Youtube comments of (@Iain1962).
-
1200
-
Just some info.
he was driving a Mercedes Class A AMG, with Polish plates, so that was suspicious already, then he was driving at excess speed in a bus lane, the Police stopped him at a traffic light, but when he saw their blue lights, he sped off through the red light, so the motorcycle police followed him as he broke multiple more laws almost knocking over pedestrians and a cyclist, the vehicle was then slowed by heavy traffic at which point the officers tried to make him stop by drawing their weapons, he once again ignored this and tried to drive away even though a policeman was literally leaning over the bonnet pointing his gun at him, so the Policeman fired.
He was also 17, the legal age to drive in France is 18, and it takes about 6 months to a year organise and pass a test. So he was illegally driving a car very likely stolen and tried to mow down the Police.
Sad but whose fault is it really?
672
-
566
-
344
-
343
-
342
-
237
-
174
-
162
-
160
-
149
-
147
-
136
-
135
-
134
-
127
-
121
-
120
-
102
-
99
-
93
-
92
-
90
-
88
-
83
-
82
-
75
-
75
-
73
-
70
-
64
-
63
-
61
-
60
-
52
-
46
-
42
-
41
-
40
-
39
-
37
-
36
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
30
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
25
-
I lived there for twenty years, it was beautiful, wonderful, vibrant, exciting and always interesting.
I was there last year and it is a dump, everything is filfthy, I thought I was in a Souk in Morocco half the time, beggars and tramps and homeless everywhere. Thieves, pickpockets, scammers grafitti, bins overflowing. Tent camps and matresses lying about, drug taking everywhere, smoking crack in the Metro.
People on those Escooters just riding about like crazy people weaving along pavements, the roads have all been bunged up with cycle lanes, bus lanes, it's absolutely horrific.
I'm not going back.
25
-
It needs to be privatised, then we will have accountability when things go wrong. Right now if the NHS hires a bad actor we pay their salary, if the hospital is fined, we pay their fine, it is just transferred from one government account to another government account, then if patients sue, the taxpayer pays again not the hospital.
So we pay for bad HR, a bad doctor/nurse, the patients suffer, we pay for the court case, and then we pick up the fine and any compensation that is rightfully due. So where is the incentive to improve. There isn't one. The logical thing to do for a Hospital is to cover it up, that's what the system basically instructs them to do.
It's a sorry state of affairs, but how to change what has become almost a national religion. I never use the NHS if I can help it, I take a holiday and see a doctor abroad even if I have to pay for it.
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
Having lived in both the Netherlands and Belgium (and France which wasn't even mentioned) I would rate the NHS as the worst system I have had to use....by far.........................................................by light years !
There is no such thing as a waiting list in the Netherlands, your GP thinks you may have cancer you see a specialist the same day or perhaps the next if it is late in the afternoon, if the specialist agrees you start treatment the next day, if a biopsy is required it will be done within 24hrs results will be in 24 or 48 hours later and treatment will begin immediately. None of this 62 days (nine weeks!!!) bullshit, same in France or Belgium.
No wait to see a GP, same day appointment is no problem, when I came back to the UK after over 30 years abroad it was like going back to the stone age. Trouble is people in the UK are in love with the NHS and most of them have nothing to compare it with. The reality is it is shit. The people who work there try their best, I agree with that very good people, but it is badly structured just like anything run in any country by the state.
The top down model is totally inept for healthcare, the Dutch model is funded bottom up, so you pay insurance (if you can't afford to pay the state will pay it for you so everybody has it), when you use a service whatever it is the provider gets paid by the insurance company, so the money is automatically going where the demand is. At the end of the year the state has a pot of money it distributes amongst the insurers to make for any imbalance ie. if one insurer has a lot of expensive treatments to pay for and another has few the first one will receive a large sum and the second a small sum or even nothing.
This means the state is not involved in the mechanics of care delivery, which makes it a non-political issue, everybody has it and the money goes where it is needed.
The UK needs a real rethink.
12
-
12
-
People really need to learn what the word "Bigot" means. It has come to mean anybody "right wing", but actually it means, from the Oxford Dictionary
"A person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic towards a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group."
So actually that defines the left (and the LGBT community) pretty perfectly, I mean the right is now the "far-right" due to their bigotry. If you want controlled immigration or believe there are only two sexes (based on biology) , they, the bigots, brand you to be a bigot, because they make prejudiced and antagonistic assumptions
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
The French are creating this problem, why do they not arrest all these people and decided if they should be granted asylum in France or send them back, end of problem.
They are supposed to do this anyway under the Dublin treaty, in fact the countries they passed through to get to France should have done it, so it is all the members of the EU not doing what they have signed up to that have created this problem, imagine if the situation was reversed, and people illegally in the UK were trying to get to France, would there be camps of illegal immigrants in Dover? No way !!!
The whole issue is pathetic, the French should just get the finger out and sort it, they are creating their own mess, they have even provided accommodation for the migrants, why don't they just put an ad on Booking.com?
6
-
6
-
Having lived in both the Netherlands and Belgium (and France which wasn't even mentioned) I would rate the NHS as the worst system I have had to use....by far.........................................................by light years !
There is no such thing as a waiting list in the Netherlands, your GP thinks you may have cancer you see a specialist the same day or perhaps the next if it is late in the afternoon, if the specialist agrees you start treatment the next day, if a biopsy is required it will be done within 24hrs results will be in 24 or 48 hours later and treatment will begin immediately. None of this 62 days (nine weeks!!!) bullshit, same in France or Belgium.
No wait to see a GP, same day appointment is no problem, when I came back to the UK after over 30 years abroad it was like going back to the stone age. Trouble is people in the UK are in love with the NHS and most of them have nothing to compare it with. The reality is it is shit. The people who work there try their best, I agree with that very good people, but it is badly structured just like anything run in any country by the state.
The top down model is totally inept for healthcare, the Dutch model is funded bottom up, so you pay insurance (if you can't afford to pay the state will pay it for you so everybody has it), when you use a service whatever it is the provider gets paid by the insurance company, so the money is automatically going where the demand is. At the end of the year the state has a pot of money it distributes amongst the insurers to make for any imbalance ie. if one insurer has a lot of expensive treatments to pay for and another has few the first one will receive a large sum and the second a small sum or even nothing.
This means the state is not involved in the mechanics of care delivery, which makes it a non-political issue, everybody has it and the money goes where it is needed.
The UK needs a real rethink.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Ronald the Press in Britain was overwhelmingly for remain only a couple of newspapers were for Brexit, in fact the whole machinery was against Brexit, the BBC, ITV and Sky news, every political party except UKIP, most of the press, but the people had had enough.
You say let the old people die and things will change...(very nice of you) but you fail to grasp that people become wiser as they get older so as they age the middle aged opinions will evolve too, also the younger people had never known anything else except being in the EU, and change for something you have never experienced is scary. Once the people see how the UK will prosper outside the EU I doubt very much if anybody would want to shackle themselves to the corrupt bureaucrats in Brussels in twenty years time especially as by then the Euro will have collapsed and many other countries may have left including your own.
Sturgeon is talking about another referendum for Scottish independence but she has no chance really, only Westminster can authorise it and they probably won't and Scotland is not in the EU, the UK is in the EU and the UK voted to leave, that is the situation no matter what she says. There are so many unlikely events that would have to occur for that to happen...However anything is possible of course but it is extremely unlikely.
Britain's economy will prosper outside the EU, the EU has been holding us back with its protectionism, now we can trade with the whole world with no restrictions imposed by Brussels.
And our relations will be good with all the nations of Europe especially the Dutch who probably think more like the British than any other European nation.
Things will settle down common sense will kick in once the emotional reactions have subsided and life will go on.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
+slothkingn1 didn't say the EU had commandeered our armed forces, but Juncker has repeatedly called for an EU army to be created, at which point the commander in chief would be the President of the Commission not our Prime Minister (well in the UK it is the Queen but she delegates the power to the PM and the Secretary of State for Defence). They have recently created a border force which can deploy on any Schengen member even if they object and patrol the borders.
The question is hand is not the British system of government and it's inconsistencies, (personally I would rather see an elected Senate than the house of Lords), however the very important difference is that the House of Lords is not the only house that can initiate legislation, any MP or Lord can propose legislation, and after many procedures it will be thrown out or voted on by both houses. In the EU ONLY the unelected commission can propose legislation, they draught it and then the MEPs debate it and they can tinker with it and even in a few cases reject it (in which case the commission repackages it and sends it out again until it passes). That is the only purpose of the MEPs aside from that they are merely a rubber stamp committee. So the 28 unelected commissioners have all the power !!! This is a totally different scenario to the UK.
If we vote to leave the process will last two years (under article 50 of the Lisbon treaty you have to give two years notice of departure), so the Tories, if that is your issue, will only have a short time left before the next election.
However please don't vote remain because you don't like the Tories, it has nothing to do with UK politics and everything to do with getting our sovereignty back so our votes actually count for something.
Oh just one other thing the UK has been against 72 EU policies in the past 15 years and we have lost every single vote, so to suggest that by remaining in we can change things is just wishful thinking.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Ricky-tr2hd Well that's a particularly negative view. The British Empire was about trade not conquest. Yes we exploited the land, yes we made profits, but so did the Indians, trade is a two way thing you know.
The British did not build railways to "extract goods", but to transport the goods and people in both directions. The East India Company worked hand in hand with the locals, the British Indian Army was almost entirely Indians, only the officers were British and it was a voluntary force.
35 million dead, firstly that's a random figure picked out of the air by an activist and you make it sound like a ritual slaughter, the population of India is huge and the British were there for 200 years and relatively speaking there were only a few atrocities over that time. Yes there were some and it's a disgrace but that's humans for you.
Britain gave a lot to India, its system of Law, it's system of government, they still organise their Army like the British, the railways, TEA !! It was the British that created the Tea industry out of nothing, the list is long.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@saymyname3097 Well lines of lorries have always happened, NI protocol is bad that's for sure we should never have agreed and the sooner it is ripped up the better, if there are skills shortages that means business is booming so that's great and we can selectively address those if needed, that's what controlling immigration is all about, us deciding who comes, the only export problems are due to the EU being officious nobody is happy with that including the EU customers who are the ones waiting for their deliveries, there are no import problems as far as I am aware and we control that function so that's entirely up to us, fisheries, well the EU controls fisheries and agriculture with the CFP and CAP not the members so there are issues there because the EU is very protectionist, that's why we left, we don't like protectionism, there was no such thing as EU funding, they just gave us some of our money back so no loss there, we now have twice as much to spend, or we would have had if the remainers hadn't insisted we give it all to the NHS because of a slogan on a bus, but that's another story.
The trade deals are not "unfavourable to the UK", in the main they are exactly as they were before and we have signed some new one. Any deal was supposed to take a decade remember? Instead we already have more than the EU. There has been no drop in living standards, wages are rising and there are plenty of jobs available. Hire and fire at will is great for the job market, it means businesses can take risks they wouldn't be able to otherwise, but then you probably have never run a business.
You are just trying to find problems where none exist because you want to say "I told you so", but instead we are the ones saying I told you so....hahaha.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@03MARA01 Honda pulled out of Europe too. They closed all their factories outside Japan, so no it had nothing to do with Brexit, that site by the way has been sold and is being redeveloped by Panattoni to a warehouse and distribution Park creating 9000 new jobs.
So we went from having no deals to having our own bespoke deals...that the EU don't have, so there's a benefit already.
The EU don't have a trade deal with the US either, the US don't like trade deals, they only have a dozen or so. There is no queue for trade deals with the USA, that's not how deals are done you don't take turns.
And we are not too small we are the 5th biggest economy in the world out of 197, that makes us one of the biggest economies in the world, not that size really matters, all that matters is do you have something we want and do we have something you want... who cares about size? Do you not buy from a shop because it's small? Only buy from megastores do you? If we had that approach we wouldn't be able to do deals with almost anybody because they are all smaller than us !!
You have obviously never been abroad for work have you? You have to register locally, get in the system, you don't just waltz in , now you don't have any automatic rights you have to apply, but it's not hard.
And the ETIAS system is not confirmed and if there is a cost it will be 7 euros valid for 3 years, hardly an issue.
It's good anyway. We don't want people just crossing borders, that's not a good thing.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+Yoda You made rather a long post full of fallacy, half truths and some blatant lies, it would take so long to go through each one, but let me give you a bit of an education on some of the major points you fail totally on.
First paragraph opt outs: Opt outs were possible until the ratification of the Lisbon treaty, now opt outs are not allowed unless they were agreed before ratification.
Now with QMV there is no longer any veto either.
Scotland: I don't know where you conjure up this figure of 9% control, Scotland has powers of many things like taxation rates and public spending, health, care for the elderly, the Police, justice and education, that is already more than 35%, and it's fair to say the SNP are screwing up what they control royally.
Para 2: Scotland has a voting age of 16 since May 2016, for Scottish elections only, this is because Scotland has a separate legal system from England so can make these irrational decisions, the SNP only want it because they have more influence over the idealistic but not yet well enough educated young people. The House of Lords is appointed but is a second chamber with largely supervisory role, hereditary peers being able to sit was abolished in 1999, the point of the Lords is that it is wise men and women who have experience who check the government is not going mad, their function is pretty much supervisory, Scotland has no such check so the Scottish parliament can do pretty much what it wants with no check to hold it back, I know which system I prefer.
Scottish trade: Export trade is calculated in the UK at where the invoice is issued not at the port of departure. You also confuse trade and exports. 65% of Scottish exports go to the rest of the UK, with only about 9% going to the EU.
Most of the oil is owned by foreign companies mainly Arab countries and Canada, with some owned by Shell which is Anglo Dutch and BP which is Anglo American most of the profits go abroad, the whisky industry is the same, over 85% is not Scottish owned.
There are no energy sanctions with Russia.
Scotland does not receive more than it puts in to the EU as you say. The UK gives the EU the money and the EU gives the UK about half of it back. So when we leave the EU the money will come from Westminster and we can keep the change.
Scotland does have the lowest unemployment rate since August 2016, the first time for over twenty years....and for about 6 months, so it is a half truth in that it is true until the next figures come out, and given the recent closures of many businesses, it will be back higher than the rest of the UK.
I could go on but there is just too much BS to cover.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@xdgamesCoUk Well most of their policies are left leaning, all this overspending, the Green Policy, the immigration policy, all this diversity nonsense.
People voted Tory to get immigration under control get us out of the EU and balance the budget.
What we get is increasing immigration , both legal and illegal, massive deficit spending, a rush to net zero, pandering to the LGBT community, increased foreign aid etc etc
The Rwanda idea was a ridiculous deflection, they knew that would never work out, we have the power to control immigration but the Tories are just afraid to use it, they had a massive majority, they could pass any law they wanted but they have failed to do anything. the Rwanda policy has wasted a whole year which is exactly what they wanted.
Why do you think they are doing so badly in the polls? Do you really think the people think Starmer and his merry band of buffoons are wonderful...Not a chance, the reason the Tories are not doing well is because they are not doing what they were elected to do.
It is also the case that Labour have rejected the radical Corbynism and moved rightwards to the centre, so we currently have a Conservative Party heading Left and the Labour Party heading right, everybody has become Lib Dems basically.
2
-
2
-
Having changed the meaning of many words they have changed the meaning of "Democracy". Old democracy, that antiquated notion of the people voting for their representatives and then holding them to account has been replaced by new democracy. New democracy is a collective of wise socialists and a collection of "institutions", the courts, the NGO's the ECHR, the UN, the WEF all of course run by radical lefties.
Voting for your leaders by majority is now called populism, and evil, whereas kowtowing to left wing ideology is democracy.
Easy really. That's why Biden talks about Trump being a "threat to democracy", and von der Leyen talks about EU democratic values, despite no-one being able to vote for any of the legislators in the EU. That really is the new democracy in action, (it may also be called "the rules based international order").
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@matthewsemple Phil doesn't know much about it I'm afraid, he just goes with tropes and made up figures.
Yes buying things from the UK is slightly more complicated if you are buying something on ebay for example, because of how VAT is handled, but it's the same in the other direction, because they haven't implemented a good system - both the EU and the UK. That was however to be expected after all we left the single market, so something was needed, but they haven't thought through.
For the bigger businesses they know what they are doing, if they export to the EU there is a good chance they export to elsewhere too, so they are used to customs.
We have a Free trade agreement for most things, so it only affects a few industries and really it's all down to a few forms.
Don't forget it's the EU that want all this complexity, not us...We are just going along because that's how they want to do it. We could have mutual recognition and it would be hardly any issues at all, but they aren't interested. And as most of them don't rely on the ballot box for their job, they don't care, and doing it this way means the EU get more money from EU citizens.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Dont forget Uncles, aunts, first cousins, second cousins removed, grandchildren, great grandchildren, godchildren, distant cousins, step brothers, step sisters, step brothers uncles, step brothers aunts, step sisters, brothers who used to be sisters, sisters who used to be brothers, and Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@msto1987 Well you say that, but very rich people work really hard ! And they can easily move somewhere else. When France tried to tax the very rich, loads of them left the country, and they ended up taking in about the same as before, it was the middle class that made up the difference.
That's what happens, the very rich leave, so the rich pay more, so they leave, so the high earning middle class pay more, and then they leave and eventually it's you paying more because everybody else has left, or stopped putting in any effort.
If the State is going to take 70% of my earnings...Hey I'm rich...instead of working I'll go and spend my cash somewhere warm instead of busting my butt to pay for you !!
Anyway as usual, having lost the initial argument you are now arguing about something else, and obviously we will never agree, because you want Communism, and I definetely don't so best to leave it here...Cheers !!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Indeed, and the same is happening in the Labour party, however if the population is not happy with what happens next we can take steps to oust them and force a new General election. What can we do about the EU ?
The EU is a repository for failed politicians, apparently mentioning Mr Kinnock is not satisfactory, Ok let me name a few more. How about Edith Cresson, catastrophic Prime Minister of France named as French Commissioner eventually booted out for corruption of even the EU (an exception). Mr Juncker oversaw a large tax scam for international companies who could base themselves in Luxembourg, eventually booted out by his own people he is now the President of the Commission, and incidentally is in charge of investigating the large tax scam he instigated in Luxembourg... I wonder how that will turn out? I can go on... The EU is a big repository for failed politicians a retirement home with a big golden pension.. no wonder the politicians are for it, it is their "fall back" for when the get kicked out by their own people for a nice cushy number.
However somebody like Marta Andreason who blew the whistle on the EU's inability/\(corruption) to manage their accounts was booted out for failing to show sufficient loyalty and respect for pointing out the accounts were fucked up and refusing to sign them off. No pension for her.
The EU sucks, face it, anybody who supports it needs their head examined.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Nonsense, my goodness you are indoctrinated aren't you.
I didn't say the vote was ALL about immigration, but it was a significant issue. You are wrong about Norway, they choose to apply most of the rules but they don't have to.
The free movement between North and South Ireland was implemented in the 1920's, long before the EU was even dreamt of, so that will not change.
The economy will not collapse if there is no agreement, first of all our goods exports to the EU is about 45% of our exports which is only about 9% of GDP so we are talking about 4% of GDP, even if we exported nothing at all to the EU that would not constitute a collapse, and tell me how those airbus planes are going to take off without the wings made in Wales and the Rolls Royce engines made in Derby?
At most there would be a contraction of around 2%, and of course with all the extra trade we will be doing with the rest of the world there probably won't be any contraction at all probably in increase in growth, in the meantime, all those German and French cars (13% of French production goes to the UK) would be a lot more expensive in the UK and lose out to locally produced cars which would boost the internal economy. This would cause the stagnant EU economy to go into negative territory. It is going to hurt the EU a lot more than us.
Wine from South Africa and Chile and Australia would be more competitive than French and Spanish and Italian wine, so they would lose out also. You seem to think that it is only possible to buy things from the EU, as we have our sovereignty back we can make trade deals with who we want and import from anywhere no need to be focussed on the EU any more, and we can also sell easier to the rest of the world as we are no longer bound by the extremely protectionist EU.
The financial sector will not suffer, yes maybe they have to open an office in the EU somewhere with a handful of people, but the transactions will still be done through the City, just the paperwork will be done in the branch office.
There are only positives from having left, if anybody has to worry it is the EU.
1
-
I suggest you look it up yourself Norway does not implement all the directives.
The Irish and British PMs met two days ago and declared there would be no changes to the free movement rules. So you are wrong again.
You don't need a trade agreement to trade, the EU does not have a trade agreement with China, but imports a massive amount, same with the USA. Trade agreements will not take years to negotiate because it will only be between the UK and the trading partner. It takes the EU years because they have to take into consideration the views and interests of 28 countries and the trading partner and they all have to agree, that's why they only have 31 active deals in 60 years of existence (and many of them are with such financial powers as the Faroe Isles, Jersey, and Albania).
The financial sector will find a way it always does, and it won't need masses of people, as we are currently in the EU we are already applying all the rules at the moment so there is nothing new to learn or change except the address on the notepaper.
As for article 50, well I agree with you on that let's invoke it straight away, or even better just repeal the 1972 European Communities Act which would mean we leave immediately.
1
-
You haven't explained anything, you've made a few sweeping wild generalisations and assumptions.
Trade is not done between countries but between companies and people, yes a trade deal can make things easier but it isn't necessary. I would be more than happy with WTO rules with the EU and no deal,
However it may have escaped your notice that loads of countries have lined up to establish trade deals with the UK since Brexit. (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, India, China, South Korea, Japan, Brazil, Ghana and even the USA who said we would be at the back of the queue) to name a few.
By my reckoning that gives a market of some 3.5 billion people, 8 times bigger than the EU. We'll see who comes crawling to who...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well it wasn't really rule as such it was a partnership, and it ended in 1858 really but limped along until 1874. But once again there was no invasion as such the power they had just accumulated slowly over time. Once the crown took over it became more of a situation of ruler and ruled, which is why it started to break down.
When you say distribution of wealth and resources what do you mean? That those who work hard and earn more should be taxed more, to give it to those who don't? That exists already. As to the government stopping monopolies, well what do you think the NHS is? It is a state created monopoly, all the industries that were nationalised by Attlee, a state monopoly ( and they all failed). The Pharmaceutical industry, it is so expensive to have a drug approved because of the state's rules it is almost impossible to start a new drug company in the UK, meaning that companies like GSK have a pseudo monopoly because of the state. I am not suggesting there should be no rules, but there are too many rules and this is the result.
There are many rules and regulations which are supposed to help but which actually put up barriers to competition and actually end up hindering.
Look at for example the telephone, until the 1980's BT had the monopoly, then it was gradually opened to competition, the result; now everybody has a phone sometimes more than one, calls are now cheaper in actual terms (ie disregarding inflation) than they were in the eighties, it cost back then about 2p for a local call and 10p for a long distance call a minute now for example I have a contract where I pay £7 for 250 minutes a month or around 2.5p per minute and I can call anywhere in the country. (and I have 5000 texts and 250mb of internet too).
That is what free market capitalism does...It improves the quality of products and drives down prices whilst also giving people jobs with a potential to climb the ladder and earn more, or even go off and start their own business.
Socialism on the other hand causes stagnation and disincentivises people from working and innovating, why would you bother you will end up with the same anyway?
1
-
OK well let's just examine some of your points. First the NHS. The NHS is terrible. I have lived in a few countries including France and The Netherlands, the French have the top health provision in the world and it is about 50/50 public private, but very expensive to run, I would say the Dutch have the best system, let me explain how it works. Everybody has to have health insurance, if you cannot afford to pay for it then the state will pay for it. Every doctor and hospital is privately run, you can choose who your doctor is and even which hospital to go to, if you are not happy you can be transferred to another hospital, everything is covered by the insurance (About £80-£120 a month ).
The doctors and hospitals are paid for what they do by the insurance companies, so if there are a lot of hip transplants the hip transplant unit has a lot of money coming in so can buy better equipment or hire more staff. This means there are no waiting lists to speak of, and no bills to pay for the user.
It is not a monolithic state run monstrosity and was about 10 times better than my experience with the NHS.
The state also has a pool of money which it pays out to the insurance companies who have paid for the most treatment, so nobody is refused insurance or subjected to some sort of eligibility test. The government is not involved in decision making, it is not a monopoly but hospitals compete for patients through their level of excellence. Quantifiably a much better system in my view.
The railways are not really privatised because they buy a franchise (essentially a monopoly) from the state for a particular line and the state owns the track, however since this system has been introduced the private companies have caused an increase in passengers compared to the BR days of around 120% so they must be doing something right.
Built in obsolescence; yes there is a bit of that, but that is also because technology advances so quickly these days that product life cycles are shorter, as to people buying the latest phone, well is it the companies fault that people are gullible? I usually have a phone which is about 3 or 4 generations behind, and only get a new one when it breaks or I get one free. Nobody forces anybody to have the latest gadget.
The reason the Nationalised industries closed or were sold off again was because they were draining the coffers of the state, the government is no good at running business, they don't have the vision nor the expertise and invariable use the business as a political pawn rather than seeing it as something which should be profitable, it's a bit like the referee trying to play in the football match instead of ensuring the rules are obeyed.
Tax; well it is true that the very rich can avoid it, if the government did less and needed less then they could lower the rate and it would be less interesting for people to go the trouble of avoiding it, the higher you make it the more appealing it becomes as Mr Hollande discovered when he raised taxes to 70% in France for the rich, they just moved out of the country.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Much of what you say is true however you seem to be missing the point. Hitler is called a fascist, but he was a socialist a National Socialist, he was obsessed with getting revenge for WWI, for that he needed the people to fight for him, to do that he needed to bring them along with him. Hence the socialism all the benefits and handouts that Germans had never had before, the social organisations, the paid holidays, Strength Through Joy. For Germans only of course, only they would be fighting for him, everyone else was disposable, and of course in time even the Germans were disposable.
It was all financed by financial trickery. Did you never wonder how they went from being broke in the Weimar Republic to being an industrial powerhouse by WWII? All of it was financed through a secondary economy with Bonds that were used to pay for all the industry. These bonds had to become Reichsmarks real money by 1939 and he didn't have enough Reichmarks, so he had to plunder.
The debt was created to fund the war, and the bills were paid by looting the conquered countries. There was no way for Hitler to carry on peacefully, his trickery would have come to light and it would have been all over. Once he started on the path there was only one possible destiny...War.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well this is what happens with PR, it's a terrible system, look at all these parties abandoning what they ran on to get the votes in the first place to try and make a deal.
Absolute nonsense, and the previous Government was the result of the last election not being sorted out, Rutte was merely a continuity PM, they still had not agreed things from the previous election. Belgium took 589 days to form a government and more recently 652 days. It's an absolute nightmare, we don't want that.
Especially as if we have it we will have loads of parties which will fracture the vote, in the Netherlands they had 26 parties, including the party for sports and the over 50's party and the Party for the Animals. What would we have? The tinkering in sheds Party, The angling Party, The Football lads, Feminist Knitters Party?
It has its flaws but FPTP is much better than PR which is a recipe for mediocrity and exactly the sort of thing we want to get rid of, wishy washy politics.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
But exports and imports are way up with the EU, in fact last year they were both the highest they have ever been, up 17.5 % (362bn) for exports and 21.6% (452.5 bn) for imports.
Don't forget that these "barriers" are designed so the EU gets revenue (not the Nation states the EU). The EU takes 75% of any duties they can charge, and they tell member states what rules they have to use because the EU controls the Customs Union. Previously the EU took 75% of all the import duties they forced us to charge, now they don't get that any more, they want to make sure that EU businesses can't evade paying them by importing via the UK to avoid the EU's protectionist taxes.
We don't need to charge them because we aren't protectionist, and we would rather the EU had the same attitude, but if it has to be Tit for Tat, then so be it. At least any duties paid entering the UK will go to HMRC rather than the EU>
Things are going great, the Germans have even tried to reach out to us to bypass the EU, because it is a nightmare for them, we are one of their biggest markets for cars, and German car sales to the UK have halved since 2016, seems we don't want German cars any more, I wonder why?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheJeremyKentBGross It was when they realised they could force Evergreen to do as they wished. Forcing White people off campus, having the staff grovel to them, whilst simultaneously the whole student thing and C16 bill was happening in Canada and they were getting Jordan pushed out, that they realised by joining forces they could create this ideology if they all got behind each others causes.
So the feminists, the LGBTQ crowd, and later the BLM mob, and all lefty causes joined forces, and the woke movement was born.
Sure it was all there before, but in order to create the "baby" the various factions had to "have Sex" with each other.
This is where woke began, and like a malignant cancer it has spread uncontrollably and they won't rest until they have killed the patient, or are removed with some Chemotherapy also known as common sense.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Ju88327 Yes but how many Europeans knew that, even you didn't until I told you and you looked it up, and you think you are an expert.
You do realise that the people were never asked that? Or actually they were, it was in the EU constitution. and the French the Dutch and the Irish all voted no to the EU constitution. So the EU changed it to a treaty, the Lisbon Treaty which they could have signed by the Politicians rather than the people voting for what is constitutional change and would normally be the subject of a referendum. The text of the Lisbon Treaty is identical to the text of the constitution. Giscard D'Estaing who wrote it said so.
It's much easier to bribe or force 27 politicians to sign a piece of paper than to convince the people, so in true EU style they just ignored the people.
Everything they do is about imposing their will and when the people say no they ignore them.
As JC Junker put it "If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue’"
They rely on sheep like yourself who believe it is all democratic and lovely, as they walk you slowly to serfdom.
If it was democratic then people would run for the job, the people would vote and the winner would be chosen by the people, but that is too risky for the "Project", they need somebody who will carry on with the plan.
What's the plan you ask? Well the eradication of your country, it will all be one big happy Europe ruled by unelected bureacrats in Brussels. You won't have a meaningful vote you won't be able to change or influence anything, you will just have to do whatever Brussels orders.
Or you can wake up and keep your country !!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ArrowfieldMan Oh I see. well you have that the wrong way round,
Let's see what remain said that didn't come true : Immediate collapse of the economy, 800,000 job losses, all factories closing, JIT supply chains decimated, nobody would want to do a trade deal, super Gonorrhoea outbreak, all planes grounded, no medicines, no nuclear materials, all EU citizens would leave (instead twice as many as we thought were here asked to stay, etc etc.
It's quite impressive, nothing that Remain predicted came to pass.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AaronOkeanos So the 2bn a week is another invention, even you agree.
The other costs are fine by me, if the EU don't want a deal it has to be done.
Buildings only need to built once, and certification only needs to done once, and if goods are already certified there is no need to re-certify them after we leave. In most cases, it is manufacturers that do the certifying themselves anyway.
The extra costs for paperwork are a nonsense, customs declarations are free, you can do them yourself if you know what you are doing, it's pretty easy. A business will have it all automated in the computer systems. Most goods will be tariff free anyway even if declarations are needed, so I doubt that cost also.
A big advantage of course is that now tariffs stay with HMRC, before 80% of them were sent directly to the EU, so we had top pay tariffs but our exchequer didn't keep the money, which was madness. Tariffs are paid by the importer, so we will be paying our tariffs to HMRC on import of EU goods.
EU citizens will pay any tariffs on our goods, not us.
This is a pessimistic Report erring on the worst case scenario, in reality it will be fine, because if it isn't people on both sides of the channel will complain so much it will be sorted, don;t forget if there are queues here then there will be queues in Calais too. And nobody wants trucks stuck in queues the locals, the truckers, the trucking companies, the ferry companies, the Customs agents, the industries that need the trucks to move stuff, even the governments because it will slow down revenue collection.
1
-
@AaronOkeanos No misconceptions.
I have been in import/export for decades, nothing much changes, rules of origin will apply but that is not complicated.
Food inspections will be straighforward also Vet checks are done before shipment not at the border.
Now to your misconceptions. There is no such thing as WTO tariffs.
Each country/bloc sets its tariffs and the WTO is a repository. We have set our tariffs, and they are for the most part lower than the EU tariffs, so produce from outside the EU will become cheaper, so that's a bit of a blow for the EU producers when theirs will be more expensive. Looks like we will buy more from elsewhere, if that's what the EU wants.
On most things tariffs are pretty low anyway, and in our schedule there are zero tariffs on 80% of goods.
43% of our exports currently go to the EU, down from 54% a decade ago, and including goods transiting via Rotterdam but that is only about 8% of our GDP.
Queues are not inevitable, you can combine all sorts of technology, computer customs declaration, ANPR cameras to identify trucks, identifiers on containers that act the same way to identify shipments all linked to the customs computer.
All those trucks have to go through a port where all that technology is already in place There is always waiting time whether on the ferry or through the tunnel, it can all be done there for most shipments. Also around 1/3 of trucks are travelling empty, and the TIR system means sealed containers are checked at final destination not port of entry, so only a tiny proportion of shipments will need any kind of physical or onerous checks.
Any disruption will most likely be down to teething difficulties more than anything else, or of course political motivation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AaronOkeanos Don't keep apologising. It's not your fault the media and people like Phil have bombarded you with neagtivity. So you have negative thoughts about it. That's normal.
But see imports from the EU are an expenditure,unless it is raw materials in which case it is an investment.
Reducing imports from the EU is good for for us.
As to Euro clearing, the EU cannot stop it. How can you stop somebody exchanging currency? They can't. Money moves by wire, there are no goods.And quite simply if they demand Deutsche Bank unravel all its positions it would be Bankrupt, and as it is the biggest bank in Germany,they can't afford that. Reduced exports to the UK Germany's biggest market, Virus problem, and their biggest bank going under at the same time,would end the Euro altogether.
Cheer up. We have changed relations before with our neighbours,even been to war to liberate them,and we have recovered.
Leaving the EU is really no big deal. The media have made it so, but it's not that big a deal really.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheBelrick Nope I have not taken any vaccines, but that's another story.
What we face now is a new threat, what we were fighting against then was an evil ideology, it wasn't a war for gain, it was defensive war, we fought to defend our country and free those taken over by the evil and restore democracy, not take them over.
We were not in a war of conquest.
Then we faced a new evil in the form of Stalin and Mao, but we defeated that ideology too with different means.
Now we have new battles to fight. If you knew a bit more about history, we always have to be vigilant against those who would dominate us, this is the latest threat, possibly even more evil because they are fighting without uniforms and recognisable weapons.
That is all. We have to find the counter measures and we will.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The fundamental problem is how it is financed. The money comes from the top down, this is the opposite of how it should be. The NHS starts with a budget let's say for hip replacements, as each operation is carried out the money is used up, when all the money is close to being used up doctors have to pick who gets treatment and who has to wait for the next budget allocation. So they have to start rationing.
Now if the money went the other way, the more operations you did the more money came in, the budget would always be there for the next patient. So this would require a complete overhaul of the system so the money goes where the demand is, rather than some guy with a spreadsheet deciding how much we are going to need for hip operations in three years time.
It should all be privatised, we also have the ludicrous situations when things go wrong. Let's say a Hospital employs a bad doctor, so the taxpayer pays his salary, then the taxpayer compensates his patients for his mistakes, then the hospital is fined ( so the state fines a state run hospital- literally fining itself) and then the Hospital runs out of money and needs bailed out, so the state fines itself, and then bails itself out. And all paid for by the taxpayer, the guilty parties are promoted or transferred, and nobody is actually held accountable.
What happened in the wake of the Lucy Letby situation for example? Anybody fired? Anybody held accountable for allowing it to go on? The people who get sacked are most often the whistleblowers. What kind of message does that send?
It's useless, I stay away unless I have no alternative.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RankinMsP Yes well the EU controls Food via the Common Agricultural Policy, I was not referring to Food but to goods.
The EU controls food and Fishing through the CAP and CFP, and how about that, those are the areas where there is the most complications. This is all stuff that the EU wants, not the food importers in the EU, they are the ones who need to do the customs clearance, it is not the job of the exporter to handle import customs it is the job of the importer, these are problems for the EU customer, who obviously want the food as they have ordered it. When you order something from China the Chinese supplier does not clear it through UK customs, that's your job as the importer to the UK, same for every transaction. The EU has made it as complicated as it could for the things it controls, for their own businesses.
Basically they set out to punish us for leaving and have ended up punishing their own businesses, which is exactly what you expect from a centrally controlled bureaucracy, that's what they do best...Bureaucracy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rachell7682 I didn't say there wouldn't be problems, there will always be problems, but the NHS has no incentive to address them. Large bureaucracies always end up being self serving. A private hospital would be concerned about being sued and make sure they weren't if at all possible, the NHS doesn't care. The taxpayer gets the bill.
Private hospitals can provide intensive care, they can do anything a Nationalised system can do.
And if you think healtchcare isn't conducive to profit it's you that's living in cloud cuckoo land... The pharmaceutical companies or the manufacturers of equipment, love it, one customer who will buy for billions great stuff !! Or the staff that work there. Everybody that works there is being paid (making a profit from their time), healthcare is just like anything else.
Having privately owned providers is perfectly fine, in fact GPs are private and most dentists are and so are opticians. And private doesn't mean it is expensive or even that you may have to pay, it could be entirely insurance based and the government could pay the premiums of anybody who is unable to themselves.
Plus it would be better for the employees, right now if you are a nurse in Britain you really only have one employer available, yes there are a few private organisations but not many, if you have a disagreement with a boss your entire career could be over, whereas if there were lots of other places to work you could resign before even having a conflict and go and work for another provider. That's how things improve, people go where it is good and not where they are told by the state rationing system we have now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@annbumfrey6812 I don't know why but my comments are not showing up, I'll try again and sorry if it shows as a repeat.
Why would you think that? The way to make money as a business is to have a good reputation and provide good service, if you don't, people go elsewhere. With the NHS you have no choice, you go where you are told when you are told. The NHS has no liability, the liability ultimately ends up with the State. Health Care is provided by private businesses all over Europe and you don't hear of as many failures as in the NHS.
The point is if it's private and it goes wrong the owners pay. If it's public and it goes wrong the taxpayers pay. The Private company is concerned about losing money by making a mistake, the NHS is not, the taxpayer will pay.
You forget that if it was private then you choose where you go, nobody forces you any more by only giving you one option, you have multiple options and pick the best for you, so you are going to look at reviews and ask people where is best for you to go. With the NHS you don't have that option, you are told where to go.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The 1924 Labour government didn't last long, we had National coalition governments from 1929 to 1945.
Then Attlee destroyed our industry by nationalising everything and the Labour/Tory ping pong managed our decline until Thatcher grabbed the bull by the horns and turned the country around, since then we have seen the advent of globalism and Politicians are now working not for the people but for the Globalist bosses.
People though are fed up. We don't want the WEF, the UN, the ECHR, and the Corporations and NGOs to be in charge, we want the people we elect to work for us...not these global masters.
Switching from one major party to the other isn't going to change that which is why people are voting for the "upstart parties". Le Pen in France, Wilders in the Netherlands, Meloni in Italy, AfD in Germany...and Reform in the UK.
In the UK came to this realisation a bit late, we thought we could trust the Tories to get Brexit sorted, instead they deliberately fudged it and then they started behaving like Socialists.
Nobody wants Labour and the MSM have been on a concerted campaign to undermine Reform with all their dirty tricks.
Maybe not this time, but next time Reform are going to be a force to be reckoned with, and the MSM is dead after this.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I have to disagree with you here Simon.
I lived in France for a long time, I never heard anybody criticise the Brits and Americans for bombing France during the war, I didn't feel any resentment at all due to that. In fact they were grateful, and knew very well that Britain was targeting the Nazis not the French, indeed often the French Resistance would help guide in the bombers so they could hit their targets. Not even a cheep about Mers-el-Kébir.
The French don't dislike us they are jealous, they could never beat us, we always ended up beating them, the may have won a battle or two but never the war, that's what annoys them.
They have monuments to Napoleon and he is still celebrated, even though if you think about it he was not dissimilar to Hitler, and yet the Germans celebrating Hitler would be unthinkable, yet the French love their Tyrant Emperor, well it was the only time they had a few victories, so you take what you can get I suppose.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@soulknife20 First you have to define Fascism, but to take your points. Nationalism, yes Nationalism would you say the Scottish National Party are fascists? They are nationalists and call themselves progressives. Most people love their country, it's really not a sign of fascism by any means. Immigration: It's not immigration that's the issue it's illegal immigration Italy has tens of thousands of illegal immigrants arriving every month, they are causing chaos for the locals. It's an issue in other Eu members too, because they move out from Italy elsewhere. It's a big problem in Europe. Same for family, pretty much every country in the world treasures the family, that is not a sign of fascism at all, breaking up the family and removing the children from the care of the parents and indoctrinating them in the will of the state is this is the opposite.
So I'm afraid these comparisons don't work, but you see before you compare really you have to define what you mean by fascism, which nobody seems to want to do, they want to complain about Meloni, but they don't really know why.
Define fascism, then we can look at her policies and see if they fit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FlatToRentUK Hahaha.
oh dear. You've read the brochure and swallowed the sales patter.
You need to look into how von der Leyen got the job, and why they picked somebody so useless. Honestly all the people in Europe and they picked her?
They had a procedure that was in the Lisbon Treaty the Spitzenkandidat system, but that would have meant Manfred Weber was President and they didn't like that (who's they you ask....well yes that is the question...who is they and why do they have such power).
Their choices were rubberstamped by the EU parliament which is also a sham, the MEPs essentially choose themselves they put all the "right" people at the top of the list in each region and hey presto. Verhofstadt's Party only has 2 seats, but he always gets one because he is top of the list. Same for Farage, he made sure he was in the right area to get a seat. So the EU parliament is a joke too.
Even then with this hand picked mob, she only got 383 votes (she needed 374) so she only just scraped it.
By the way how many other elections do you know of where there is only one candidate and your options are Yes or No in an "election"?
Finally if the EU is the member states and the member states hold a referendum and say no, then that should be the end of the matter whatever it is, instead they have to vote again and say yes or they are ignored, so clearly the EU is not the member states because they are not listened to, they are told what to do.
Anyway we are out of their clutches now thanks goodness, now we can watch the pantomime from the side-lines as they stumble from one meeting to the next shuffling papers and taxing people and achieving nothing but drowning everyone in a sea of paperwork.
1
-
@FlatToRentUK Repeating things does not make them true. You obviously paid no attention to anything I said. Continue to believe the story rather than investigating what happened
Von der Leyen was selected by Macron, Merkel, Tusk and Juncker. So only two heads of state and the two outgoing "leaders", what do you call it when the outgoing leader choses their successor? If you think the EU is democratic you are wilfully blind. They put in place a system and then ignored it, just like they made it illegal to bail out the Euro and then bailed out the Euro, and it is illegal for the EU to be indebt but they are now trillions in debt, and the EU army was a dangerous Fantasy and now here we are everyone is calling for an EU army, not in the member states though...in the EU corridors of power.
PR is a disaster, you always end up with coalitions where the smallest party holds the balance of power like in Scotland where the Greens have the SNP over a barrel with only 7 seats or even a situation where no government can be formed in the horse trading that follows an election, which is why there was no government in Belgium for a year and a half, the last Dutch election remains unresolved and a compromise has been reached., same in Sweden, and in NZ where Adern became Pm even though she didn't win the lection. It's a disaster.
Basically you have it all upside down.
Have a nice evening.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@withcoffey Well it might have had something to do with Brexit, investors wanted something based in the EU, and as the whole point of the business is to provide services for the customer, a new office was opened and a new fund created in Dublin.
That's just a sensible business move, like for example Marks and Spencers have shops in France, but they are still based in the UK, and VW have offices here but are still based in Germany and so on.
Nothing Naive about it at all. Nothing was moved, a new fund was created. That's what international business is all about. Things change all the time in the world and so business has to adapt. The initial comment was that businesses have moved completely, ie closed their UK office and moved everything to the EU, but despite claims that loads of businesses have done this, after 10 days I am still waiting for somebody to name one business that has actually done that, and nobody can name anybody !!
1
-
1
-
I disagree, there are some similarities, but then don't most wars begin along these lines, a territorial dispute, a linguistic or religious or ideological affiliation.
However Hitler was out for revenge, he had a plan from the moment he came to power, he started building a war machine immediately and everything he did was about building a massive military, from building roads and buildings, Cruise ships that could be converted to troop ships in a moment, tanks and guns and planes were designed and manufactured in secret, all Political moves were designed to advance the cause.
War was the goal, Lebensraum the objective, but really it was all about avenging the defeat of 1918. I don't see this with Putin at all.
It seems to me he was reticent to go to war, and he has been restrained, he has moved very slowly, indeed it seems to be WWI style trench warfare (with drones and satellites and sophisticated weaponry) rather than fast moving Panzer groups encircling and advancing at tremendous speed. IN WWII the lines in Russia would move hundreds of miles in a month, in Ukraine they have been fighting over a couple of km's for years.
I am no fan of Putin, but I am also no fan of Zelensky, he's a bit of a dictator himself, and let's face it he's a puppet, he is entirely dependent on continued support from the West and to ensure that he has to do as he is told.Putin should not have invaded but there is more to all this than we know...that's for sure.
It didn't start as a Proxy war, but it has turned into one, and of course it's the young men in both countries and the civilians on the front line who bear the brunt of it all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ScottishRoss27 You don't seem to know much about this. You must be an SNP supporter.
Article of Union
Article 1.
‘That the two Kingdoms of Scotland and England, shall, upon the first Day of May
next ensuing the Date hereof, and for ever after, be united into one Kingdom by the Name of Great-Britain, and that the Ensigns Armorial of the said united Kingdom, be such as her Majesty shall appoint; and the Crosses of St. Andrew and St. George be conjoined in such a manner as her Majesty shall think fit, and used in all Flags, Banners, Standards, and Ensigns,
both at Sea and Land.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@paulhollett7183 We could what when were in the EU? I don't know which comment you are responding to.
As for EU laws well that's easy. All of them. Our systems are incompatible we should never have been receiving any law from outside our country.
You may not like those who make the rules here, but your vote counts and you can participate in our democracy and there will be a time when you will like those those that make the rules here. In the EU you have no say whatsoever, you are merely an order taker, you don't have a vote on anybody who makes the law, and you have no idea what they are doing. When a lwa is going through parliament, it is discussed in the House, but also in the media, if people don't like what is being proposed they will be in touch with their MP, it will be on TV, both sides will be putting forth the whats and wherefores and pros and cons, in short we know what's going on and participate.
What law are they currently discussing in the EU commission ? Who is participating? We have no clue whatsoever. And then out comes their document , maybe thousands of pages all done and ready for a vote in the parliament most of whom won't read more than the title and the summary and it is rubber stamped into law.
No thanks, that's not how I want our law to be made and certainly not by people who are not elected.
I really struggle why anybody would prefer unelected people in a foreign country making our law rather than elected people in our own country. It's a mystery.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fitzstv8506 Honestly mate you need to get some better sources of information.
Sterling had risen dramatically in the lead up to the referendum, following the referendum it dropped back to where it has been for most of the life of the Euro.
The rise was the anomaly not the return to its natural level, just look at the GBP/EUR chart on maximum time span, you can easily google it. France Germany Italy and the Netherlands who are the main contributors to the EU budget now we have left are all struggling. The Eurozone is officially in recession, that does not signal "rapid Growth" (look that up too).
The UK was the fastest growing economy in the G7 last year, we are way past the pandemic problems. Exports and imports were the highest they have ever been last year.
Google "UK Trade in Numbers -web version Gov . UK" for the government statistics.
We are not "losing anything" the 100bn a year number is absolute nonsense, we had second highest inward investment in Europe last year just behind France, we are pretty much always at the top or second, every year.
The UK is powering ahead, whereas the EU with their inward looking protectionism and overbearing regulatory demands and obsession with paperwork is destroying their business. Plus they have run out of money. They are begging for the members to give them an extra 66bn but the members don't want to pay up...Tricky... That's another fee we dodged by getting out.
You need to stop getting your information from Phil, or rather trusting it. He doesn't know what he is talking about and feeds you negativity. i double check everything from official sources, I never believe news reports or stories, I see them more of a guide, and go and check on everything they say.
Like for example this 4% hit to the economy predicted by the OBR that has become a trope. They didn't say that at all, it was badly reported, they never ever said that and yet it has become a "remain fact"...Much like your imaginary 100bn a year loss.
Things are going great
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Hallowe'en is an ancient act to scare away evil spirits. The first of November is All Hallows Day, or All Saints day if you prefer.
In order to make sure that the Saints were not disturbed by evil spirits on their day, people would try and scare them away by dressing up in costumes on the Hallow's eve, hence Hallowe'en.
We all used to do it when I was young, and we would knock on all doors not just people we knew. But you didn't just stand at the door and get a handout, you had to go in the front room and perform something, a poem, or sing a verse of a song, or recite something or other, otherwise no sweeties !!
There were other traditions, dooking for Apples, which involved leaning over the back of a chair, holding a fork in your teeth with which you tried to let go and stab apples floating in a bucket or a tin bath.
Now they just do this trick or treat thing, which came from the USA, nothing to do with our traditions. All the effort has been removed as usual in the modern world, just gimme the sweets !!
1
-
It's also to do with music being more or less free and not being something you own.
A computer file is easy to copy easy to send or download, so it's a bit like water, we need it but it's everywhere and basically free so we don't think much about it.
When you had to go to work and spend your money buying maybe one record, which was a thing you could hold, and came with artwork and you picked that one record and that was it until next week when you bought another one, one 45 or one album a week, that meant you also listened to it...often and treasured it.
Now music is a disposable item, easy to make, easy to obtain, easy to consume, and easy to throw away.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dantianblue Royalty first. The head of state the protection against the country becoming a dictatorship. Nobody can have total power in the UK because the Monarch prevents it. A system that is used in many EU countries, like Belgium, Sweden, The Netherlands, and Spain.
The unelected House of Lords do not make law they can only revise it. Whereas ain the EU only the unelected commission can make law and the job of Parliament is to revise it. The other way around, only the unelected can make law.
Spads are just advisors, researchers and gofers.
Even the parliament is self selecting in the EU, with their system the top of each list is pretty much guaranteed a seat, so we can't even choose them, the only tiny bit of democracy, even that is all fixed up, which is why Nigel Farage always got a seat and people like Guy Verhofstadt is always there, it's impossible for them not to get a seat.
I know which I prefer, and it's not the EU secret club system. We don't know who chooses people like von der Leyen, they just appear !!!
Nobody voted for her, there weren't even any other candidates, it was this is our candidate, Yes or NO?
That's not democracy, one candidate, that only the preselected MEPs "vote" for !!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nickryder9669 All the deals can be seen on the government website.
The Eu could have been friendly they evidently chose to be hostile, if you can't see that you must be blind.
No deals contain freedom of movement and even if they did with NZ and Australia, the combined population of those two is only 30m (1.5m of them British expats), compared to 440m in the EU.
As for only foreigners getting the higher paid jobs...total nonsense, in any case it was the working class that voted for Brexit and they were the ones seeing their wages dragged down. 6.5 million EU citizens applied to stay that's 30% more than the entire population of New Zealand.
The inflation is everywhere so nothing to do with Brexit, unless us leaving caused the US to have high inflation...But then logical thinking doesn't seem to be your strong point.
The system would have changed anyway as the Eu changed the rules on 1st July last year, so it makes no difference whatsoever, everybody would have been building warehouse anyway.
It is interesting that you see things in such a short sighted manner but then I would expect nothing less. Business is going great in the UK, meanwhile German car exports to the UK alone have gone from 31bn in 2016 to 16bn last year....That's 15 bn per annum down in 5 years, and down to people making personal choices, not some government policy, that's a lot of people who chose to buy a car from some other origin !! Maybe being hostile to your second largest export market isn't such a good idea.
Meanwhile those French fish wholesalers can't get their shellfish so they have to sack workers because of the EU, so those French guys are out of a job too.
Maybe that's why they want to come to the UK.
You don't understand free markets at all, being able to hire and fire favours the employee, the person who wants someone else to take the risk whilst they take a salary, because those who are risk takers are more willing to take risks which means more jobs, which means more power to the employee, if demand for worker is higher than suipply then the employee chooses. If you have all sort of obligations to someone you employ then you aren't going to do it unless you can be sure to meet them, which means less opportunity and less jobs, which is why the EU has no growth.
But then again you are a remainer that's too advanced for you. How you can think free markets equates to fascism is weird, if anything it is the EU approach, with the EU regulating every detail, controlling everything. That's more akin to fascism than freedom.
Guess being hostile to your customers isn't a good plan after all.
But Brexit was never about money, only 5% of leave voters stated the economy as their reason, almost everybody voted because of sovereignty.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@03MARA01 Business does business, trade deals just facilitate things, it's up to business who benefits.
I find it amusing the Australians flooding our market with food, firstly you don't seem concerned with the EU flooding our market with food, surely that's more of a worry? And if tons of food is arriving from Australia surely it would hurt the EU producers we would import from Australia the extra we need rather than the EU. Makes sense that if the Australian stuff is cheaper we stop buying the EU stuff. So if anybody should be concerned it should be the French and the Dutch farmers.
Anyway, only a small amount of food will come, we need to order it first and then they need to produce it and that will take years maybe decades before it reaches any kind of volume, if ever.
The US, UK, India Japan China and the EU is about 80% of the world's economy so that means the remaining 20% split between 160 countries each of the remaining countries shares are going to be awfully small.
Size is not relevant, look at Singapore or the UAE, incredibly wealthy, a natural resource or a strategic position or a business friendly trade policy are all factors as are a reliable and strong currency and reliable legal system. Size is just one factor among many.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Harassed247 All of that was built by private industry. The hapless Attlee, brought it all under state control, and we went from being one of the largest manufacturers in the world to a strike ridden wasteland, which is the destiny of every attempt at Socialism, destruction of everything, including the fabric of society.
Maggie had to put it back on track or we would have been sunk, thank goodness she did. She had 30 odd years of decay to deal with, so it was a big job.
I don't want the government owning anything, they are awful at running things, a politician's horizon is the next election, business needs a longer term view, and then when the government changed all the business priorities were readjusted, only to be readjusted again at the next change-over. It was a disaster. All that is left is the NHS which is a catastrophe, rationing of drugs and care and run by an ever growing army of pen pushers...It always happens when the state is involved.
Thank goodness for Maggie.
1
-
@Paul Martin You obviously don't remember what it was like...Strikes all the time, the three day week, power cuts, prices and incomes policy, 15% inflation every year for years, a year waiting list to get a phone line, we almost had fuel rationing, I remember receiving the coupons in the post in preparation.
Don't forget that the "utilities we once owned" were forcibly taken from their owners when the state took them over. The State didn't build the railways or the coal mines or the factories, they were all nationalised, forcibly purchased by the state, after WWII. Thatcher just put them back into competent hands.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johntate5050 But they are owned by the Crown Estate, which is ultimately owned by the people, the Crown just holds it in Trust and the Monarch is merely a custodian, in fact it is in great hands as they are not allowed to sell anything, so no foreign investors can come in and buy up the country. As to whether it was "plundered", well that is debatable, but Britain was successful through trade, not plunder, the Spanish, Portuguese, French and Dutch liked to plunder, but Britain traded.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Everything changed after 9/11. Firstly that whole thing is very suspicious, the story we are told is most definitely not the reality, but regardelss since then the world changed, everything started going backwards.
Our freedoms were eroded and a totalitarian net is being created around us, the internet was taken over in 2008 or so, everything started changing, you could see things starting to be censored in the name of Political Correctness. Now we have all out censorship, hate speech laws, people being arrested for typing a comment on Facebook, they want to remove cash and replace it with a state run money controlled by them, we have cameras everywhere, flying or driving or heating our home is now frowned on, CO2 literally the gas of life the gas that plants break down into Carbohydrates and Oxygen to provide our food and the air we breathe, is portrayed as a poisonous pollutant.
We must be afraid of nice weather, it's no longer a heatwave to be enjoyed but an existential climate crisis out to kill us all, and drives people to glue themselves to roads and throw soup at works of art - only Vegan soup is allowed.
Society is being dismantled, civilisation destroyed, there must be some sort of objective....but it certainly doesn't include us, we are in the way, especially if you have realised what's up, that makes you a target straight away - First they will call you a bigot, then far-right, then they will try and get you sacked from your job and deprive you of income, if that fails they will accuse you of a crime, or hate speech and try and get the police to do their dirty work.
Very worrying times, but we have to fight, or our children and their children won't live in a free world like we did.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The right believe in freedom of the individual, the left believe in Collectivism, so logically, speaking far right would be extreme freedom, hardly any government or perhaps even no government, Anarchy even.
The far left on the other hand believe on extreme collectivism, centralisation of power, lots of regulations and taxes, no free enterprise (you might get rich, and we can't have that, that would mean inequality).
If I had to choose, I certainly wouldn't choose communism. Far right in media speak basically means you don't want to be assimilated into the collective and go along with their phoney narrative, which makes you a bad boy/girl/They-them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mandywithell Yes but that's not how our democracy works. It's not a national vote, it's lots of local votes, and each constituency is a separate competition. if you come second or eighth it's the same thing. Adding up the votes is interesting, but meaningless, it's the seats that matter. Everybody has a say by voting in their constituency.
If you remove this link to the constituency you change everything, you have to split things into regions and then you don't have an MP you have a whole bunch of MPs in your region and if they all refuse to help you with your gripe, which of them is at fault? So you change the relationship with the public and the MP, and then you have a system of lists, so the top of the list of each of the bigger parties is guaranteed a seat. So how is that democratic if you know you are going to win the seat before anyone casts a vote?
Then if you have such a system you will have a multitude of parties, many single issue parties who maybe have one or two seats but aren't interested in anything except their issue occupying a seat that could be better filled. And then you have the biggest party winning with only 25% of the vote, so you have horse trading after the election and everybody jostles for power and you end up with some patchwork coalition government that is going to govern through compromise and committee, and very often the party that came third or fourth holds the balance of power and therefore has the most power, so coming third is the best spot.
In other words a wishy washy mess.
I much prefer FPTP, you don't need to have a seat in Parliament to make things happen in the UK, we have a great system.
Reform will use this information to build a platform, and next time they will do much better, if they do things properly. The Lib dems target their efforts in seats they know they can win and they benefited from disaffected Tories who couldn't bring themselves to vote Labour or Reform.
1
-
@mandywithell Well a lot of absurdities and evident bias creeping in to your thinking.
Since when do you have the ability to define democracy? What exactly do you think was undemocratic about Brexit? or Boris? Both of those you gave as examples, but both were voted for.
As to the Lib dems targeting seats what's undemocratic about that? How do you think the SNP candidate would get on in Islington? They probably should target their efforts on Scotland somewhere don't you think? Or are they in fact undemocratic because they don't contest every constituency in the country equally.
Have you ever asked an MP for help, they are usually very good indeed, if not they usually don't get reelected. It's a very big part of the job. Good MPs take it very seriously, and if they are too busy (if they are in the cabinet or otherwise engaged) they delegate staff to help constituents.
We had our election on Thursday we had our new government in place by Friday morning. In the Netherlands they had the election in November 2023, 26 parties ran, the winner got 23.5%, the Government took power on the 2nd of July 2024. That's 10 months, and that only happened because caretaker PM Rutte has a new job at the head of NATO so had to resign, so the PM is a Civil Servant placeholder.
Belgium has had no government twice in the past decade for nearly two years because they couldn't agree a coalition. so by the time the government was formed half its term was over.
If that's what you want happening in the UK then go for it, but I will be voting to stick with FPTP. That way we can get on with things, on the left or on the right, at least we get on with it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1