I started blogging in July, and turned on Ye Olde Sitemeter on 1 September 2007.
Altho' this is a serious political blog, I couldn't resist doing a couple of posts about Kate McCann's small but perky tits.
Since then the old visits/page views have improved enormously, but I haven't had many comments.
So this has backfired horribly.
If any fellow libertarians have any idea how I unpaint myself out of this corner, please advise!
Wednesday, 12 September 2007
Stat Porn
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Start talking about dick sizes:P
How will that help me unpainting myself out of the corner?
That'll make things worse, not bettter.
Just say you were experimenting with true laissez faire economics. By altering your content you discovered that you satisfied the demand for such information. This was to help you understand the relative importance of your other political posts to useers of the internet, and thus improve the relevancy of your blog. Sorted!
Yeah, but the experiment tells me there is less appetite for serious debate about tax and welfare reform than there is for tabloid frippery. Which is hardly surprising, but still depressing.
Just keep going mark, do it for you no one else, and are we all not a little guilty of not supporting other bloggers, I know I am, I read everyblog on my lists, and some that aren't, yet rarely make comment, which I feel I should do.
I think that the Tits post was extremely funny, and laughed my socks off. Because I recognised my own thoughts in your comment, as it has been said by others sometimes we use humour to mask the pain and or understanding. Or maybe its just a bloke thing. Sometimes you do think whats the point, and question why your blogging. In all honesty my reason is it stops me moaning to the wife and getting the "shut the fuck up" look or the "your out of your tiny little mind" one. When something riles and pisses you off the humour helps, I think I should make more use of it.
Keep going mate!!
LFB, very true.
As soon as I mention tax and welfare reform at the dinner table, my long-suffering Mrs starts figeting and my children start throwing food.
Most of your postings are short and to the point and do not inspire more than: "I agree" and that is not what you want either.
J, thanks, I keep 'em short because people blog at work and don't have time to read anything that is more than fifty words or so.
"Agreed" or "Absolute rubbish" or a link top more accurate stat's in comments is fine. I am supposed to be working some of the time at least, so, similarly I can't (or shouldn't) get involved in debates.
And if people leave short comments, I can follow link to their websites so that I can further hone my "Top Ten Blogs".
(I am at home now, as you might guess, after two hour stupid Tube journey, hence relative length of this).
Gosh - I don't care at all about Mrs Dr McCann's body bits - sitemeter is interesting but ...
There are lots of us here - I started reading your blog a few days ago - but never commented.
If it gets me in your Top 10 blogroll though I'll comment daily.
Tax reform? It's much needed. Am rapidly approaching pension age with a spouse long term sick after being s/e and as we have savings not many benefits available to us - but capital now going down as we've had to draw on our old age savings since MyMan was in a RTA. Although I'm now a full time carer I don't receive carer allowance so am short of several years on state pension. What pisses me off is that if I was just a year younger I'd be entitled to full pension with only 30 yrs contributions.
However, unless you are Gordon Brown blogging under an alias while you get folks reactions - with the intent to change the system fast, then, I'm sorry but I'm on here to try and get some fun out of life ......
And unless you are the kind of accountant that can tell me how on earth I can keep the precious income from our savings from being taxed well then I'd add you to my blog roll. I still don't understand how a millionaire like Lord Levy can be a non taxpayer. If you can tell me I'd be much obliged.
Bet you wish you'd not asked for comments now?
I'm not normally this tetchy...
http://colyfordcross.blogspot.com/
http://sidmouth-town.blogspot.com/
LT, I am that kind of accountant. But my bosses charge me out at over £100 per hour.
More to the point, there are millions of other people who fall between all the stools, who would benefit from a flat-rate universal, non-means tested, non-taxable, non-contributory benefit scheme like the one outlined here.
(for sure, some would be entitled to slightly less in benefits, but there'd be no more forms to fill in and no stoll between which to fall)
Not 'stoll', 'stools', obviously.
Mark - i hope you get a fare cut of what your bosses charge out for your help. Had a short peek at the non-contrib benefit scheme.
my favoured idea is for no taxation at all unless income is abover £100,000 per annum - but taxation on goods (other than fruit/veges and healthy foods) to be increased - so the more you spent the more you paid to help maintain the infrastructure. cigarettes/tvs/cars/alcohol hefty increases.
I think there is most unlikely to be any scheme which would be a basic, simple and therefore cheaper, and straightforward - as GBrown would then have to trim down all staff who are employed to make these complicated systems work.... sacking some of servile serpents.
Keep going; get your ideas out there because people need them.
Short is good - I haven't got all day to try to understand a tax system so I vote for the short ones which I can read on the back of a bus ticket and stand a cat in hell's chance of comprehending.
I'd even be prepared to pay slightly more tax if that was the penalty for a simpler system.
But you'd be out of a job. I thought accountants adored complex tax regimes - are you sure you are a real accountant?
WOAR, welcome back!
Simple is good. The flip side of this is governmnet spending, which is running way too high, as any fule kno, so there's plenty of scope for tax cuts.
Even the simplest system would be complicated, and I'd still be the best at doing it, so I wouldn't lose my job.
A hundred thousand people at HM Revenue & Customs would tho', which is a bonus.
Post a Comment