Immigration...the ex-Eastern bloc says no.
14 September 2015, 11:28 PM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 September 2015, 09:46 AM
#33
I know it's possible to pick holes in any argument, but I believe the damage done during the '97- Labour term will have repercussions for many years to come. Governments should not be allowed to borrow vast sums to meet their election promises, then leave future governments, not to mention taxpayers, in a really **** situation.
15 September 2015, 10:10 AM
#35
You demonstrate perfectly one of the issues we are up against here - people have been force-fed liberal ideologies so much that anything 'right wing' is considered to be the Third Reich reborn. It doesn't help having the state-run broadcaster forcing a liberal viewpoint down everyones throats I guess, but right wing does not mean putting crazy policies into force like 'deport everyone who looks a bit foreign'.
15 September 2015, 10:35 AM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well its easy to point out the problem. If we look at post '97 when Labour came into power they firstly opened up the flood gates to massive immigration from developing countries such as Pakistan and Bangladesh allowing hundreds of thousands to settle in the UK who are in the most part dependant on government (and thus majority Labour voters, cementing future re-election prospects). This was funded by hugely irresponsible policies such as selling off 1/3 of the UK's gold reserves when gold prices were extremely low, borrowing vast sums and also putting huge future pressure on future tax payers with staggering amounts of government jobs being created with unfunded final salary pensions (i.e. when they retire there is no 'fund' to pay these pensions, the liability is on tax payers - these liabilities may not even be possible to meet).
What should we have done? Well they should not have sold off gold reserves when prices were so low, they should not have borrowed huge sums and put such crippling future liabilities on future tax payers. Skilled immigration should have been encouraged, especially to those in the right demographic (probably targeting countries where there are 'cheap' skilled workers that integrate and are less likely to become state dependant - India, China, Eastern Europe).
I know it's possible to pick holes in any argument, but I believe the damage done during the '97- Labour term will have repercussions for many years to come. Governments should not be allowed to borrow vast sums to meet their election promises, then leave future governments, not to mention taxpayers, in a really **** situation.
We need to get things onto a stable and sustainable economic and social footing ASAP, or people are going to experience situations in the UK that would have seemed unimaginable since the end of WW2.
What should we have done? Well they should not have sold off gold reserves when prices were so low, they should not have borrowed huge sums and put such crippling future liabilities on future tax payers. Skilled immigration should have been encouraged, especially to those in the right demographic (probably targeting countries where there are 'cheap' skilled workers that integrate and are less likely to become state dependant - India, China, Eastern Europe).
I know it's possible to pick holes in any argument, but I believe the damage done during the '97- Labour term will have repercussions for many years to come. Governments should not be allowed to borrow vast sums to meet their election promises, then leave future governments, not to mention taxpayers, in a really **** situation.
We need to get things onto a stable and sustainable economic and social footing ASAP, or people are going to experience situations in the UK that would have seemed unimaginable since the end of WW2.
And on the infamous and often (deliberately) misunderstood 'gold reserves sell off'...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/...s-gold-5614853
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5788dbac-7...#axzz3lnYseUlU
15 September 2015, 10:38 AM
#37
Scooby Regular
The BBC, who I assume you are referring to, is not 'state run'. That's the whole point of it. Successive governments, both Labour and Conservative, are always complaining that the BBC is biased against them. Corbyn's campaign people complained about the BBC's perceived 'hatchet job' on the Panorama programme. And a lot of Alcazar's posts are extremely right wing, and do indeed smack of Third Reich reborn. Prosecute the media and people with left-wing views for treason? In a democracy? Really? Many members of my family were killed in ww2 to protect us from this sort of doctrine.
as a reliable source of news seriously
the MSM including the BBC are not perfect and have faults, but jeez at least they try
15 September 2015, 11:17 AM
#38
[QUOTE=DYK;11736976.I see the refugees in Germany are waving the ISIS flags.[/QUOTE]
Old photo from a demonstration in Bonn a few years ago, and not an isis flag. A lie, in simple terms, propaganda in the time honoured style of Goebbels.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...=facebook-post
Old photo from a demonstration in Bonn a few years ago, and not an isis flag. A lie, in simple terms, propaganda in the time honoured style of Goebbels.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...=facebook-post
15 September 2015, 01:15 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
And on the infamous and often (deliberately) misunderstood 'gold reserves sell off'...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/...s-gold-5614853
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5788dbac-7...#axzz3lnYseUlU
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/...s-gold-5614853
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5788dbac-7...#axzz3lnYseUlU
I like this from the FT
"For most governments in rich countries, holding gold remains a largely pointless activity."
which is soo true - obviously tin pot African dictatorships do need gold reserves, but not modern, investment led economies
I also seem to remember that he got a very good dollar exchange rate too
15 September 2015, 02:33 PM
#41
The BBC, who I assume you are referring to, is not 'state run'. That's the whole point of it. Successive governments, both Labour and Conservative, are always complaining that the BBC is biased against them. Corbyn's campaign people complained about the BBC's perceived 'hatchet job' on the Panorama programme. And a lot of Alcazar's posts are extremely right wing, and do indeed smack of Third Reich reborn. Prosecute the media and people with left-wing views for treason? In a democracy? Really? Many members of my family were killed in ww2 to protect us from this sort of doctrine.
And when those jihadists have carried out a few attacks, killed a few hundred, no-one is responsible, no-one takes responsibility?
Really???????
15 September 2015, 04:17 PM
#42
So basically you are saying that it's OK for the Beeb to present such a biased view that the sheep in this country condone us letting in a few jihadists, yes?
And when those jihadists have carried out a few attacks, killed a few hundred, no-one is responsible, no-one takes responsibility?
Really???????
And when those jihadists have carried out a few attacks, killed a few hundred, no-one is responsible, no-one takes responsibility?
Really???????
15 September 2015, 06:12 PM
#44
And a lot of Alcazar's posts are extremely right wing, and do indeed smack of Third Reich reborn. Prosecute the media and people with left-wing views for treason? In a democracy? Really?
Are you serious? I hope you feel the same way if you and yours get involved in some loony jihadist's attack.
15 September 2015, 07:40 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Pottering around ...
Posts: 3,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone on here who doesn't share these right wing views are labelled loony left wing liberals,some of my family members also died fighting Hitlers fascism in WW2.
Show some respect to those that fell to make the world a better place ....
Show some respect to those that fell to make the world a better place ....
16 September 2015, 04:48 PM
#52
And the guys that were the alleged perpetrators of the 9/11 atrocity flew into JFK with full documentation. They didn't have to swim across the Rio Grande from Mexico, disguised as Mexican immigrants, because they're a little bit more organised than that.
16 September 2015, 05:14 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
16 September 2015, 06:19 PM
#55
And neither of you has yet answered the question.
FACT: the media has slanted the reporting and hidden stuff in order to give a biased picture of what's happening.
FACT: this has resulted in a wave of sympathy for what are, in effect, and in majority,economic migrants.
FACT: ISIS promised this last spring to have thousands of trained Jihadists in Europe this year.
FACT: some of those previously spotted as ISIS fighters have been recognised as "refugees".
FACT: the biased media reporting has led to European countries spreading their doors wide to accept migrants, no checks, no details, just welcome.
Now, I ask again:
Do you, or do you not condone the media's behaviour in this, and will you still be as laid back if and when attacks begin?
No ducking it, no more insults to me, (which are like water off a duck's back anyway), no more prevaricating, just answer those two simple questions, yes or no.
If the answer is yes, you are part of the problem.
If the answer is no, then what SHOULD be done about the media?
And if you can't, or won't answer, you are cowards of the first order, hiding behind snide insults to me.
As for Martin, that's just a further example of your way of arguing: insult the poster, don't post any arguments, just insult people. sad really, but there you are, laid bare again
FACT: the media has slanted the reporting and hidden stuff in order to give a biased picture of what's happening.
FACT: this has resulted in a wave of sympathy for what are, in effect, and in majority,economic migrants.
FACT: ISIS promised this last spring to have thousands of trained Jihadists in Europe this year.
FACT: some of those previously spotted as ISIS fighters have been recognised as "refugees".
FACT: the biased media reporting has led to European countries spreading their doors wide to accept migrants, no checks, no details, just welcome.
Now, I ask again:
Do you, or do you not condone the media's behaviour in this, and will you still be as laid back if and when attacks begin?
No ducking it, no more insults to me, (which are like water off a duck's back anyway), no more prevaricating, just answer those two simple questions, yes or no.
If the answer is yes, you are part of the problem.
If the answer is no, then what SHOULD be done about the media?
And if you can't, or won't answer, you are cowards of the first order, hiding behind snide insults to me.
As for Martin, that's just a further example of your way of arguing: insult the poster, don't post any arguments, just insult people. sad really, but there you are, laid bare again
Last edited by alcazar; 16 September 2015 at 06:21 PM.
16 September 2015, 06:31 PM
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And neither of you has yet answered the question.
FACT: the media has slanted the reporting and hidden stuff in order to give a biased picture of what's happening.
FACT: this has resulted in a wave of sympathy for what are, in effect, and in majority,economic migrants.
FACT: ISIS promised this last spring to have thousands of trained Jihadists in Europe this year.
FACT: some of those previously spotted as ISIS fighters have been recognised as "refugees".
FACT: the biased media reporting has led to European countries spreading their doors wide to accept migrants, no checks, no details, just welcome.
Now, I ask again:
Do you, or do you not condone the media's behaviour in this, and will you still be as laid back if and when attacks begin?
No ducking it, no more insults to me, (which are like water off a duck's back anyway), no more prevaricating, just answer those two simple questions, yes or no.
If the answer is yes, you are part of the problem.
If the answer is no, then what SHOULD be done about the media?
And if you can't, or won't answer, you are cowards of the first order, hiding behind snide insults to me.
As for Martin, that's just a further example of your way of arguing: insult the poster, don't post any arguments, just insult people. sad really, but there you are, laid bare again
FACT: the media has slanted the reporting and hidden stuff in order to give a biased picture of what's happening.
FACT: this has resulted in a wave of sympathy for what are, in effect, and in majority,economic migrants.
FACT: ISIS promised this last spring to have thousands of trained Jihadists in Europe this year.
FACT: some of those previously spotted as ISIS fighters have been recognised as "refugees".
FACT: the biased media reporting has led to European countries spreading their doors wide to accept migrants, no checks, no details, just welcome.
Now, I ask again:
Do you, or do you not condone the media's behaviour in this, and will you still be as laid back if and when attacks begin?
No ducking it, no more insults to me, (which are like water off a duck's back anyway), no more prevaricating, just answer those two simple questions, yes or no.
If the answer is yes, you are part of the problem.
If the answer is no, then what SHOULD be done about the media?
And if you can't, or won't answer, you are cowards of the first order, hiding behind snide insults to me.
As for Martin, that's just a further example of your way of arguing: insult the poster, don't post any arguments, just insult people. sad really, but there you are, laid bare again
Everytime your irrational nonsense gets shown for what it is you just become even more irrational and make even dafter claims.
If all the above points are 'FACTS' then please provide the evidence/smoking gun that proves them.
Answer me this, why would all the media and all the journalist want to cover-up what would be a huge story?
Maybe Murdock and co. are now fully paid up members of ISIS?
Maybe, just maybe the media aren't reporting what you believe because it largely nonsense
Last edited by Martin2005; 16 September 2015 at 06:59 PM.
16 September 2015, 06:54 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Pottering around ...
Posts: 3,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And neither of you has yet answered the question.
FACT: the media has slanted the reporting and hidden stuff in order to give a biased picture of what's happening.
FACT: this has resulted in a wave of sympathy for what are, in effect, and in majority,economic migrants.
FACT: ISIS promised this last spring to have thousands of trained Jihadists in Europe this year.
FACT: some of those previously spotted as ISIS fighters have been recognised as "refugees".
FACT: the biased media reporting has led to European countries spreading their doors wide to accept migrants, no checks, no details, just welcome.
Now, I ask again:
Do you, or do you not condone the media's behaviour in this, and will you still be as laid back if and when attacks begin?
No ducking it, no more insults to me, (which are like water off a duck's back anyway), no more prevaricating, just answer those two simple questions, yes or no.
If the answer is yes, you are part of the problem.
If the answer is no, then what SHOULD be done about the media?
And if you can't, or won't answer, you are cowards of the first order, hiding behind snide insults to me.
As for Martin, that's just a further example of your way of arguing: insult the poster, don't post any arguments, just insult people. sad really, but there you are, laid bare again
FACT: the media has slanted the reporting and hidden stuff in order to give a biased picture of what's happening.
FACT: this has resulted in a wave of sympathy for what are, in effect, and in majority,economic migrants.
FACT: ISIS promised this last spring to have thousands of trained Jihadists in Europe this year.
FACT: some of those previously spotted as ISIS fighters have been recognised as "refugees".
FACT: the biased media reporting has led to European countries spreading their doors wide to accept migrants, no checks, no details, just welcome.
Now, I ask again:
Do you, or do you not condone the media's behaviour in this, and will you still be as laid back if and when attacks begin?
No ducking it, no more insults to me, (which are like water off a duck's back anyway), no more prevaricating, just answer those two simple questions, yes or no.
If the answer is yes, you are part of the problem.
If the answer is no, then what SHOULD be done about the media?
And if you can't, or won't answer, you are cowards of the first order, hiding behind snide insults to me.
As for Martin, that's just a further example of your way of arguing: insult the poster, don't post any arguments, just insult people. sad really, but there you are, laid bare again
My answer is NO,I don't remember insulting you .....As far as I know there is a broadcasting complaints commission ...