Jeremy Clarkson claps back on Twitter/X! đ
Posted by FlipStig1@reddit | thegrandtour | View on Reddit | 289 comments
A random Twitter/X user called out Jeremy Clarkson for that Times column attempting to draw a connection between British farmers and miners. In response, Clarkson insulted him back! đ đ
jamesjohnohull@reddit
The Initial Tweet isn't wrong in fairness.
pattyboiIII@reddit
It absolutely is, I know so many farmers and they are anything but what I'd consider wealthy. They might own a lot of land and have expensive equipment but they never have any money to spend. It all goes back into the farm. It's the sort of money you can't liquidate without losing your entire way of life. Imagine if you owned a million pound plot of land but if you sold it you could never work your job again.
I despise it when people act like farmers are minted because they absolutely aren't, I've even ran into people calling them fucking landed gentry.
Clarkson is an exception of course because of his TV shows but surprisingly most farmers aren't the host of who wants to be a millionaire or the lead presenter in the most famous non drama TV show.
Correct-Reception-42@reddit
I think it depends on how you read it. I think he means farmers who happen to be rich (Clarkson). I don't think he's trying to say that all farmers are rich. The second one would obviously be wrong. The first one would be questionable because Clarkson doesn't claim to be one of the farmers he's referring to and because the number of rich farmers is likely not high. Nevertheless it's a distinction that should be made.
_MadBurger_@reddit
As a farmer literally everyone thinks you are rich. Problem is that that arenât totally incorrect here in the U.S. farmers who owned at least 150 acres from 1950-1980/1990 were making BANK but with increase in overhead and wages without proper compensation has lead farmers to become sucked dry. People are still in the mode of thought of farmers are rich but couldnât be further from the truth.
Wide-Fish-3918@reddit
Someone has a nice house they are rich. Someine has multiple arces of land and they are oh so poor! Poor old farmers with their millions in land :( i do feel awful bad for them.
_MadBurger_@reddit
So you are saying they should sell their land and not farm anymore in order to have money and live? You arenât very bright.
whyIsOnline@reddit
People get what they vote for..
Mammoth-Barnacle-894@reddit
While thereâs obviously a little more to it than that, I have to admit that it was endlessly gratifying seeing the back to back posts of farmer voting for Trump to (in their own words) âown the libsâ - then see them in tears in the next post because the tariffs and economic uncertainty absolutely destroyed them financially.
_MadBurger_@reddit
A large majority of farmers make soy and corn and export it in mass. They have been warned for decades by fellow farmers and they didnât want to listen. You are still under educated on the subject.
Mammoth-Barnacle-894@reddit
I didn't posit any ideas or assumptions about anything. But I am a literal expert at what gratifies me. I mentioned the examples that they used in their videos. That's all.
cortez0498@reddit
Yeah, he obviously means rich people cosplaying as farmers, like Clarkson.
aquaknox@reddit
it's not really cosplaying if he's actually doing it. the man clearly sinks incredible amounts of time and effort into it
Key_Drop9589@reddit
Itâs mostly for the show, if prime didnât renew his contract for a Season 5 heâd definitely spend the year doing cooking courses in Vietnam while having Charlie run the farm.
bullet50000@reddit
People who post like that, I'd argue, at the very least, they're at least trying to get support/clicks from people who believe that.
whyIsOnline@reddit
Clarkson himself makes this distinction. Definitely in the columns, but I think in the show as well.
pattyboiIII@reddit
Ok I could see that. It does meant that he's either an idiot for thinking farmers or wealthy or an idiot for thinking that Clarkson advocates for wealthy farmers. So not much better.
Correct-Reception-42@reddit
Nevertheless I still think Clarkson is in the wrong in this whole argument. The tax may be a problem for smaller farms but it's not the actual biggest threat. There is surely a way to close the tax loophole Clarkson is trying to use while keeping collateral damage low. As far as I can grasp these things operating a farm is a much bigger problem, so if he actually cared he could put some resources into finding solutions for that. If a farm could be run profitably, larger farms who are affected could also take on some debt to pay the tax for example.
grubas@reddit
Clarkson is playing games with definitions so he can be in the right while fighting the stuff he doesn't like.
The absolute refusal to admit he bought the farm and land because of the loophole hurts the entire cause because of him being propped up as the "leader".
as you say, there's plenty of other things he could be agitating for that helps farmers, but he's stick on the one issue that grossly impacts him.
OldDonD@reddit
And it's one thing to have the opportunity to sell a farm for a lot of money, in theory. Farms are often generational. Personally, I'm not gonna be the first to quit after 10 generations. No matter the money.
BigBoy1963@reddit
"Imagine if you owned a million pound plot of land but if you sold it you could never work your job again"
You say this as if we should have sympathy for that? How many coal miners own land worth millions? If they sold that they wouldnt need to work again, theyd be a miliionaire.... its not even in the same world mate. Not saying they are minted but its not the same struggle as the coal miners. Not even fucking close.
Tullyswimmer@reddit
Yeah, the comments ITT are pretty eye-opening, but it also explains *exactly* what the problem is with Britain right now.
People, who have no understanding about farming, look at the assets a farmer has, and go "you're a millionaire, you don't need all that money and land. You're hoarding it." And then they work to pass laws to take significant amounts of that perceived wealth.
Farmers are cash poor except at the time they sell their crops... But even then, they're not going out and buying luxury goods or sports cars. It's replacing and repairing expensive equipment that is essential to their farm.
ReggaeReggaeBob@reddit
They absolutely are going out and buying sports cars, whenever I speak to someone driving a super expensive car in my area, they are almost always a farmer. Ridiculous the amount of money they have, but claim they are 'cash poor'
pja@reddit
Thatâs the same as any other capital intensive business though. Other businesses have to pay inheritance tax if the business is passed on to the ownerâs heirs, why shouldnât farmers?
Tullyswimmer@reddit
Because farmers are absolutely critical to the survival of the population.
And, a lot of their value is in their land, and that value will continue to rise as demand for housing in certain areas goes up.
pja@reddit
The UK hasnât been self-suficient in food since somewhere around 1830. Possibly earlier.
The valuation of farming land for inheritance tax purposes is done as if it carried a perpetual covenant that ensures no houses can ever be built on it - i.e. it is valued for itâs agricultural value alone.
Riplexx@reddit
It will work like this. You tax out farmers, big corpos and venture capital buys it, rents part of it for farming and half of it would be building site in a few years while they bribe and influence all levels of government. UK not being self sufficient wonât be solved by this, it could be solved with completely different set of reforms.Â
mpt11@reddit
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-inheritance-tax-on-farms-explained
Tullyswimmer@reddit
>If your profits look like this, and youâre a single person passing on a ÂŁ2.2 million farm â as in our example above â then you could be in trouble when it comes to paying off a ÂŁ14,000 annual tax bill.
>But the key issue is that we donât know how many farms are worth enough to potentially be taxed, while also making very low or no profits.Â
It seems to me that they should figure that number out BEFORE passing the tax law. Or at least have an estimate. Because with weather patterns and such, it's impossible to predict how well a farm might do in 5 or 10 years.
mpt11@reddit
They've worked it out on a per year basis. It's around 500 out of 209000 farm holdings. It's really going to affect few farms
Business-Drag52@reddit
I can't comment on British farmers, but I live in an area of Kansas where everything is broken into mile sections so the farmers can have their big 1 square mile fields. A couple of these farmers are like you mentioned, but the vast majority are massive landowners taking in millions every year. One guy upgrades all of his equipment every two years. It's insane waste.
Shmuule@reddit
If your worst case scenario is 'liquidate my way of life and start again with hundreds of thousands of pounds' then your plight is absolutely not the same as the miners.
Logic-DL@reddit
Also tbf to Clarkson, even his farm isn't profitable, hence why the show is exploring other avenues alongside the farm, like his pub/shop idea in Season 4.
Yes, he buys a Lambo tractor, and expensive equipment etc, but all of it seems to be out of his own very wealthy pocket, not the farm profits.
Ashari83@reddit
A lambo tractor isn't particularly more expensive than a john deere or a fendt. It's just the running joke that it shares a name with the supercar.Â
blind-delights2131@reddit
Is it not? I know we've seen the 'shows' figures at the end of each season, but that misses so much out that I'm not sure how much we can get from it.
Amaakaams@reddit
Probably mostly Amazon, because in the end he is still playing the Clarkson character and given the choice, the character Clarkson has to buy a Lambo tractor.
Alundra828@reddit
Okay, but they're a demographic that overwhelmingly voted for Brexit, making everyone in Britain poorer. And they removed us from the common market, increasing demand for food they cannot compete with Europe in terms of supply, which drives prices up, making everyone in Britain poorer. Cost of importing input goods for farming like fertilizer also shot up, forcing farmers to further increase their pricing, making everyone in Britain poorer. And they are the demographic that is subsidised the most, which is paid for by tax payers, making everyone in Britain poorer. They also own vast portions of land in this country, which creates scarcity high land prices which contribute to housing costs and increased living costs, making everyone in Britain poorer.
It's incredible these people get up in the morning and walk around given how many times they've shot themselves in the foot. Because what you have is a tiny amount of people, owning the majority of the land, using said land to produce incredibly inflated goods at great expense that we could've gotten cheaper elsewhere, and not only that they also routinely take our freedoms away. And not only that, they're voting very heavily toward Reform UK at the moment. Which is just great, we'll add cosying up to the far-right to the list shall we?
I'm not going to say they're landed gentry. But they're not innocent choir boys either my bledrin.
malac0da13@reddit
Clarkson even admitted last season that the only reason his farm is profitable is because of the show and doesnât know how most farmers can do it.
g0ldcd@reddit
If you don't have a lot of money and don't have a farm - you're stuffed.
If you don't have a lot of money and DO have a farm - you have the additional option of swapping the farm for a lot of money..
XXXJAHLUIGI@reddit
âThey might have a lot of wealth but theyâre certainly not wealthyâ
Farmers do a lot of complaining while also acting like theyâre some class of self sacrificing saints who choose to forego millions to do a job they pretend they hate. You cant act like youâre not rich when youâve chose to own expensive machinery and land that farmers themselves will admit make them no money. If they wanted to they could sell their property, invest the funds properly and retire their family. They donât. Miners did not have this luxury, farmers are not comparable to miners
amalgam_reynolds@reddit
He's not talking about them. He literally said "rich farmers." He's talking about people who are already rich who are buying farms, not saying that all farmers are rich.
mpt11@reddit
It isn't. The idea is to stop people buying land to avoid paying taxes, like Clarkson did and Dyson. If you read the link below it's going to affect a very small number. Let's not forget they pay less inheritance tax than the rest of us already
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-inheritance-tax-on-farms-explained
ArcticBiologist@reddit
The tweet is specifically about rich farmers though.
Budget_Reception_300@reddit
Bro it literally says "rich farmers" . Your whole comment is nullified
BMW_wulfi@reddit
Building multi million pound farm mansions and a mini farm shop / pub empire all whilst crying about how hard it is for himself as a farmer is really on the nose even for Jeremy. It has to be said. He deserves this criticism.
runnytempurabatter@reddit
Congrats on missing the point. He constantly says that the reason he can do these things is there combined money of Amazon and himself. If he's struggling so much how hard it must be for the average farmer. But you do you
RockNAllOverTheWorld@reddit
He's not showing how hard it is for him, he specifically mentions several times throughout the docuseries how if he didn't have TV money he'd be screwed. He also makes it a point to stock goods from other farmers in the area who have been struggling to move product, that was the whole reason for trying to start a restaurant before it was sidelined by the local government.
CrazedIvan@reddit
Yeah any other take than this is madness. Iâm not from the country but what is clearly explained in the show is the poor state farmers are in and itâs clear that his personal pocket and probably some Amazon money is footing a big portion of the bill.
I mean there are scenes in the show where they go over the budget.
StephenHunterUK@reddit
The latest series also has a discussion of mental health in the farming community; there is quite a high suicide rate, I believe.
obiwanconobi@reddit
Farmers struggle BECAUSE of people like Clarkson.
They're just too scared of the alternative to realise it.
Professional_Bee1278@reddit
RIGHT WING NIMBIES.
CombatRedRover@reddit
^^^This.
Clarkson KNOWS he has an advantage in farming. He's illustrating how screwed British farmers are, that someone with his resources still has as many problems farming as he does. If it's this hard for Clarkson, how hard is it for some average John Smith farmer?
Some people completely miss the point because their personal jealousy of someone else's wealth keeps them from listening to legitimate points that person sometimes makes.
Wadiyatorkinabeet@reddit
But does his involvement jeopardise the movement BECAUSE of this and who he is. He doesn't talk often about how it is fine for him, easy for him etc. So when someone not involved in the industry sees JC talking about the challenges, how receptive are they going to be?
Also because of his comments confirming he bought the farm as a tax dodge etc. he does no favours to the movement bevause it allows people to paint them all with the same brush.
70stang@reddit
It's also worth mentioning that wealth regardless, literally every farmer or farm worker he interacts with is far better and more efficient at the job than him, because they didn't come to it as a 60+ year old multi-millionaire with "a phobia of manual labor."
So yeah, many sides to this coin. Is it hard for farmers? Yes, absolutely.
Does Jeremy's money mean that every other farmer has it hard specifically because he does even with a lot of money? Not really; if farming was lucrative, he would still be shit at it even with his resources. Then the conversation would be completely flipped, "every farmer in the UK makes money except for this celebrity who tried to do it."
I think you're close here, but ultimately inaccurate. He knows he has an advantage in business, which is why "things that draw a crowd" have been more important in basically every season of the show than farming is. Farm shop, restaurant, pub, so on and so forth.
I would argue that (to his credit) he is very well aware that he has a disadvantage in farming itself.
Intergalatic_Baker@reddit
I would argue that thereâs a helping hand from Amazon for show budgets from the Grand Tour. All those tractor hires and trucks, is that all clarksonâs bank or that Amazon saying bring your representative and tractor for a film day on Clarksonâs Farm, any PR team would bite for that for a laugh.
70stang@reddit
Right, but that's not an advantage in farming.
It's an advantage in business/marketing, but not in the act of farming.
If "Clarksons Farm" was about being a subsistence farm thst didn't generate any profit and only existed for him and his family to live off of, he would be as shit at it as he is now, is my point.
Intergalatic_Baker@reddit
Thatâs my takeaway from it all. Yes, in the recent episodes heâs had cost issues and Iâm doing the maths in my head and itâs high, too high for a farmer to pull out the bank whenever, so thereâs obviously some help, but imagine youâre doing a slow burn project all costed and presumes youâd get something, but the council decided to hate you that day and burns all your work with a denial. Jezza can immediately fire back and have a second opinion easy, everyone else likely canât, but this show demonstrates the arduous processes.
TheHumbleLegume@reddit
I tried to suggest this yesterday and got insulted, at least your comment got some traction.
Jazs1994@reddit
Clarkson had no real equipment before he started. I'm watching it through again but I remember his profits from s1/year 1 was basically pennies. Even if he hadn't bought the Lambo tractor it wouldn't have been much. And it's a big farm at that.
Many times he pointed out the many issues any farmer would face just trying to operate and start a new venture here or there. Regardless of the farm shop/restaurant
FartingBob@reddit
to start out from scratch as a farmer (even if you already have the land) would need a loan of millions. And then wait a year (if you are doing crops) before you have any income. And then another year before the next lot of money comes in. All while costs are to be paid as they are used. Would be near impossible for an independent farmer to do without having generational wealth to fall back on.
BMW_wulfi@reddit
Heâs doing that because thatâs the content. Thatâs the show. The show in turn is paying for and enabling him to make millions. This is the conflict of interest because is it about the money or doing the right thing? Heâs said multiple times he got into farm property because of the tax breaks lol.
Comparing his situation to the coal miners of decades past is absolutely asinine. But thatâs his thing - it gets clicks and it gets him views on his content (see above).
You can do good things in small quantities and still be a complete hypocrite who deserves to be called for it (and you can still be funny). Such is life.
Lewinator56@reddit
Clarkson makes millions, but the farm is a business, that business isn't Clarkson, and the business runs at a loss or just about making a profit. Clarkson has the money to inject into it that other farmers don't have, so when he says he's struggling, he does genuinely mean it. Clarkson won't go bankrupt, but the farm could. There's an important distinction to make between personal capital and business capital, and farms have almost no capital at all.
The show isn't just about money though, more than anything, and it's been praised for it a lot, it shows the hardships all farmers have to go through, and it shows it in a way other programmes like countryfile never have. It isn't afraid to show the reality of things going wrong, and it isn't afraid to show the work Clarkson has to put in every day.
Caleb becoming a national personality is going to get him an extra income, which benefits him in farming too - is this now unacceptable as well?
ottermanuk@reddit
Clarkson does/has make millions
The farm is a business
But he has said himself that the main reason he got the farm was for inheritance tax based reasons. So the farm basically can lose money as long as it saves more in tax.
He is showing that farming is hard, and it is, and it is good that he is documenting that in an engaging way. But also he is an unreliable narrator because the farm is not the true prize, hence his recent complaints about governmental tax changes.
People can be two things. I enjoy Clarksons Farm. I think Clarkson is a hypocritical tosser.
Harry's Farm on YouTube is another good insight to the issues of farming in the UK with a lot less chaff but a bit more in depth.
highlandviper@reddit
His motives are clearly selfish. Heâs never been a particularly nice person/celebrity. But he does very much have a good point to make⊠which is that government and local government policy combined with corporate supermarket greed is making life very difficult for smallholders. A similar thing happened to the coal miners and the towns built around the mines. Whether he bought the farm as an inheritance tax loophole or not, or whether heâs shit at farming or not doesnât change the fact his metaphor is somewhat apt. Not specifically for him, obviously⊠but for the wider network of smallholders. Policies need to change and smallholders need to be supported and enabled⊠particularly now considering the global political environment and climate change. He has a point. Regardless of how you feel about Jeremy Clarkson, ALL of our farmers need support⊠and his program is very good at showing you why.
Patrick_Epper_PhD@reddit
At the end of S1, when confronted with his sub-ÂŁ1000 revenue post subsidies, Clarkson is appalled and apart from remarking on government help, he says directly to the camera "most farmers don't have Amazon camera crews or Who Wants to be a Millionaire to fall back on".
He speaks out for farmers because he's now one of them and has seen and lived through their woes without the actual consequence that derive from them because he's rich, and he's quite conscious of that.
CamGoldenGun@reddit
he's using the show as a platform to show how ridiculous the red-tape and how communication between the various stakeholders is virtually non-existent.
The shop isn't in an ideal location, granted. The huge queues is enough to show that. But the restaurant was a good idea, especially with the local produce.
If there's anything that comes out of this show, I'd hope it would a better way to facilitate "farm to table." Whether that to be joining up on a waiting list via a butcher to get 1/2, 1/4, of a cow, etc. Through years of urbanization people are so disconnected from the farm that they're lost on how to approach something like that.
Chaise91@reddit
Nothing he has created would survive if not for his money. That pub - someone who isn't rich isn't going to run it with the idea of providing the best possible experience. They're going to run it for as cheap as possible. Does Jeremy feign financial troubles a bit? Yes absolutely but remember this is a TV show - it needs some drama.
PRSArchon@reddit
I disagree, it's hard even despite his privileges. Imagine how it is for a normal farmer.
Toochilled77@reddit
If you were a small farmer you might also watch the show rather than spaff bull crap that hasnât happened.
Iâm so sick of people getting upset at the idea they have of what Clarkson is.
benput@reddit
Go work a week as a farmer and then think about what you said
BMW_wulfi@reddit
Youâre talking to someone with immediate family who are multi-generation, small scale sheep and dairy farmersâŠ.
ComesInAnOldBox@reddit
So, not you, then? Having family members who are experts doesn't mean you know more than fuck-all about the topic.
Thirst_Trappist@reddit
This made me chuckle. And I appreciate the pointing out the truth as well
benput@reddit
Well then your obviously a bit detached from reality, farming is criminally underpaid and over-worked. The hours are relentless and the work is not easy. So many problems can occur during a season. Obviously you know all this already though
Pr_cision@reddit
If that was true you would understand. anyone can claim âmy family are farmers so dont tell me what to doâ just to try and win an online argument. I donât think you have the views of someone who would know how hard it can be. If you did youâd see what clarkson was trying to do
kakadukaka@reddit
What a way to show that you know nothing about clarksson or what he is "crying" about. Maybe do 2 minutes of research first.
Agitated-Kale8690@reddit
I don't think he's ever claimed to be a poor farmer. More a farmer for the poor farmers.
angrytoaad@reddit
Talk about completely missing the point.. I bet you haven't actually watched the show
52nd_and_Broadway@reddit
âFarming is so hardâ
How much actual farming has this drunken lout actually done? A fraction of the workers you see off screen, Iâm guessing
3suamsuaw@reddit
The whole point is to show its even difficult for him.
FordsFavouriteTowel@reddit
Do you even watch the show? Because it really sounds like you donât.
Quaiche@reddit
You're missing the entire point, he's advocating for the farmers and not specifically himself.
I think you blokes just hate rich people and won't even think a second about what they're trying to say.
Shifty377@reddit
Wondering if you've ever even watched the show if that's your take away from it? He's not crying about how hard it is for him he's showing how hard it is to run a profitable farm. The presents prime time TV, of course he's not hard up.
Specialist_Ad_7719@reddit
Whether or not they have watched the show won't make a difference. They have a narrow minded view set of Clarkson rich, Clarkson bad; and can't see that a lot of the show is to highlight farmer's plight with added humour.
Apatride@reddit
A small farmer wouldn't have a voice so you would never hear about their struggles. At least his approach is not as disconnected as the approach taken by many movie stars who want to tell the world about various struggles. He is actually showing what daily struggles farmers face and saying it is worse for most regular farmers.
As for the argument that other farmers are more competent (from another comment) Clarkson has Kaleb and many advisors and farming is more a science (and bureaucracy) than an art nowadays so I don't think Clarkson's lack of experience is a major issue here.
FloepieFloepie2@reddit
Damn, talking about not getting the message.
DexterFoley@reddit
You're completely missing the point in the show then.
RA12220@reddit
Clarkson says a bunch of idiotic things. I guess itâs different if itâs on a show or published as an opinion piece.
titelipsjonny@reddit
As we all know, the miners in 1984 had acres of land and equipment they could sell for millions...
Duck_Person1@reddit
Farmers aren't the issue it's the land lords driving up the price of land. Which means Clarkson used to be part of the problem but now he's part of the solution.
brett1081@reddit
Whatâs a dumb take. Jeremy is in a unique position to farm while having the external wealth to not go under because of it. Do you think all farmers are former presenters, world famous, and have a documentary money into the operation?
Notacat444@reddit
His enduring distrust for the bearded community is endlessly entertaining.
Professional_Bee1278@reddit
I'm with CLARKSON, 10 years ago no one gave a shit about beards and now all the sheeple have one.
It's a sign of weakness.
laineDdednaHdeR@reddit
Aside from my time in the military, I've had one consistently since 2007. Sorry, I don't want to look like I'm 12 anymore.
Professional_Bee1278@reddit
I've got a baby face too dude and I do just fine clean shaven.
laineDdednaHdeR@reddit
Good for you. Stop being a dick to everyone else because of your ordinal preference.
Dick.
Doctathunder@reddit
I completely agree with this. Itâs a way of covering up bad facial geometry and a boring personality. Itâs a crutch.
CaptainKCCO42@reddit
Some people just look better with a beard đ€·ââïž Why would you not do what makes you look best. You sound bitter that you canât grow a good beard.
amnesteyh@reddit
Imagine gatekeeping having a beard. How pathetic could you get lmfao
Professional_Bee1278@reddit
It's based on BS such as if you've got a higher T level you can grow a beard. It's fake news.
Beards hide emotion, so bearded men are in hiding....from something....their own emotions.
LifeIsSoup-ImFork@reddit
all im hearing is that you have low T and you're jealous because you cant grow one. must be tough, lil buddy
Professional_Bee1278@reddit
Nice try snowflake.
I'm a scientist.
Men that have beards have then because their hair follicles are more receptive to free t, not that they have more.
Male baldness is the same, their weak scalp hair follicles can't cope with the T and that's why their hair fall out.
Not because they have more.
Also, I have high testosterone.
Also, facts.
Business-Drag52@reddit
So you can't grow a beard, lil bro? It's okay. Mine didn't really start coming in until I was 24. It might get there one day. Or not. You're not less of a man because you can't grow one, but you're also not somehow better than men that can grow one and do. You'd havena beard if you follicles would allow it. Why do you think you know so much about beards? Probably tried to figure out how to make yours grow better huh?
Professional_Bee1278@reddit
No I just like to point out facts on my freshly made and disposable reddit account.
Suck it up snowflake, having a beard doesn't mean JACK SHIT. đ€ (Other than what I pointed out above)
chjorth33@reddit
Here I was thinking I have a beard so I don't have to spend money on razors and waste time shaving. (Also a lot of those guys in WWII were teenagers so, ya know, probably incapable of growing a beard lol)
Professional_Bee1278@reddit
Going to war, means you've taken the responsibility of a man.
Beards need oiling and trimming.
My face takes 5 minutes with a phillips shaver, it's great and no hastle. Plus, I stand out from the rest of the bearded crowd. I guess if you want to be the same as everyone else, grow a beard.
If you're an individual, don't.
poebanystalker@reddit
đ€đ€đ€
LifeIsSoup-ImFork@reddit
đ„±
jo_blow421@reddit
This comment reeks of insecurity
FreshLennon@reddit
I have a beard because I wanted to see if I could grow one just out of curiosity. Turns out I grow a big nice full long one that my wife really likes and now I don't have to shave every day.
You sound unhinged my dude lol like don't be so dramatic. You even put ellipses like you're doing a scene in a Broadway play lmao
AmNoSuperSand52@reddit
My guy, itâs facial hair
calum11124@reddit
I think you just misunderstand the science of it but whatever
11b328i@reddit
Are you high?
Professional_Bee1278@reddit
High on facts pal.
11b328i@reddit
Daft or dumb is more like it
yaourted@reddit
head hair is just covering up bad skull geometry, become baldpilled like your buddy Tate
The_Hellcat707@reddit
It's just some hair bro it's not that deep
Tryforce88@reddit
I was thinking the same thing, Iâve had a beard since I could have one. I really just donât like shaving constantly. Iâve never given a second thought to how people see it or the fact they even have thoughts about it. I have 0 thoughts about it and itâs on my face đ€Ł. I do know there are guys who itâs like half their life. But that doesnât make that true for all of us.
JohnMcClane42069@reddit
Lmao fuckin relax there Andrew Tate
Fit-Pumpkin-4044@reddit
Do you genuinely believe beards becoming fashionable is some deep state conspiracy? đ€
TheBlockObama@reddit
Only real men can grow thick beards. Sorry about little boys like you with whispy cat whiskers lmao
WilfordsTrain@reddit
I gotta say I feel the same. What are these bearded men hiding under those billowing face-pubes?
Commercial_Reward_78@reddit
An ad hominem attack in place of a reasoned response may amuse the less intellectually-demanding, but it casts the perpetrator in a fairly dismal light.
BeardySam@reddit
Emulating margret thatcher as much as he can
LeatherAdvantage8250@reddit
I feel like it's partly just that he can't grow a thick one
alvik@reddit
Well that's not true at all
SeveralTable3097@reddit
He looks like a homeless guy who reeks of beer with that beard. No wonder he hates them so much.
LeatherAdvantage8250@reddit
Are you saying that that isn't patchy?
JoeSicko@reddit
He had better looking sheep.
Notacat444@reddit
Poignant username.
Fast-Chemistry5741@reddit
Hi iâm newly here .I can't see people's pictures .can some explain why?
Fast-Chemistry5741@reddit
Hi iâm newly here .why no one has a picture?
lynivvinyl@reddit
I feel like he can't even grow one.
BaldEagleNor@reddit
He had a pretty hefty beard during Covid
funnytoenail@reddit
I know his clap backs are funny and all but this is a real problem.
Farmers are not being penalised by the current government. Farm owners are now having tax dodging loopholes closed, because - even Clarksonâs admitted that his farm was originally purchased as a means to dodge inheritance tax, these measures are only targeting large scale, rich, farm owners.
His current rhetoric is trying to lump him and his other rich farmers friends, and rile up the poorer, smaller scale farmers/farm hands into thinking âwe are all in this togetherâ, anti-government rhetoric.
All he wants to do is dodge taxes that are fair for him.
AwarenessComplete263@reddit
Farms (particularly small family farms) are a national heritage and security asset. Because of what has happened to land prices in this country, when they're gone they are gone.
That's potentially all family farms gone, within two generations.
They need to be protected. Just because Jeremy Clarkson isn't in it for the right reasons doesn't mean he doesn't stand for tens of thousands of people who don't have a voice in this.
ArcticBiologist@reddit
Then it's the fault of Clarkson and the like to exploit farms and farmlands as a loophole. He's the problem, not an ally to the farmers.
CaptainKCCO42@reddit
But he is using his farm for good. He is farming it, as well as advocating for the âreal farmersâ who need a bigger voice in the fight.
ArcticBiologist@reddit
Sure.
rattybag247@reddit
Smaller farms are / can be exempt from the Inheritance tax rules. His isn't. He is not a farmer, he is a TV presenter.
AwarenessComplete263@reddit
The exemption isn't big enough to capture most small family farms, and hardly any in the South.
Yes he does not deserve the tax break, but he speaks for many people who do deserve it, and therefore is using his voice and platform for good.
bonzog@reddit
He's not protecting family farms, he's using them.
The land prices have shot up partly because they are such a useful tax-dodging mechanism for the wealthy like him.
martybad@reddit
I think it's better to let a few wealthy dodge a questionable tax (inheritance tax / death duty) rather than screw over the agricultural backbone of the country.
Even an average sized farm with average land (as judged by per acre price) will be hit by the change in inheritance tax, so no it's not just rich people sheltering assets, it's literally the fat part of the bell curve and up that is having their legacy destroyed and being forced to sell to industrial farming operations or property developers.
gaymenfucking@reddit
Potentially the least questionable tax there is, the guy getting taxed doesnât even experience it
martybad@reddit
except there's no transaction to tax (i.e. no taxable event), and the tax rate is much higher than if it were treated as a normal transaction (SDLT) even after the exemptions for the IHT
gaymenfucking@reddit
The transaction is of one persons wealth to some other person(s) as they decide in a document they write. The taxable event is dying. It isnât a normal transaction, itâs a persons entire estate being transferred.
martybad@reddit
Then why not tax it like any other transaction? what makes the transfer upon death so special other than avarice on the part of the state?
gaymenfucking@reddit
When you die you arenât around anymore to give a fuck about your wealth
martybad@reddit
Avarice of the masses is still avarice.
Why wouldn't every ageing landowner simply sell to their heirs presumptive then and avoid the IHT? seems easy to get around, no such need if the tax is the same either way.
gaymenfucking@reddit
âAvarice of the massesâ đ
Sounds like a good loophole to close, your point?
martybad@reddit
so are you going to raise transfer tax on all real estate to 20-40%? don't think that'll fly with anyone who wants to buy a house
sherriff_b1027@reddit
In case you don't actually know, Estate/Inheritance Tax is a massive way to combat income inequality. The wealthy are by far more likely to have significant taxable assets to pass down that the poor would never have had, so the rich stay rich/get richer if they aren't taxed in that way specifically.
martybad@reddit
Why is income inequality inherently bad? Some of the most equal societies in terms of income are some of the most unequal in wealth (per the respective Gini coefficients).
Which would lead one to believe a transfer of wealth (assets) has nothing to do with solving income inequality.
Avatarbriman@reddit
But if every other tax has been working correctly, than other than their own inheritance or minor gifts, all of that money has already been taxed. And now is being taxed again...
If the rich were actually taxed appropriately on capital gains, and income, then inheritance issues wouldnt be relevant. They would already have given 50% of their money as tax.
gaymenfucking@reddit
Yes, so?
If youâve done all those things and still have a massive pile of money when you die, your kids still didnât earn it and society could still use it.
Tax is just the means to fund civilisation, this abstract idea that doing it once is fair and twice isnât is arbitrary.
bonzog@reddit
It's not a few, though. Half of the country is owned by less than 1% of the population.
James Dyson and Jeremy Clarkson are not unsung agricultural heroes; they're land bankers. With rather good PR.
martybad@reddit
My point is it's better to let them go, than to catch them all and have farmers get caught in the crossfire.
Specific-Lion-9087@reddit
Same with immigrants, hopefully.
Wouldnât want citizens getting caught up in the mix, best to just let them stay.
Lovely chat!
martybad@reddit
This isn't the same thing and you know it, but nice deflection.
Cheers!
obiwanconobi@reddit
Then it would be very easy to say "set the threshold higher" or "exempt people who have a history of family farming" or "exempt people who actually use a majority of their farm land", all things that would exclude him and help "small" farmers.
But he isn't doing that, he wants the inheritance tax scrapped because he's selfish and everyone here supporting them thinks they may benefit from the rule one day. You won't.
AwarenessComplete263@reddit
Yes, you've tapped into the point. There's no nuance in the position - the government are throwing the baby out with the bathwater by scrapping the tax relief entirely (subject to an unrealistic ÂŁ1m exemption).
I agree that the way to do this would be to close the loophole. That would be much better than destroying the country's family farming industry. However, the next best thing is for people like Clarkson to fly the flag for people who don't have a voice - even if his personal motives aren't necessarily in the right place.
obiwanconobi@reddit
Nah, the next best thing is for people like Clarkson to shut the fuck up.
I would have supported the farmers, but I'm not supporting anything that doesn't exclude scum like Clarkson and Dyson. If the farmers go down with them, then they should have picked a better leader shouldn't they.
In fact, maybe the farmers should take their tractors and park them outside of Clarkson and Dysons farms until they sell to actual farmers.
Indiana_Jawnz@reddit
You think small family farmers had some tryouts for spokespeople and picked Clarkson?
AwarenessComplete263@reddit
With all due respect, whether you decide to support the farmers or not is completely irrelevant.
What matters is whether the government hears the message, and whether people with actual influence (like Clarkson) speak up for those who don't have a voice.
obiwanconobi@reddit
Not really. Because theyre not going to U-turn.
No election for 4 years, plus this being an actual small issue that affects not many people is enough for it to be ignored.
They've already lost the battle, they just haven't realised it.
AwarenessComplete263@reddit
Possibly, possibly not.
obiwanconobi@reddit
Idk man, look at the time frame for other gov u-turns. It's passed the point.
Imo they had a chance to get it reversed or changed, but they pitched their flag to Clarkson and fucked it.
My parents love Clarkson and even they thought it was stupid when they realised farmers are treat differently to literally any other business.
Logic-DL@reddit
So we can trust in you to pay your inheritance tax then? Even if you inherited enough money to live off for the rest of your life, but have to pay tax to where the money only aids you for a few years max?
It's not selfish to want to get rid of inheritance tax/lower it. The government already taxes us on almost everything they can and at a high level.
Fucking pensions are taxed, you pay tax for your entire career, and then the moment you retire, you're still paying tax on that pension you fairly earned.
The rich already pay 45% of their earnings in tax as well, no shit they're going to be against inheritance tax on top of that, if you're paying nearly half your fucking income in tax, you're not going to want MORE tax on top of that, even us lower classes do not want more tax right now, especially with how hard it is to afford stuff currently.
obiwanconobi@reddit
Get that boot out your mouth.
Yes, if I became a millionaire I wouldn't care about IHT. For the simple fact that I will be dead.
Logic-DL@reddit
Sure you wouldn't care IHT if you became a millionaire due to inheritance.
Sure.
obiwanconobi@reddit
If I became a millionaire due to inheritance it would be money I didn't work for.
Phoenix_Kerman@reddit
indeed. think it was about 6 million clarkson paid for all the land he owns in the area and that was when it was cheap during the financial crash.
land has gone up since and the new inheritance tax threshold is what? seems to be one million but it's certainly less than what clarkson paid for the land and that's got to cover equipment, livestock and everything else on a farm
DeanSLa@reddit
and why have farm land prices increased so much? Something to do with a tax loophole allowing the ultra wealthy to buy up land and avoid inheritance perhaps?
dafgar@reddit
Probably because you canât build more land? Who do you think buys up these family farms when the land goes for sale? Itâs not small families wanting to grow crops itâs corporations, often foreign, who then turn around and use the land to maximize their investment or simply take control of the food supply. When the option is let local families continue to provide food for people in their region or hand off control of the produce supply to foreign nationals/mega corporations, iâd prefer to have the local families continue to be able to provide for not only their communities but their family as well.
AwarenessComplete263@reddit
No, I'm not sure if you're aware of the residential housing price boom which has been persisting in the UK since the late 90s, but this has had an impact across all property including development land and farming land which has mixed residential and development potential.
There's no evidence to suggest tax legislation is pushing up farming land prices.
Simoxs7@reddit
But you donât protect them by making them a valuable investment for rich people who just plan on using it as tax avoidance.
AwarenessComplete263@reddit
The nature of the structure is that they are a valuable investment for the sons and daughters of the farmers who can continue to practice the craft from generation to generation.
To the extent there is a loophole which allows a minority of rich people to take advantage (which there of course is, but the net benefit to family farming far outweighs that), the focus should be on closing that loophole. Instead, what we have is a government which has thrown the baby out with the bathwater but just imposing a blanket rule across the industry, which will decimate local and family farming.
There needs to be nuance, and that nuance is missing.
ItzMichaelHD@reddit
I want a farm, why should someone else have one just because they got it handed to them on a silver platter when my house will get charged with inheritance tax?
tunasweetcorn@reddit
Complete and utter nonsense
LopsidedTank57@reddit
Inheritance is a morally wrong.
funnytoenail@reddit
While I want the rich to be appropriately taxed, âinheritance is morally wrongâ is an asinine take.
LopsidedTank57@reddit
Sorry was a typo. I have fixed.
mpt11@reddit
Exactly
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-inheritance-tax-on-farms-explained
peeper_tom@reddit
Well i think most normal people want this too especially in my world. i work on a farm and its my job to grow crops for local restaurants, working with local kids,introducing native plants back, i would love to own my own land one day to keep this going and have more autonomy over my own life and my family without interference from the money grabbers in london. I wanna reap what i sew. My community would love it too.. the world is too big now.
mmoonbelly@reddit
I think itâs a land-grab for property development (grew up in a dairy part of Gloucestershire).
The issues round our way are that the farms have always just about been break even. (Broke my heart (90s) working at the dairy in town as an 18 year old earning ÂŁ3.25/hr for a bit of cash for uni to be working alongside a 50-something farmer whoâd lost his heard to BSE and was working to keep food on the table for his family. He was forced-upbeat through the shifts. But Jesus.)
If they get hit for 25% inheritance tax that can only be met by selling land or equipment, then the farmâs gone.
Tullyswimmer@reddit
It's either a land-grab for property development, or selling out to big corporate farming companies or even wealthy individuals - often foreign. (here in the US, and also up in Canada, China owns huge swaths of our farmland... Bill Gates is the largest American owner of farmland, which he leases to farmers to use since he doesn't know shit about farming, obviously).
It's also one of the bigger problems with governments that draw too much power from urban centers. I grew up in rural NY, 6 hours from NYC, surrounded by farms. Of course we technically had representation in government, but nobody ever listened to our reps. Whatever the more populated cities wanted to do is what happened - even if that meant putting a landfill 6 miles/10km from a lake that provided clean drinking water for dozens of small towns, and polluting it's watershed, for the sole purpose of taking trash from NYC.
mmoonbelly@reddit
Thereâs that too. A mate down in Somerset has a large-holding. Heâs expecting large consolidation over the next decades as small-holdings become next to uneconomical. Their farm can shoulder the cost of appropriate financial planning now (restructuring etc) so theyâll be alright.
But thatâs the issue. Others wonât be.
The Treasury in Westminster doesnât seem to understand its own figures and the % of cash tied up in land and machinery, rather than convertible to meet unplanned for events - the levels theyâve set make sense for a London Town house (basically what theyâre all living in).
Clarksonâs piece on Sunday was clear. One suicideâs one too many and there will be more, and additional early deaths from heart problems aggravated by this kind of worry.
MrMakarov@reddit
This just isn't true, because as he's said himself, the farm is going into a trust so will be tax exempt anyway.
GodsWorth01@reddit
From what I understand, the farmersâ side of the story is, the profits are too low and proposed tax will be too high. To the point where they have to sell the farm to afford the tax.
I mean that makes sense since we saw, in the first season, the net profit from the farm was ÂŁ144 per annum.
Ofcourse I have no idea what Iâm saying since I am Indian and live in India. I just heard what Jeremy said in the protests.
FreddyFrogFrightener@reddit
Charles Darwin had a beard, guess he was an idiot.
goingpt@reddit
Really got him with that one...
TheTurkishThing@reddit
Kaleb has a beard
sername_generic@reddit
Just barely.
WilfordsTrain@reddit
If you squint itâs thicker
boomeradf@reddit
And he struggles to listen to him.
ImpressionPristine46@reddit
Don't let it distract you from the fact that Clarkson is still very much in the wrong.
nikhkin@reddit
"I don't care what you have to say because of your physical appearance" is a pretty weak argument.
GodsWorth01@reddit
Itâs a meme from TG days. The trio have been anti-beard for decades. Itâs not a serious thing.
Super_Shallot2351@reddit
Doesn't really work when you're trying to argue a serious point in your shitty weekly article, though.
EasilyInpressed@reddit
Doesnât the hamster one have a slimy goatee?
Patrick_Epper_PhD@reddit
Admittedly his constant run-ins with walls and other hard surfaces were far easier to poke fun at considering they ran a car show.
hoopstick@reddit
So does General Snailspace
DayBowBow1@reddit
Which is weird because they're all about being "manly" but dislike beards.
FartingBob@reddit
Their generation didnt see beards as manly. Its a thing that comes and goes throughout generations.
Logic-DL@reddit
This, hell back in the Tudor days, the average American at 20 stone+ would've been seen as the manliest man to exist.
Tudors loved fat blokes, they were the Johnny Sins of the time.
No-Sheepherder5481@reddit
Even Gen A see beards more as more of a soy boy hipster thing than a big manly man doing manual labour
Fashion is cyclical
AnalDisfunction@reddit
Aren't the oldest gen A'ers like 13 or something?
Erigion@reddit
It's probably a form of manliness from the perspective of a well-off British person.
NotA-Spy@reddit
See the irony is all three of them have rocked beards before. Mr slowly and the hamster still do
GodsWorth01@reddit
The whole anti-beard thing between them is a joke from TG days. Itâs not a serious stance or anything.
JulianoRamirez@reddit
"Recent figures show that in London 12 police cars are crashed every day. And the reason is, it's because they're driving in high-energy, difficult situations while under the influence of a moustache"
NotA-Spy@reddit
Iâm aware - thatâs why I said itâs irony
Ok_Muscle_3770@reddit
It might have been slightly funny in 2004 or so. But then again, Grand Tour is filled with recycled old tired jokes and gags.
Notacat444@reddit
He's been vocally anti-beard for many years.
Honorable_Dead_Snark@reddit
Probably because he canât grow a proper oneÂ
tompez@reddit
It's a joke.
Chrismonn@reddit
It's not that serious
Scalage89@reddit
His original point is though, that makes his response even weaker.
ArkPlayer583@reddit
I feel Clarkson's farm brought on a new wave of people who don't know Jezza at all. This is one of the most authentic Clarkson tweets I've ever seen.
Cod_rules@reddit
That's what he's been doing since his TG days. I love him as a presenter, but he is extremely annoying off the air.
rudabega_pie@reddit
Honestly, I expected a better comeback. 6/10 at least for commitment to hating beards.
Super_Shallot2351@reddit
Was it supposed to be funny?
ahent@reddit
Meh. I understand Clarkson is well off. But he is still using his celebrity to bring attention to the plight of farmers in the UK in an entertaining way that is educational. He could just stand at a podium and talk about how hard it is but instead made a program that shows how hard it is and usually in every episode he talks about how it's a bit easier for him than others but it's still very difficult and daunting. While he may not be suffering as much financially as other farmers, if you watch his show or read his column you begin to wonder how someone without a few hundred million dollars already in the bank can make it as a farmer. Just watching all the regulations and committees he has to appease to do almost anything is impressive. When he tried to make a little store to bring in some products from local farmers, he showed how difficult it was for him and I am sure he has more resources in the legal dept than most of the farmers he is trying to showcase in his store.
Ifyoocanreadthishelp@reddit
His store was so difficult because it is him, any other farm shop and they'd be looking at a relatively low number of local visitors, because it's Jeremy Clarkson the major opposition was the amount of visitors and traffic it would cause.
martybad@reddit
Which is bass ackwards thinking...
The local powers that be should want a local business to be successful, especially one that has an entirely local supply chain, the opposition was simply cutting off their nose to spite their face
HamfistedVegan@reddit
Imagine if you live in a quiet village and then within a few weeks all the roads are jammed with cars because some celebrity opened a shop without proper facilities or planning?
Councils want businesses and successful ones at that. They don't want their villages and towns being overrun by hordes of tourists desperate to get a jar of jam for 15 quid because it was made by a man who has controversial opinions for money roleplaying as a hard-done-by salt of the earth farmer.
martybad@reddit
username seems relevant here
TIGHazard@reddit
I feel like the specific problem is that they're multiple types of opposition.
You get the NIMBY's who don't want anything. Then some who don't like Clarkson, but if Jamie Oliver came along with the same plans - they'd be accepting it.
But then you have some who like Clarkson. They want his farm to succeed. But they look at it and they see it as being too successful.
Imagine the local roads, traffic lights, etc were originally designed based on the assumption that farms get 50 visitors a day to the farm shop, because that's what they got in the 1970's. And they haven't been upgraded since then.
Then Clarkson comes along and with his big name, now 5000 people a day want to visit. And they decline because the road system can't handle it.
That's the people Clarkson needs to win over, somehow.
Ifyoocanreadthishelp@reddit
Welcome to the UK.
The whole country is being fucked by NIMBYs.
_pxe@reddit
The reason why it's difficult for him can be reduced to two:
-Everything he does is big, done very quickly, without a progression and will attract hundreds of people a day because of his name.
-He keeps doing multiple projects at the same time.
If you see the other farmers he interacts with, usually they have 1-2 animals or a certain amount of crops that they specialized over years. Jeremy has 4 different animals plus multiple crops, a store and now a pub.
His actions create the drama, if you saw last season when he made the challenge against Kaleb his side didn't make much money(while still ending up positive), Kaleb instead did what everyone does focusing on crops without crazy experiments and won with a margin.
grandweapon@reddit
He intentionally makes it difficult for himself because it's good content (and presumably part of the costs are covered by Amazon). A show with just barley crops and a small herd of goats and a tiny farm shop will last 1 or 2 seasons max.
He deliberately finds new things to do so the show can remain fresh. If the show goes on for 5 more seasons, he's going to end up rearing alpacas and embarking on a large scale irrigation project for his new oil palm plantation or something.
That's not to say it's not educational and shining a spotlight on the struggles of farmers. Doing more means they can showcase the struggles of a wider variety of farmers.
NotEntirelyShure@reddit
Hardly much of a burn.
JoPo108@reddit
I wouldn't say claps back but shows how pathetic of an argument he can make.
Acsteffy@reddit
I mean, its more sad that someone like Jezza is replying to a random person on Twitter.
He doth protest too much.
SuspiciousAgency5025@reddit
Claps back? More like taps his little finger on his own butthole, the cosplaying bellend.
williamg209@reddit
Jezza has had a beard before though
Few_Scientist5381@reddit
May Clarkson forever Clarkson, Play on the Hammond.
Plastic_Doom@reddit
Classic clarkson petulance to disengage with any real threat of debate
Standard_Court4473@reddit
Wrinkly cunt clearly can't grow one himself. Probably never learned how to cycle either. Or any number of his other insecurities.
b_buddd@reddit
Not what would consider a clever comeback
EmoGothPunk@reddit
What's his deal against beards, besides additional ammo to insult Richard and James when they had one?
10ToSfromaSRBalloon@reddit
Clarkson says shave everyone!
Cirieno@reddit
https://metro.co.uk/2021/03/17/the-grand-tours-jeremy-clarkson-is-shaving-off-huge-lockdown-beard-14259210/
areyouhungryforapple@reddit
Jeremy being "in touch" (to a marginal degree) does not change a lifetime of being an out of touch tory
Just be a rich boomer in silence and stop the virtue signalling man it's embarrassing
signmeupnot@reddit
New season of Clarkson farm, 2 minutes in 'I want Caleb to have sucess, I'm not a socialist'.
Yeah because being a socialist has always been about limiting the sucess of others, however small. Not making sure that people have basic necessities, and a system they can rely on, should they need help.
Sabotskij@reddit
There's a disconnect both ways here though. You're right that that isn't what socialism is, but socialism does inherently, unintentionally and systematically limit success of individuals because it requires a economical system that prevents it in a vast majority of cases.
What you're really describing is social democracy.
signmeupnot@reddit
We can discuss the categories, but isn't what you are describing communism?
Anyway I believe what Jeremy is referring to is socialism in the social Democracy sense, and not full blown communism. Because why would he make sure to say he is not a communist? Does anyone imagine that?
Sabotskij@reddit
Well socialism is a stepping stone to communism. What exactly Jeremy means by it I don't know, but he is not an uneducated or close minded person so I have to assume he knows the difference and knows what he's saying.
Logic-DL@reddit
Communism has you working for the party still and in favour of the party, Socialism does not.
Really simple comparison would be:
Socialist society, a guy like Eddie Hall would get more food than most others if his job was to be hauling around logs and extremely heavy lifting all day every day. He gets what he needs because his job demands it. If your job doesn't demand that you eat more food than others, then you don't get more food.
Communism? Eddie Hall is getting enough food to live, but not have the strongman physique, under communism, you get the exact amount of food and water etc you need to make it through the week/month/year, and so does everyone else. On top of that, this can all change too depending on what the Government sees as needed and if it's deemed that you aren't needed by the People, then goodbye to you, you're gone.
For instance, let's say environmentalists ran a communist government, say goodbye to any job they so much as think damages the environment, you could be working at a nuclear power plant, one of the greenest forms of energy around, but if they think "well it destroys the planet lol" then your job is gone, the plant is gone, you're fucked.
signmeupnot@reddit
Maybe he does, but saying I'm not a social democrat doesn't have the same bogey man ring to it.
Sabotskij@reddit
For sure... but I mean he definitely is though. Doesn't matter who you're voting for in England, it's all social democracy, just differences in how much and on what the state should spend on. He definitely want them to spend on farmers right now. But maybe he really does mean he wants things to be like they were during the industrial revolution... but I doubt it.
Agitated_Slice_1446@reddit
Embarrassing
Standard_Statement17@reddit
Im afraid that's considered a comeback....is he 12?
sturdybutter@reddit
Didnât Jeremy have an absolute rat nest of a beard just a few years ago?
Federal-Research-148@reddit
This is lame, be honest
MFC1886@reddit
âHa ha, your medium is dyingâ
linusSocktips@reddit
Can you just make a Jeremy Clarkson fan club instead of posting this garbage in the grand tour?
oddoma88@reddit
oh no ...
anyway
DueNeighborhood5487@reddit
He might have a point with the article but the insult is just pitiful.
His argument is the same as saying that Clarkson isn't worth listening to as he's massively overweight these days.
Correct-Reception-42@reddit
There's no argument there anyway. Farmers fulfill an entirely different purpose from coal miners. They also face completely different challenges. It's just a very cheap argument. Having no inheritance tax on farms doesn't help farmers anyway since operating a farm is problematic enough. That tax is aimed at people like him especially who just want to dodge taxes. If he were actually interested in family farmers he'd lobby for different things.
BaldEagleNor@reddit
You have to give it to him, he has been damn consistent regarding his hatred for beards throughout the years.
sds7@reddit
It's called Twitter. I refuse to accept that Nazi's stupid name for it
ChesterCopp@reddit
Worst comeback of all time?
SoThenISays@reddit
I'm a fan of his, but this is something only men who grow beards badly say.
YousureWannaknow@reddit
Would that mean, that Jezza won't be interested in any news from Hamster?
Embarrassed-Ad-01298@reddit
Richard Ham?
YousureWannaknow@reddit
As far as I seen his pictures.. He did grow some beard..
KuntaWuKnicks@reddit
Thatâs the equivalent of a Reddit user losing an argument going into someoneâs profile and criticising something insignificant to the argument
Not that Iâm saying heâs losing the argument
FlorpFlap@reddit
the beard thing is a recurring joke in top gear, I'm genuinely surprised by how many non top gear viewers are in this sub
TIGHazard@reddit
I don't remember those jokes at all.
I remember stuff like "look, there's Jesus in the audience" and stuff like "Not listening to you, you're wearing a Subaru jacket", but I don't remember anything specifically about not listening to someone because they've got a beard.
Also, you have to remember, if they were during the studio sections - they often got cut for the Dave / International version with commercials.
RoughManguy@reddit
Leave it to Knicks fan to not get a jokey reference. What a surprise.
ts737@reddit
Of course a Knicks fan would say this
Nghbrhdsyndicalist@reddit
He doesnât really have an argument.
Notacat444@reddit
Have you never watch Top Gear?
misfit0513@reddit
His building planner has a beard
nicu95@reddit
Nothing wrong with beards.
MrRoBoT696969@reddit
Am I the only one who can read his comments in top gear fashion?
Any_Leg_4773@reddit
I've seen bad responses before, this might actually take the cake.
ReefNixon@reddit
I yearn for a world where the rich and privileged shut the fuck up and be rich and privileged in peace.
I work full time and will be short on bills this month, but god forbid Clarksonâs kids have to pay some tax on something they didnât work for at all, theyâre the real victims of course.
lkern@reddit
How about we stop posting unrelated things... Clearkson has always had a terrible opinions and easy access to the news...
TheWalrusMann@reddit
as much as I loved him on the show, he's such an insufferable out of touch wanker irl
Hunt3RMH@reddit
I have a lumberjack beard, i'm afraid Clarkson hate me đ„ș
skashiii@reddit
Clarkson keeps proving how much of a primitive he isâŠ
LuXe5@reddit
Clarkson use his wealth and popularity to show how shitty it is for struggling farmers. He repeatedly called out councils, criticized brexit and gives platform to other farmers. All that while making Farming more popular. I see a general net positive for farming. Heck, maybe some youngsters would take up farming due to Caleb or Harriet. It's not all bad
sprauncey_dildoes@reddit
Doesnât Kaleb have a beard?
JustBerserk@reddit
My favourite koelak.
Maleficent-War-8429@reddit
Government's fucking with farmers historically has basically never worked out well from what I've seen. Governments simply aren't cut out to run them. The fucking crops don't care about whatever stupid delays bureaucracy causes, they need to be planted and harvested when they need to be and nature isn't going to let you do it 4 months behind schedule.
memcwho@reddit
If no one had to pay IHT, at any level, then actual farmers could afford farms not being used as tax avoidance by the rich.
areyouhungryforapple@reddit
Yeah he's literally, LITERALLY part of the problem lmao
The hypocrisy of the rich never ceases
memcwho@reddit
If no one had to pay IHT, at any level, then actual farmers could afford farms not being used as tax avoidance by the rich.