Comments by "BVargas78" (@BVargas78) on "LBC" channel.

@jamesshaw2108 I trust Starmer to be a way more responsible steward of the economy than Truss and co.
13
Yeah that video kind of ruined my morning and it didnt even lead anywhere.
3
Some of them are closing ranks to protect their fellow parishioner.
3
The title made me think David Davis was going to be on the wrong side here, but i'm glad he's not!
3
While i do think the BBC was pandering to the right (perhaps in the hope that it helps maintain some support from there, for the TV License, which is a fools hope) and I do think removing Lineker was unfair, I do think 2 million pounds a year from License payer money was way too much to be paying someone. They could probably find a newcomer, who has charisma and talent and knows a lot about football who would glady do the same role for 200k.
2
Parish councillor? Doesn’t surprise me those that virtue signal the hardest often have the most skeletons in their closet.
2
@wolfen210959 If they took any more off my money when I was in UK, i'd have been better off on benefits! I literally stopped paying BBC TV license long ago and it wasn't because I didn't like it but because i wanted to put that money towards broadband cost. To Linekers credit he did take a voluntary pay cut which i was unaware of at the time of making OP. But it goes to show how out of touch the high ups at the BBC can be, when they think it's ok to pay their stars that much while people are struggling to get by and even pay their fee.
1
Well said.
1
Bad guys or not it's a scary act. How long before groups like ISIS, the Taliban, Hamas and Hezbollah themselves or anti NATO countries learn how how to hack into mobile devices and detonate the battery causing mass injuries/deaths? It's not the kind of future and want to be in.
1
It sets a dangerous precedence. How long before enemies of the west, be it ISIS or North Korea, even Russia or China (if things get really frosty after a Taiwan invasion for example) start using similar technology/hacks against western politicians, officials or even innocent people.
1
My guess is that Trump wants to make America the no.1 global industrial superpower/industrial producer. And for that he wants to befriend Russia as that can be their source of cheap resources to fuel the american industry. It turns a lot of the economic direction on its head and while it may benefit the american worker over the long term there's no guarantees. It could be a very costly gamble that ends up failing but time will tell.
1
If Brexit is irreversible, UK should use its military assistance as leverage in negotiating trade deals with Europe. The argument can boil down to something as simple that if you give us the trade concessions we will be wealthier and thus in a better position to provide military aid. Compared to if you give us a bad trade deal that will make us poorer.
1
I bet the carnival was less violent in 80s than now. Modern youth culture especially for minorities (ie urban rap) is toxic as gangs and gang warfare is glamorized. As well as a bad anti social attitude.
1
That's why they call her Preti! Sorry, just a lame joke, i'll let myself out. :)
1
An overlooked reason Brexit happened was because there was a large underclass of unemployed and working poor native brits, who for various reasons, had to work jobs for terrible privately run employment agencies which had grown used to exploiting and mistreating workers from the poorest European countries. And for many of these british workers it was the only kind of job available. You could literally turn up for work at 5am only to be sent home at 6am due to the practice of 'overbooking' and then made to pay for transport costs leaving them out of pocket and in a situation of economic crisis. This was made possible due to the abundance of desperate workers who tolerated it as it was their only way to have a chance of earning any money in their current situation, outside of turning to crime. The middle class, often self describing progressives who sympathised with the working poor were completely oblivious to how bad the situation was. So did the Brexit make things better for these brits who were in a really bad situation and voted for it through a desperate desire for change? Not really, maybe a little bit in that agencies are forced to treat workers with a modicum of more respect due to them being in less supply now. But the improvement has been minimal. 'Overbooking' still happens but to a slightly lesser extent. And for all that did Brexit hurt the economy? Yes, it is apparent to all pretty much. So where am I going with this? The point is that if we treated the poorest UK citizens with a modicum more respect back then (2012-2015 times) and the native born working poor were just a little better off, and treated slightly better than what we allowed for. Many of them would have been content and not voted for Brexit and we would all have been better off for it. This is what happens when we lose a sense of solidarity among us and looking out for one another. It makes people vote for extremes and we all end up the worse off for it.
1
A lot of people who voted for brexit were part of the unemployed underclass, often being shuffled between JSA and exploitative temp agency. Has their life improved as a result? I don't think it has, but I don't think it's gotten any worse for them either. My point is that I think that if these people got a slightly better deal in terms of benefits or at least how they were treated in the labour market (forced into zero hour contracts etc being sent home with no work (or pay) at 6am etc and as a result being worse off) then they wouldn't have voted for brexit but a lot of people were desperate and I think a lot of middle class people are out of touch with how bad the situation had gotten for the worst off brits. Sometimes spending a bit more on people, can actually save more. This would certainly have been the case here. But such a measure goes against the ideology of most right wingers, even though it would have made practical sense.
1