• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

Please say this isn't so..please.

Started by Yorkshire pud, March 23, 2013, 08:41:51 AM

Yorkshire pud




I'm the first to acknowledge that the Daily Wail <sic> is a tabloid piece of trash--Alex Jones has stated on air he thinks it a highly respected national newspaper; What he probably doesn't know (or care about), is it's probably the most sued newspaper in the UK. Has no real ethical motivation-it would take far too long to explain why and how.


But; the following was mentioned this morning in the newspaper review on the breakfast news here in the UK. Now, shooting a lion unless he was imminent danger I see as pointless, and cruel. I'm not a vegetarian, and firmly believe (as he seems to have done) you should be prepared to eat what you kill (if it's purely for 'sport'), Culling and removing sick/dangerous animals I can see the logic in and not eating..


So what are my misgivings? I'm aware that tabloids spin stories like a top; and I take that on board: BUT, does he really believe the world was made in six days? That any belief to the contrary is from hell? That being the case how the hell was he elected to a position that influences your legislature? Doesn't it scare you?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2297414/Paul-Broun-Tea-party-congressman-killed-ate-LION-safari-hunt.html


Quote from: Yorkshire pud on March 23, 2013, 08:41:51 AM


I'm the first to acknowledge that the Daily Wail <sic> is a tabloid piece of trash--Alex Jones has stated on air he thinks it a highly respected national newspaper; What he probably doesn't know (or care about), is it's probably the most sued newspaper in the UK. Has no real ethical motivation-it would take far too long to explain why and how.


But; the following was mentioned this morning in the newspaper review on the breakfast news here in the UK. Now, shooting a lion unless he was imminent danger I see as pointless, and cruel. I'm not a vegetarian, and firmly believe (as he seems to have done) you should be prepared to eat what you kill (if it's purely for 'sport'), Culling and removing sick/dangerous animals I can see the logic in and not eating..


So what are my misgivings? I'm aware that tabloids spin stories like a top; and I take that on board: BUT, does he really believe the world was made in six days? That any belief to the contrary is from hell? That being the case how the hell was he elected to a position that influences your legislature? Doesn't it scare you?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2297414/Paul-Broun-Tea-party-congressman-killed-ate-LION-safari-hunt.html

On behalf of we colonists, I do apologize.  It seems that in America (probably everywhere, really), you can say just about anything and be taken seriously as long as you say it with the right attitude and conviction.  Repeat a lie until it becomes the truth.

Of course, more to the point, biblical literalists are simply running with the herd.  They've been indoctrinated.  Some of them will no doubt argue that they've reached their opinions after much considered reason.  We can all piss and moan about it (do you use that expression in the U.K.?) or we can live and let live.  I think American rocker Frank Zappa said something like, "Stupid isn't going away.  You have to make it work for you."

By the way, is there a consensus favorite incarnation of Dr. Who in England?  I only joined the show when Christopher Eccleston took over.  My family definitely prefers the David Tennant version.  The new guy could sell advertising space on tht forehead.  That ain't a forehead -- it's a fivehead!

Ican point to any number of jackasses, criminals, idiots, and perverts holding high office in the D party, but they are given a free pass because they 'vote right'.

This is just another double standard

Yorkshire pud

Quote from: West of the Rockies on March 23, 2013, 11:49:28 AM
On behalf of we colonists, I do apologize.  It seems that in America (probably everywhere, really), you can say just about anything and be taken seriously as long as you say it with the right attitude and conviction.  Repeat a lie until it becomes the truth.




Ha ha! I have an acquaintance, an aerospace engineer who frequents the US and he refers to it as 'the colony'..but I digress. You're quite right of course, a lie only has legs because it's made into the received wisdom


Quote

Of course, more to the point, biblical literalists are simply running with the herd.  They've been indoctrinated.  Some of them will no doubt argue that they've reached their opinions after much considered reason.  We can all piss and moan about it (do you use that expression in the U.K.?) or we can live and let live.  I think American rocker Frank Zappa said something like, "Stupid isn't going away.  You have to make it work for you."

Now, indulge me on this: I've asked several people and even in these environs, but whereas in the UK, politics and religion don't EVER mix, it seems compulsory in the USA you can't be in politics and taken seriously unless you also speak to your deity or he/she speaks too you.. Why is that? It seems to me that the Pied Piper could waltz into town and as long he was naturalised US, and placed 'god' in well received places of his speeches he'd have a chance..The one that I cringe at (and I can tell you we would if it were used for the UK, or it's constituent countries and principalities) is 'God bless America'.. Where does that leave the atheists or non christians? To me it's a cop out, a reason to say 'nothing to do with me, it's gods will'. Doesn't anyone think it toe curling?

Quote
By the way, is there a consensus favorite incarnation of Dr. Who in England?  I only joined the show when Christopher Eccleston took over.  My family definitely prefers the David Tennant version.  The new guy could sell advertising space on tht forehead.  That ain't a forehead -- it's a fivehead!


Wasn't a big fan oof Dr Who I'm afraid, but when Patrick Trouten and John Pertwee were the doctors I used to hide when the cyber men (with their cardboard tube heads!) were on..Darleks didn't bother me.. I've no idea who is next placed. Rumour has it he could be a she....... ;)

Yorkshire pud

Quote from: Paper*Boy on March 23, 2013, 12:36:18 PM
Ican point to any number of jackasses, criminals, idiots, and perverts holding high office in the D party, but they are given a free pass because they 'vote right'.

This is just another double standard


This isn't about republicans or democrats; it's about how anyone in high office can seriously think the earth is only 9000 years old, was made in six days and expect to be taken seriously? These people meet politicians from other countries and no doubt use choice adjectives on those same politicians as to their mental health.
It's not a crime to be a jackass at times; we all have been/will be; What is dangerous, is this guy makes YOUR laws, affecting you and your family, and his prime motivator is religion, and his belief contrary to all serious scientific findings. If he was a criminal he should be reported, the same as any other politician.

Quote from: Paper*Boy on March 23, 2013, 12:36:18 PM
Ican point to any number of jackasses, criminals, idiots, and perverts holding high office in the D party, but they are given a free pass because they 'vote right'.

This is just another double standard

Hi, Paper Boy... I agree with you completely that there are plenty of turds in the punchbowl of Democratic politics.  There are some folks I admire and respect, and others who I wish would shut up, go away, and maybe devote themselves to a little learning.  I think that politics are like everything else.  I know that when I was in law enforcement, there were officers I truly respected; there were others who were not such good human beings.  I know teachers who are dedicated and competent.  I've known others who I wish were out of the profession.  Life, eh?

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on March 23, 2013, 12:52:47 PM

This isn't about republicans or democrats; it's about how anyone in high office can seriously think the earth is only 9000 years old, was made in six days and expect to be taken seriously? These people meet politicians from other countries and no doubt use choice adjectives on those same politicians as to their mental health.
It's not a crime to be a jackass at times; we all have been/will be; What is dangerous, is this guy makes YOUR laws, affecting you and your family, and his prime motivator is religion, and his belief contrary to all serious scientific findings. If he was a criminal he should be reported, the same as any other politician.

I can't really defend the idea the earth is 6000 years old, I think I mentioned awhile back I grew up in a Protestant Christian environment and never met anyone who thought that - maybe they do in a different part of the country (Texas, the South?). 

I will say I don't buy into the 'man-made' portion of the  global cooling global warming global change hysteria - certainly not after the East Anglia shenagans were revealed, lied about, and covered up.  And no, I don't want to re-argue that for the 3rd or 4th time on the forum, but here's a sample:  the other planets were also warming up at a similar rate, there has been no continued warming trend now for the past 10 years or so, what kind of movement is it anyway when the chief spokesman is perhaps the biggest political hack in our lifetime - Al Gore.

Anyway - if the choice is between someone that believes the earth is 6000 years old but is against more spending, more taxes, and is strong on foreign policy, I'd prefer that to a tax-and-spender that got all A's in high school science.

lonevoice

Quote from: Paper*Boy on March 23, 2013, 12:36:18 PM
Ican point to any number of jackasses, criminals, idiots, and perverts holding high office in the D party, but they are given a free pass because they 'vote right'.

This is just another double standard

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2297618/Massachusetts-lawmaker-took-pictures-genitals-female-coworkers-computer.html#ixzz2OIosmKrb

Here's my favorite one from the past few days.   On the same day that the state's politicians underwent ethics training, Massachusetts state representative John Fresolo (D-Mass) was accused of taking pictures of his genitals and emailing them to a female coworker.

Not his first brush with the law, in 2005 he reportedly physically abused his then-13-year-old daughter.  In 1996 he was arrested for beating his then-wife.

But he keeps getting re-elected.

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on March 23, 2013, 12:44:54 PM
... Now, indulge me on this: I've asked several people and even in these environs, but whereas in the UK, politics and religion don't EVER mix, it seems compulsory in the USA you can't be in politics and taken seriously unless you also speak to your deity or he/she speaks too you.. Why is that?...

I thought you realized awhile back that some of your perceptions about the US were not completely accurate.  I also thought you had received a responce to your question about religion.  Maybe it didn't resonate, or maybe you are just still fixated on it, but let me try again.

Most people in the US claim to be somewhat religious.  Most aren't all that devout, or even attend church, but many are and do.  So given that a politician - especially in a 2 party system - must reach out to the largest portion of voters, and alienate the fewest, it helps to pay lip service to many things including religion and doing so doesn't hurt them.  Whether they go to church or not and regardless of the intensity of their devotion.

Very few of these politicians are truly religious.  Do you really believe Nancy Pelosi is a strong Catholic?  Or Obama a Bible thumping Christian?  The Christian, Catholic and Jewish Ds mostly support abortion for example - unless the constituents in their districts very strongly do not.  There are a few Protestant Christian Tea Party types among the Rs, but not all that many - they tend to represent the Bible Belt pockets.  But votes on Biblical issues don't really come up all that often - it really is about taxes, spending, deficits.  Even social issues are more about arguing than passing legislation.  But so what if the religious representatives do vote their faith on things like abortion - are you saying those people don't deserve to have their voices heard?  The 1st Amendment prohibits the government from establishing a government religion, it doesn't prohibit people from trying to impose their views on policy, regardless of where theose views come from.

Since you seem concerned, let me ask you this:  Europe and the UK are importing Muslims just as fast as they can, and these people are establishing neighborhoods and entire sections of towns and cities as their own.  Are they not electing fellow Muslims to government positions and getting policy favorable to them passed, or is it only Christians, Catholics, and Jews who are wrong to do so?


Quote from: Paper*Boy on March 23, 2013, 01:18:24 PM

I can't really defend the idea the earth is 6000 years old, I think I mentioned awhile back I grew up in a Protestant Christian environment and never met anyone who thought that - maybe they do in a different part of the country (Texas, the South?). 

I will say I don't buy into the 'man-made' portion of the  global cooling global warming global change hysteria - certainly not after the East Anglia shenagans were revealed, lied about, and covered up.  And no, I don't want to re-argue that for the 3rd or 4th time on the forum, but here's a sample:  the other planets were also warming up at a similar rate, there has been no continued warming trend now for the past 10 years or so, what kind of movement is it anyway when the chief spokesman is perhaps the biggest political hack in our lifetime - Al Gore.

Anyway - if the choice is between someone that believes the earth is 6000 years old but is against more spending, more taxes, and is strong on foreign policy, I'd prefer that to a tax-and-spender that got all A's in high school science.

Well, I can say this much:  I hope you're correct.  I would not mind one iota if my own beliefs and faith in consensus scientific opinion were proven wrong!

Just out of curiosity, were you a paper boy?  I delivered papers on a bicycle route from 8th grade through high school (back in the mid-late 70's).  It was good exercise.

Quote from: lonevoice on March 23, 2013, 01:42:51 PM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2297618/Massachusetts-lawmaker-took-pictures-genitals-female-coworkers-computer.html#ixzz2OIosmKrb

Here's my favorite one from the past few days.   On the same day that the state's politicians underwent ethics training, Massachusetts state representative John Fresolo (D-Mass) was accused of taking pictures of his genitals and emailing them to a female coworker.

Not his first brush with the law, in 2005 he reportedly physically abused his then-13-year-old daughter.  In 1996 he was arrested for beating his then-wife.

But he keeps getting re-elected.

For me, one of the issues is that people can keep on pointing to examples of people from both parties who do this.  Yeah, right now we're talking about this Democratic asshole.  But give it two days or two weeks, and it'll be a Republican doing the same thing.  Tit for tat.  We end up (like good little lapdogs) being distracted from the especially important malfeasance going on all over by getting worked up over this stuff (and the Kardashians and such).

Quote from: West of the Rockies on March 23, 2013, 01:50:46 PM
... Just out of curiosity, were you a paper boy?  I delivered papers on a bicycle route from 8th grade through high school (back in the mid-late 70's).  It was good exercise.

Nope.  I'm not sure why I chose that.


Quote from: West of the Rockies on March 23, 2013, 01:53:55 PM
...  We end up (like good little lapdogs) being distracted from the especially important malfeasance going on all over by getting worked up over this stuff...

Agreed.  Sometimes I think the 2 parties in the US are really the politicians in Washington DC, and the rest of us.


Now, indulge me on this: I've asked several people and even in these environs, but whereas in the UK, politics and religion don't EVER mix, it seems compulsory in the USA you can't be in politics and taken seriously unless you also speak to your deity or he/she speaks too you.. Why is that? It seems to me that the Pied Piper could waltz into town and as long he was naturalised US, and placed 'god' in well received places of his speeches he'd have a chance..The one that I cringe at (and I can tell you we would if it were used for the UK, or it's constituent countries and principalities) is 'God bless America'.. Where does that leave the atheists or non christians? To me it's a cop out, a reason to say 'nothing to do with me, it's gods will'. Doesn't anyone think it toe curling?

Toe curling, indeed, and not in the good way!

Well, Americans are a pretty religious lot, generally speaking.  Being religious is not a guarantee of political success, of course, because there is certainly a lot of animosity among religious groups.  America has elected only one Catholic president ever.  Romney certainly encountered some distrust, I think, due to his religion (Mormon).  I think religion is fairly irrelevant in local and regional elections, but for federal office, it does appear to be a big factor.  If you want to be taken seriously, you better be ready to describe how your life has been guided by God.  I daresay that some of that talk is all just window dressing.  But for other people, such as Texas governor Rick Perry who held a state-wide "pray for rain day", religion is a central part of their worldview.  I rather doubt than an avowed atheist could win federal office.



Yorkshire pud

Quote from: Paper*Boy on March 23, 2013, 01:49:58 PM

Since you seem concerned, let me ask you this:  Europe and the UK are importing Muslims just as fast as they can, and these people are establishing neighborhoods and entire sections of towns and cities as their own.  Are they not electing fellow Muslims to government positions and getting policy favorable to them passed, or is it only Christians, Catholics, and Jews who are wrong to do so?


In the UK the biggest influx of immigrants isn't defined along religious grounds. Since the lifting of work permits and residence approval within the European Union (Not to be confused with having the Euro as a currency) of which Britain is a signatory; Anyone within the union may work and live in any other country within the union unhindered..The same way someone in NJ can go live in CA in the USA. The downside is that the UK, Germany, France being the richest comparatively to the others, have received the lion's share of immigrants from the (principally) former Soviet bloc countries which are now in the European union. Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia,  but mainly Polish citizens have been the ones who have made up the biggest demographic going to the UK, Germany and France, irrespective of their religion, but I understand Polish are mainly catholic. Interestingly, in my experience and common knowledge those four Baltic former soviet states are the least tolerant of Muslims or indeed Asians in general! Do I like the arrangement? No of course not; The Uk is a  small island, it's current population is 70 million, the area of the UK  is similar to Kansas. The US has a population of about 320 million. You see the dilemma? I said in an earlier post about our politics that we have a political party that (amongst other things) is on a restrict immigration ticket, and it's fair to say it's popularity is growing, mainly because the main parties are not perceived to be listening.. Time will tell.. Here's a statistic  more than half the babies born now in the UK are born to mothers who were born abroad...




But this is somewhat off topic.

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on March 23, 2013, 03:27:42 PM

In the UK the biggest influx of immigrants isn't defined along religious grounds. Since the lifting of work permits and residence approval within the European Union (Not to be confused with having the Euro as a currency) of which Britain is a signatory; Anyone within the union may work and live in any other country within the union unhindered..The same way someone in NJ can go live in CA in the USA. The downside is that the UK, Germany, France being the richest comparatively to the others, have received the lion's share of immigrants from the (principally) former Soviet bloc countries which are now in the European union. Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia,  but mainly Polish citizens have been the ones who have made up the biggest demographic going to the UK, Germany and France, irrespective of their religion, but I understand Polish are mainly catholic. Interestingly, in my experience and common knowledge those four Baltic former soviet states are the least tolerant of Muslims or indeed Asians in general! Do I like the arrangement? No of course not; The Uk is a  small island, it's current population is 70 million, the area of the UK  is similar to Kansas. The US has a population of about 320 million. You see the dilemma? I said in an earlier post about our politics that we have a political party that (amongst other things) is on a restrict immigration ticket, and it's fair to say it's popularity is growing, mainly because the main parties are not perceived to be listening.. Time will tell.. Here's a statistic  more than half the babies born now in the UK are born to mothers who were born abroad...

I know that Europe has been struggling with Muslim immigration for years.  I remember reading a book by French novelist Robert Merle (best known in America for his book Day of the Dolphin, which was made into a movie starring George C. Scott).  I think it was called Behind the Glass; it was about turmoil on campus due to immigration and such.

Here in The States, we seem to have a handful of general positions on the subject.  We have those with a romantic notion that America is a melting pot and that we should welcome the world's hungry and poor (see the Statue of Liberty).  We have those who seem most immigrants as devils here to take away our jobs.  Some see immigrants as a necessary evil to assure a cheap labor force.  Others see the immigrants as wholely victims, poor slobs who are being abused and paid pennies on the dollar.  In a world of diminishing resources and an ever-growing population, it would be nice if we could begin to get a handle on the issue.  I sure as shootin' don't know the answer.


Zircon

York, your post is most eye opening. Over half the babies born in the UK (to include Scotland, Ireland and Wales) are from mothers from elsewhere.

Now I will appear to be intolerant here but restricting Muslims and Asians isn't such a bad thing in my view. Having your economy gradually taken over by slave labor out of China makes it hard for a person in Britain or the rest of western Europe to get a well paying enough job to support a family and pay taxes and afford a roof and four walls. Having Muslims, who average 8 children per woman, is not a good way to bolster your population since they (my perception anyway) are largely intolerant of their hosts customs and religion. If a Muslim sets foot on your land they claim it to be theirs in the name of their faith. So much for the English Empire and its gratuitous granting of citizenship (British Citizen) to the conquered.

Europe needs to stop this population bomb by not allowing more of these folks in. Now I focus on Muslims and Asians but not the former Baltics and Poles. Why? They are European and I do believe they have a strong work ethic. Not all to be sure as I'm not that naive. Apparently their social networking and services back in their homelands aren't up to the same levels as they are in Britain, Germany and France. If they had the industry up and running to the level of those productive nations in western Europe, they'd be happy to remain at home. I think they are trying hard in those nations to get up to speed and b viable capitalistic producers.

Europe has figured out a way, at least in part, to meld socialism and capitalism into a working arrangement but too many holes still exist where the system can be abused. Taxing the hell out of those with money or who make the money isn't the solution. We're finding that out here in the States. Yet, our leadership just got reelected - by virtue of the fact that the non-producers can vote and now outnumber those who actually do something for a living.

Just an observation (mixed with opinion obviously).

Zirc

Yorkshire pud

Quote from: Zircon on March 23, 2013, 04:28:29 PM
York, your post is most eye opening. Over half the babies born in the UK (to include Scotland, Ireland and Wales) are from mothers from elsewhere.

Now I will appear to be intolerant here but restricting Muslims and Asians isn't such a bad thing in my view. Having your economy gradually taken over by slave labor out of China makes it hard for a person in Britain or the rest of western Europe to get a well paying enough job to support a family and pay taxes and afford a roof and four walls. Having Muslims, who average 8 children per woman, is not a good way to bolster your population since they (my perception anyway) are largely intolerant of their hosts customs and religion. If a Muslim sets foot on your land they claim it to be theirs in the name of their faith. So much for the English Empire and its gratuitous granting of citizenship (British Citizen) to the conquered.

Europe needs to stop this population bomb by not allowing more of these folks in. Now I focus on Muslims and Asians but not the former Baltics and Poles. Why? They are European and I do believe they have a strong work ethic. Not all to be sure as I'm not that naive. Apparently their social networking and services back in their homelands aren't up to the same levels as they are in Britain, Germany and France. If they had the industry up and running to the level of those productive nations in western Europe, they'd be happy to remain at home. I think they are trying hard in those nations to get up to speed and b viable capitalistic producers.

Europe has figured out a way, at least in part, to meld socialism and capitalism into a working arrangement but too many holes still exist where the system can be abused. Taxing the hell out of those with money or who make the money isn't the solution. We're finding that out here in the States. Yet, our leadership just got reelected - by virtue of the fact that the non-producers can vote and now outnumber those who actually do something for a living.

Just an observation (mixed with opinion obviously).

Zirc


Zirc...I've had a good amount of an agreeable red; Please let me respond to your post in the morning (It's 2300 here, and I don't do night times)  :)

Zircon

Quote from: West of the Rockies on March 23, 2013, 11:49:28 AM
On behalf of we colonists, I do apologize.  It seems that in America (probably everywhere, really), you can say just about anything and be taken seriously as long as you say it with the right attitude and conviction.  Repeat a lie until it becomes the truth.

Of course, more to the point, biblical literalists are simply running with the herd.  They've been indoctrinated.  Some of them will no doubt argue that they've reached their opinions after much considered reason.  We can all piss and moan about it (do you use that expression in the U.K.?) or we can live and let live.  I think American rocker Frank Zappa said something like, "Stupid isn't going away.  You have to make it work for you."

By the way, is there a consensus favorite incarnation of Dr. Who in England?  I only joined the show when Christopher Eccleston took over.  My family definitely prefers the David Tennant version.  The new guy could sell advertising space on tht forehead.  That ain't a forehead -- it's a fivehead!
Please pardon my intrusion ... you're a Doctor Who fan? ... nice to know ya. I really got into Doctor Who when John Pertwee was about to exit and the great Tom Baker took over the TARDIS with his signature top hat and scarf. The greatest Doctor Who in my opinion. The ones that have followed are dweebs, again my opinion.

And Frank Zappa .. he was a prophet.

Quote from: Zircon on March 23, 2013, 05:33:52 PM
Please pardon my intrusion ... you're a Doctor Who fan? ... nice to know ya. I really got into Doctor Who when John Pertwee was about to exit and the great Tom Baker took over the TARDIS with his signature top hat and scarf. The greatest Doctor Who in my opinion. The ones that have followed are dweebs, again my opinion.

And Frank Zappa .. he was a prophet.

Hi, Zirc... actually, the material you quoted above comes from a post I tried to make.  I included a quotation from Yorkshire's post and somehow my words got transposed so that it looked like the entire thing came from Yorkshire.  I'm the Who fan, but Yorkshire later responded that he had enjoyed some of the earlier Dr. incarnations.  I came to the show a little late in the game.  It seems that Who inspires the same sort of devotion that Star Trek does, with those who like the original cast often warring with those who prefer TNG or Janeway, et al.  Sorry for the weird confusion.

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on March 23, 2013, 03:27:42 PM
In the UK the biggest influx of immigrants isn't defined along religious grounds...

Maybe not by the rest of you. 

The Muslims are certainly moving in and they do see things as defined along religious grounds.  And not in any good way.

Just like here where most people work hard, try to improve themselves and their neighborhood, etc - when those people need help they are grateful for it and try to get back on their feet.  They think the poor will also be grateful and take the eopportunity to get on their feet, but they don't - they just get more surly and demanding.  We can't assume others will react to our benevolence the way we do or would.

Quote from: Zircon on March 23, 2013, 04:28:29 PM
... Now I focus on Muslims and Asians but not the former Baltics and Poles. Why? They are European and I do believe they have a strong work ethic...

The Asians are very hard workers.  They just tend to have lousy stifling governments, at least in the past.  Before China's rise, recall how well the Chinese are doing everywhere but China.  Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, Taiwan are economic powerhouses - they've had better governments than some of the others.  Viet Nam, Malaysia, Indonesia are on the way up.  Even India and possibly Burma.

What's bad for our country is when too many of any one group of foreigners come to the point where separate enclaves are set up and they aren't assimulating like the earlier European immigrants did.

Yorkshire pud


Morning! I'll try to clarify and expand on what has gone before.

Quote from: Zircon on March 23, 2013, 04:28:29 PM
York, your post is most eye opening. Over half the babies born in the UK (to include Scotland, Ireland and Wales) are from mothers from elsewhere.


On the figures published last year, yes. Clearly the spread isn't even across all four countries and principalities and certain conurbations have a greater influx than others.

Quote
Now I will appear to be intolerant here but restricting Muslims and Asians isn't such a bad thing in my view. Having your economy gradually taken over by slave labor out of China makes it hard for a person in Britain or the rest of western Europe to get a well paying enough job to support a family and pay taxes and afford a roof and four walls. Having Muslims, who average 8 children per woman, is not a good way to bolster your population since they (my perception anyway) are largely intolerant of their hosts customs and religion. If a Muslim sets foot on your land they claim it to be theirs in the name of their faith. So much for the English Empire and its gratuitous granting of citizenship (British Citizen) to the conquered.




It is more complex than this. The Uk with it's Commonwealth and it's Empire before that spread it's tentacles all over the planet. It's said the sun never set on the British Empire. India is still in our Commonwealth, it's the largest democracy in the world. In 1947, it split; and what is now Pakistan led by President Zia became a mainly muslim faith country in it's own right. Today because of the mutual animosity there are still military skirmishes over the true ownership of Kashmir..And both being nuclear states there is that concern too.. In India, muslims are treated as second or even third class citizens, known as 'the untouchables'.
The natural stance when immigrants come to the UK (and it's the elephant in the room, that NO politician will ever approach) is that Indians (mainly Sikhs, Hindus (majority) and Buddists) It's the birthplace of at least four religions; by and large don't and won't associate with Pakistanis and Bangladeshis (almost all muslims) and vice versa. The thing trotted out is that only white blue collar men are anti 'anyone but me'. Personally I have friends of several faiths, Jewish, Muslim, a Buddhist (which is a philosophy rather than a religion) Pagan even! In the town I live in, we have a large minority of immigrants from across many countries and faiths. Polish, Czech, Latvian, Lithuanian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Indian, Russian, Slovakian, and for some reason quite a number from Paraguay (I don't know why!)..


What happens is that the few job vacancies that are around have even more contending for the same positions; and although illegal many immigrants are willing to accept lower pay and conditions; and so they 'live' in cramped conditions and send the money home to their families. The next bit will flip your mind...(trust me!). Because the UK is signed up to the rules and regulations emanating from the corrupt and bizarre EU commission  those same EU member state citizens (Polish, Latvian etc)  are allowed to claim state benefits for their families even if they don't live in the UK!! I swear I'm not making it up. I hope you weren't drinking coffee then!  :) 


All that combined with no utility company owned by a UK based company, (Electricity, water, gas) Or our railways (owned by overseas companies)...and several other erstwhile UK owned companies. Privatisation measures brought in (because the bitch didn't believe in society or state owned companies) by Thatchers government in the 80's, resulted in the open market being king and the world (in their tax havens) taking over , well, the UK basically. Capitalism taken to it's logical conclusion; no borders, no restrictions, no affinity or loyalty; and frighteningly, no local control. If a foreign based company decides that this week we're not worthy of investment or improvement (or even supply-gas, water etc), there is jack shit we can do about it. I could go on and on, but you get the idea.
 
Quote
Europe needs to stop this population bomb by not allowing more of these folks in. Now I focus on Muslims and Asians but not the former Baltics and Poles. Why? They are European and I do believe they have a strong work ethic. Not all to be sure as I'm not that naive. Apparently their social networking and services back in their homelands aren't up to the same levels as they are in Britain, Germany and France. If they had the industry up and running to the level of those productive nations in western Europe, they'd be happy to remain at home. I think they are trying hard in those nations to get up to speed and b viable capitalistic producers.


Asian muslims have a very strong work ethic too..Polish (in my experience) are and aren't, depending who they are..You also need to take into account that after WW2, many ex Polish military people (mainly men) settled here, married British women and settled as British citizens. I was invited to a Polish birthday party about 15 years ago and had an education in drinking beer! LOL! Although they're passionate about their heritage they loved the British way of life and integrated themselves, learning the language; something that Pakistanis don't as a rule feel a need to do as they're insular by and large. Interestingly Indians are not like that, it might stem from the very British infrastructure in their homeland..

Quote
Europe has figured out a way, at least in part, to meld socialism and capitalism into a working arrangement but too many holes still exist where the system can be abused. Taxing the hell out of those with money or who make the money isn't the solution. We're finding that out here in the States. Yet, our leadership just got reelected - by virtue of the fact that the non-producers can vote and now outnumber those who actually do something for a living.

Just an observation (mixed with opinion obviously).

Zirc


We're all being taxed to death Zirc. So the burden is proportionally harder for the poorer. Petrol (gas) is (ready?) currently about $8.75 per gallon; and that is US gallons, which is 16 fl oz and not our Imperial 20 Fl oz. Diesel is more..nearer $9.15...85% of it goes in tax and has for years. We pay something called VAT (Valued added tax), it's currently in the UK 20%..so everything you buy has been subject to a tax of 20%.. ON TOP of any other taxes that may have been paid before that.  Crazy shit eh?   :-\

Yorkshire pud

Quote from: Paper*Boy on March 23, 2013, 08:50:39 PM

The Asians are very hard workers.  They just tend to have lousy stifling governments, at least in the past.  Before China's rise, recall how well the Chinese are doing everywhere but China.  Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, Taiwan are economic powerhouses - they've had better governments than some of the others.  Viet Nam, Malaysia, Indonesia are on the way up.  Even India and possibly Burma.

What's bad for our country is when too many of any one group of foreigners come to the point where separate enclaves are set up and they aren't assimulating like the earlier European immigrants did.


Even India? India is second only to China in the growth of it's economy. And it's getting bigger..ONE Indian billionaire owns TATA steels, which is the largest steel producer in the UK...it's subsidiary now owns Jaguar cars. Bentley and Rolls Royce are owned by the Germans.

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on March 24, 2013, 03:06:14 AM

Even India?...

I meant even India is now on the path of growth.  It's a fairly new development, for a long time they weren't. Durng the cold war they were 'non-aligned' but actually cleints of the Soviets - military supplies, trading, education, ideology to a certain extent, while the US, China and the West were on better terms with Pakistan. 

When I was there in the 80s they weren't importing any western consumer goods - so 'scotch', cigarettes, seemingly everything, was required to be produced there.  It's changed from that model, just as China has.

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on March 24, 2013, 03:02:07 AM
... The thing trotted out is that only white blue collar men are anti 'anyone but me'.... the UK is signed up to the rules and regulations emanating from the corrupt and bizarre EU commission  those same EU member state citizens (Polish, Latvian etc)  are allowed to claim state benefits for their families even if they don't live in the UK!!...  learning the language; something that Pakistanis don't as a rule feel a need to do as they're insular by and large... We're all being taxed to death...

Western Europe is done.  Everyone can see it, yet the Leftist D's - people like George Soros, and their accomplices in the Media are hell bent on transforming the US into a Socialistic state similar to these EU countries.  I suspect it's just a step on the road towards a global government, with them in change - they know they have to destroy Europe and the US first. 

I don't see another explanation for their actions.



Quote from: Yorkshire pud on March 24, 2013, 03:02:07 AM
... All that combined with no utility company owned by a UK based company, (Electricity, water, gas) Or our railways (owned by overseas companies)...and several other erstwhile UK owned companies. Privatisation measures brought in (because the bitch didn't believe in society or state owned companies) by Thatchers government in the 80's, resulted in the open market being king and the world (in their tax havens) taking over , well, the UK basically. Capitalism taken to it's logical conclusion; no borders, no restrictions, no affinity or loyalty; and frighteningly, no local control. If a foreign based company decides that this week we're not worthy of investment or improvement (or even supply-gas, water etc), there is jack shit we can do about it. I could go on and on, but you get the idea.

Bloated bureaucratic government run enterprises aren't the answer either.  Privisation should be done smartly.  When there is a monopoly or oligopoly, especially something like water, energy, infrastructure - that needs to be regulated.  And there is nothing wrong about requiring it to be owned and managed by that country's citizens, at least a majority of voting shares.  It can even be argued on National Security grounds.  Pure Capitlism is not the goal - peace, freedom, opportunity, and prosperity are.  The sharp edges (like in this example) need to be rounded off.

I think during the era of Reagan and Thatcher, so much was over-regulated (here), and state owned (there) that something had to be done.  Mistakes were made - here jobs were exported when what was intended was expand global trade.  There, it sounds like UK monopolies were sold and ended up in the hands of foreigners.  No doubt there are plenty of other examples of unintended consequences.  What was needed were serious people to govern in the succeeding years and make any corrections as needed.  Which means not Clinton, or Bush, or Obama.

Yorkshire pud

Quote from: Paper*Boy on March 24, 2013, 03:51:08 AM

Western Europe is done.  Everyone can see it, yet the Leftist D's - people like George Soros, and their accomplices in the Media are hell bent on transforming the US into a Socialistic state similar to these EU countries.  I suspect it's just a step on the road towards a global government, with them in change - they know they have to destroy Europe and the US first. 

I don't see another explanation for their actions.


It isn't socialist though. If it were we wouldn't have such disparity..The rich are getting even more obscenely rich and the poor more poor; those in the middle are getting poorer. The printed media and Murdochs press in particular is largely (very) anti left..

Quote
Bloated bureaucratic government run enterprises aren't the answer either.  Privisation should be done smartly.  When there is a monopoly or oligopoly, especially something like water, energy, infrastructure - that needs to be regulated.  And there is nothing wrong about requiring it to be owned and managed by that country's citizens, at least a majority of voting shares.  It can even be argued on National Security grounds.  Pure Capitlism is not the goal - peace, freedom, opportunity, and prosperity are.  The sharp edges (like in this example) need to be rounded off.

I think during the era of Reagan and Thatcher, so much was over-regulated (here), and state owned (there) that something had to be done.  Mistakes were made






Oh yes; and were warned would transpire by those who at the time were condemned as reactionary anti British, anti reform, anti whatever: Privatisation was sold on a lie. Millions of tax payers money was spent without our sanction with an accountancy firm to oversee (and advertise) the process. The lie was it would enable everyone in the UK to take a stake in something they already owned! So essentially those that could afford the shares could buy. Those of us who couldn't, are still waiting for their share of the sell off-being tax payers an all. Subsequently, the investment firms bought up the shares, and the shares eventually bought by foreign investors..


Quote
- here jobs were exported when what was intended was expand global trade.  There, it sounds like UK monopolies were sold and ended up in the hands of foreigners.


Pretty much; state owned monopolies became privately owned monopolies..The best bit is take the railways. Until just after the war, it was several privately owned firms. Not one EVER made a profit. They were there as a public service...nationalisation of them all amalgamated to form British Railways. It suffered lack of investment, but one of the good things was it ran as an integrated service. When Thatcher privatised it here's what happened: Each geographic region was sold off separately..Under the myth of 'competition'..No-one has explained how a railway can compete with another railway franchise that can't share the same track! The bosses of these new companies knew that to secure the badly needed investment couldn't possibly be raised by shares, so..they went to the government, and secured subsidies (and short term franchise leases) from the taxpayer (the same precious tax payer who couldn't be expected to prop up British Rail!)..New rail bosses, saw a golden goose when they saw it, paid themselves huge share dividends and golden goodbyes and overnight we had multi millionaires who basically didn't have too put one penny of their own money into a subsidised railway infrastructure.


The track? Ahhh, that was sold too as a private company in it's own right, but because it was so rubbish, it was taken back into state ownership (My sister in law was employed by them for a while) and still remains so. The franchises (rolling stock, both freight and passengers) pay the track company too use the track. Get this...it's frequently cheaper too transport a locomotive via road for maintenance etc, than it is to run it on the track to which it was intended! We as taxpayers subsidise the railways many many times more now it's 'private', than we ever did in the entire time we did as British rail since the war!


Quote


  No doubt there are plenty of other examples of unintended consequences.  What was needed were serious people to govern in the succeeding years and make any corrections as needed.  Which means not Clinton, or Bush, or Obama.


Unintended consequences I can accept if everyone was saying the same; but they weren't. Several experienced railway experts warned against privatisation, including a then cabinet minister whose family in the past were connected with the pre-war private railways. This was a monumental waste of public money, that we will continue to pay for long after I've left this earth.

One statistic shows what is wrong in many countries, they can't insure or cover their bank deposits.  This is all about capitalism run a muck, not socialism:

Bank Assets to GDP  -
Iceland 12x (2009)
Ireland 9x (2010)
Cyprus 7x
Spain 5x
Italy 3x
USA 0.6x


As for this, it is an almost childishly naive application of a truism spoken by many hunters.  The man is sick.

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on March 23, 2013, 08:41:51 AM


I'm the first to acknowledge that the Daily Wail <sic> is a tabloid piece of trash--Alex Jones has stated on air he thinks it a highly respected national newspaper; What he probably doesn't know (or care about), is it's probably the most sued newspaper in the UK. Has no real ethical motivation-it would take far too long to explain why and how.


But; the following was mentioned this morning in the newspaper review on the breakfast news here in the UK. Now, shooting a lion unless he was imminent danger I see as pointless, and cruel. I'm not a vegetarian, and firmly believe (as he seems to have done) you should be prepared to eat what you kill (if it's purely for 'sport'), Culling and removing sick/dangerous animals I can see the logic in and not eating..


So what are my misgivings? I'm aware that tabloids spin stories like a top; and I take that on board: BUT, does he really believe the world was made in six days? That any belief to the contrary is from hell? That being the case how the hell was he elected to a position that influences your legislature? Doesn't it scare you?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2297414/Paul-Broun-Tea-party-congressman-killed-ate-LION-safari-hunt.html

Sardondi

How can anyone, anyone, argue that Europe wouldn't be on the brink of collapse if only there had been more government control? That's almost as good, and as literally fantastic, as saying, "True Communism has never been tried."

But I'm sure repeating those mantra will be of great comfort in the ruins.

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod