Posts by Bibbles

    the Scots are too canny to withdraw from Westminsters financial umbrella

    I'm not sure if Sturgeon would still expect handouts if Scotland leaves the union, but I suspect she does. What's more, our history of being soft makes me think we would still throw money at them. Interesting to see what would happen regarding a border

    I admire the Scots for their nationalism, but not their common sense. They have a large percentage of people who don't want to be ruled by the British parliament but have no objection being ruled by the EU parliament. The average EU deficit is 1%, and is the highest deficit a country can have to be allowed to join the EU, however Scotland's deficit is 7%. Despite their spending, their NHS is worse than ours. The SDP are extremely left wing, and believe they can spend their way out of trouble, and we all know that doesn't work. They also believe that they can continue with free education, and free prescriptions etc etc, without the massive subsidies from the government. Despite having so many seats, it's still only 45% of the country who voted SDP, which tells me that a referendum would still produce a small remain vote.


    I would love to see Scotland leave, because I believe they cost the UK an enormous amount of money. If I were in power the first thing I would do is address the Barnett formula, because Scotland has had it to good for to long.

    You probably chose to like the wrong colour. ;)

    I initially put red (because I do like red) but then took it off. To be honest, as far right as I may be, I do actually believe the gap between the very top and a hard working person at the bottom is to large, but I don't think that makes me a communist

    I believe we should defend the rights of gay people, the rights of women, the right for an animal to be slaughtered humanely, and people who do not love Allah. I also believe we should defend the rights of people who totally disagree with the first sentence. Am I being a hypocrite, am I being a liberal, or are the two the same thing ?

    What's all this talk of "freedom of speech". We haven't had this privilege for some years now. We have to agree with the liberal way of thinking, and nothing else is permissible. To say you think homosexualism is wrong is forbidden, to say playing God and changing someones sex is wrong, is unforgivable, and to laugh at a geezer with hands the size of plates, but has chosen to wear a skirt, is an arrestable offense. Now the really bad news, it's going to get worse. Even though 99% of people think this political correctness is bonkers, and 99% of people believe we have lost the freedom of speech, the 1% of the nation will continue to have there own way. In other words, the lunatics have taken over the asylum !!

    Although this is a election story, best placed here....


    A hate crime is when there is intention to cause severe distress to someone. Taking the piss out of someone is not illegal yet, as far as I know. Perhaps I am wrong.:/ The police keep responding to these sort of things and in some cases, arrest people.


    We keep hearing reports of how overstretched the police are, yet they have resources to deal with these kind of "crimes".:rolleyes:

    That's a really good point. It only takes one footballer to make a so called racist remark to another and the entire Met is on to it. If someone brakes into your house and steels your belongings, you get a crime number to give to the insurance company.

    It was meant to be a Leader's debate, so I'm kind of with CH4 on that, but I'll pick up about any planned changes to CH4, if they happen, in the media forums. But the head of Ch4 news has already publicly blasted Boris a few months ago, so she is not impartial.


    Talking of debates, I missed some of them including that CH4 one, but I have just seen most of the BBC debate tonight and I wish I hadn't bothered.


    Too many people on stage and too much noise.

    In order the BBC are being seen to be fair, they are being stupid. Why put on the leader of the SDP and Plaid Cymru when they only represent a small part of the UK. I watched the entire thing, and learned nothing new. Sturgeon and the leader of Green party are excellent orators, albeit I despise their politics. I liked the guy from the Brexit Party, and think he did a decent job. The leader of Labour party was at a total disadvantage because their policies are so damn stupid, and all the Tory guy could say was "we will get Brexit done".


    What upsets me is out of the seven party leaders only two had any respect for democracy, and I think you know what I mean

    I was a retailer for most of my working life. The company I had worked for closed down two shops in Liverpool, because the shoplifting was so rife they simply couldn't make it pay.


    Back in the mid nineties I lived in Bournemouth for a while. The locals in Bournemouth are quite cold, and befriending people was quite difficult. Believe it or not their was a large scouse community in the area. The Scousers were far more friendly, however, I wouldn't even leave a pint on the table went I went to the toilet. Everyone I knew was up to some sort of illegal activity. They are strange people, they would beat you up and steal your wallet, then hold a whip round to help you out.

    I would add that there should be greater incentives for training those people already in the UK in any skills where there is a shortfall.

    Thank God, some sense spoken. Has it not occurred to anyone that taking doctors and nurses from other countries is theft. Their country of origin no doubt funded their education, and then we come along stole them. Due to mass and uncontrolled immigration the government accompanied by businesses haven't bothered training people. I have seen job adds for people earning the minimum wage, insisting on exact experience. Since mass immigration we have lost the ability to forward plan. As far as manual labour goes, schools have been guilty of telling kids they are a failure if they don't go to uni. There used to be what I call the law natural progression. The academic kids who went to uni, and had it paid for by the government, the less bright ones that took up trades, and the worker bees who worked in factories and shops. It all balanced out perfectly. Then we had mass immigration !!

    We are indeed one of the Countries who are net contributors, after Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium and France because we have a thriving economy thanks largely to our trade with the EU. All to be thrown away in the hope of trade elsewhere, largely the USA and whatever Trump demands

    I am sick of this "we are full to the brim", there are miles and miles of open land (92% is undeveloped), what we are short of is infrastructure to cope - houses, schools, health services, and so on. You cannot claim that immigrants are driving wages down, the E Europeans for instance who work the fields all manage to send some of their wages to the family back home

    LOL, your tripping over yourself. Our thriving economy is down to a successful government, one you will no doubt not be voting for. It has absolutely nothing to do with being part of the EU.


    Yes 92% of the country hasn't been built on, but in comparative terms that is a lot. Do you not want forestry, open fields, farmland, and recreational space? Are you not interested in wildlife or the water table. More farm animals, more emissions etc etc. In real terms we are full to the brim. Fact, if we stopped all immigration tomorrow, it would take at least 20 years for the additional taxes from mass immigration to pay for the infrastructure we require. Populations need to grow slowly in order infrastructures can keep up. Again, not rocket science.


    Of course immigrants are driving wages down. If a polish builder is willing to work for half an English worker, no building company is going to be handing out rises. This isn't rocket science. You didn't read my previous post properly. We have thousands of unemployed lazy English people doing nothing, yet we have thousands of East Europeans working the fields. Do I have to spell out the answer? For most of our history we didn't have mass immigration and an open door policy, but potatoes got picked, and hotels had a work force. The difference was that Tony Blair hadn't introduced the right not to work. Perhaps a step backwards would be a step forwards !!

    Ted Heath made it very clear that the aim was to unite Europe and stop any chance of more wars. It worked

    Look, it's in the past, we voted out, just accept it. If we had of voted to remain the leavers would have accepted it and just moved on, why can't you?


    The country is full to the brim, having freedom of movement was destroying our culture, holding back wages, and allowing companies to stop training people. We are one of a few countries in the EU that are a net contributor. That's like having a bank account where you get back 95p for every pound you invest. Yes, the trading policy is convenient, but there is no reason we can't have that without all the other crap that has to go with it. Anyway, that's all in the past now. It's likely Conservative will have a comfortable majority, and we will be out within a few months. We can then all celebrate our Independence and start building for a better future

    I do indeed respect democracy, we voted in 1977 to remain. Is that not democracy?

    The results of the recent elections showed great support for the LibDems and their Remain policy

    If you think that the laws on benefit, health, and housing need to be tightened up you would e very lucky to find politicians prepared to take that on. No doubt lawyers would have a field day

    It was suggested to Mrs Thatcher that she should tighten them up, her reply was it would be political suicide

    You know as well as I do we voted in 1977 for a trading policy called the common market. We didn't vote for freedom of movement, and the right for Europe to make our laws.


    To be fair the Tories have tightened up a little on the benefit system, albeit not enough. Your right that to tighten up more may lose them so votes, and that's why I propose that anyone with out or job, excluding people who are retired, don't get a vote. If people don't put in, they don't have the right to have a say.

    So Corbyn and Johnson will go head to head on ITV tonight; that'll be interesting to watch them spinning away like mad with all their 'jam tomorrow' drivel and doublespeak? The latest was the Tories are gonna plant 60 zillion trees by 2035, and Swinson countered it with 'the Lib Dems are going to plant twice as many'. What utter contempt they must have for the electorate in their expectation that we'll believe it? So we'll have one who couldn't run a fucking whelk-stall, and another who's a fucking adroit liar, and one of them is going to be our next prime minister. I've never known anything like this!

    I have, it's the same every election. All politicians are lyres, it's a requisite when they sign up. Somehow Swinson reminds me of Vicky Pollard, and I can't help giggling when I watch her. All that said, it could be worse. The Labour party have a leader who sympathises with terrorists, wants to nationalise everything that moves, thinks it is a good idea to borrow a squillion billion pounds, and believes it would be a great idea if everyone in the world comes to live here. With the opposition in front of me, I think I could win the election for the Tories

    We need immigrants to fill the jobs that British people will not do, care workers, agricultural workers. and any menial work

    I think only the LibDems recognise that and along with their Remain policy they get my vote

    I live in an a county with high unemployment, but there are towns and areas full of east Europeans. This tells me that society is allowing people to live off of benefits whilst East Europeans are filling the unskilled jobs. If we force people to get up off of their ar5e5 and go to work, then perhaps we won't need the mass immigration you want.. Let's not forget, there is meant to be a housing crisis, and the people you are so desperate to move here, have to live somewhere. They also have to use services such as the NHS and transport. We can't cope with the people we have, let alone more.


    Regards Brexit, I thought we voted OUT, or do you not respect democracy ?

    LIB DEMS > "Tackle the rise in hate crimes by making them all aggravated offences, giving law enforcement the resources and training they need to identify and prevent them, and condemning inflammatory rhetoric – including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia – by those with public platforms"

    Fascism at work.

    Islamophobia is an oxymoron. A phobia is an illogical fear. Having a fear of a religion that preaches violence and intolerance, accompanied by a stream of atrocities in the name of Allah, is hardly illogical.

    So why does someone have to be blamed. Locking someone up for mistake isn't going to bring back the 96 poor soles who lost their lives. The disaster was a combination of events and bad decisions.

    1. The Liverpool supporters should have been put at the other end

    2. The gates should not have been opened to allow supporters in without tickets. However, the disruption being caused outside the ground justifies the decision.

    3. Supporters with tickets for other pens decided they would go in the central pens. Police have been blamed for this, but surely the supporters were also to blame.

    4. Liverpool supporters turning up in their thousands without tickets.

    I fully appreciate there was a police cover up, and I have no issue with any individual being tried for perverting the course of justice.

    What sickens me is the outright defence of the supporters. People conveniently forget the Heysel disaster, where 39 people lost their lives as a result of Liverpool supporters. At the time Liverpool supporters were a scourge in the football world. I had a friend who was a police officer on duty at Wembley for the final. Again, thousands of supporters turned up without tickets attempting to jump over turnstiles and knock down gates. They learned nothing. I went to the Champions League final in June, supporting Spurs. I travelled up from Murcia on the train, and spent 3 hours talking to Liverpool supporters. Most didn't have tickets, and several of them told me they were going to get into the stadium by what ever means it took. Again, they have learned nothing.

    Ultimately David Duckenfield has had his life ruined by family members of the deceased who just want to have somebody blamed. This poor man was doing his job to the best of his ability, and didn't want anyone to be hurt, let alone killed. Whether his decisions were right wrong is almost irrelevant, he had to flip a coin, and it appears it may have landed the wrong way up. If he had locked the supporters outside, and they rioted, I am sure he would have been punished. Rock and hard place comes to mind.

    As sad as Hillsborough was there have been far worse disasters before and after. I think it's time to move on now


    [HY Mod edit] Post moved here. Duplicate thread deleted.