***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 5 *****
Ongoing Election chat.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 23 Apr 15 at 21:30
|
This software is so s***e in so many ways.
I just lost a long and considered reply to Runfer's question because the thread was marked read only while I was working.
You would think it would, at least, allow me to retain my copy of my writings so that I may repost them.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sun 5 Apr 15 at 19:27
|
|
Sorry Mark, I was trying to look for a logical break in the last thread to move it over. The original reasons for breaking discussions into volumes has long since gone (dial-up connections) to be replaced by people using small devices to read. Apologies again
|
>> Sorry Mark,
No need to apologise, you have done us a favour!
|
Not your fault.
This software was rather good 15 years ago when it was written. Sadly the rest of the world has advanced and left it behind.
|
>> You would think it would, at least, allow me to retain my copy of my
>> writings so that I may repost them.
Sometimes, when I press the back button on the browser, my posted (but subsequently rejected) text is still there.
|
|
Don't worry, it was a mainly rhetorical question.
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/32227680
Trident becomes an issue for the parties.
|
|
Caused by the SNP cosying up to Labour. Still time for many U turns. Does anyone believe a politician scrabbling for a place at the trough?
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 9 Apr 15 at 08:46
|
>> Still time for many U turns.
>>
Only two U-boats though. (Sorry)
It reminds me of Churchill's laconic recollections of the naval programme discussions in 1908, I think, about the number of dreadnoughts to lay down.
"One side wanted 4, the other 6, so after a lot of arguing we compromised on 8".
|
|
It was planned to have five Polaris submarines, in fact much of the long lead time machinery was ordered for five. Four was decided as a minimum to maintain one at sea at all times, this was OK until the four boats built aged and became a bit unreliable but was managed with difficulty. No chance of a viable deterrent with three boats.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 9 Apr 15 at 15:50
|
|
Agreed we've either got casd or not. LDs should be honest and say they want rid.
|
Miliband "poison", Cameron "muddle-headed".
goo.gl/xhf2MI (Telegraph).
|
>> Miliband "poison", Cameron "muddle-headed".
>>
>> goo.gl/xhf2MI (Telegraph).
>>
Self evident! ;-)
|
|
Seems he'd get on well with Cameron...
|
I've been watching Brillo-pad's programme while waiting for my bread to bake.
Can anybody explain to me why, while there is a shortage of houses, any sort of help-to-buy programme shouldn't just push up the price of houses to the level at which buyers can only just afford them with the 'subsidy', deferred loan, or whatever?
Last edited by: Manatee on Sun 12 Apr 15 at 12:06
|
progressively introduce anonymised CVsâ€
That will be blank sheets of paper then.
|
“phase in a 35 hours weekâ€
Blimey.... even the Frogs are trying to undo that madness.
|
>> “phase in a 35 hours weekâ€
>>
>> Blimey.... even the Frogs are trying to undo that madness.
And yet...the extraordinary growth in automation of the last 50 years does not seem to have translated into a proportionate increase in output despite the working week remining much the same.
Granted, some of the increase in productivity has translated into higher living standards and more 'stuff' but consider that there has been an immense mobilisation of women, those of working age now being largely in employment rather than being at home, and working hours for many are still high.
It's Parkinson's law on a national scale.
In the science fiction I read as a youth, people only worked a couple of days a week because the machines did most of the work. Nobody would have guessed that employment would rise as it has to so little avail, it seems.
Even the Bank of England is baffled - British productivity is still lower than it was in 2008.
www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/quarterlybulletin/2014/qb14q201.pdf
|
>> "General election NHS promises - my view as a GP"
>>
>> www.patient.co.uk/blogs/sarah-says/2015/04/general-election-nhs-promises-my-view-as-a-gp?utm_campaign=forumemail&utm_source=sendgrid&utm_medium=email
I suspect my friend who is a GP in NE Wales would report a similar story. He's planning to retire well before he's 60.
|
|
GPs are as self serving as any group. They don't like any sort of change that may impact on their working conditions or income, just as they were opposed to the original idea of a National Health Service.
|
>>just as they were opposed to the original idea of a National Health Service.
Is that a fact! - I learn something new every day on this forum.
|
>> >>just as they were opposed to the original idea of a National Health Service.
>>
Not just GPs. Surgeons fought against the NHS too, and won the two concessions of being allowed to practice private medicine inside the NHS, and of retaining profesional independence virtually outside managerial control.
|
Most GPs and most surgeons do all right today, but the sky was the limit before the NHS. I well remember my poor parents worrying about doctors' fees, and I myself needed expensive surgery when very young, around 1943.
They were on friendly equal terms with the doctors, who didn't harass them for the bread. But on a civil service salary back then the fees were quite forbidding in themselves.
My three-years-younger sister, whose health was also iffy when we were children - undiagnosed TB it later turned out - became a doctor herself and married a doctor. They met doing VSO in Africa.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Thu 16 Apr 15 at 15:46
|
|
In the doctors hierarchy are GPs much the same as a hospital consultant ?
|
>> In the doctors hierarchy are GPs much the same as a hospital consultant ?
Their career paths divide shortly after qualification and they're under different Royal Colleges so it's a bit difficult to make comparisons. Also of course there's a difference between a salaried GP and the Senior Partner.
Perhaps Lygonos can offer an insider's view?
|
|
There seems to be an almost auction-like atmosphere in this election campaign to see which party can promise to pump as much money into the NHS as possible. What we need is some realism, in recognising the excellent service the NHS provides, we must also recognise that it is a bottomless pit. At some point we have to accept the service that can be provided for a given amount of public money. I would rather more money went into training and education, the wealth producing rather than wealth consuming parts of the public sector.
|
Investment rather than consumption (even when the consumption is always referred to as investment). Now there's a novel idea.
The whole premise on which the debate is being conducted is false, because none will tell the truth.
There has been no austerity yet. The debt has just about doubled in nominal terms.
Bennett says we don't need austerity because we are the world's 6th richest country. Why does nobody ask her why the world's 6th richest country can't get by within its means.
Farage is actually closest to telling the truth as far as the debt and deficit goes and he's a fruitcake. Funny old world.
My boon companion, who has been politically minded all her life, refuses to engage with this lot at all. The parish council one will be the most interesting election here.
Last edited by: Manatee on Thu 16 Apr 15 at 21:04
|
>> In the doctors hierarchy are GPs much the same as a hospital consultant ?
No, GPs are 'generalists' and have to know a useful amount about all branches of medicine. They have to be able to stand in for specialists in emergencies, but basically they should be able to shunt patients to the right hospital/specialist without inordinate delay and timewasting. It helps to have a practice secretary with a Scheiss-hot filing system.
Don't read it if it bores you, but I used to know some Nigerian doctors. In Nigeria medical students tended to want to become highly-paid specialists, which was inefficient on various levels. One of my friends wanted to form a 'school of general practice' at one of the university medical schools. Unfortunately he died young - he came from a family in which some did and some didn't, fragile and eccentric men and very solid West African women - so I don't think the GP school got off the ground.
>> Perhaps Lygonos can offer an insider's view?
Naturally I have been hoping he would. But he seems to be lying low at present. The patients - or is it customers these days whether we like it or not - have to come first even if they are swearing alcoholic Jocks with self-inflicted injuries.
|
>> The patients - or is it customers these days whether we like it or not - have to come first even if they are swearing alcoholic Jocks with self-inflicted injuries.
My doctor sister and her husband got a lot of those come to think of it, they were both trained partly in Edinburgh. I can remember the bro-in-law's very disapproving attitude to drivers pulled by the fuzz he had to blood-test, completely blotto at ten in the morning, and how I thought it a bit unsporting of him at the time.
I am happy, if a bit ashamed, to admit that he was right and I was a stupid thoughtless hooligan. Not to him of course, just to everyone else in the world.
|
|
Why is everybody so obsessed with the national debt? It ain't coming down unless the cuts are so severe we all be living in tents.Don't know about Farage it's all the foreigners fault that we are having problems.Sorry Nigel I have always paid into the system.>;)
|
The focus is on the annual deficit not the National Dept. Unless we reduce the deficit the national debt will continue to grow year by year. Until we move into surplus, which is not going to be in the near future we won't even begin to reduce the national debt.
|
>> Why is everybody so obsessed with the national debt?
Because it is nearly double what it was 5 years ago and we have to pay interest on it. That already costs between £40bn and £50bn a year which is about £2000 per household.
The £1.6 million billion or so national debt (and the servicing cost) is massively understated by who knows how much because a lot of what is really borrowing is disguised as contracts for providing things like hospitals and roads. So within the £100 billion or so it costs to run the NHS are what are really loan repayments, interest and profit for private contractors.
The only reason this situation is anywhere near manageable is that interest rates are low, and the government can borrow money at a real rate of c. 2%. When interest rates rise then they will need some inflation to make the interest affordable and to diminish the debt in real terms (and your savings with it).
The shameless dishonesty of the whole parcel of them is sickening. What do you make of "Britain doesn't need more austerity because it is the 6th richest nation in the world"? That's like saying somebody on £100,000 a year should spend £110,000 because he is well off, even though he already has debts of £200,000.
Some of them don't even know (or acknowledge) the difference between debt, new borrowing, and the deficit including Cameron himself who was told off by the UK Statistics Authority two years ago for saying that the government was "paying down Britain's debts". Not a bean has been paid off, and since then the debt has gone up by between £200 and £300 billion.
The unwashed and unthinking have encouraged to believe that "ordinary" people should not need to pay much if any tax, while at the same time they can have a welfare state, NHS, free childcare, etc etc.. They can't. This is partly why we now have so many stealth and indirect taxes, including high rates of VAT and employment taxes. This makes it difficult to keep taxation fair and progressive apart from anything else.
They are being allowed to think that the NHS in its current form is affordable. It isn't, while ever demand is uncapped and it is free. The parties need to get their heads together and tell us honestly that one aspect of managing the NHS will be rationing (i.e. demand management) by one means or another - the NHS cannot be obliged to do everything, free, and at the same time provide a quality service. Every improvement, whether by way of efficiencies or "investment" (the new word for spending) just increases demand. Rationing is coming back now in the form of treatment delays - this is due to uncontrolled demand, not underfunding.
When I see these peoples' oily performances, I fulminate first at their lies, and then again at the cheers from the audiences when they show their approval for the empty promises and misleading claims, although often (as last night on QT) the best contributions come from the floor when somebody with a brain is allowed to speak.
|
..
being edited
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 17 Apr 15 at 17:36
|
I lost my way in teh middle of this, I am on a phone. I think it makes sense now............
>>Why is everybody so obsessed with the national debt?
Long winded and over simplistic thought follows;
I have an income of £100 per month.
Month 1: I spend £110 on my credit card.
Month 2: I receive a credit card bill for £110 which I expected because that's what I spent. As I cannot pay it all off I pay £50, I don't reduce my spending, so spend the same as last month £110.
Month 3: Next month I receive a bill for £180. £60 balance from the last bill [fair enough, its money I spent], £110 [fair enough, its money I spent] and £10 interest [for which i received no value].
I pay off £50 again because I think that's what I can afford. I do not reduce my spending so I spend another £110
Month 4: I now receive a bill for £240. £220 that I have actually spent over the months and £20 interest for which I have received no benefit.
So, what do I do about my rising debt and my income disappearing into interest payments?
Well first, lets get my spending down from £110 per month to try to stop it getting worse.
I may think I only have to take it down to £100, my income, but I am being hit by £20 interest per month, so if I want my debt to get no worse, then I have to reduce my spending below £100 to £80
That reduction in spending may hurt. But I am stillpaying interst and so I am susceptible to changing interest rates and losing loads of my income every month.
If I want to actually reduce my debt, then I have to cut my spending even further.
Perhaps another £30 - but until the debt does come down, I now only have £50 per month to spend out of the £100 that I am getting.
Now, if I am spending it on booze, ok, I can stop drinking. But what if that reduction includes paying to get to work or eat every month?
Well, I cannot reduce my spending, my income is what it is, so I'll borrow from a loan shark.
I don't change my spending or income though, and eventually I go bankrupt - or get duffed up by the loan shark.
Translate that to the country;
Income: Do you want to pay more tax?
Spending: Do you want to spend less on the Health Service?
What do you want to do?
Some politicians think you don't need to cut your spending, then you must gain more income.
Some politicians think you don't need to raise taxes (income) so you must cut your spending.
Now, throw into that;
If interest rates go up, perhaps because my country credit rating has changed, then I must cut my spending or raise my income even further.
If I reduce my spending so far it affects the economy because I'm not buying stuff, then people lose jobs, income (tax revenues) go down so now I either cut my spending even further or raise tax even further.
If I still cannot get my spending down or reduce my debt or raise my income, then I need to borrow some more money to keep me going - say from the IMF which keeps me going.
But I still have a spending / income imbalance.
What happens next? Ask Greece.
|
www.thepoke.co.uk/2015/04/17/english-teacher-decided-mark-ukip-election-flyer-came-letterbox/
Brilliant.
They ventured into our street yesterday, sadly I missed them. They also left a pamphlet - there was a token effort at translating it into Welsh - the whole thing looked a bit desperate...binned.
|
....................just as I've binned the expensively produced & professionally manicured carp from the Labs & Cons!
Last edited by: Roger. on Fri 17 Apr 15 at 16:43
|
>> www.thepoke.co.uk/2015/04/17/english-teacher-decided-mark-ukip-election-flyer-came-letterbox/
>>
>> Brilliant.
....and that is one reason why UKIP insists that all leaflets are approved before printing!
I guess that particular branch let their enthusiasm run away from proper procedure.
Crap grammar does not necessarily crap councillors make!
|
>>>....and that is one reason why UKIP insists that all leaflets are approved before printing!
So, UKIP try to make it professional and fail. They cannot even control their own party insofar as printing leaflets are concerned. That bodes well for the future.
|
Claim & counter claim!
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/11545146/Ukip-election-leaflet-ridiculed-for-dozens-of-errors.html
Apparently one of the people named in the flyer (Mr. Tanswell) who is supposed to have produced this, is an ex LibDem councillor who switched to UKIP.
Last edited by: Roger. on Sat 18 Apr 15 at 13:06
|
>> Claim & counter claim!
>>
>> www.telegraph.co.uk/news/11545146/Ukip-election-leaflet-ridiculed-for-dozens-of-errors.html
I suppose you believe all that "it wasn't me i was hacked" crap?
|
>> >> Claim & counter claim!
>> >>
>> >> www.telegraph.co.uk/news/11545146/Ukip-election-leaflet-ridiculed-for-dozens-of-errors.html
>>
>>
>> I suppose you believe all that "it wasn't me i was hacked" crap?
>>
Not necessarily! It may be bo££ox - it may not be.
Wait 'n see, I say.
|
Believe a politician, no chance.
Sturgeon - "The SNP will not do a deal with he Tories". Odd that during the first (minority) SNP government they relied on the Tory MSPs to vote through their budget.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 17 Apr 15 at 17:03
|
According to the Telegraph...
Party stance on immigration:
Conservative: Migrants will be barred from claiming benefits such as tax credits and housing benefit for four years.
Labour: Migrants will not be able to claim benefits for at least two years.
Liberal Democrats: Universal Credit will only payable to migrants for six months, after they have worked for six months.
Ukip: A new commission will reduce net immigration, and establish a visa system based on the Australian points based system.
Green: People who have lived illegally in the country for five years will be allowed to remain unless they pose a serious danger to public safety.
SNP: Controlled points-based system to support the migration of skilled workers for the benefit of Scotland’s economy.
|
|
Bar the greens all much of a muchness.
|
>>Bar the greens all much of a muchness.
And all complete caca.
Probably the only ones being practical and honest about their approach to immigration are the Greens, and they're rubbish.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 17 Apr 15 at 18:05
|
|
And only ukip and snp speak of immigration.the others seem more concerned about benefits rather than anything else.
|
It's never been like this before. Usually a two-horse race, with a third horse panting along behind.
Now there are several fringe and minority parties with quite good electoral support. Coalitions are likely or certain. Like France in the forties and fifties. It's unprecedented here anyway in my time.
|
>> It's never been like this before. Usually a two-horse race, with a third horse panting
>> along behind.
>>
>> Now there are several fringe and minority parties with quite good electoral support. Coalitions are
>> likely or certain. Like France in the forties and fifties. It's unprecedented here anyway in
>> my time.
>>
I remember the 1970s... Little difference Labour under Jim Callaghan had an alliance withe the LDs and the SNP.. and held power for 5 years. And that brought in Mrs Thatcher. I expect a repeat with economic dunces running the country.. ( Dennis Healey had to have economics lessons when he became COE,,,)
The 5 year and 10 year economics cycles coincide in 2018-9... if we have a recession then, whomever is in Government will have their plans shafted.. as the economic growth will stop and all plans will be instantly carp.
|
|
Anyone intending to vote by post - last date for receipt of application form is next Tuesday.
|
>> Anyone intending to vote by post - last date for receipt of application form is
>> next Tuesday.
>>
Applications for postal votes here closed about 3 weeks ago!
Postal votes are going out this weekend to land on doormats by Tuesday 21st.
Those registering late (up to the 20th.) will have no option for a postal vote!
|
Britain on the Brink - The Great Deception.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=vv5O_Gq30ow
|
>>Postal votes are going out this weekend to land on doormats by Tuesday 21st.
>>
Ours arrived this morning.
|
"Applications for postal votes here closed about 3 weeks ago!"
Where's "here" Roger. thought you were in England these days
"If you are in England, Scotland or Wales and want to vote by post at the 2015 UK general election, you must submit a postal vote application form to your local authority by 5pm on Tuesday 21 April."
www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/register-to-vote/postal-vote-application
|
>> "Applications for postal votes here closed about 3 weeks ago!"
>>
>>
>> Where's "here" Roger. thought you were in England these days
>>
>> "If you are in England, Scotland or Wales and want to vote by post at
>> the 2015 UK general election, you must submit a postal vote application form to your
>> local authority by 5pm on Tuesday 21 April."
>>
>> www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/register-to-vote/postal-vote-application
>>
>>
I, probably drew a wrong conclusion, insofar as I understand our LA is sending out the postal votes to arrive by Tuesday next week. It seems likely that they are despatching those for whom they already have valid requests, but obviously will have to send out a much smaller number later for late registers.
Information about exactly when the postal votes are being sent has been kept pretty quiet.
Only the legal timetable has been published here (my own election pack confirms this) and no information about actual date of sending out the postal vote has been promulgated.
It is, of course essential to time election leaflets to arrive concurrently, or just before, the postal vote form arrives, as most people fill it in almost straight away and post it back to the Council quickly.
Miss the boat here and around 20% to 25% of one's electorate will vote before seeing your offering!
I have been at election counts where "live" votes have put us neck and neck with, in our case, Labour, only to see the postal vote boxes being emptied and the result instantly changing - and not in our favour!
Labour locally is VERY strong - the District Council is absolutely run by the local (temporarily ex) MP, John Mann, who has his wife on the council and who is quite ruthless in enforcing his will on Labour councillors
Their local party is large and none of the other parties locally can match them in leafleting or funding.
The whole postal vote system is a travesty really. 20% to 25% of a ward or constituency electors who cannot be a***d to vote in person is just plain wrong
Far too many people vote that way, not because they are ill or infirm, or out of the country, but because it's too easy.
The system is open to misuse, as paterfamilias pressure in parts of the country is so intense that a single dominant person can enforce voting his wishes on a goodly number of people.
|
>> The whole postal vote system is a travesty really. 20% to 25% of a ward
>> or constituency electors who cannot be a***d to vote in person is just plain wrong
>> Far too many people vote that way, not because they are ill or infirm, or
>> out of the country, but because it's too easy.
>>
>> The system is open to misuse, as paterfamilias pressure in parts of the country is
>> so intense that a single dominant person can enforce voting his wishes on a goodly
>> number of people.
Did you mean the 'whole' postal vote system is a travesty?
I find that system most convenient and particularly so when I was working long shifts in London. I would imagine it ensures many people vote when they might not bother and you can post it off then go on holiday, etc, etc.
Why should I and people like me be penalised just because some in out society are bigoted 'a' holes who would impose their views on others in their families. If you are that arrogant and self centred, won't you accompany your chattel (wife) to the polling booth and supervise her that way anyway?
|
>> Why should I and people like me be penalised just because some in out society
>> are bigoted 'a' holes who would impose their views on others in their families. If
>> you are that arrogant and self centred, won't you accompany your chattel (wife) to the
>> polling booth and supervise her that way anyway?
You know and I know that only one person is allowed into the booth, so supervision at that point is impossible. Still never miss the chance to air your prejudice tho eh.
|
>> You know and I know that only one person is allowed into the booth, so
>> supervision at that point is impossible. Still never miss the chance to air your prejudice
>> tho eh.
>>
Very good. Are you willing to discuss the issue?
Unless you have your head in the sand you know some communities have a problem with the arrogant head male of the family dictating to everyone else what they should or shouldn't do ...including how they vote.
I dislike that intensely.
Would you wish that that sort of thing is buried, so no one can discuss it or address it? Are you happy for some women of that community to be so downtrodden. I am not. What is your view?
I responded to Roger's post about postal voting being a problem because some people oversee other member's of their families voting rights... and posted from the angle of that difficulty shouldn't affect my right to postal vote.
You are very quick to bandy insults when it comes to race.. and your interpretation of how you think it should go... yet you seem strangely quiet on the inequality of women within that particular discussion point.
So what's it to be on this one?...Does the race/religious entitlement need the main support or does women's equality?
My colours nailed very firmly to the mast are....sexism/homophobia/animal rights, etc come first, very much so and I see no reason why anyone who is religious cannot respect that, particularly as they are supported by many laws in this country.
May I take it that you think someone's culture or religious beliefs are paramount and that someone like me shouldn't query them.. as to do so is prejudiced and racist?
|
>> Very good. Are you willing to discuss the issue?
>>
>> Unless you have your head in the sand you know some communities have a problem
>> with the arrogant head male of the family dictating to everyone else what they should
>> or shouldn't do ...including how they vote.
I think you're indulging a stereotype there WP - I assume the reference here and previously regarding 'chattels' are pitched at those of the Islamic faith. Nothing about the feisty Islamic ladies I worked with suggested their husband's influenced their vote in elections nor for that matter their influence in the Mosque.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying abuse doesn't happen. Unfortunately the first past the post electoral system has massive incentives to those who want to influence the result because the whole outcome is decided in a relatively small number of marginal/swing seats. The effect is even more pronounced in local government where wards of a few thousand people are in play. Trying to 'pack' those marginal wards isn't unique to minority groups, the big parties have always been at it as well. Getting voters registered and out, including dodgy registrations, has gone on for years - there are scandals and less publicised stuff in the lectoral courts going to way back when.
Zero is right though. Postal voting has a history of abuse wherever it's been used. The expansion of it's scope between 1979 and 1997 was driven by attempts by the then incumbent party to capture its latent expat/holidaying voters. I doubt labour's hands were clean in years 1997-2005. The whole equal sized constituencies thing was a Tory gerrymander.
Internet voting would be worse still.
|
>> I think you're indulging a stereotype there WP - I assume the reference here and
>> previously regarding 'chattels' are pitched at those of the Islamic faith. Nothing about the feisty
>> Islamic ladies I worked with suggested their husband's influenced their vote in elections nor for
>> that matter their influence in the Mosque.
I very clearly wrote SOME communities. I did not write ALL communities within some religions.
I do not consider my viewpoint stereotypical because I can see the wider picture which is a vast majority within the Muslim faith do not act like that...however a minority do.
The rest of your post I agree with.
I too worked closely with people of all backgrounds and unsurprisingly I found the Muslim colleagues no different to any other human being.
If I thought there were elements of Buddhism that were incompatible with (whatever) I'd be posting it.
My country's history is that of Christianity... I'll challenge that if it needs it.
What I won't do is pretend that something doesn't happen when it does.
|
>> is a vast majority within the Muslim faith do not act like that...however a minority
>> do.
However you singularly failed to include this point in your haste to make the smart "chattels" comment
Mind you, at the end of the day, you are not that bothered about the fate of "chattels" because you were too concerned about being inconvenienced.
|
>> However you singularly failed to include this point in your haste to make the smart
>> "chattels" comment
Oh, I see. Every time I make a comment that goes against your sensibilities, I should ensure there is the appropriate caveat to go with it.
>>
>> Mind you, at the end of the day, you are not that bothered about the
>> fate of "chattels" because you were too concerned about being inconvenienced.
Interesting that you would assume that. A sort of 'concentrate on my perceived weakness' (my wish not to be inconvenienced versus the fate of people who are second class citizens) to try to distract from the point you have made and I have countered.
As it happens I do care about the fate of such people.. very much so. So much so in fact, I'm willing to say so on here in circumstances some think is racist etc... when the sexist angle interacts with the racist one.
I have been consistent all the way along.
I'd like my 3 year old daughter to have the same chances in life as my 7 year old son.
Now, answer my question about when someone's culture or religion clashes with another's rights along the lines of sexism, homophobia, animal rights, etc... you seem to have missed that bit.
|
made and I have countered.
>>
>> As it happens I do care about the fate of such people.. very much so.
>> So much so in fact, I'm willing to say so on here in circumstances some
>> think is racist etc... when the sexist angle interacts with the racist one.
Cobblers, All you cared about was the fact that some non white non Christian person might make it inconvenient for you to use a postal vote. Your constant two faced whining "i care about people" is nothing more than a smoke screen. There is only Westpig in Westpig world, and frankly you and your attitude disgust me and make me want to vomit.
You are the very worse kind of insidious slimy dangerous racist who tries to make up reasons and explanations for your attitudes.
|
>> You are the very worse kind of insidious slimy dangerous racist who tries to make
>> up reasons and explanations for your attitudes.
Steady on old chap.
There are standards here, as you well know, and your last couple of posts are well outside of them.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 19 Apr 15 at 15:54
|
>> Cobblers, All you cared about was the fact that some non white non Christian person
>> might make it inconvenient for you to use a postal vote. Your constant two faced
>> whining "i care about people" is nothing more than a smoke screen. There is only
>> Westpig in Westpig world, and frankly you and your attitude disgust me and make me
>> want to vomit.
>>
>> You are the very worse kind of insidious slimy dangerous racist who tries to make
>> up reasons and explanations for your attitudes.
Well, that says a lot about you Zero.
Your intolerance and presumption that your thoughts are the right ones and that if anyone else thinks differently there must be an angle and it will be the 'wrong' one, because after all Zero is always right.
|
ell, that says a lot about you Zero.
>>
>> Your intolerance and presumption that your thoughts are the right ones and that if anyone
>> else thinks differently there must be an angle and it will be the 'wrong' one,
>> because after all Zero is always right.
Yes but I don't pretend to be something I am not.
|
>> I very clearly wrote SOME communities. I did not write ALL communities within some religions.
>>
>>
What you wrote was, as you say, some communities. But you didn't put that in context of a small sub-set. While I may have drawn an inference that you were talking about the Muslim community I firmly believe that was your intention. You were presenting the same stereotype you have before of a whole religion that treats it's women like chattels or cattle.
If there is a problem of votes being manipulated and the postal method being used as means then the problem needs tackling. It's not though simply a question the 'Paterfamilias' dominating the women. The fraud alleged in East London owed more to Houses in Multiple Occupation and premises with a wholly implausible number of occupants.
In so far as there is a wider issue of men dominating the voting intentions of their wives/daughters, in what you now say is a minority of the population we've identified, it too needs tackling. You don't help that process by adopting the 'women as chatttels' stereotype and the attitudes that go with it. Rather, it's about engaging with communities, particularly the youngsters, in terms they will accept.
|
>> While I may have drawn an inference that you were
>> talking about the Muslim community I firmly believe that was your intention.
You are absolutely correct.
>> You were presenting
>> the same stereotype you have before of a whole religion that treats it's women like
>> chattels or cattle.
See, this is where it goes wrong. I do not think that ALL of the religion treats its women like that. I do not think that most or a significant number do... however, there are some in a noticeable minority that do... and they seem to live a charmed life.... because no one is willing to address it, they are either paralysed with PC or afraid of the racist label that as sure as eggs are eggs will come with it.
If people like me raise it as an issue because it irritates me... people like you challenge me and tell me i'm too stereotypical... purely because I've debated it... (or people like Zero have a meltdown and assume inaccurately God knows what).
The rest of it I agree with.
Last edited by: Westpig on Sun 19 Apr 15 at 17:53
|
>> >> You know and I know that only one person is allowed into the booth,
>> so
>> >> supervision at that point is impossible. Still never miss the chance to air your
>> prejudice
>> >> tho eh.
>> >>
>>
>> Very good. Are you willing to discuss the issue?
Not really, I know why you threw the "chattels" reference in as well as you do.
|
>> Not really, I know why you threw the "chattels" reference in as well as you
>> do.
Oh yes, you've hit the nail on the head.
I referred to it, because it annoys me.
The inequality of it and the pillocks like you who allow it to continue by being too timid to address it and who try to shout other people down when they do so and accuse them of intolerance or racism.. when in reality, all they are doing is indulging in realism.
Your stance actually hinders racial harmony if you could only see it.
|
>> The inequality of it and the pillocks like you
I don't need to use a two faced lying little s*** bag like you for any lessons in dealing with racism or humanity.
Frankly its t***s like you that gave the Metrolpolitan police its appalling reputation.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 19 Apr 15 at 15:41
|
>> I don't need to use a two faced lying little s*** bag like you for
>> any lessons in dealing with racism or humanity.
>>
>> Frankly its t***s like you that gave the Metrolpolitan police its appalling reputation.
>>
I do notice that you didn't answer my question.
|
Its all very well to try and justify your original stance by then trying to hide behind your caring sharing side.
Lets look at the original post that started this. You complaint was that your right to a postal vote was in danger because of Muslim men bullying their wives into voting the way they wanted.
An assumption. You don't know that happens. An assumption you assumed to be correct, one you want to be correct because it panders to your racist preconceptions. Does it happen in muslim society? yes I am sure it has happened, just as it has happened in every other strata of the people that make up this nation.
The real problem with postal voting is in making up and registering voters, usually in homes of multiple occupation as Brompo pointed out to you.
Doesn't meet your agenda tho, we can't inflame that with terms like "chattel" can we.
Do I approve of womens rights? yes of course i do. I don't use it as an excuse to justify my racist attitudes tho.
|
>> Its all very well to try and justify your original stance by then trying to
>> hide behind your caring sharing side.
Ah, so you can debate things and drop the Tourettes.
>>
>> Lets look at the original post that started this. You complaint was that your right
>> to a postal vote was in danger because of Muslim men bullying their wives into
>> voting the way they wanted.
>>
>> An assumption. You don't know that happens. An assumption you assumed to be correct, one
>> you want to be correct because it panders to your racist preconceptions. Does it happen
>> in muslim society? yes I am sure it has happened, just as it has happened
>> in every other strata of the people that make up this nation.
Have a re-read of what you have just written.
You accuse me of 'assumption', then say I don't know this happens and only wish it to be so so it can pander to my racist preconceptions...then you say "Yes I am sure it has happened".
Yes, so am I sure it has happened. It's just that on Planet Zero when I think and say that, I'm massaging my racist pre conceptions... yet when you say it, it's o.k.????
>> Do I approve of womens rights? yes of course i do. I don't use it
>> as an excuse to justify my racist attitudes tho.
>>
Well we are beginning to get there. What about women's rights versus race/religion? You know what I've posted, you know the angle I'm discussing...answer that please.
If you wish, widen it to homophobia versus race/religion..or.. animal welfare.
|
>> >>
>> >> Lets look at the original post that started this. You complaint was that your
>> right
>> >> to a postal vote was in danger because of Muslim men bullying their wives
>> into
>> >> voting the way they wanted.
>> >>
>> >> An assumption. You don't know that happens. An assumption you assumed to be correct,
>> one
>> >> you want to be correct because it panders to your racist preconceptions. Does it
>> happen
>> >> in muslim society? yes I am sure it has happened, just as it has
>> happened
>> >> in every other strata of the people that make up this nation.
>>
>> Have a re-read of what you have just written.
>>
>> You accuse me of 'assumption', then say I don't know this happens and only wish
>> it to be so so it can pander to my racist preconceptions...then you say "Yes
>> I am sure it has happened".
Has happened. Not a problem so bad that it is the reason you think your rights are about to be impinged, as you intimated. And not only in muslim households as you intimated.
>> Yes, so am I sure it has happened. It's just that on Planet Zero when
>> I think and say that, I'm massaging my racist pre conceptions... yet when you say
>> it, it's o.k.????
Because on planet zero we accept that it has happened everywhere, and do not single out one race or society and then exaggerate the accusation. I know my grandmother was expected to vote the same way as her husband.
>> >> Do I approve of womens rights? yes of course i do. I don't use
>> it
>> >> as an excuse to justify my racist attitudes tho.
>> Well we are beginning to get there. What about women's rights versus race/religion? You know
>> what I've posted, you know the angle I'm discussing...answer that please.
Female subserviency in muslims households is as much a product of the the way their gender perceived themselves in the past as it is the men enforcing it. You need to mix with some of the second and third generation female muslims, they are perfectly well aware of their gender rights and perfectly able to and do utilise them.
|
>> Female subserviency in muslims households is as much a product of the the way
>> their gender perceived themselves in the past as it is the men enforcing it. You
>> need to mix with some of the second and third generation female muslims, they are
>> perfectly well aware of their gender rights and perfectly able to and do utilise them.
Yes, yes, yes...very good.
Do you think that someone's racial background, culture or religion outweighs the right of a female of our species, the rights of a gay human being or the rights of an animal to be humanely treated.
Simple 'yes' or 'no'.
|
>> Do you think that someone's racial background, culture or religion outweighs the right of a
>> female of our species, the rights of a gay human being or the rights of
>> an animal to be humanely treated.
no.
As I explained in the post. I guess its my fault for not making that clear.
Oh I see it was explained in the bit you missed out.
second and third generation female muslims, they are perfectly well aware of their gender rights and perfectly able to and do utilise them.
perhaps your prejudices blinded you to that bit.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 19 Apr 15 at 19:18
|
>> Oh I see it was explained in the bit you missed out.
>>
>> second and third generation female muslims, they are perfectly well aware of their gender
>> rights and perfectly able to and do utilise them.
>>
>> perhaps your prejudices blinded you to that bit.
>>
Ah, back to the insults.
Didn't include it because I tend agreed with it.
Only 'tend to' agree with it, however, because it's a bit of a sweeping statement, because not all women feel empowered enough to utilise their rights (across the board as well as within Islam)..do they?
|
>> Ah, back to the insults.
Not an insult, it was a query. I'd go careful about the cry about insults if i were you, it might cramp your normal style if you are not allowed to employ them.
>> Only 'tend to' agree with it, however, because it's a bit of a sweeping statement,
Ah, you don't make sweeping statements do you, you call it "the big picture" I believe.
>> because not all women feel empowered enough to utilise their rights (across the board as
>> well as within Islam)..do they?
not all, but plenty do, and even more will especially within the immigrant and islamic community, because being here gives them empowerment, something to be applauded don't you think?
|
>> not all, but plenty do, and even more will especially within the immigrant and islamic
>> community, because being here gives them empowerment, something to be applauded don't you think?
Yes. I do.
That just leaves the ones that are not as confident or are in a considerably more abusive situation, the ones we shouldn't forget about.
|
>> I don't need to use a two faced lying little s*** bag like you for
>> any lessons in dealing with racism or humanity.
Well I think you do.
You seem to be confused.
You seem to think that if anyone has the temerity to write or discuss anything of negativity that relates to anyone else's race or religion that it is automatically racist.
Think about that for a moment. Is everyone perfect, are there people amongst us that make no mistakes?
Does Islam/ Christianity/ Sikhism, etc always get it right?
Can no one challenge anything on Planet Zero?
|
>> You seem to be confused.
>>
>> You seem to think that if anyone has the temerity to write or discuss anything
>> of negativity that relates to anyone else's race or religion that it is automatically racist.
I am not in the least bit confused, I am convinced YOU are racist. I really don't think I can make that any clearer.
>> Does Islam/ Christianity/ Sikhism, etc always get it right?
No they don't, Do you ever complain about christianity or Sikhism? no.
>> Can no one challenge anything on Planet Zero?
Ah Planet Zero. The planet where we don't think its ok to hang innocent people for the greater good, the planet where we don't think its a good idea to hit our children and teach them the role of violence to get our own way, the place where we allow our children to travel in coaches on school trips, the planet where we wouldn't send our sons out to other parts of the planet to get involved in and inflame wars in which we have no part. Do the inhabitants of planet Zero need to learn anything from Planet Westpig?
|
>> I am not in the least bit confused,
We will have to agree to disagree then.
I am convinced YOU are racist. I
>> really don't think I can make that any clearer. .
Think on, you are entitled to your view.. although I'd request that you keep it polite.
>>
>> >> Does Islam/ Christianity/ Sikhism, etc always get it right?
>>
>> No they don't, Do you ever complain about christianity or Sikhism? no.
Quite happy to in the relevant circumstances. Christian crusades weren't very nice.
>> Do the inhabitants
>> of planet Zero need to learn anything from Planet Westpig?
>>
Oh yes. Tolerance, politeness, allowing for other people's viewpoint.. oh and actually answering a question.
|
>> Oh yes. Tolerance, politeness, allowing for other people's viewpoint..
As long as it fits the Westpig way. Other wise they are, "pillocks" was it?
>>although I'd request that you keep it
>> polite.
Ah do what I say, not do as I do. Sorry forgot that rule.
|
I've just applied for a postal vote (I'll be away on the day) and I haven't taken it personally! I hope it works this time - in October 2013 my postal vote followed me around the country and I didn't get it in time, owing to the inability to predict when it would land at the address I directed it to.
Roger is correct to say there has been and almost certainly still is material abuse of the postal vote system, the effects probably being greater in local elections at ward level than national at constituency level.
I agree it should be looked at.
|
Every country that employs or allows postal voting has found fraud to be an issue or a lesser or greater scale. The very medium and process makes it inherently unsafe, with nothing tone done to prevent it.
The only way to prevent widespread (if it gets that far, and it has in certain council elections) fraud with postal voting is to severely limit its availability to those with a proven need.
To those who say I can't get to the booths, we need to change that process. Polling should be over two days with the station open for 48 hours. If you are on holiday, sorry, elections are always in may, so just bad planning on your part.
|
Wish I hadn't mentioned postal votes. I only wanted to remind those who wanted one to send off their application in time.
On holiday in Croatia election week. This is the first time I have ever used a postal vote.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Sun 19 Apr 15 at 16:32
|
>> Wish I hadn't mentioned postal votes. I only wanted to remind those who wanted one
>> to send off their application in time.
>>
>> On holiday in Croatia election week. This is the first time I have ever used
>> a postal vote.
The greens wont thank you for the vote after polluting the planet with gratuitous air travel.
|
|
What could be more gratuitous air travel than shipping Ms Bennett here from Australia?
|
>> It's never been like this before. Usually a two-horse race, with a third horse panting
>> along behind.
>>
A bit like the 1890s - Conservatives, Liberals, Liberal Unionists, plus Irish Nationalists threatening to hold the balance of power and disrupt Westminster business unless they got Home Rule.
|
>> >>Bar the greens all much of a muchness.
>>
>> And all complete caca.
>>
>> Probably the only ones being practical and honest about their approach to immigration are the
>> Greens, and they're rubbish.
>>
The Greens - much of a mulchness!
|
I wonder why the greens are often ridiculed the way they are.
I suppose their ideas are something we aren't allowed to believe in.No more billions spend on weapons of mass destruction as the yanks would say.Cleaner envirioment and a fairer society for all.
Or is this all pi in the sky? Let's face there is no party capable of balancing the books if it is that what we want.
|
In a way the Greens are more honest. Work out what is sustainable and make that an objective.
What they haven't got is a realistic plan to get from here to there.
But neither have the others got a plan for anything sustainable. Their aims fit a world with unlimited resources and the implicit assumption is that to the extent that reality interferes (as it must) "something will turn up", Micawber-like.
|
>> I wonder why the greens are often ridiculed the way they are.
Read their manifesto completely and then ask yourself how they intend to pay for this fairer society especially as they intend to destroy industry and finance, tax the very rich till they leave - all the major sources of income they would need to carry out the policies.
They know they can't get elected to government, so they can spout stuff that does not add up.
And that is the pity because we need a holistic approach, but one that is pragmatic. The greens cock that up
Last edited by: Zero on Sat 18 Apr 15 at 20:22
|
i like the Greens in theory. But they are the biggest hypocrites because they KNOW their policies can only make people poorer but claim to make them better off. The others claim they will make people better off.. and at least they are serious about that whether their policies will in fact work.
As others above, a rush to extract all the world's resources is not a sustainable way to live on our planet - and don't talk about what price pressures do to farming practises.
|
Tony Benn's speech on an EU referendum back in 2007 but still relevant today:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0I-ZdvQz1o
|
its b*****. Its just Tony Benn being Tony Benn.
Dopt get me wrong, I like him because he is honest and sincere. He is however mentally scarred from his time in government when he realised that as a minister he had no power, and could do nothing because the civil service ran the country. From that moment he considered communism the only true way, not realising that communists are the worse form of eurocrats.
|
>>He is however mentally scarred from his time in government when he realised that as a minister he had no power, and could do nothing because the civil service ran the country. From that moment he considered communism the only true way, not realising that communists are the worse form of eurocrats.
Yes, we know all that guvnor, but the danger is that the EU is actually becoming more and more like a communist block IMO, and I don't want Great Britain to be a part of that thank you very much. A trading partner, yes, but not dictated to by some unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.
|
>> Yes, we know all that guvnor, but the danger is that the EU is actually
>> becoming more and more like a communist block IMO, and I don't want Great Britain
>> to be a part of that thank you very much. A trading partner, yes, but
>> not dictated to by some unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.
In the years to come, you are either part of a group, or you are mincemeat.
|
>>In the years to come, you are either part of a group, or you are mincemeat.
Your not wrong there. I too want Great Britain to be part of a group - a group of European trading nations (a common market) - exactly what we voted for back in 1975.
|
>> >>In the years to come, you are either part of a group, or you are
>> mincemeat.
>>
>> Your not wrong there. I too want Great Britain to be part of a group
>> - a group of European trading nations (a common market) - exactly what we voted
>> for back in 1975.
They might want us as mincemeat. You need to ask yourself why Nige has stopped spouting about Norway being the ideal scenario.
|
The UK has a population of nigh-on 65 million, with a GDP of $2.5 trillion (purchasing power)
Norway has a pop of just over 5 million, with a GDP of $353 billion, so you cant really compare the two.
|
|
you missed the point however Nothing I say will convince you so I wont bother.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 19 Apr 15 at 09:53
|
Zero and Westpig are not far apart in their actual outlook.
Chalk and cheese though, mischief on one side and a certain sort of gravitas standing in the line of fire.
Call it a draw. What my spade buddies in old-time Notting Hill used to call ten bob's worth of weed wrapped in newspaper or magazine paper.
|
>> Zero and Westpig are not far apart in their actual outlook.
>>
>> Chalk and cheese though, mischief on one side and a certain sort of gravitas standing
>> in the line of fire.
Your "mischief" is just attention seeking. He always has to have the last word. I expect he will have a go at me now.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Sun 19 Apr 15 at 20:09
|
>> Your "mischief" is just attention seeking. He always has to have the last word. I expect he will have a go at me now.
Oh God... when will it ever end? Don't you start ON you griping old-before-your-time matelot you.
A chap tries to inject a bit of reason into a thread, and what happens? A goddam torpedo, that's what. Tsk, one might almost say.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Sun 19 Apr 15 at 20:41
|
>> Your "mischief" is just attention seeking. He always has to have the last word. I
>> expect he will have a go at me now.
I wish to thank you. You have been trying to tell me all this time, and I have failed to see it.
All is clear to me now.
Its obvious, that by keep popping up to have a go at me (like some weird whack-a-mole game machine) its YOU that is seeking attention from me, and its pretty obvious (based on the way you keep going on about it) that its because you are vertically challenged and jealous of my superior stature.
So I apologise for being so dense, and will now seek to remedy the situation.
I shall ignore you short ass.
Good evening.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 19 Apr 15 at 20:47
|
>> I shall ignore you short ass.
Periscope envy?
|
>>
>> >> I shall ignore you short ass.
>>
>> Periscope envy?
He can't get it up. Tho it would explain his far away views.
|
|
The ideal size for a submariner is three feet tall with six foot arms. Or was before the introduction of nuclear powered floating hotels.
|
I don't think he was referring to YOUR height ON..........:)
Pat
|
|
This thread is a prime example of things that put me off reading forums...
|
>> This thread is a prime example of things that put me off reading forums...
And commenting on them it seems.
|
Just leave them to it, its not like you have to read it.
As far as I am concerned as long as there are some vestiges of comment in there it should be allowed to continue. Nobody is being hurt. Their stances are important.
|
There are simple rules for posting. Good manners and respect for the providers of the site should mean that they are adhered to.
It's not difficult.
|
>> I don't think he was referring to YOUR height ON..........:)
>>
>> Pat
>>
As you know I am more likely to bang my head on a door lintel than my a*** on a doorstep. :-)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 20 Apr 15 at 08:18
|
|
What a dismally boring election campaign so far. No entertaining clangers like last time and Mr Brown's 'bigot' comment. Two large parties neck and neck, the formation of the next Government will be down to the small parties, still saddled with a stupidly unfair electoral system. My initial feeling is not to vote for any of them, the problem is that with our cretinous electoral system such a policy allows fringe party nutcases into power.
|
>> Two large parties neck and neck, the formation of the next
>> Government will be down to the small parties, still saddled with a stupidly unfair electoral
>> system. My initial feeling is not to vote for any of them, the problem is
>> that with our cretinous electoral system such a policy allows fringe party nutcases into power.
>>
You're being a bit contradictory there, our FPTP is the system least likely to give fringe parties any influence at all.
|
Election Promises...Read all about it ! Volume 4. - No FM2R
