View Full Version : POLL: EU - stay or go?
Oldpinkman
15-06-2016, 10:08
It's money and business and no-one mucks around when money is at stake.
"The FTSE also fell below its key '6,000' mark as panic seemed to set in yesterday as almost £100bn was wiped off its value" - a comment from my currency trading service update this morning
You think?
So is that why there must be tens of thousands of audiophiles (perhaps more), all over the world, who are convinced beyond question, and have reported such, that different cables can significantly alter the sound of hi-fi equipment, and in ways which known science can't yet fully explain - and no I don't buy the notion that all of them are 'imagining' it! ;)
For me, the sheer weight of numbers involved, claiming hearing those differences warrants further investigation, and if proven that those claiming such are able to successfully identify them under controlled conditions, then there should be an appropriate scientific investigation launched, in order to ascertain whether a new phenomenon exists that may be responsible for creating those differences.
That is true science at work, rather than just automatically dismissing the existence of something, simply because it appears to contradict known science/currently accepted wisdom.
But the problem is, how to investigate these claimed differences 'scientifically'? That would involved proper controlled experiments, to identify whether the differences can be consistently identified.Unfortunately the people who claim to hear the differences either haven't the time or inclination to take part in such experiments, and/or would say that the 'stressful' nature of such experiments would impair their listening ability. So it's a stalemate: scientists are only interested in investigating phenomena that are demonstrably 'real', and not just lots of anecdotal evidence. Plus, most differences can be explained as a result of the materials used in cables, or the way in which they're configured; the 'foo' comes in when manufacturers say their cables incorporate some mystery material that they won't disclose because they don't want others copying it. I repeat, to me as an end-user, none of this matters, as I'm not looking for proof, my ears are all I need. But some subjectivists want to have their cake and eat it; they make all sorts of claims about what they hear, but instead of leaving it there, they postulate some unknown 'scientific' explanation that is actually just uninformed guesswork, then bleat when someone with an actual understanding of the science points out their schoolboy errors.
Icke, or anyone else, doesn't need "privileged access to any facts", he or they simply need use of a computer and access to the Internet, together with the patience and desire to do enough digging in the right places, in order to uncover plenty of 'hidden truths', covered up by previous and current corrupt governments.
The advantage Icke has is that he's got more time, money and motivation to actively pursue the information he needs for that, than the average guy on the street, and also, as a free thinker, the ability not to allow himself to be brainwashed or controlled by government propaganda.
Therefore, he's simply a facilitator of information, which you can then check out for yourself and verify, not someone to be automatically believed, word for word, any more than a politician with a biased agenda. Ultimately, you have to do your own research and decide for yourself whether Icke, or others like him, make some valid claims.
Don't rule it out at some point, if he gets too 'mouthy', as they did that to Jill Dando (via MI6), to shut her up, when she was threatening to expose Jimmy Saville and a whole paedophile ring (who had major connections with 'the elite' and royal family), blaming her killing on some poor 'nobody' who was supposedly stalking her...
Honestly, if you dig deep enough, you'll find truly shocking evidence tying the royal family and previous prime ministers in with all sorts of horrific crimes (Ted Heath in particular and his penchant for buggering young boys, and then having them killed, to hide the evidence) - all carefully covered up of course.... I kid you not!
Look at our current 'coke-snorting' chancellor, and how he's partial to being spanked by whores in brothels - all verifiable if you know where to look - and yet how much of that do you hear about in the news?
I have a friend who used to be a reporter for the News of the World, and he could tell you some stuff about all of the above [things that they were TOLD NOT to print], with REAL evidence to back it up, which would make your toes curl......
Marco.
I don't time to unpick that lot, but it looks like a mixture of rumour, guesswork and speculation. Do you have any proof for any of those claims that you repeat as if they were known facts? And, no disrespect to your friend, but I wouldn't take the word of a Murdoch journalist for the time of day, let alone unreported claims about 'stuff'.
My job was, and my current studies make me a researcher by occupation. The first thing a researcher needs to do, and to keep doing, is to verify his/her sources. That goes beyond using the internet; it means checking that what your're told, or what you read, is factually based and not just rumour or gossip. For example, why would MI6, which is responsible for external security threats, murder Jill Dando because she about to blow the whistle on a domestic scandal? That would be MI5's job. Any unexplained death can be ascribed to the security services, because a) they're secretive organisations by definition and b) their policy is never to confirm or deny anything. Coincidentally, I was looking through some older AoS posts last night, and found a 'Jimmy Savile RIP' thread. Apart from one person who'd met him and said he was 'a strange man', the tone was universally respectful, even fulsome. No mention of Jill Dando by yourself or anyone else, so when did this rumour/story actually start?
Think im distancing myself from this thread.
Joe,
I'll happily debate the hi-fi stuff with you another time, on a more appropriate part of the forum, as it is distinctly off-topic.
As for the rest of what you've written, well you seem to be getting rather 'agitated' and confrontational (apologies if you're actually not, but that's how the tone of your reply reads), and that's unlike you, so take a chill-pill :)
Everything I wrote (save the MI6 thing, which was a typo, of course I meant MI5 - it was late last night when I was typing that post, and will correct the error), is based not only on what I've discovered through my extensive research into those matters over many years, but also that of quite a few friends, who are much more 'into' the subjects in question than I am, and consequently have studied them in greater depth [think near-obsessive levels here], and who also know how to utilise the Internet far better than me, whilst sharing the information with me they've found along the way.
That information exists in the public domain for all those with the desire and wherewithal to find it. I will say no more on that.
In terms of my good friend, whom I've known since I was a kid, and who was a professional reporter and photographer for over 20 years, not just for the newspaper in question, but almost every one in Britain, as he was employed in a freelance capacity, he's shown me evidence in private, some of which confirms, or at the very least, almost certainly suggests, that what I've outlined is true, but of course I don't expect you to take my word (or his) for that, as you don't know him or me.
However, the point is that *I know* what I know, and it's damning and shocking in the extreme, and largely the reason why I feel how I do towards 'the establishment', the royal family, etc, and the disdain in which I hold many forms of authority, simply because most are corrupt to the core, so how can one respect them?
That explains not only my stance on the deeply-ingrained and long established corruption, both governmental and media-related, all of which acts as a true cancer in our world, but how I consider it affects the current EU referendum, and thus forms the basis for my stance on these matters, which of course I'm perfectly entitled to put forward.
Now, let's leave it there, as I have no intention of arguing further with you on this specific matter, and return to the main thrust of the EU debate :cool:
Marco.
"The FTSE also fell below its key '6,000' mark as panic seemed to set in yesterday as almost £100bn was wiped off its value" - a comment from my currency trading service update this morning
Do you actually understand how the stock market works? Rhetorical question as I'm sure you do which makes that post look all the more bizarre.
Is he - got any evidence/links? As a major member of 'the elite', I'm rather surprised at that. Indeed, he's not known to back the losing side, and instead is usually one of those pulling the control strings. Must be some kind of double-bluff.....
Marco.
The Sun backed the Leave campaign yesterday : http://www.newstatesman.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/the_sun_leave_front_page.jpg?itok=ShsQGis3
Yeah, so Gaz was saying. Thanks for that. Interesting...... Think I'll have to apply some 'lateral thinking' to that one! ;)
Marco.
There is a theory that Murdoch, like his father before him, hates the British, or more specifically the English, and so anything he does is ultimately aimed at screwing us over. Not sure I buy into that but it is one possible explanation.
Joe,
I'll happily debate the hi-fi stuff with you another time, on a more appropriate part of the forum, as it is distinctly off-topic.
As for the rest of what you've written, well you seem to be getting rather 'agitated' and confrontational (apologies if you're actually not, but that's how the tone of your reply reads), and that's unlike you, so take a chill-pill :)
I'm actually not agitated in the slightest, just taking a break from reading some fairly tedious stuff about Wordsworth! Happy to leave it there and not distract further from the thread topic.
Excellent... We move on :cool:
Marco.
There is a theory that Murdoch, like his father before him, hates the British, or more specifically the English, and so anything he does is ultimately aimed at screwing us over. Not sure I buy into that but it is one possible explanation.
Hang on... Murdoch supports LEAVE, and everything he does is to screw us over?
I mean, I agree with you, but I'm confused. It seems like a mighty U-turn for you...
But yes, leaving the EU will screw us over.
Well said Martin!!
Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk
It's a theory, I didn't say it was my theory. Just what I've read. Just putting it in for interest's sake.
Interesting. FTSE, NASDAQ, and DOW markets are all UP at the end of the days trading despite the government's latest attempt at scaremongering by saying they'll introduce emergency tax hikes. It appears that the major stock indices perhaps show an underlying trend that investors have less confidence/belief in Nr10 than Nr10 does. Public opinion seems to be swinging that way too. As for the overall stock market position, it's actually no worse than it appeared prior to the last general election, so business as usual for now.
It's always business as usual.
There was a thing called the Second World War, quite a big deal, hundreds of millions died, hundreds of cities razed to the ground.
Business still went on.
Leaving the EU is a storm in a teacup by comparison.
There's only one thing I can say for sure about this referendum, it stinks to high heaven.
I feel like I'm in the middle of a tug of war to get my taxes.
As Leonard Cohen says "old black Joe's still picking cotton".
But that's the way it's going to be so I guess all we can do is try to make our circumstances work for us as best we can.
Taxi for George!
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/15/revolt-of-65-tory-mps-over-osborne-tax-rises
Second World War... hundreds of millions died, hundreds of cities razed to the ground.
I know that factual accuracy is not your strong suit, but aren't you maybe getting just a wee bit carried away with the numbers there, Martin?
[emoji12]
Sent from the EU border with Switzerland, using Tapatalk
Taxi for George!
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/15/revolt-of-65-tory-mps-over-osborne-tax-rises
Ah, the sadomasochist cocaine addict... A fine upstanding example of a chap to be chancellor :)
Marco.
Werner Berghofer
16-06-2016, 04:54
Martin,
hundreds of millions died […]
These number seem a little bit high to me:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
Osborn and Cameron's days are numbered whatever way the vote goes. The way that they have conducted the referendum has been truly, utterly disgraceful. They should go, never to be entrusted with the running of the UK ever again. They have forgotten that it is a country they're running , yet have acted without the honesty, dignity or impartiality of dignified professional statesmen with the UK's future the main consideration. It's been like watching a toff's less-than-amateur debating society erupt into a verbal pub brawl, forgetting about the 70-odd million people's futures at stake. Perhaps we ought to raise one of those on line E-petitions and call it "Remove Osborne and Cameron". I suspect a lot of people would sign such an E-petition!
It should never have got to the point where so many parties are in such division, but the UK ought to have been pulling together based on the truth. Truth is, no crystal ball is needed and there is sufficient information to make sound future predictions on how areas of our lives would be affected either way the vote goes. Trouble is, our politicians have let us down and failed to do the legwork to present us with a cognitive argument even though it was in their power to do so. They've all failed us by not providing anything like the truth or detailed information needed for an honest campaign and are only looking out for their own sad, sorry careers.
Its like watching a piece of dough being pulled in all directions and intertwined , never to go back as a whole.
Its a simple question with very complicated answers , that you are lucky IMO if you can make a proper decision!!
But for me , I am out
Interesting take on the financial industry and future prospects:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-k-financial-industry-better-off-without-eu-says-british-financier-1465929301
Firebottle
16-06-2016, 07:06
Osborn and Cameron's days are numbered whatever way the vote goes. The way that they have conducted the referendum has been truly, utterly disgraceful. They should go, never to be entrusted with the running of the UK ever again. They have forgotten that it is a country they're running , yet have acted without the honesty, dignity or impartiality of dignified professional statesmen with the UK's future the main consideration. It's been like watching a toff's less-than-amateur debating society erupt into a verbal pub brawl, forgetting about the 70-odd million people's futures at stake. Perhaps we ought to raise one of those on line E-petitions and call it "Remove Osborne and Cameron". I suspect a lot of people would sign such an E-petition!
It should never have got to the point where so many parties are in such division, but the UK ought to have been pulling together based on the truth. Truth is, no crystal ball is needed and there is sufficient information to make sound future predictions on how areas of our lives would be affected either way the vote goes. Trouble is, our politicians have let us down and failed to do the legwork to present us with a cognitive argument even though it was in their power to do so. They've all failed us by not providing anything like the truth or detailed information needed for an honest campaign and are only looking out for their own sad, sorry careers.
Good post Paul. Unfortunately the truth you have written above is in no way attributable to any of the politicians integrity. Sack the F'ing lot.
Do you fancy running the country Paul?
Good post Paul. Unfortunately the truth you have written above is in no way attributable to any of the politicians integrity. Sack the F'ing lot.
Do you fancy running the country Paul?
My wife's the one who runs things here! (squeek squeek!). I had a stint in local government where I was a strategic director for a few years. Nothing would persuade me to go back to any form of government. Poison chalice, mostly due to the others in government!
I say again, and ask you to think about it.
The establishments shitting itself over Brexit, more so now Mr Burns has came out in favour... ask yourself why.
No tinfoil hat here Pinky, :) just going on the bizaare assumption that Politicians dont always do whats best for the people who trust them to do so. Who's scratching who's back and what do they stand to lose?
The compassionate Conservative's should have never got in a second term, but FPTP system means they could.
The systems broke.
"Infrastructure's fucked".
Im calling Brexit, then 2nd Referendum vote which will be successful.
Arkless Electronics
16-06-2016, 15:28
Osborn and Cameron's days are numbered whatever way the vote goes. The way that they have conducted the referendum has been truly, utterly disgraceful. They should go, never to be entrusted with the running of the UK ever again. They have forgotten that it is a country they're running , yet have acted without the honesty, dignity or impartiality of dignified professional statesmen with the UK's future the main consideration. It's been like watching a toff's less-than-amateur debating society erupt into a verbal pub brawl, forgetting about the 70-odd million people's futures at stake. Perhaps we ought to raise one of those on line E-petitions and call it "Remove Osborne and Cameron". I suspect a lot of people would sign such an E-petition!
It should never have got to the point where so many parties are in such division, but the UK ought to have been pulling together based on the truth. Truth is, no crystal ball is needed and there is sufficient information to make sound future predictions on how areas of our lives would be affected either way the vote goes. Trouble is, our politicians have let us down and failed to do the legwork to present us with a cognitive argument even though it was in their power to do so. They've all failed us by not providing anything like the truth or detailed information needed for an honest campaign and are only looking out for their own sad, sorry careers.
Agreed..... but the brexit campaign has been worse still!! They would probably claim the health risk from plague infested rats being released into the population was "mere scaremongering" if they thought it suited their cause!
I repeat that there should never have been a referendum. It's simply too complicated for the public (or even the experts!) to understand the implications and this results in the most important referendum for a generation being decided by knee-jerk reaction and peoples prejudices. No way to decide the future!
Best scenario? We remain and Tory in fighting results in a "night of the long knives" that lets Corbyn in! Bring it on!!!
If Corbyn gets in then I'm off. Probably no decent country would have me but screw it, I'll sell up and go to California and live in the woods as an illegal, I don't care. It would be like having that bearded, lefty teacher in charge - every school had one -quite intelligent but absolutely no grasp on reality.
Arkless Electronics
16-06-2016, 16:06
If Corbyn gets in then I'm off. Probably no decent country would have me but screw it, I'll sell up and go to California and live in the woods as an illegal, I don't care. It would be like having that bearded, lefty teacher in charge - every school had one -quite intelligent but absolutely no grasp on reality.
I take it the prospect of the poorest, weakest, most dispossessed in society being given a leg up, and the ending of them being treated like mushrooms, doesn't appeal then?
Nor does getting better fairer employment rights?
Nor does the building of loads of new council houses to ameliorate the housing crisis?
Nor does the renationalisation of utilities etc to ensure they are run for the benefit of the population rather then for the profit of the already exorbitantly wealthy?
Nor does the formation of a national investment bank to finance the building of new infrastructure and revitalise UK industry?
I take it you also have no problem with food banks and homelessness being on the rise whilst Dodgy Dave's pals and natural allies stash billions in untaxed dirty money in off shore accounts and buy islands and ocean going yachts?
To me and many others even a fall in GDP and us falling from 5th to 7th most wealthy nation, both hopefully short term, would be a price worth paying for literally millions of British people, amongst them those most shat on by the Tories in the past, to get "a new deal" resulting in more and better paid jobs, better health care, better infrastructure and amenities and cheaper, more readily available housing ;)
I take it you also have no problem with food banks and homelessness being on the rise whilst Dodgy Dave's pals and natural allies stash billions in untaxed dirty money in off shore accounts and buy islands and ocean going yachts?
Lol... Martin's on record, during the debate on the Scottish referendum, of having stated that food banks don't exist, and that homelessness here in the UK, isn't a significant problem... :eek:
Unless he has since 'reassessed' that view......? ;)
Marco.
walpurgis
16-06-2016, 16:33
homelessness here in the UK, isn't a significant problem... :eek: ;)
Marco.
Dunno. Guess you could ask all the Poles, Estonians and Romanians and the like, living under the arches of motorway bridges.
(and before anybody jumps on their high horse, there are plenty of examples locally)
Firebottle
16-06-2016, 16:34
I take it the prospect of the poorest, weakest, most dispossessed in society being given a leg up, and the ending of them being treated like mushrooms, doesn't appeal then?
Nor does getting better fairer employment rights?
Nor does the building of loads of new council houses to ameliorate the housing crisis?
Nor does the renationalisation of utilities etc to ensure they are run for the benefit of the population rather then for the profit of the already exorbitantly wealthy?
Nor does the formation of a national investment bank to finance the building of new infrastructure and revitalise UK industry?
I take it you also have no problem with food banks and homelessness being on the rise whilst Dodgy Dave's pals and natural allies stash billions in untaxed dirty money in off shore accounts and buy islands and ocean going yachts?
To me and many others even a fall in GDP and us falling from 5th to 7th most wealthy nation, both hopefully short term, would be a price worth paying for literally millions of British people, amongst them those most shat on by the Tories in the past, to get "a new deal" resulting in more and better paid jobs, better health care, better infrastructure and amenities and cheaper, more readily available housing ;)
I'd love it if all the above happened, but it's not going to. We're talking politicians here, no matter what flavour or colour they are, they haven't got a clue how to fix it for the common man.
Arkless Electronics
16-06-2016, 16:47
I'd love it if all the above happened, but it's not going to. We're talking politicians here, no matter what flavour or colour they are, they haven't got a clue how to fix it for the common man.
Corbyn strikes me as not from the mould as most other politicians. he appears to have integrity and to actually care about the common man... of course it could be he's a good actor and in league with multi nationals behind our backs.... Time will tell. I'd rather bet on someone who at least appears to want to make the changes I listed!
Just look at the Attlee government after the war and what this Labour government did for the country! The NHS, the welfare state, free prescriptions etc etc. It can happen.
Well said Sir.
:clapclapclap:
I take it the prospect of the poorest, weakest, most dispossessed in society being given a leg up, and the ending of them being treated like mushrooms, doesn't appeal then?
Nor does getting better fairer employment rights?
Nor does the building of loads of new council houses to ameliorate the housing crisis?
Nor does the renationalisation of utilities etc to ensure they are run for the benefit of the population rather then for the profit of the already exorbitantly wealthy?
Nor does the formation of a national investment bank to finance the building of new infrastructure and revitalise UK industry?
I take it you also have no problem with food banks and homelessness being on the rise whilst Dodgy Dave's pals and natural allies stash billions in untaxed dirty money in off shore accounts and buy islands and ocean going yachts?
To me and many others even a fall in GDP and us falling from 5th to 7th most wealthy nation, both hopefully short term, would be a price worth paying for literally millions of British people, amongst them those most shat on by the Tories in the past, to get "a new deal" resulting in more and better paid jobs, better health care, better infrastructure and amenities and cheaper, more readily available housing ;)
I take it the prospect of the poorest, weakest, most dispossessed in society being given a leg up, and the ending of them being treated like mushrooms, doesn't appeal then?
Nor does getting better fairer employment rights?
Nor does the building of loads of new council houses to ameliorate the housing crisis?
Nor does the renationalisation of utilities etc to ensure they are run for the benefit of the population rather then for the profit of the already exorbitantly wealthy?
Nor does the formation of a national investment bank to finance the building of new infrastructure and revitalise UK industry?
I take it you also have no problem with food banks and homelessness being on the rise whilst Dodgy Dave's pals and natural allies stash billions in untaxed dirty money in off shore accounts and buy islands and ocean going yachts?
To me and many others even a fall in GDP and us falling from 5th to 7th most wealthy nation, both hopefully short term, would be a price worth paying for literally millions of British people, amongst them those most shat on by the Tories in the past, to get "a new deal" resulting in more and better paid jobs, better health care, better infrastructure and amenities and cheaper, more readily available housing ;)
Your assuming it is a dialectic position. That if you are not in favour of socialism then you must support the evil tories.
There are other approaches that don't involve bankrupting the country with crackpot schemes or sticking it to everyone and buying a yacht. Granted at the moment they are the choices, but it doesn't have to be that way. As a working man on a relatively low income I am not in favour of getting it stuck to me by evil tories. At the same time bankrupting the country helps no-one, especially the needy.
As I've said before we agree on the outcomes just not the means of getting there.
For example I don't like council housing because it fosters the idea that people should rely on the state for their basic needs. This and other socialist policies keep people as children, looking to the nanny state to provide for them, instead of becoming self reliant wealth creators.
But that is a whole other - big - topic of discussion not relevant here.
And Marco misrepresents me. Never said food banks don't exist. The reason they exist now and not before is because they were only made legal in the last Parliament.
And Marco misrepresents me. Never said food banks don't exist. The reason they exist now and not before is because they were only made legal in the last Parliament.
Bunkum! :ner:
Read the Scottish referendum thread in the archive, and you'll see where I made a very similar point, which Jez has just made, and you told me, quite categorically, that food banks don't exist here...when at the very same time Del and I were donating to the one in our church every week!!
What's your view now on homelessness here in the UK - has it crept up to being more of serious problem now in your eyes, compared with when we last discussed the issue? :)
Marco.
Show me the post then.
As for the homeless you've been to my place it is one of the poorest neighbourhoods in England. Not seen anyone sleeping rough here in years, although I've seen one or two when in London.
If your incorporating 'homeless' to mean people living in shelters or 'Bed & Breakfast' places then different matters. To me homeless means no roof over your head, not that you don't have your own house to live in.
Arkless Electronics
16-06-2016, 17:13
Your assuming it is a dialectic position. That if you are not in favour of socialism then you must support the evil tories.
There are other approaches that don't involve bankrupting the country with crackpot schemes or sticking it to everyone and buying a yacht. Granted at the moment they are the choices, but it doesn't have to be that way. As a working man on a relatively low income I am not in favour of getting it stuck to me by evil tories. At the same time bankrupting the country helps no-one, especially the needy.
As I've said before we agree on the outcomes just not the means of getting there.
For example I don't like council housing because it fosters the idea that people should rely on the state for their basic needs. This and other socialist policies keep people as children, looking to the nanny state to provide for them, instead of becoming self reliant wealth creators.
But that is a whole other - big - topic of discussion not relevant here.
And Marco misrepresents me. Never said food banks don't exist. The reason they exist now and not before is because they were only made legal in the last Parliament.
There is no reason why socialist democracy should "bankrupt the country". You never know, all the policies of Corbyn re investment in UK industry could make us wealthier in the long term... that's the idea... Even if the country becomes less wealthy well personally there is wealth in health, happiness and people that counts for more than the GDP. Look at Bhutan, they have a national happiness index! :)
As for the other bit I high lighted.... :doh: This I guess is where Tories don't get it!! Not everyone is capable of "becoming self reliant wealth creators" :eek: :stalks: Some are disabled, some old, some never had the opportunity to get a decent education, many just don't know "the right people in the right places" for doors to open to them.... This is why we need a "nanny state to provide for them". Yes, even them.
Or would you prefer all the above to remain in poverty, squalor, with poor life expectancy, never having a holiday, living in a damp shit hole on a sink estate, never tasting nice food etc because those who have been luckier in lifes lottery want to keep the ladder well and truly pulled up?
Just heard that Goldman Sachs think's the UK should stay in the EU :eyebrows:
To me that spells like "GET OUT" ! Goldman Sachs have sold off Greece amongst others. They are run by a nasty bunch of greedy. lying bastards who don't feel for people and who's only motivation is profit.
Just my 2 cts. as I don't live in the UK (I have a British passport though ;-)
Show me the post then.
Lol - I can't be arsed looking for it, but trust me, I know what you said. A retentive memory is one of the things I'm blessed with! ;)
To me homeless means no roof over your head, not that you don't have your own house to live in.
Absolutely, and there are TENS OF THOUSANDS (if not more) people like that, not just immigrants either, 'living' in the UK! In this day and age, and in a supposedly wealthy country, that is a bloody disgrace.
Marco.
Just heard that Goldman Sachs think's the UK should stay in the EU :eyebrows:
To me that spells like "GET OUT" ! Goldman Sachs have sold off Greece amongst others. They are run by a nasty bunch of greedy. lying bastards who don't feel for people and who's only motivation is profit.
Just my 2 cts. as I don't live in the UK (I have a British passport ;-)
You betcha.
As for the other bit I high lighted.... :doh: This I guess is where Tories don't get it!! Not everyone is capable of "becoming self reliant wealth creators" :eek: :stalks: Some are disabled, some old, some never had the opportunity to get a decent education, many just don't know "the right people in the right places" for doors to open to them.... This is why we need a "nanny state to provide for them". Yes, even them.
Or would you prefer all the above to remain in poverty, squalor, with poor life expectancy, never having a holiday, living in a damp shit hole on a sink estate, never tasting nice food etc because those who have been luckier in lifes lottery want to keep the ladder well and truly pulled up?
No! Surely if there are less able-bodied people sucking at the State teat then we have more money for the truly deserving cases? Assuming two things - one, we get richer as a nation. Two, you have someone in power with some empathy for the less fortunate.
I'll grant you Corbyn may be the latter, but he isn't capable of generating the wealth required with the policies he suggests. The opposite in fact as they have been tried already and have failed everywhere they were tried.
Arkless Electronics
16-06-2016, 18:29
It appears Labour MP Jo Cox was murdered by a crazy Brexiter :eek: Russia Today has named the assailant and quoted witnesses as saying he was shouting "Britain first" during the attack. RIP.
Russia Today (RT), isn't that Putin's private TV station ? I watched RT quite a bit, that is up to the Crimea situation. Then it just got to lob sided. But hey, they did have some nice documentaries. A part from that it's a horrible thing that happened.
Arkless Electronics
16-06-2016, 21:22
Russia Today (RT), isn't that Putin's private TV station ? I watched RT quite a bit, that is up to the Crimea situation. Then it just got to lob sided. But hey, they did have some nice documentaries. A part from that it's a horrible thing that happened.
Yes it was a terrible tragedy.
RT is indeed very pro Russia..... but in spite of that does excellent reporting on non Russia centric matters and like you say has good documentaries... It will also sometimes have UK news well before it appears on the BBC... especially if it's something the UK government would rather not publicise!
We just got back from a wonderful concert to find the news that Jo Cox had died. It's just awful. How can this be happening in our country? I'm not sure I recognise it so well anymore.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/a-day-of-infamy/
Never heard of her, but truly dreadful news. There really is some disgusting pond life out there, posing as 'human beings', who simply don't deserve to breathe air, and the scumbag who did this is one of them. Shocking :(
Marco.
Spectral Morn
16-06-2016, 23:10
It appears Labour MP Jo Cox was murdered by a crazy Brexiter :eek: Russia Today has named the assailant and quoted witnesses as saying he was shouting "Britain first" during the attack. RIP.
Awful, I only heard this a little while ago. The news report I saw is reporting a witness heard him shout put Britain First. To be stabbed and then shot :( There are no adequate words, she struck me from what I saw as being a cut above many other politicians a real loss, to her party, politics, her constituency, the UK, society and her family.
The degree of hate being followed through with recently is deeply shocking and sad, Orlando and now this. Different scale but still raw hatred ... words fail :(
Oldpinkman
17-06-2016, 05:23
Awful, I only heard this a little while ago. The news report I saw is reporting a witness heard him shout put Britain First. To be stabbed and then shot :( There are no adequate words, she struck me from what I saw as being a cut above many other politicians a real loss, to her party, politics, her constituency, the UK, society and her family.
The degree of hate being followed through with recently is deeply shocking and sad, Orlando and now this. Different scale but still raw hatred ... words fail :(
+1. heartbreaking
Oldpinkman
17-06-2016, 06:18
Assuming two things - one, we get richer as a nation. Two, you have someone in power with some empathy for the less fortunate.
I'll grant you Corbyn may be the latter, but he isn't capable of generating the wealth required with the policies he suggests. The opposite in fact as they have been tried already and have failed everywhere they were tried.
Martin - I agree, the support for the Conservatives at the last election was because the electorate prioritised management of the economy and wealth generation, and felt that the Conservatives were better trusted with that.
Curious how selective you are on the point, when there is worldwide unanimity on what is best for the UK economically. This, from the left wing fanatical East European Washington post will do for one example
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/britain-flirts-with-economic-insanity/2016/05/01/bb8d7a4a-0e1f-11e6-bfa1-4efa856caf2a_story.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjK22ho6O5s
Real shame, seemed like one of the good guys.
Truly shocking and terrible thing to have happened. Her poor family must be distraught. It appears the animal who did this had previous mental health issues and was a far right nut-job loner who subscribed to an extremist South African magazine "S.A. Patriot" published by white supremacist organisation "White Rhino" who were supporters of apartheid. He had no real politics except for extremist hate views. Shame he now has to be taken care of at the tax payers' expense, utter scum-bag. RIP Jo Cox.
... It appears the animal who did this had previous mental health issues and was a far right nut-job loner ...
Absolutely, but no proper four legged, two legged, flying or crawling "animal", would ever contemplate committing such a gratuitous crime.
No consideration at all given by the killer for the life changing grief his act will have on the people close to her, especially the two children left without their mother.
Absolutely, but no proper four legged, two legged, flying or crawling "animal", would ever contemplate committing such a gratuitous crime.
Indeed. The behaviour of that waste-of-oxygen scum is an affront to animals! And I say that, because that's how I feel, despite being sanctimoniously reprimanded earlier by someone (post now deleted) for expressing those feelings, who often doesn't know when to keep his big mouth shut.
My thoughts and prayers go out to Jo Cox's family and the terrible sense of loss and grief that they must now be feeling. Let's hope that in time they can learn to cope, and that the vermin responsible for killing her so callously feels the full force of the law.
Marco.
Lol - I can't be arsed looking for it, but trust me, I know what you said. A retentive memory is one of the things I'm blessed with! ;)
Absolutely, and there are TENS OF THOUSANDS (if not more) people like that, not just immigrants either, 'living' in the UK! In this day and age, and in a supposedly wealthy country, that is a bloody disgrace.
Marco.
Homelessness is a terrrible thing. I am a member of, and do work for Shelter so have seen many real examples of the damage it does. Thankfully, it is not as widespread as people tend to imagine. Homeless Link's latest estimate is 3,659 people sleeping rough in the Uk on any one night : http://www.homeless.org.uk/facts/homelessness-in-numbers/rough-sleeping/rough-sleeping-our-analysis
Glad you do work for Shelter, Dave. Respect :)
However, I would have to query the accuracy of those figures, when it says on the website:
According to the latest figures, collected...
Collected by whom? And are they government derived (read as 'massaged', to comply with an agenda) or provided by an unbiased independent authority, and thus more likely to be real? I've probably seen about half of that figure alone, just around Wrexham! ;)
Marco.
Lol - I can't be arsed looking for it, but trust me, I know what you said. A retentive memory is one of the things I'm blessed with! ;)
I'm quite good at researching, which is better than relying on memory.
Here's the relevant thread:
http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?37685-The-General-Election/page22&highlight=food+bank
And here's what Macca actually wrote in the relevant post:
Marco: 'Why, here in the UK, in the lack of austerity you claim, are 1000s of people having to rely on food banks to eat? Why is there so many homeless (many more than show up on deliberately 'massaged' government figures)?'
Macca: They are not relying on food banks to eat. before we had food banks were people starving to death? No. I lived on benefits for almost 4 years, no food banks back then. Did I starve to death? Obviously not. If you are on a low income a bit of free food frees up some cash to spend on something else you could not otherwise afford.
So Macca didn't say there were/are no food banks, rather that people didn't 'rely' on them to eat and would starve to death without them.
The issue is, Joe, that although "food banks" may have not been known as such, when Martin was on benefits, food, provisions and clothing, have always been collected by various charities, in order to give to the homeless and needy.
I know, because I've been donating it, and have even done so directly to the recipients concerned, through our church, for over 20 years! And I can assure that those people relied on that help to survive.
Therefore, although "food banks", as they are now known, didn't 'exist' as such, during the time Martin was referring to, the actual charitable process did, as outlined above - and indeed continues until this day, so Martin was wrong to assume that no such thing existed at the time he was referring to.
The only difference now is that we refer to it as "food banks" (everything has a 'posh name' these days), therefore my point still stands. We're arguing over nothing more than terminology. Thanks for doing the research, though :thumbsup:
Marco.
My wife set up the first one in my area.. More than 20 years ago i guess now
The problem is, unless stuff is happening right under folk's noses, it doesn't exist! :doh:
Marco.
But that's an argument that cuts both ways. If food banks, or something equivalent, have been going for 20 years, then you can't point the finger at any particular political party, because in that 20 year period we've had Labour, Tory, and Coalition governments.
I wasn't pointing a finger at any political party. My point was that "food banks", named as such or otherwise, have been going for more than 20 years - a point which Martin had disputed, and which has been proven wrong.
If not, I guess that Grant and I must've 'imagined' donating all that stuff to the HOMELESS and POOR back then who needed it? ;)
The argument was about the existence or otherwise of "food banks", not which political party has contributed most to the need for them.
Marco.
It was 1 foodbank... There was another one opened later then later they reduced for a long time.. Last few years of this administration they have exploded. They are everywhere now as are charities. May not happen in Tory heartlands i dont know but there are lots of folk here who work but still have to use them. Buy there clothes at charity shops. Get no holidays. Cant get good medical care sometimes. List goes on.
Sure its all our own fault though
I wasn't pointing a finger at any political party. My point was that "food banks", named as such or otherwise, have been going for more than 20 years - a point which Martin had disputed, and which has been proven wrong.
If not, I guess that Grant and I must've 'imagined' donating all that stuff to the HOMELESS and POOR back then who needed it? ;)
The argument was about the existence or otherwise of "food banks", not which political party has contributed most to the need for them.
Marco.
For this to be correct you have to assume that I was unaware that any charitable organization existed prior to food banks. How likely do you think that is?
The fact is that discussion was specifically about 'Food Banks', not giving to the poor in general, and my comment clearly refers to Food Banks and not other forms of poor-relief, some of which have been extant for at least 2000 years in this country.
So if we accept that Food Banks are just another form of poor-relief, which is your position, and that poor-relief has existed for millennia, why does the emergence of Food Banks (specifically) indicate that anything is any worse than it used to be? (That being your original argument to me.)
Lol - now you want to regurgitate the argument from that old thread? Sorry, not interested! :ner:
Just admit that "food banks" have existed, in one form of another (call it 'collecting stuff' for the homeless and needy), for a very long time in this country, including when you were on benefits - and we'll draw a line under the matter and move on :)
Marco.
Okay then, I will admit that charitable giving to the poor has existed as far back as records go. Ancient Sumeria, 3000BC let's say. It is not an invention of evil tories.
No matter how evil they are, they were beaten to it on creating poor people, and on giving them free food.
Queueing for food when we have social service is different though. It really shouldnt happen, far less be in the increase
Okay then, I will admit that charitable giving to the poor has existed as far back as records go. Ancient Sumeria, 3000BC let's say. It is not an invention of evil tories.
No matter how evil they are, they were beaten to it on creating poor people, and on giving them free food.
Lol - very good! :D
Anyway, back to reality, I'm afraid that I'm rather dubious of the figures for homelessness, quoted on that website, which Dave linked to earlier.
I'm almost certain if you spent 6 months touring the UK, in the relevant areas, walking the streets and visiting all the hostels, etc, and thus properly assessing the homeless situation, you'd arrive at a rather different figure!
Marco.
Queueing for food when we have social service is different though. It really shouldn't happen, far less be in the increase
Indeed, and the fact that that situation exists AT ALL, never mind the seriousness of it, in somewhere like the UK in this day and age, is an utter abomination. And it stems largely from the vulgar and grossly unfair division of wealth that exists, and the sickening amount of greed that's prevalent in society, especially amongst those who are the wealthiest.
Marco.
Arkless Electronics
17-06-2016, 13:21
Indeed, and the fact that that situation exists AT ALL, never mind the seriousness of it, in somewhere like the UK in this day and age, is an utter abomination. And it stems largely from the vulgar and grossly unfair division of wealth that exists, and the sickening amount of greed that's prevalent in society, especially amongst those who are the wealthiest.
Marco.
Spot on!
Mathew 26.11 - 'The poor will always be with you'
Is this Jesus predicting evil tories?
Strange bloke Jesus. Very keen on re-locating the bureaux de change and protecting brasses from physical and verbal abuse, but pretty accepting when it came to poverty.
His big mistake was, of course, to try telling people to stop judging each other and start respecting each other. Got beaten up and nailed to a tree for that.
Arkless Electronics
17-06-2016, 13:35
In many ways capitalism is greed!
The worlds single biggest issue could be said to be over population causing too much competition for resources... and yet it is hardly ever mentioned as a major issue by western governments. For capitalism to work it needs to make more money then last year on an ongoing basis.. this means it needs more consumers to buy its products and more poor to exploit as cheap labour to make it. If capitalism is taken to reducto absurdum (and not that absurd!) we end up with one "super mega corporation" owning all business and in effect running the world! It's a race to the bottom that can only result in the worlds resources being used at an ever increasing pace and the wealth gap ever increasing and it truly sickens me.
Arkless Electronics
17-06-2016, 13:40
Mathew 26.11 - 'The poor will always be with you'
Is this Jesus predicting evil tories?
Strange bloke Jesus. Very keen on re-locating the bureaux de change and protecting brasses from physical and verbal abuse, but pretty accepting when it came to poverty.
His big mistake was, of course, to try telling people to stop judging each other and start respecting each other. Got beaten up and nailed to a tree for that.
..... and the Christian religion has been well exploited by capitalism for its own ends!! "give unto Ceaser what is his"... The "Christian work ethic" etc being exploited by the rich to get the poor to accept their plight and work harder for the masters.... It's all politics at the end of the day and anything that can be exploited usually will be...
In many ways capitalism is greed!
The worlds single biggest issue could be said to be over population causing too much competition for resources... and yet it is hardly ever mentioned as a major issue by western governments. For capitalism to work it needs to make more money then last year on an ongoing basis.. this means it needs more consumers to buy its products and more poor to exploit as cheap labour to make it. If capitalism is taken to reducto absurdum (and not that absurd!) we end up with one "super mega corporation" owning all business and in effect running the world! It's a race to the bottom that can only result in the worlds resources being used at an ever increasing pace and the wealth gap ever increasing and it truly sickens me.
+1
I also agree with those sentiments, but equally, I have no time either for the opposite, which is to be jealous and resent those who are wealthy and successful, through hard-working and humane means, without being greedy or nasty.
No-one should be begrudged what they've earned (or won), fairly and squarely. It's perfectly possible to be wealthy and still have a good heart, and those who qualify should be admired and respected for what they've achieved in life, not resented or hated by those less fortunate. Envy is a rather dangerous and distasteful human trait.
Here's something to test your character as a person... When you hear about someone who's just won millions on the Lottery, is your first reaction to be pleased for them and their good fortune, or resentful towards them because they've now got more money than you could ever hope to earn in a lifetime?
Marco.
as much as I am enjoying watching the surreal discussion about something that wasn't said on a different thread, just what has all this thread crapping about food banks got to do with the referendum, or did I miss something?
:)
To bring it back to the issue at hand, here's Farage a month or so ago, before he started recycling Nazi propaganda films.
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_573b8f77e4b0328a838b8c9c?edition=uk
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage-copies-nazi-propaganda-8209318#shEALZXEwOZOeXB0.97
Can we at least all agree that this man is a seriously nasty piece of work, or does anyone here actually condone violence and the encouragement of hatred?
Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk
In many ways capitalism is greed!
The worlds single biggest issue could be said to be over population causing too much competition for resources... and yet it is hardly ever mentioned as a major issue by western governments. For capitalism to work it needs to make more money then last year on an ongoing basis.. this means it needs more consumers to buy its products and more poor to exploit as cheap labour to make it. If capitalism is taken to reducto absurdum (and not that absurd!) we end up with one "super mega corporation" owning all business and in effect running the world! It's a race to the bottom that can only result in the worlds resources being used at an ever increasing pace and the wealth gap ever increasing and it truly sickens me.
Did capitalism make greedy people or did greedy people make capitalism?
The reason overpopulation is never mentioned is because no-one wants to be the first into the suicide booth to solve the problem. If there is a global over-population problem which I don't agree that there is.
If you want an idea of what the problem is take Nigeria as an example. Vastly wealthy country, massive oil and mineral reserves, majority of the population live on less than a dollar a day.
The problem isn't 'capitalism' it is people, or rather the culture that people are brought up in, and what they come to believe is acceptable and not acceptable behaviour.
as much as I am enjoying watching the surreal discussion about something that wasn't said on a different thread, just what has all this thread crapping about food banks got to do with the referendum, or did I miss something?
Yes, it's a lot less boring than the pishanto you want to discuss! :ner:
;)
Marco.
Actually, launching "hate" campaigns against any specific politicians is missing the point of the real subject of the referendum, rather like playing fiddle whilst Rome burns. Having said that, hows also about a polling opinion on the far left multi-millionaire socialist Geldof, screaming 4 letter swear words and abuse from his yacht whilst swigging champers...which caused so many red faces on board that many VIPs upped sticks and disembarked in disgust. Nice advert for the "Remain" camp, eh?
There are only a few days to go and most people that I speak to about it are less concerned with the actual idiots connected with the campaign and more concerned with the details behind the running of the EU and what it means for their futures. The debate might be more meaningful and less emotive if we stuck to the real issues at hand. Just saying.
Actually, launching "hate" campaigns against any specific politicians is missing the point of the real subject of the referendum, .
Do you not think it worthy of comment that the poster encouraging a LEAVE vote which Farage "launched" yesterday is uncannily similar to Nazi propaganda?
Sent from Europe using Tapatalk
Copied from a post I saw elsewhere....I think it offers some perspective.
:)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Here are a few that strongly believe the UK should remain a member of the EU:
Governor of the Bank of England
International Monetary Fund
Institute for Fiscal Studies
Confederation of British Industry
Leaders/heads of state of every single other member of the EU
President of the United States of America
Eight former US Treasury Secretaries
President of China
Prime Minister of India
Prime Minister of Canada
Prime Minister of Australia
Prime Minister of Japan
Prime Minister of New Zealand
The chief executives of most of the top 100 companies in the UK including Marks and Spencer, BT, Asda, Vodafone, Virgin, IBM, BMW etc.
Kofi Annan, the former Secretary General of the United Nations
All living former Prime Ministers of the UK (from both parties)
Virtually all reputable and recognised economists
The Prime Minister of the UK
The leader of the Labour Party
The Leader of the Liberal Democrats
The Leader of the Green Party
The Leader of the Scottish National Party
The leader of Plaid Cymru
Leader of Sinn Fein
Martin Lewis, that money saving dude off the telly
The Secretary General of the TUC
Unison
National Union of Students
National Union of Farmers
Stephen Hawking
Chief Executive of the NHS
300 of the most prominent international historians
Director of Europol
David Anderson QC, Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation
Former Directors of GCHQ
Secretary General of Nato
Church of England
Church in Scotland
Church in Wales
Friends of the Earth
Greenpeace
Director General of the World Trade Organisation
WWF
World Bank
OECD
Here are pretty much the only notable people who think we should leave the EU:
Boris Johnson, who probably doesnt really care either way, but knows hell become Prime Minister if the country votes to leave
A former Secretary of State for Work and Pensions who carried out a brutal regime of cuts to benefits and essential support for the poorest in society as well as the disabled and sick
The guy who was Education Secretary and every single teacher in the country hated with a furious passion for the damage he was doing to the education system
Leader of UKIP
BNP
Britain First
Donald Trump
Keith Chegwin
David Icke
Pick the list that you most trust and vote that way. It really couldnt be more simple.
Sent from the uncontrolled Swiss border using Tapatalk
You missed me off your influential remain list.
But I'll forgive you.
Child murderers Sinn Fein want to stay? Another reason to leave.
BTW I've met Geldof and he's a wanker. No surprise I know but good to have confirmation.
You (rpdx) seem to need lists of organisations to help you make your own mind up. I believe that most people will actually decide based on the facts, not on lists of organisations who may or may NOT be taking sides.
It's smacking of desperation to simply chuck lists of who might be for remain (where do you dig these stats up from and have you bothered to check that they're factual or is this just more sensationalism based on the leave side's propaganda machine and media?).
Ah, well, while we're about it, your list is meaningless drivel. There are dozens of notable personalities who are firmly behind leave that you've singularly failed to mention including a senior figure in the UK's financial market sector, Dyson, Lord Owen, William Dartmouth, etc etc etc ad infinitum. Please if you're going to play top trumps, at least start with a properly researched set of cards rather than quoting verbatim from a who's who of the Tory propaganda "remain" journalism school of sensationalism.
Again: Lets stick to the facts of what this debate is about, not who's voting for what. I couldn't give a monkeys who else is voting for either camp. Most people just want the facts upon which to make an informed decision, and believe that I have come to the only logical decision I can based on some pretty extensive research which started long before this debate happened, or the referendum for that matter.
Child murderers Sinn Fein want to stay? Another reason to leave.
I'm not sure that this really negates the rest of the list, but I know you like to cherry pick your facts.
:)
Have you no comment on the similarity of the Farage "BREAKING POINT"poster to Nazi propaganda, or is it easier to ignore that?
Sent from the unpoliced border of Switzerland using Tapatalk
You (rpdx) seem to need lists of organisations to help you make your own mind up.
That's arrogant patronising claptrap Paul. I've contributed an awful lot more to this thread than that list, as you well know, even though you seem to tend towards simply ignoring or worse, misrepresenting my contributions. Your assertions often seem to be backed up by "I've done lots of research" which (apart from the naming one book) never seem to be backed up by anything more than that claim.
I'm not trying to change your mind, which goes double if you really can't see that it matters who you are standing alongside.
Yet another "leaver" ignoring the question about the similarity of Farage's poster to Nazi propaganda, I note.
R
That's arrogant patronising claptrap Paul.
Ok, that's far enough. I warned you before what would happen, UMPTEEN TIMES, if you (or anyone else) made personal remarks again towards another member on this thread. We do not address each other here in such an abrasive or disrespectful manner.
You're out for a week, so your enjoy your holiday. You need to *learn* that I mean what I say!!
<Thread closed, and this time permanently>
Marco.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.