Sounds like the next series of Homelands could be worth watching.....
Off Topic Politics Thread
- Thread starter ChilcoSaint
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
And South Park. They are going to have a field day.
Trump's chief White House strategist told the Hollywood Reporter that he benefited from left-wing media outlets that labeled him as evil.
"Darkness is good," Bannon told the publication.
He added: "Dick Cheney, Darth Vader, Satan. That's power. It only helps us when they get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing."
http://www.businessinsider.com/steve...-vader-2016-11
On Sessions:
called Iraq war protesters unamerican.
- Constantly sought to have LGBTQ groups and clubs defunded at public universities solely due to their orientation, saying, in his own words
organization that professes to be comprised of homosexuals and/or lesbians may not receive state funding or use state-supported facilities to foster or promote those illegal, *1551 sexually deviate activities defined in the sodomy and sexual misconduct laws.
....
- Tried to get rid of any books on Islam being distributed to libraries as part of federal grants
- wholeheartedly supports civil forfeiture and is against any change to it.
- voted against banning torture.
- takes campaign donations from foreign corporations
Wtf
"Darkness is good," Bannon told the publication.
He added: "Dick Cheney, Darth Vader, Satan. That's power. It only helps us when they get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing."
http://www.businessinsider.com/steve...-vader-2016-11
On Sessions:
called Iraq war protesters unamerican.
- Constantly sought to have LGBTQ groups and clubs defunded at public universities solely due to their orientation, saying, in his own words
organization that professes to be comprised of homosexuals and/or lesbians may not receive state funding or use state-supported facilities to foster or promote those illegal, *1551 sexually deviate activities defined in the sodomy and sexual misconduct laws.
....
- Tried to get rid of any books on Islam being distributed to libraries as part of federal grants
- wholeheartedly supports civil forfeiture and is against any change to it.
- voted against banning torture.
- takes campaign donations from foreign corporations
Wtf
Last edited:
The combined impact of welfare cuts will leave struggling working families - the “just about managing” households Theresa May has vowed to help – worse off by more than £2,500 a year by 2020, according to research published days before her government’s first autumn statement.
A study of 187,000 households across the UK found that policies including cuts to universal credit and the four-year benefit rate freeze, coupled with rising rents and higher inflation, would see low-income working families typically lose £48.90 a week by the end of the decade.
The findings have alarmed councils and charities worried that the growing financial burden on low-income families will raise poverty and homelessness levels.
The research will increase the pressure on the chancellor, Philip Hammond, to offer some relief to the “just about managing” families – or “Jams” – in Wednesday’s autumn statement. He warned on Sunday that the government is facing a “sharp challenge” in the face of the Brexit vote, but indicated that there would be some limited relief for those who are struggling.
The prime minister will also announce tax breaks and an annual £2bn investment fund for research and development to big businesses on Monday – an offer likely to be criticised for failing to address welfare cuts. She will further woo big business by slashing corporation tax to the lowest level out of the world’s top 20 economies, according to reports.
On becoming prime minister in July, she promised to help “ordinary working class families” in a bold attempt to distance her from her predecessor’s austerity approach. She has confirmed there will be no fresh cuts to social security budgets in this parliament.
But the study, by the consultancy Policy in Practice, suggests that even after promising no more cuts the cumulative impact of the £12bn of welfare changes either already in place or due to come into force will be far harsher than that experienced by low-income households under the first wave of austerity-driven welfare cuts during David Cameron’s leadership.
The study is based on the financial circumstances of 187,475 households in 17 district, council and metropolitan borough councils in England, Scotland and Wales under a mix of political control.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-by-2020-study
400 died of starvation last year and it's meant to be close to 1000 this year. I can see the doubling at least. So disgusting this **** happens in this country.
A study of 187,000 households across the UK found that policies including cuts to universal credit and the four-year benefit rate freeze, coupled with rising rents and higher inflation, would see low-income working families typically lose £48.90 a week by the end of the decade.
The findings have alarmed councils and charities worried that the growing financial burden on low-income families will raise poverty and homelessness levels.
The research will increase the pressure on the chancellor, Philip Hammond, to offer some relief to the “just about managing” families – or “Jams” – in Wednesday’s autumn statement. He warned on Sunday that the government is facing a “sharp challenge” in the face of the Brexit vote, but indicated that there would be some limited relief for those who are struggling.
The prime minister will also announce tax breaks and an annual £2bn investment fund for research and development to big businesses on Monday – an offer likely to be criticised for failing to address welfare cuts. She will further woo big business by slashing corporation tax to the lowest level out of the world’s top 20 economies, according to reports.
On becoming prime minister in July, she promised to help “ordinary working class families” in a bold attempt to distance her from her predecessor’s austerity approach. She has confirmed there will be no fresh cuts to social security budgets in this parliament.
But the study, by the consultancy Policy in Practice, suggests that even after promising no more cuts the cumulative impact of the £12bn of welfare changes either already in place or due to come into force will be far harsher than that experienced by low-income households under the first wave of austerity-driven welfare cuts during David Cameron’s leadership.
The study is based on the financial circumstances of 187,475 households in 17 district, council and metropolitan borough councils in England, Scotland and Wales under a mix of political control.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-by-2020-study
400 died of starvation last year and it's meant to be close to 1000 this year. I can see the doubling at least. So disgusting this **** happens in this country.
Trump Picks Climate Skeptic Jeff Sessions to Enforce Environmental
Full article here
Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, whom President-elect Donald Trump put forward Friday as his choice for attorney general, has questioned mainstream science on man-made climate change and attacked U.S. EPA for regulatory outreach.
It’s a sign, activists say, that he would likely back Trump’s promises to roll back President Obama’s climate policies.
The Department of Justice is not as high-profile on climate issues as EPA. But Sessions, if confirmed, could shape how the Trump administration defends and enforces environmental laws. In the Senate, Sessions has been a powerful critic of greenhouse gas regulations, calling the underlying climate science “deliberate misinformation.”
“I don’t know we know enough now to answer this question conclusively either way, but there’s been a lot of exaggeration, there’s been a lot of hype, and people are feeling the crunch already in their electric bills ... in our effort to stop storms that don’t seem to be going down, or to stop temperatures that don’t seem to be rising,” he said in a 2014 Senate floor speech.
A U.S. prosecutor and attorney general in Alabama before being elected to the Senate in 1996, Sessions serves on the Judiciary Committee and the Environment and Public Works Committee. Accusations of racism during Sessions’ tenure as a prosecutor derailed a 1986 nomination for a federal judgeship, and he once again faces intense scrutiny from civil rights groups fearful about the protection of minority rights under the Trump administration.
But his views on climate change have also stoked concern among environmentalists, who have previously counted on the Obama administration’s Justice Department to uphold agencies’ climate rules and go after energy companies for wrongdoing.
The League of Conservation Voters gave Sessions a lifetime score of 7 percent. He has received nearly $400,000 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry over the course of his Senate career, according to the OpenSecrets.org campaign finance database. He has repeatedly voted in favor of expanding drilling and energy production, a review of his record shows.
Guy sounds insane. There goes climate control.
Full article here
Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, whom President-elect Donald Trump put forward Friday as his choice for attorney general, has questioned mainstream science on man-made climate change and attacked U.S. EPA for regulatory outreach.
It’s a sign, activists say, that he would likely back Trump’s promises to roll back President Obama’s climate policies.
The Department of Justice is not as high-profile on climate issues as EPA. But Sessions, if confirmed, could shape how the Trump administration defends and enforces environmental laws. In the Senate, Sessions has been a powerful critic of greenhouse gas regulations, calling the underlying climate science “deliberate misinformation.”
“I don’t know we know enough now to answer this question conclusively either way, but there’s been a lot of exaggeration, there’s been a lot of hype, and people are feeling the crunch already in their electric bills ... in our effort to stop storms that don’t seem to be going down, or to stop temperatures that don’t seem to be rising,” he said in a 2014 Senate floor speech.
A U.S. prosecutor and attorney general in Alabama before being elected to the Senate in 1996, Sessions serves on the Judiciary Committee and the Environment and Public Works Committee. Accusations of racism during Sessions’ tenure as a prosecutor derailed a 1986 nomination for a federal judgeship, and he once again faces intense scrutiny from civil rights groups fearful about the protection of minority rights under the Trump administration.
But his views on climate change have also stoked concern among environmentalists, who have previously counted on the Obama administration’s Justice Department to uphold agencies’ climate rules and go after energy companies for wrongdoing.
The League of Conservation Voters gave Sessions a lifetime score of 7 percent. He has received nearly $400,000 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry over the course of his Senate career, according to the OpenSecrets.org campaign finance database. He has repeatedly voted in favor of expanding drilling and energy production, a review of his record shows.
Guy sounds insane. There goes climate control.
Trump speaks publicly about policy ideas for the first time.
You must log in or register to see media
it really annoys me when some mention the cost of national buildings or the building of a new Royal Yacht. Buckingham Palace will cost 370 million over 10 years (will probably go up) costing each person 7 pounds over 10 years. Most of this money is to pay hundreds of skilled workers and keep them employed for 10 years, same for the workers building the new Brittania. Pretty sure most on here would not begrudge paying a pound a year if it went to keeping hundreds employed
a Hispanic attacks a black student with a glue gun and they still manage to get get in a line about trump, probably if it was a real gun it would not have even made the news
I have nothing against the builders that will work on it and that is pretty obvious. I have everything against the Royals being millionaires yet don't see fit to cough up some cash. If it was just a national building were people could go and see and walk around etc I would have no issue.
Many hispanics actually deem themselves as white in America. Since Trump was elected racist attacks have gone up like crazy.
Last edited:
Does sound like those builders are taking everyone for a ride though. 379 mill for a rewiring job? I know a couple of sparkies, may be able to help them out.
The Royals can afford to pay for their own home improvements imo. Did this get debated in parliament, or just rubber stamped I wonder?
A spokesman for Number 10 said that there was "no vacancy for an ambassador to the United States".
Regarding the cost of renovating Buck House, I read an "article" on Facebook, yesterday (haven't been able to find it this morning), that claims the Queen donates 80% of all monies gained through the Crown Estates/businesses to the country.
I don't know the validity of the comment, but if true it throws a different light on the topic, as it would appear she is contributing more to the coffers than one would expect. Potentially more than the cost of the renovations.
I don't know the validity of the comment, but if true it throws a different light on the topic, as it would appear she is contributing more to the coffers than one would expect. Potentially more than the cost of the renovations.
http://metro.co.uk/2016/04/21/this-is-how-much-the-queen-actually-costs-us-5827257/
This article suggests she generates far more income than she costs.
Out of curiosity has anyone been in Buckingham Palace? I wouldn't mind a nose about.
I have, with work. But I only got as far as the post room, next to the guard block. Didn't get a chance to nose about, but I met the postman who delivered the internal mail and had the run of the place, more or less.
He had a few good stories, including the time he was at Balmoral, where everything is a lot less formal, and said "excuse me love" as he squeezed past a lady in a tatty coat who he thought was a housekeeper; she wasn't a housekeeper.
Presidents don't come cheap either. I'm sure I read somewhere that the Obamas cost the US over a billion a year. Presumably most First Families cost about the same. I think that included high costs for some pretty frivolous things. The cinema in the White House, that sort of thing. Then you have the cost of Secret Service protection for former presidents, pensions etc. It all adds up.
