Dubstepforum.com

I don't even know how the rants about sustainability started, clear ignorance and unwillingness to understand the scenario of my point is my guess. Just read the words ' can't be self-sustainable' and started going on a mad one.

Negativity won't be the reason we don't survive but pointless arguments about points taken way out of context might though. Especially when I agree with a lot of the so called arguments aimed against me

Oh sorry, my rant wasn't aimed at you. Just that specific notion that gets waved about by even serious scientists. It's a shit concept because nothing sustains, its all gradual and revolving.

My comment wasn't aimed at you either haha, interesting point though.

lol at least it this shit thread that gets some ok use now

But to further miss aim and rant ,
I would say think of the genuinely positive side effect of that last nuclear ting in Japan. Something can break progressively, which sounds crazy but it can.
Sometimes, the idea of sustainability gets used to discard the principle of trial and error which is the safest way we have in dealing with anything.

test recordings wrote:

jesslem wrote:

test recordings wrote:

jesslem wrote:I was just trying to reveal the underlying laziness in you and show you that even what you perceive to be lazy can be seen as demotivation tbh.

I think you have you're own logic backwards there... I'm not getting mad either, I haven't foe'd you because it's amuing if nothing else

What's backwards about it? By demonstrating the similarity between the states of laziness and demotivation I assert that english people are lazy. You're the one who said they weren't and tried to justify that by introducing demotivation.

Not that bit, the bit about trying to

show you that even what you perceive to be lazy can be seen as demotivation tbh

. It should be the other way around. I appreciate what you're trying to achieve but you're just coming across as an incoherent dickhead so foe list for you sir. I'll unblock you later in life to see if you can put a decent logical proposal across...

So you wanted me to say that a=b instead of b=a?

wirez wrote:

jaydot wrote:Call Centre work

In comes the argument of...

If you need a job and have a family to run don't be a picky tnuc with your work, support your family and don't blame foreigners if you choose to be lazy.

That's not my issue, it's the instability factor that comes with call centre work. They have such a high rotation of staff. I'd rather my job be secure than take a job that won't be

what is the official racist chav music genre?

id go for oasis or stone roses

jaydot wrote:

wirez wrote:

jaydot wrote:Call Centre work

In comes the argument of...

If you need a job and have a family to run don't be a picky tnuc with your work, support your family and don't blame foreigners if you choose to be lazy.

That's not my issue, it's the instability factor that comes with call centre work. They have such a high rotation of staff. I'd rather my job be secure than take a job that won't be

I haven't been on more than 2 weeks notice since I started work in 2000. I haven't been unemployed for more than 2 days. The perfect job doesn't exist, but bills do.

what kinda stuff you listen to when your discriminating jay?

oi! punk duhh

Agent 47 wrote:what kinda stuff you listen to when your discriminating jay?

"God Save The Queen" by the Sex Pistols

Agent 47 wrote:what kinda stuff you listen to when your discriminating jay?

lol I read this as, "what kinda stuff you listen to when your discriminating Jah?

The word/term 'manaman' makes me wants to back hand people.

UKIP Councillor and EU Candidate Donna Edmunds remembering the good old days.

Tbf, I think they should, and it's up to people to decide whether they wanna shop there based on that.

garethom wrote:Tbf, I think they should, and it's up to people to decide whether they wanna shop there based on that.

That'd be fine if companies released the real reasons for not employing people to the public so we can decide if we want to shop there with that information... but we just don't have that information and relying on the media to provide it isn't very useful either. I bet a lot of companies do discriminate when they employ people, its clear sales people for high end stores don't employ fugly people but thats no excuse for giving them the right to.

It'd be a pretty strong message if the Government came out and said companies could be openly racist, homophobic and sexist.

there is a massive poster ting near my hau5 with their nonsensical h8 speach on, big up ukip making me feel less of a tnuc by comparison.

Muncey wrote:

garethom wrote:Tbf, I think they should, and it's up to people to decide whether they wanna shop there based on that.

That'd be fine if companies released the real reasons for not employing people to the public so we can decide if we want to shop there with that information... but we just don't have that information and relying on the media to provide it isn't very useful either.

True that man, hadn't considered that. Still think they should though, but you're right, needs to be greater transparency.

Muncey wrote: It'd be a pretty strong message if the Government came out and said companies could be openly racist, homophobic and sexist.

To go full genevieve, I think it'd be a good one. Let the market decide. And going back to that first point, at least they're OPEN about it then, and we could decide for ourselves where we wanna spend our dollar.

I am for freedom of speech tho, the whole getting nicked for saying racist things is bullshit, law should be changed to if someone says something racist you are legally aloud to punch them.

Didn't someone get arrested for saying something racist on twitter about the footballer who had a heart attack? that was a bit scary and close to the thought police.