, I call them assassination missions, 'cus I'm not going to waste my time extracting some bloke from a robot infested building) - managed to sneak all the way to the other side of the map, lobbed a poison grenade into the building, and legged it. Think I killed a total of two enemies on that one
  9. XCOM 2

    Started playing this week. Very addictive game. For some stupid, stupid reason, I thought I'd play Iron Man mode as my first go As you can imagine, I am getting absolutely destroyed, and do a lot of rage-quitting. Just had my ship shot down by a UFO, and had to abandon one of my best rangers, so the rest of my team could escape. R.I.P Michael Scott.
  10. Vardy breaks a new record

    Maybe a few more, but not necessarily. Firstly they wouldn't play to Vardy's strengths, so he'd have less chance to hit teams on the counter, which is how he scores many of his goals. Plus surrounding a player with better ones doesn't always increase the amount of goals scored - look at Lukaku this season, for instance. It's not a great argument, because you can make that same argument for any player. Put Troy Deeney in the Man City team and he'd score more goals, but that doesn't make him as good as Harry Kane either.
  11. Vardy breaks a new record

    Kane had 13 apps for us, at the age of 19. And most of them were either subs, or played in strange positions (eg. as a wide player in a 4-3-3, thanks Pearson). Lets remember that Vardy didn't have a great first season with us either. Most people wanted him sold, if I remember correctly.
  12. Vardy breaks a new record

    Of course I'm not a Spurs fan In the same way that I can say quite confidently that Messi is better than Vardy, without needing to be a Barcelona fan. Quite frankly, I don't care enough to go to the effort to post all the stats; whether you choose to believe them or just cry "fake news" is up to you. But even the goal scoring statistics posted above speak volumes, without going to need to go into the other statistics as well. Look, I get that as Leicester fans we all want our players to be the best. But imagine the shoe was on the other foot for a second; imagine that Vardy had that goal scoring record, and someone tried to argue that a player with almost half the amount of goals was a better player. You'd laugh them out of a town. (Also, your attempt trying to come across as all holier-than-though is rather spoilt by trying to imply that I'm either a Spurs fan, or elitist - which is a bizzare in itself).
  13. another school shooting

    Much trickier to make, conceal, and kill people with explosive devices than it guns. Get a lot of dud explosive devices, and they're much trickier to make (even if you have the knowledge) as opposed to popping down to Walmart to pick up an assault rifle.
  14. Vardy breaks a new record

    but...but... better conversion rate!! (And that is why David Nugent is often hailed as the greatest striker to ever play for England)
  15. Vardy breaks a new record

    You've really got your knickers in a twist about this, don't you. Take of those blue-tinted specs for one moment. "Goal per shot ratio" isn't a great statistic. Yeah, it might show how clinical someone is. Or, it might just show that Kane takes a lot more speculative efforts than Vardy, who tends to wait 'til he's in on goal to shoot. Either is fine, but the only stat that matters at the end of the day is goals scored. If you take 4x as many shots and score twice as many goals, that's still better than having 1 shot and 1 goal. Kane has outscored Vardy every season, including our title winning season (where it can't be argued that Tottenham had the better team). Maybe Vardy would score more in a better team, but probably not significantly so - Vardy needs a team that plays to his strengths, and lets him hit on the counter. Look up the statistics and you'll see that Kanes statisics dwarf Vardys. His passing percentages, key passes, chances created, etc. are all better. His hold up play is better, his match ratings are better, and most importantly, his goal scoring is better. Even his interceptions and tackles are better this season. He's won the golden boot for the past 2 seasons, and looks set to possibly win it for a third time in a row. There's a reason why Harry Kane will lead the line for England. There won't even be a debate about it, because it's that clear cut. If you ask any person who isn't a Leicester fan, who is the better footballer, and they'll say Harry Kane. Maybe Vardy is more clinical, but then again, maybe so is Iheanacho. That's not the only metric for a football player. Look, I can see why people would say otherwise. I'm really not a big fan of Kane; he's a bit of a tosser (especially during the title season), and it's difficult to see how he got so good after being so average for us. And defending Kane on a Leicester forum is going to be an unpopular, and thankless task. But quite frankly, trying to argue that Vardy is the better player is delusional, as almost every single statistic, public opinion, and literally just common sense says otherwise. Would I trade Kane for Vardy? No, but only because of sentimental reasons. Do you possibly think that as a Leicester fan, you may just be a teensy bit biased?
×