UK Politics - General News & Discussion

For discussions on politics and current events.
User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Tuvalu

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by Pseudo »

Caribbean wrote:
Pseudo wrote:I'm sorry, your logic doesn't follow. My buying shares would do as much to make ARM a British company as leaving the EU makes the UK any more of a sovereign state.
Once there are sufficient shareholders with a common purpose, they can control what a company does and where a company is based, because the shareowners own the company and appoint the Board of Directors - share ownership 101.
Yeah, I understand that and yet your logic doesn't follow, though it's a fairly typical of the fantastical thinking that Brexit supporters appear to enjoy.

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1231
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by RichardIC »

Pseudo wrote:Yeah, I understand that and yet your logic doesn't follow, though it's a fairly typical of the fantastical thinking that Brexit supporters appear to enjoy.
Take.... Back..... Control....

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Tuvalu

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by Pseudo »

RichardIC wrote:
Pseudo wrote:Yeah, I understand that and yet your logic doesn't follow, though it's a fairly typical of the fantastical thinking that Brexit supporters appear to enjoy.
Take.... Back..... Control....
One share down and only two hundred and fifty million to go!

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2358
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 5 times
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by Caribbean »

Pseudo wrote:though it's a fairly typical of the fantastical thinking that Brexit supporters appear to enjoy
Oh dear - and I thought we were going to have a grown-up conversation. Exactly the sort of childish response that drove me away from supporting the Remain cause
Pseudo wrote:One share down and only two hundred and fifty million to go!
Well yes - I suspected that your personal efforts would be somewhat insignificant in the great scheme of things - it's the institutional investors that hold the majority of shares (and states, of course, either directly or via Sovereign Wealth Funds). Though you would need deep pockets to put overall control of ARM in the hands of a single entity, it's not unknown for groups of shareholders to take control from the directors (who are supposed to work on behalf of the shareholders). Look at Rio Tinto over the last week or so - the sacking (sorry, "resignation") of three of the top-tier management, including the CEO, came about as a result of shareholder pressure following the destruction of the Juukan George caves (one of the oldest habitation sites in Australia).

At the moment, ARM is a holding of Softbank, which is privately owned - if it does get floated as a public company, I suspect that there will be a great many tech companies (and pensions funds, unit trusts etc. etc.) wanting a slice, as well as large numbers of private investors.

Meanwhile, ARM itself is actually still based in the UK, with it's Global HQ in Cambridge. Ownership is elsewhere - that's what happens with globalisation - it becomes impossible to keep ownership tied to one country (unless you have a "golden share", like the British Government has with BAE), or are a totalitarian country
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Tuvalu

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by Pseudo »

Caribbean wrote:
Pseudo wrote:though it's a fairly typical of the fantastical thinking that Brexit supporters appear to enjoy
Oh dear - and I thought we were going to have a grown-up conversation. Exactly the sort of childish response that drove me away from supporting the Remain cause
We can absolutely have a grown-up conversation if you can refrain from engaging in delusional fantasies about small investors buying enough shares to repatriate a multi-billion dollar company.
Pseudo wrote:One share down and only two hundred and fifty million to go!
Well yes - I suspected that your personal efforts would be somewhat insignificant in the great scheme of things - it's the institutional investors that hold the majority of shares (and states, of course, either directly or via Sovereign Wealth Funds). Though you would need deep pockets to put overall control of ARM in the hands of a single entity, it's not unknown for groups of shareholders to take control from the directors (who are supposed to work on behalf of the shareholders). Look at Rio Tinto over the last week or so - the sacking (sorry, "resignation") of three of the top-tier management, including the CEO, came about as a result of shareholder pressure following the destruction of the Juukan George caves (one of the oldest habitation sites in Australia).
Though let's be honest, what happened with Rio Tinto is the exception rather than the rule and the result of some quite incredible mismanagement.
At the moment, ARM is a holding of Softbank, which is privately owned - if it does get floated as a public company, I suspect that there will be a great many tech companies (and pensions funds, unit trusts etc. etc.) wanting a slice, as well as large numbers of private investors.

Meanwhile, ARM itself is actually still based in the UK, with it's Global HQ in Cambridge. Ownership is elsewhere - that's what happens with globalisation - it becomes impossible to keep ownership tied to one country (unless you have a "golden share", like the British Government has with BAE), or are a totalitarian country
As I'm sure you know, ARM's headquarters remaining in the UK for five years was a stipulation of the government allowing the deal to go ahead four years ago. If Softbank floats the company then there's probably a decent chance that it would remain there for the foreseeable future, but if Nvidia get their hands on them then I wouldn't bank on it.

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2358
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 5 times
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by Caribbean »

Pseudo wrote:fantasies about small investors buying enough shares to repatriate a multi-billion dollar company
So I take it you'll just moan about it, but do nothing
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Tuvalu

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by Pseudo »

Caribbean wrote:
Pseudo wrote:fantasies about small investors buying enough shares to repatriate a multi-billion dollar company
So I take it you'll just moan about it, but do nothing
As you've already conceded, there's nothing that small individual investors can do because of the scale of investment required. But by all means, I'll kick in £10,000 if you can find one and a half million others to do the same thing.

topman
Member
Posts: 579
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 1 time
Tokelau

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by topman »

Pseudo wrote:
Caribbean wrote:
Pseudo wrote:fantasies about small investors buying enough shares to repatriate a multi-billion dollar company
So I take it you'll just moan about it, but do nothing
As you've already conceded, there's nothing that small individual investors can do because of the scale of investment required. But by all means, I'll kick in £10,000 if you can find one and a half million others to do the same thing.
I suppose you could expand that argument to include voting.

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Tuvalu

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by Pseudo »

topman wrote:
Pseudo wrote:
Caribbean wrote:
Pseudo wrote:fantasies about small investors buying enough shares to repatriate a multi-billion dollar company
So I take it you'll just moan about it, but do nothing
As you've already conceded, there's nothing that small individual investors can do because of the scale of investment required. But by all means, I'll kick in £10,000 if you can find one and a half million others to do the same thing.
I suppose you could expand that argument to include voting.
I'm not sure how because there aren't organisations with millions of votes that make your vote insignificant. I mean, you could maybe squeeze Murdoch, The Barclay Brothers and The Viscount Rothermere in to a fairly broad interpretation of that idea but I don't think that it quite fits. Really, under our electoral system the significance of your vote is more dependent on your location than anything else.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

A fun Wed afternoon coming up when the select committees' Chairs will quizz the PM on the government's response
- to coronavirus, in particular in relation to the economy,
- negotiations with the European Union, and
- the integrated review of foreign policy, defence, security and international development.

All getting on swimmingly?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

One can take many view on this, in the bill that the Parliament gets to chew on from Monday onwards:
"any other legislation, convention or rule of international or domestic law whatsoever, including any order, judgement or decision of the Europe Court or of any other court or tribunal" will be subject to a Gvmnt 'override'

1. The draft text has been padded with extras, so there is at least some raw meat to throw to the lions, roaring angrily, or
2. The defeat in Supreme Court is still hurting, and this will assure ;) that there will be no repeat
Or?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Tuvalu

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by Pseudo »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:One can take many view on this, in the bill that the Parliament gets to chew on from Monday onwards:
"any other legislation, convention or rule of international or domestic law whatsoever, including any order, judgement or decision of the Europe Court or of any other court or tribunal" will be subject to a Gvmnt 'override'

1. The draft text has been padded with extras, so there is at least some raw meat to throw to the lions, roaring angrily, or
2. The defeat in Supreme Court is still hurting, and this will assure ;) that there will be no repeat
Or?
I tend to go with the view that those claiming that MP's didn't know what they were voting for in January are the same people who claim that everyone that voted Leave in 2016 knew what they were voting for.


SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by SW1 »

Very simple solution the EU just needs to confirm the UK will be a listed country as per


dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2556
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 4 times
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by dmereifield »

Yes but they were holding it up to try to preasure the UK into making concessions. Now they're in a tight spot because they've been called out on it. Trouble is, if they now announce that GB has been approved they look like they've been bullied into it and if they still hold out it looks like they are indeed trying to use it as a negotiating tactic, thus supporting Boris'/Frost's narrative. Lose lose

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2556
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 4 times
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by dmereifield »

Pseudo wrote: I hope you're right, but I fear that you're wrong because I don't think that the current government will move away from its position even though a scooter will always lose a game of chicken with a 20 tonne truck it appears the UK's scooter is optimistic that if can pop a wheelie just before impact it'll win.
The current Government won't move away from their position. The fact that the EU hasn't pulled out of talks or initiated any dispute proceedings (in response to the IM bill and Boris' undiplomatic language about the EUs bad faith etc) is quite telling. The only thing they did was set an arbitrary deadline to withdraw it by the end of the month. That gives them time to continue negotiating and try to find a solution. They want a deal more than they like to admit.

They don't want a hole in the SM, they don't want the UK to have a completely free hand on state aid, they don't want to be locked out of UK EEZ, they don't want the UK to be able to regress on LPF areas and they'd like to be able maintain their substantive trade surplus with the UK.

So, they have 2 options:

1) UK adhering to state aid restrictions as per usual FTA s (e.g. UK-Japan, EU-Japan, EU-Canada etc), some (albeit reduced) quota from UK EEZ, UK agreeing non regression clauses on LPF areas, NI SM hole plugged and managed via UK-EU joint committee and tarrif free access to UK market...

Or

UK free to act without great hindrance on state aid (aside from weak WTO), no quota from UK EEZ, no LPF restrictions on UK, hole in the SM and UK unilaterally managing the NI protocol, and tarriffs on their exports to the UK.

Which of the two do you think they'll go for?

By holding out completely and refusing to concede anything on state aid, LPF and fisheries until now, and now stating intent to take a unilateral approach on aspects of the NI protocol, the EU can easily claim a win for: UK conceding to standard state aid commensurate with an FTA (that UK is willing to agree in other FTAs, too); LPF non regression; the UK giving some fish quota; UK not using IM and instead working through the joint committee

Easy wins for the EU there, if they want them. They're of course also wins for the UK since they are grounded in the UKs opening position, a million miles away from the EUs initial (and current) absurd demands to keep they UK under the thumb

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

dmereifield wrote: initiated any dispute proceedings
- well, month end is nigh...
dmereifield wrote:and they'd like to be able maintain their substantive trade surplus with the UK.
This issue alone is a more weighty driver than all the others listed, taken together. And this is what the May gvmnt squandered, right at the beginning, agreeing to do the 'easy bits' first, and leaving all the leverage from services for later
- that round of talks will be more one-sided. We've got a massive surplus to protect; any ideas ;) on 'how to'?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
Pseudo
Senior Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 21:37
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
Tuvalu

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by Pseudo »

dmereifield wrote:The current Government won't move away from their position.
That'd be a novelty, it'd make it about the only position that the current government hasn't done a u-turn on. :lol:
The fact that the EU hasn't pulled out of talks or initiated any dispute proceedings (in response to the IM bill and Boris' undiplomatic language about the EUs bad faith etc) is quite telling.
I think that the Withdrawal Agreement Bill would actually have to pass parliament and become law before the EU could give formal written notice of a dispute because as things currently stand the withdrawal agreement as passed in January is British law and the amendments that the government are talking about are just that, talk.
The only thing they did was set an arbitrary deadline to withdraw it by the end of the month. That gives them time to continue negotiating and try to find a solution. They want a deal more than they like to admit.
I think that you'll find that EU have been entirely forthcoming about their desire for a deal.
They don't want a hole in the SM,
I think that would have been an ideal solution for both sides, but the British government prioritised removing the rights of its citizens to live and work in twenty-seven other countries over the economic benefits of the single market.
they don't want the UK to have a completely free hand on state aid,
Neither does the UK judging by the trade agreement that it just negotiated with Japan. ;)
they don't want to be locked out of UK EEZ, they don't want the UK to be able to regress on LPF areas and they'd like to be able maintain their substantive trade surplus with the UK.

So, they have 2 options:

1) UK adhering to state aid restrictions as per usual FTA s (e.g. UK-Japan, EU-Japan, EU-Canada etc), some (albeit reduced) quota from UK EEZ, UK agreeing non regression clauses on LPF areas, NI SM hole plugged and managed via UK-EU joint committee and tarrif free access to UK market...

Or

UK free to act without great hindrance on state aid (aside from weak WTO), no quota from UK EEZ, no LPF restrictions on UK, hole in the SM and UK unilaterally managing the NI protocol, and tarriffs on their exports to the UK.

Which of the two do you think they'll go for?

By holding out completely and refusing to concede anything on state aid, LPF and fisheries until now, and now stating intent to take a unilateral approach on aspects of the NI protocol, the EU can easily claim a win for: UK conceding to standard state aid commensurate with an FTA (that UK is willing to agree in other FTAs, too); LPF non regression; the UK giving some fish quota; UK not using IM and instead working through the joint committee

Easy wins for the EU there, if they want them. They're of course also wins for the UK since they are grounded in the UKs opening position, a million miles away from the EUs initial (and current) absurd demands to keep they UK under the thumb
The problem that I think that you seem to have forgotten is that the party that has the most to lose economically and socially from a loose arrangement or no arrangement at all is the UK. The British government is pointing a gun at its own head and demanding that the EU put that same gun down. As was pointed out fairly early in these negotiations but now appears to have escaped many is that the EU has more to lose by undermining the indivisibility of the four freedoms than it does from not reaching an agreement with the UK. Now I accept that the British government probably knows this and are trying to push their luck in order to undermine the foundations of the EU (which would advantage the UK in the short-term but not so much in the monger-term but coincidentally would massively be to Russia's advantage) but that doesn't mean that anyone with an ounce of patriotism should be chugging down the kool-aid.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Pseudo wrote: The British government is pointing a gun at its own head and demanding that the other EU put their gun down.
The reasons why, until Trump, Nixon was the only "major power chief executive" to have associated himself with a 'madman' brinkmanship strategy are sound enough. Such strategies don't work if the leader at the helm has become to be seen as erratic or even irrational. Perhaps that point has been reached? I mean, talking about us (not :) Trump).
- The question is: can you be both a reckless madman and a reliable alliance partner?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Caribbean
Senior Member
Posts: 2358
Joined: 09 Jan 2016, 19:08
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 5 times
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by Caribbean »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Nixon was the only "major power chief executive" to have associated himself with a 'madman' brinkmanship strategy are sound enough.
I think Kennedy comes pretty close to that definition as well. "Turn your ships around or I start World War Last Ever"
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Caribbean wrote: "Turn your ships around or I start World War Last Ever"
He-heh; he wasn't a madman, but meant it (and had a track record of being 1. rational, and 2. avoiding wars. He was just too busy on other fronts to avoid the entanglement in the Congo (the only UN General Secretary then, ever, to get assassinated there; well, in Bulawayo while going about that Biz). And trying to pull out from Vietnam (not saying, abandoning support as that had been there ever since the French engaged - even though they did it with the wrong motives) probably was the straw for the camels back - rather than not supporting the Bay of the Pigs, as often is asserted. Isn't it funny how Trump has been able to turn the Deep State argument on its head?).

Now, back to our own Madman, pretending to be irrational ( we all know he is erratic - raise hands, if anyone disagrees :D ).
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Not a fan of the program , generally, but the 5 seconds (11:55 - 12:00) cuts through the chaff: Did the PM lie about his deal with the EU... or not understand it
- Sky's Sophie Ridge on Sunday
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:The ISC [...]
" is one of Parliament's most important committees, overseeing the seven agencies and departments which make up the UK intelligence community.
As I said recently the US Treasury Dept has also an intelligence arm (main focus was starving terrorists of money transfers) and perhaps we should follow suit as this was not caught in the net by the Committee that has access to UK intelligence reports:
"The FinCEN Files is a leak of secret documents which reveal how major banks have allowed "dirty money" to be moved around the world. They also expose how US intelligence sees the UK as a "higher risk jurisdiction" and show it is awash with Russian cash from unexplained sources."
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

cpu121
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: 10 May 2015, 02:09
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by cpu121 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:The ISC [...]
" is one of Parliament's most important committees, overseeing the seven agencies and departments which make up the UK intelligence community.
As I said recently the US Treasury Dept has also an intelligence arm (main focus was starving terrorists of money transfers) and perhaps we should follow suit as this was not caught in the net by the Committee that has access to UK intelligence reports:
"The FinCEN Files is a leak of secret documents which reveal how major banks have allowed "dirty money" to be moved around the world. They also expose how US intelligence sees the UK as a "higher risk jurisdiction" and show it is awash with Russian cash from unexplained sources."
Economic crime is in the scope of the Treasury Select Committee as most of the work is performed by HM Treasury and related organisations (FCA, SFO etc).

https://committees.parliament.uk/work/1 ... mic-crime/

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

You are talking economic crime; I am talking political influencing (and how the report with "Russian" appended to its header missed out on essential aspects)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54228079

Furthermore, I was implying that in intelligence work a little bit of overlap is by far better than, as you seem to suspect, that strict silo'ing is in place.
- tunnel vision springs to mind :)

I may have mis-/ overinterpreted, so please feel free to correct me (or, give alternative suggestions on how intelligence gathering - and even more so - the use of what has been gathered, might be improved).
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: UK Politics - General News & Discussion

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Reuters (in Bengaluru) is up and early
"The Sunday Times reported, citing senior party sources.
]that]
Johnson reached out to former Conservative Party chairman Andrew Feldman to taken on the chief of staff role, but Feldman turned him down, the newspaper reported bit.ly/2FjaMQB.

The step to look for a new chief of staff may be seen as reducing the role of Johnson’s aide Dominic Cummings"

What will Gove do, if Brexit 'gets done'?
Which one will deconstruct British Civil Service: the Cabinet Office or the newly constructed "war room" which has no portfolio? And furthermore, will the Cabinet Office itself get deconstructed in the process
- all good footwork for supercharging devolution (... unintended consequences and all that ;) )
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Post Reply