Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

by JAS Thu 26 Sep - 20:41

First topic message reminder :

super_realist wrote:Well done Jas, I've done it a few times and have applied too. Not heard back yet though.

I did it in 2008 Super and was disappointed not to break 4 hours (I ran Glasgow 3 times in the mid 80s with a PB of 2.52) Huge difference in running marathons from early to mid 20's and late 40's/early 50's though. I said in 2008 that I had one more left and it WOULD be sub 4 hours!! I've applied 3 times without success since but I'm in this time.

BlueCoverman wrote:Nice one JAS...trust all that training won't interfere with the golf schedule too much!

In reality and coupled with the Captaincy it probably will knock my game backwards a bit. C'est la vie :-/. Ideally the day I'd want to be doing my last long training run is the day of the Captains drive in.

kwinigolfer wrote:Didn't Kirkygolfer run in it - think some of us helped him raise money?

I'm sure somebody from the boards did Kwini, cant remember the name though.

by incontinentia Tue 5 Nov - 13:29

Looks like pube head is in a bit of a pickle. Relying on his ex-agents credibility in one lawsuit while challenging it in another. Oh Rory, what have you got yourself into!

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/golf/rory-mcilroy-accuses-former-sponsor-oakley-of-harassment-1.1583734

by JAS Thu 7 Nov - 10:30

Is it right to have an overseas aid budget?

Is it right to allocate some of that budget as aid to a country that has decided it can afford a Space programme???

by **navyblueshorts** Thu 7 Nov - 10:58

I'd say 'No' to the latter but haven't we (the U.K.) just recently agreed to cease aid for India?

by golfermartin Thu 7 Nov - 11:00

"Yes" and "No". Problem is do the poor in India have a "voice" sufficient to shame the government out of office over what is a pretty shameful set of affairs? The money spent on the space programme clearly should be going into addressing poverty issues.

by JAS Thu 7 Nov - 11:51

Exactly!! Putting aside the Indian space Programme for a minute, to me there are 2 things about overseas aid
1. How much of it actually gets to the people that genuinely need it rather than the grubby hands of the corrupt government officials and/or totalitarian war mongers that probably have a lot to do with the levels of poverty in their respective nations in the first place.
2. Giving money away when we are in fiscal defecit??? Are we mad?? Analogy...Struggling to pay the mortgage and support our own household but looking down the street at other poor kids whose parents are out spending their money on fags and booze, yeah let's get further into debt sweeping up and bailing out the irresponsible!!

Back to the Indian thing, aid there should stop forthwith (if it hasn't already - not aware of that NBS). The fact is India is already helping itself to a portion of UK wealth by the invasion of cheap IT skills Jobs are flooding over there at a great rate of knots. Many Indians come here, earn decent money and send most of it back to India. Not saying that's right or wrong, my point is that the Indians are smart enough to sort themselves out and we are mugs not to see if.

by McLaren Thu 7 Nov - 13:31

How do you know a space program isn't the best use of India's limited resources?

Much like the WW2 or the Apollo missions it could be a crucial economic stimulus.

It promotes education, mastery of highly skilled jobs and general scientific benefits.

So think of it this way. There could be two scenarios.

1. India develops its space project and ensures better economic returns in the future. But still needs aid to help with other projects.

2. India does not spend the money on the space program and therefore provides no economic stimulus, and no future returns. And still needs aid now.

Think about it in terms of what is the best way for india to use its resources. Not the simple daily mail analysis that because you have a rocket you don't get aid.

by incontinentia Thu 7 Nov - 13:39

McLaren wrote:How do you know a space program isn't the best use of India's limited resources?

Much like the WW2 or the Apollo missions it could be a crucial economic stimulus.

It promotes education, mastery of highly skilled jobs and general scientific benefits.

So think of it this way. There could be two scenarios.

1. India develops its space project and ensures better economic returns in the future. But still needs aid to help with other projects.

2. India does not spend the money on the space program and therefore provides no economic stimulus, and no future returns. And still needs aid now.

Think about it in terms of what is the best way for india to use its resources. Not the simple daily mail analysis that because you have a rocket you don't get aid.

Would you apply the same logic to their nuclear weapons programme? Let's face it, India doesn't give a damn about its poor.

by MontysMerkin Thu 7 Nov - 13:47

incontinentia wrote:
McLaren wrote:How do you know a space program isn't the best use of India's limited resources?

Much like the WW2 or the Apollo missions it could be a crucial economic stimulus.

It promotes education, mastery of highly skilled jobs and general scientific benefits.

So think of it this way. There could be two scenarios.

1. India develops its space project and ensures better economic returns in the future. But still needs aid to help with other projects.

2. India does not spend the money on the space program and therefore provides no economic stimulus, and no future returns. And still needs aid now.

Think about it in terms of what is the best way for india to use its resources. Not the simple daily mail analysis that because you have a rocket you don't get aid.
Would you apply the same logic to their nuclear weapons programme? Let's face it, India doesn't give a damn about its poor.

Would you apply the same logic to their nuclear weapons programme? Let's face it, [insert country of choice] doesn't give a damn about its poor.

There fixed for ya.

by super_realist Thu 7 Nov - 13:48

Why would you care, let them eat cake.....

actually, Scandinavia, Iceland and Finland are very good at caring for their poor.

by MontysMerkin Thu 7 Nov - 13:52

Ahh those great bastions of socialism!

by super_realist Thu 7 Nov - 13:55

by **navyblueshorts** Thu 7 Nov - 14:57

super_realist wrote:Why would you care...

Humanity maybe?

by super_realist Thu 7 Nov - 15:05

navyblueshorts wrote:
super_realist wrote:Why would you care...
Humanity maybe?

It was a joke Navy.

by golfermartin Thu 7 Nov - 15:12

I wonder how many paupers are employed in India's space programme? And how many might benefit from the "crucial economic stimulus" it brings?

by JAS Thu 7 Nov - 15:19

As per usual Mac you completely gloss over the central point of the argument as if it didn't exist. As much as I detest the Daily Mail, if that was their stance then I'd quite happily agree with them on this one.

Who threw money at us when we were going though the wealth creating industrial revolution? Nobody!!!
Bottom line....they don't NEED our financial help disguised as aid, they'll take it though as long as we're mug enough to give it.

Can we afford to give it? You'd rather support another country's space program (indirectly) than fund decent railways at home, proper pay & conditions for firemen, affordable fuel for pensioners? how very in-Guardian of you?

by MontysMerkin Thu 7 Nov - 15:40

It's a tough one and no mistake but I would think the aid budget has more historical/political underpinnings than merely feeding the poor (although that makes it easier to sell to the idiot in the street).

by JAS Thu 7 Nov - 15:49

Still think though...at times when we (as a Nation) have a current account defecit then the OA budget should be the first thing to bite the dust... at least until we're back in the black.

Dont care if that sounds naive, to me its one of those common sense ideas which politicians of all flavours seem completely incapable of comprehending.

by JAS Thu 7 Nov - 15:50

Still think though...at times when we (as a Nation) have a current account defecit then the OA budget should be the first thing to bite the dust... at least until we're back in the black.

Dont care if that sounds naive, selfish or both, to me its one of those common sense ideas which politicians of all flavours seem completely incapable of comprehending.

by incontinentia Thu 7 Nov - 15:54

golfermartin wrote:I wonder how many paupers are employed in India's space programme? And how many might benefit from the "crucial economic stimulus" it brings?

It's been rumoured that instead of sending dogs or chimps into space for their first test flight, India sent paupers instead- disgusting.

by MontysMerkin Thu 7 Nov - 15:55

JAS, you can say that again drumroll

by MontysMerkin Thu 7 Nov - 15:59

JAS wrote:Still think though...at times when we (as a Nation) have a current account defecit then the OA budget should be the first thing to bite the dust... at least until we're back in the black.

Dont care if that sounds naive, selfish or both, to me its one of those common sense ideas which politicians of all flavours seem completely incapable of comprehending.

For me it's sorting out the tax situation. As things have become more transparent and it appears only the middle classes are paying their dues it makes me wonder whether there isn't enough to go round, and then some. Rather that than poverty for me - how much money (power) do people need?

by Doc Thu 7 Nov - 16:09

For me the aid budget should have been the first thing cut and cash used to stabalise our own fragile services. I can't accept that we have child poverty in this country yet see fit to send billions over seas to some very shady characters/governments/organisations who can profit personally from it.

Here's one for our Scotish bretheren, and yesterdays political shenanagins around closing our shipyards in Portsmouth. Politics will not save Dave if the Scottish vote YES. Ther are way too many in England who will not accept that our naval ships are built on foreign soil.

by **navyblueshorts** Thu 7 Nov - 16:30

Doc wrote:...Here's one for our Scotish bretheren, and yesterdays political shenanagins around closing our shipyards in Portsmouth. Politics will not save Dave if the Scottish vote YES. Ther are way too many in England who will not accept that our naval ships are built on foreign soil.

No-one makes much, if anything, of our future purchase of the Joint Strike Fighter or the Typhoon, for example. OK, a bit of them may be British-built but hardly a great deal.

by JAS Thu 7 Nov - 17:31

The Southerners didn't complain too much when we started being a net importer of coal Doc.

I take your point though as it was the union bashing industrial vandalism of the Thatcher era which hit Scotland hardest followed closely by the Poll tax pilot which poured petrol on the flames of a pretty insipid candle of an independence movement and turned it into a bloody great bonfire and at the same time reduced to Tories in Scotland to a rump.

All water under the bridge though and that bitterness (and plenty of it is still there) hopefully won't sway the vote.

by Doc Fri 8 Nov - 10:15

JAS I just find it gauling that politicians don't have the courage to come out and tell the truth. From everything I've read and seen in interviews, it's now obvious that this is some form of blackmail. There is no way that any of those type 26 friggates will be built in Scotland if there's a seperation. (EU law wont allow it anyway) There's only ministers trying to avoid and obfiscate the question, but everyone else and even Dave has said we dont build our ships on foreign soil. The problem is going to be for Dave, is that if the Portsmouth yards are closed they cannot be reopened and the workforce will have gone. Unless something is done in the short term to keep the yard 'open'. There are plenty of voters in England and especially Hampshire who will not vote tory, and the Scottish thing could still backfire on Dave and cause him a double whammy. He's playing politics with peoples lives and is going to look stupid, well even more stupid.

by super_realist Fri 8 Nov - 10:33

The yard IS staying open, they just aren't building ships there anymore.

I'm hoping that those working in the Glasgow yards are at least clever enough to not vote for the yes side in the referendum.

by JAS Fri 8 Nov - 10:43

Well of course they don't Doc....they're politicians!! And you're bang on...blackmail is EXACTLY what it is. After that however you then lose me. There's an awful lot of wild and unrealistic speculation goes on about a post pro-independence vote would mean. Would Scotland be in the EU? Would Scotland be in NATO? Will the English get the hump and start being awkward? Given the 95% chance that the vote will be a resounding NO we shouldn't need to bother thinking about the answers but for the sake of indulging the debate... If the Jocks remain part of both the EU and NATO....there would be no grounds for the English to insist that Naval vessel production should be moved back to England.

by super_realist Fri 8 Nov - 11:39

Thank goodness JAS it is hopefully going to be a No Vote, If however it does go the way of the fat, slovenly, slimy, necrophiliac, heart attack in waiting and his lego haired half witted carpet munching sidekick's favour then I think I'll move to Denmark, Norway or to one of the oil companies on the outskirts of Londinium.
Taxes for individuals and companies would have to go through the roof to support his mad plans.

My worry is there are enough bigoted, anti English people who buy into his thinly veiled agenda of tapping into the anti english childish views which persist in Scotland, and in particular amongst the working or dole class in Scotland.

by JAS Fri 8 Nov - 12:01

It would be fair to say they're not you're favourite couple then? Laugh

I have heard it before but the Lego haired reference has me chuckling every time Wink

by super_realist Fri 8 Nov - 12:07

On another note I see some hypocrital religious leaders are opposing the age at which people can join the forces.

So, you shouldn't be able to join the forces at 16, but it's OK for them to indoctrinate children with lies, hypocrisy, evil and immorality from their so called "good-book"?

Mmm. Perhaps they might look closer to home to who does more harm to young people.

by Doc Fri 8 Nov - 12:28

Another pointless and stupid comment from the church in Scotland (Wales as well) even though Salmond has changed things so that 16-year olds can vote?

On the subject of fat and slimey with Mrs lego Very Happy

once the vote is over and they lose, where next for the SNP. The SNP only exist on a single point and once that point has been defeated it's accepted it will be another 300-years before another vote takes place. Therefore there would be no point to the SNP so must break up and walk into the sunset, or will they rebrand themselves? They cant be almost independant, but I can see Salmond taking a leaf out of his heros book and calling themselves 'Forsa Scotland' censored

by JAS Fri 8 Nov - 12:45

Don't think they'll disappear, think they'll go away and have a think and try and come back with devolution++.

They currently have a majority in the Scottish parliament so I don't see that disappearing overnight. Even if they lose their majority I would imagine they'll still be the main opposition. Left & lefter is the order of the day in Scottish politics.

Don't think it'll be 300 years before they manage to orchestrate another vote, after all the last one was as recent as 1979.

by super_realist Fri 8 Nov - 12:50

Doc, That's a very good question. I think that Heart Attack and Lego appear to think that the rest of the country care about Scotland. I don't see why they see independence as some sort of ransom to the rest of the UK.

So far, I've not seen a single figure to show how Scotland would be better off, as I said earlier, it's simply down to one issue, hatred of the English.
I keep hearing about how we'd be like Norway. Complete rubbish, one country of healthy, educated , hard working people with 750 BILLION in the bank and another country of unhealthy, slovenly, poorly educated with a massive deficit.

Hopefully, when the referendum is over and they've lost they'l disappear up their own rather large backsides and those of us with common sense can get on together like we have done since 1707.

by MontysMerkin Fri 8 Nov - 13:04

I know it affects you lot up there in haggis noshing territory but down here no-one gives a flying f*ck one way or the other. In fact we might get a bit of peace and quiet if you did one. That's my race relations over for the day...

by super_realist Fri 8 Nov - 13:14

That's exactly it Monty, I've absolutely no interest in those Leek Munchers or those fond of devouring starchy pouches of carbohydrate, so not sure why Fatty and Lego are making such idle threats.

Hopefully though, their own electorate are going to tell them to get f**ked.

by incontinentia Fri 8 Nov - 13:24

super_realist wrote:... the fat, slovenly, slimy, necrophiliac, heart attack in waiting and his lego haired half witted carpet munching sidekick's favour...

Vintage super_realist!! Laugh

super_realist wrote:those fond of devouring starchy pouches of carbohydrate.

that's very politically correct of you soups, not bad for a haggis-nosher! Braveheart

by MontysMerkin Fri 8 Nov - 13:33

Don't know whats wrong with carpet munching, seems to me to be a redeeming feature?

by super_realist Fri 8 Nov - 13:38

So, may I use "those fond of devouring starchy pouches of carbohydrate" as a rebuke for your knee cap smashing brethren? Run

by **navyblueshorts** Fri 8 Nov - 13:50

Doc wrote:...The SNP only exist on a single point and once that point has been defeated it's accepted it will be another 300-years before another vote takes place. Therefore there would be no point to the SNP so must break up and walk into the sunset, or will they rebrand themselves?...

A good point but there's no way they'll disappear......they're politicians and therefore have an ego the size of a large planet. How can anyone possibly do anything without them being in the limelight????

by incontinentia Fri 8 Nov - 13:58

super_realist wrote:So, may I use "those fond of devouring starchy pouches of carbohydrate" as a rebuke for your knee cap smashing brethren?

Yes, but if you could use the term "patella fracturing rapscallion" it would be more appropriate.

by super_realist Fri 8 Nov - 14:02

Brilliant Inco.

How about the "fortuitous happenstance of those residents of western sector of the British Isles?"

by incontinentia Fri 8 Nov - 14:19

I know that geographically Ireland is in the British Isles but vomit

by super_realist Fri 8 Nov - 18:09

I see Nine Chins is looking like Eric Cartman from the alternative universe with his crappy goatee

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1728885/evil-cartman.jpg

by pedro Fri 8 Nov - 20:21

Nine Chin and Boo Weekleys love child?

by **navyblueshorts** Sun 10 Nov - 20:00

Just out of interest, did anyone see the motoGP race from Valencia this weekend? The first half of the race was a fantastic advert for motorsport and was everything F1 no longer is. Incredible season from Marquez as well - what was I doing at 20? Certainly nothing like that!

by pedro Sun 10 Nov - 23:26

No, but I saw this. Hope she gets some dustin' johnson.
http://www.maxim.com/girls-of-maxim/paulina-gretzky-maxim-december-cover-girl

by kwinigolfer Mon 11 Nov - 0:12

Just 12 posts necessary to lift the 606v2 golf board to the 100,000 mark.
Trust McLaren, or anyone else awake in the wee hours, takes us over the threshhold.
nbs? barra??

by barragan Mon 11 Nov - 9:21

Good spot kwin - 5 to go.

by Bob_the_Job Mon 11 Nov - 9:58

Will there be fireworks and champagne?

by 1GrumpyGolfer Mon 11 Nov - 12:08

Best ask Ban, Bob. He had the special post and he wasted it talking about a driver Laugh

So what have we seen in 100,000+ posts?

Posters come and gone, a split, posters exposed as frauds, ups and downs of families as life continues, 77 new drivers from TaylorMade each one promising an extra 50 yards, a ban on anchoring, cheating scandals, doping scandals, sponsors won, lost, welched, and running for the hills, dominance in majors, and who knows what the next 100,000 posts will bring?

Still, it beats being bored at work.

by Sponsored content