Off Topic Politics Thread

Maybe if they were given the EU loan that Osborne (part of the ECB) signed off then maybe they would! There was a lot more to that Ford transfer from Southampton to Turkey than the public see.

 

You haven't read my post. I said the left and the right not just the left. And the rest of my post was about how the left and right (that are actually vocal or heard or have influence) are quite happy to jump on those "extremes" (which you quite rightly state they are) because it suits their cause to oppose.

My whole post is that most of the left and most of the right are probably much more sympathetic to both sides of the "argument" on these things whereas the portrayal we get in the media and by politicians of all sides is of supporting those extreme viewpoints. And then that is portrayed as what "people think."

Tory and Labour moderates are quite happy to jump behind the viewpoint of the other side trying to defend state/private ownership and thus they don't even try (because they are now hemmed in) to try and see the good and the bad.

 

sadly not, looked them up unless you can find different

 

Interesting hearing an “expert” going head to head with an ardent Brexiteer who has no facts to back him up .... worthwhile listening in my opinion

 

Error

 

I did read your post but misunderstood.

I was also going to say that I don't believe many on the right believe you should privatise everything and then realised that virtually everything had already been privatised and hence in this regard the new 'centre' is now rather to the right of the old centre.

You said a lot of things and I was struggling to form my response into a coherent whole so I gave it a shot and then hit the button

I think the confusion for me was over who 'the left' and 'the right' are. These labels are a bit general and these could describe any number of different groups given the differing views in both major parties. I now understand that you were describing more extreme factions but I don't think that helps as they will always be supporting extreme views and unless we share those views surely we should be discussing more moderate options available.

Which brings us back (maybe) to the mixed economy. A high level of Government control (on behalf of the people) over essential services and less control over commercial provision of other stuff. But what's 'essential' and what isn't how much control is needed over each? Generally government has rolled back control and we can see the adverse affects of that so how do we regain control so public and private sectors are somehow more accountable to the greater good? The old commercial ideal that competition results in the best products and services may work at a local level but once organisations get bigger all sorts of other factors come into play.

I could go on but this post is long enough already ... we live in a complicated world and now's the time to return to the simpler of pleasures of MATCH DAY

 

haha i had a good listen. thought the remainer went a bit overboard about the overspend (as remain has way higher spend thanks to the government). Was pretty funny though about the rules surrounding the CETA and the Japan deals about restricting the UK's ability to deal with these two countries. The leaver was stunned and had no response haha

 

75% of immigrants are on welfare? What in the world makes you think that could ever make sense? If you look d that up, perhaps you need to try looking at some better sources.

Also, you realize that states like CA set their own state taxes and state welfare benefits, right? So if that’s what they want to do, it has nothing to do with Trump or any other President.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45299309

Papers across the political spectrum in Europe foresee the consequences of a "no-deal" Brexit. I hope Raab´s purpose of sending out reports about a "no-deal" is to rein in the nutjobs like JRM, Johnson, Royston Smith, Suella Fernandes, Bone, Redwood, and Cash. If there is insufficient cross-party support for the Chequers deal, perhaps Mrs May has two posible options left. One to ask for an extensión to the 29 March 2019 deadline or, put her Premiership on the line, call off Brexit in its entirety, and form a National Government, leaving rump Conservative and Labour parties wallowing in their mire. I am prepared to think it will be the former.

 

https://www.politifact.com/californ...-percent-immigrants-california-welfare-s-exa/

Summary ...

Cortes said, "We have right now … in the state of California, 55 percent of all immigrants are on public assistance."

That’s true of households but not individual immigrants, in 2012, a study found. The Current Population Survey found a lower amount, that 41 percent of immigrant households in California relied on welfare.

Government assistance is broadly defined to include school lunch and Medicaid. The discrepancy in what may ordinarily be considered welfare, like cash and housing assistance, was much lower between native and immigrant households in California.

In the absence of clearer definitions of public assistance and the distinction between immigrants and immigrant households, Cortes’ claim exaggerates immigrants’ drain on public coffers.

 

That was a good listen.
Yet again it shows just how little people really understand about the difficulties of leaving the EU, and shows that some will just continue to bluster their way forward, just as was done in the beginning, with the falsehoods that convinced some that leaving would be easy and beneficial.
People say it wouldn’t be democratic to hold a second vote. Why? Why, now that people have more awareness of the lies and the truths, would it be undemocratic to have a second vote?
Changing our mind about which political party rules the country is a democratic right we exercise at the polls. Or is that considered different?

 

"Leave" has become a faith-based religion. It'll all be just fine.

please log in to view this image

Vin

 

Wonga

http://newsthump.com/2018/08/27/won...r-accidentally-borrowing-a-fiver-from-itself/

 

As Brexit looms here's a great old song from 1915 to remind us of the good old days:

Goodbye-ee, goodbye-ee,
Wipe the tear, baby dear, from your eye-ee,
Tho’ it’s hard to part I know,
I’ll be tickled to death to go.
Don’t cry-ee, dont sigh-ee,
There’s a silver lining in the sky-ee,
Bonsoir, old thing, cheerio, chin, chin,
Nah-poo, toodle-oo, Goodbye-ee.

Anyone know the origins of chin, chin, Nah-poo, or toodle-oo? (or toodle pip for that matter?)

(I've checked the lyrics @ChilcoSaint - nothing too not P.C.)

 

“Nah-poo” is a corruption of the French “il n’y a plus” meaning “there is no more”.
“Chin chin” is an old way of saying “cheers” or “good health”, as in “keep your chin up”.
“Toodle-oo” derives from “toddle” and basically means “off I go”. Toodle-pip is a variation.

 

on the ball or what!

 

I've never met a woman who couldn't dance, just a little bit

 

By that definition 100% of native UK residents would be on welfare due to receiving state healthcare, less for immigrants due to them often not being eligible.

% on welfare is pointless to an argument saying 100% should be as like above it would invariably swing that the other way anyway.

Should be asking what % are working and contributing to GDP as thats a better benchmark than wages or welfare as income isn't equivalent to how much work you're doing that benefits the country.

A boss that employs 10 immigrants and pays them a small amount and pays himself a big amount. He may pay more tax on a universal system than his employee's but the only reason he can pay that tax is because of the people under him, otherwise he wouldn't have that money to tax and would need welfare himself. So saying those immigrants are a drain is incorrect.

 

Sorry, its not 75%, USA Today has it down as 76%
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/09/01/immigrant-welfare-use-report/71517072/