Politics The General Election 2015

[Scouse]

Here are a few.

And how do any of those, which are being debated anyway, override the fact that UKIP are a racist party?

edit: And Bodhs, I'm all for democracy, more of it in fact, and more free speech. I'm happy for people to vote whatever way they like. In fact, I'd encourage them to do so. But I've set out my stall on UKIP quite clearly and repeatedly, but you guys are the ones who're avoiding arguments and trying to shout people down...

 

[Bodhi]

So people are free to vote anyway they choose, as long as it isn't Ukip?

Pretty sure that isn't how these things work...

 

[Raven]

And how do any of those, which are being debated anyway, override the fact that UKIP are a racist party?

Nothing, but then I haven't argued that they are racist or not. I have argued that regardless, they have a right to say what they like (within the law) which they do. I am sure they are chock full of racists and I am sure that a fair amount of their supporters are too but not all of them are, not any more. Things have moved on in the last few years.

I have also stated that some of their polices are based on facts, which again, they are.

Its not as black and white (excuse the pun) as just saying, nah they are racist, I refuse to listen to a word. Things aren't that simple and in a democracy everyone has the right to express their opinion, no matter how stupid it is.

 

[Scouse]

So people are free to vote anyway they choose, as long as it isn't Ukip?

I didn't say that.

You said that.

Your comprehension levels are low even for a stokie.

 

[Bodhi]

I didn't say that.

You said that.

Your comprehension levels are low even for a stokie.

And your views on democracy are worrying even for a communist.

 

[Job]

A Labour party in power using the SNP is such a serious fuk up I hope the CIA take him out with a drone.

 

[Raven]

If it happened, it would be the end of the Labour party so not all bad.

 

[Gwadien]

A Labour party in power using the SNP is such a serious fuk up I hope the CIA take him out with a drone.

I think UKIP teaming up with the Tories would be equally, if not more damaging.

Imagine if they got into a coalition with each other, and loads of businessmen voted for the Tories, and were pro EU, then UKIP demanded that they negotiate to leave the EU as a part of a coalition deal, and the Tories say yes.

Maybe not far-fetched, but it's as far-fetched as the Tory propaganda saying the union will fall if Labour and the SNP got into a coalition.

I'm pretty sure the SNP would ask for further devolution in a coalition, and that's about it - you know, that thing all the leaders promised.

 

[Raven]

They (the Tories) wouldn't allow negotiation to leave under a Tory/UKIP coalition. They would ensure we get the referendum though, the thing the loony left are terrified of, people being allowed to democratically choose whether to stay in Europe or not.

 

[DaGaffer]

Here are a few.

Net Migration increasing year on year

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_396645.pdf

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/migra...-feb-2015.html#tab-1--Net-migration-to-the-UK

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-to-uk-higher-than-when-coalition-took-office

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30224637

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_immigration_to_the_United_Kingdom#European_Union

quick figure, 1.5 million people between 2004 and 2009.

If you think those sort of figures are sustainable then you are nuts.

but na na racist na na

Then the amount of money that gets poured into Europe, and for what exactly? Its certainly not helping the poorer countries.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/nov/22/eu-budget-spending-contributions-european-union

Except. They are sustainable. Belgium and Holland both have much higher population densities than the UK, and yet both seem to manage to have a much nicer quality of life. Its not the people, its the shit planning for those people that's the problem.

As for the money being poured into Europe, especially the East, of course its having a benefit. Anyone who went to one of the old Warsaw Pact countries before 1990, or even a few years after, will tell you there's a massive change in those countries. But there will always be laggards in the EU, and the UK is a better place to make money fast than anywhere else, especially now with the Pound so strong against the Euro.

 

[Raven]

Except. They are sustainable. Belgium and Holland both have much higher population densities than the UK, and yet both seem to manage to have a much nicer quality of life. Its not the people, its the shit planning for those people that's the problem.

As for the money being poured into Europe, especially the East, of course its having a benefit. Anyone who went to one of the old Warsaw Pact countries before 1990, or even a few years after, will tell you there's a massive change in those countries. But there will always be laggards in the EU, and the UK is a better place to make money fast than anywhere else, especially now with the Pound so strong against the Euro.

Except, they aren't sustainable. Lets say a round 300k every year for 10 years, that's 3 million more people in the UK, not counting natural population increases due to age, birth rate etc. Assuming 4 per household, that's 750,000 new homes required every 10 years just to cover immigration plus the extra pressure on hospitals, schools, the police and any number of other public service. (its probably more like 2/3 per household, 1 - 1.5 million new homes)

There is a massive housing shortage and a massive shortage on suitable places to build, they can't keep wanging Nu-build estates on the outskirts of towns because they just aren't designed like that. They need infrastructure and services. On top of the fact that more often than not they just end up as sink estates anyway.

Belgium has not had such a massive influx of people, regardless of its population density.

 

[Wij]

Except. They are sustainable. Belgium and Holland both have much higher population densities than the UK, and yet both seem to manage to have a much nicer quality of life. Its not the people, its the shit planning for those people that's the problem.

As for the money being poured into Europe, especially the East, of course its having a benefit. Anyone who went to one of the old Warsaw Pact countries before 1990, or even a few years after, will tell you there's a massive change in those countries. But there will always be laggards in the EU, and the UK is a better place to make money fast than anywhere else, especially now with the Pound so strong against the Euro.

Holland?


View: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eE_IUPInEuc

 

[Gwadien]

Holland?


View: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eE_IUPInEuc

To be fair, @DaGaffer is kinda right.

People who live in Holland generate money (iirc) and the rest of the Netherlands, not so much, there's some people in Holland who don't like the rest of the 'Netherlands' because of this, and see theirself as Hollanderseresrsers, bit like London I guess.

 

[DaGaffer]

Except, they aren't sustainable. Lets say a round 300k every year for 10 years, that's 3 million more people in the UK, not counting natural population increases due to age, birth rate etc. Assuming 4 per household, that's 750,000 new homes required every 10 years just to cover immigration plus the extra pressure on hospitals, schools, the police and any number of other public service. (its probably more like 2/3 per household, 1 - 1.5 million new homes)

There is a massive housing shortage and a massive shortage on suitable places to build, they can't keep wanging Nu-build estates on the outskirts of towns because they just aren't designed like that. They need infrastructure and services. On top of the fact that more often than not they just end up as sink estates anyway.

Belgium has not had such a massive influx of people, regardless of its population density.

Except you're assuming growth continues unfettered; it won't. As other EU countries improve, the immigration rate drops, and as the UK economy waxes and wanes, same story (Ireland had relatively higher immigration from the EU until 2009, and its all dropped away, despite similarly liberal rules on identity etc.)

As for "natural" growth, there isn't any. Which is part of the problem for the pensions hole. The birth rate is low, and there are currently 5 million plus British passport holders living abroad.

The rest of it is as I said in the previous post, a problem of planning, not people. Instead of looking at building thousands of houses and hospitals as a problem, it should be looked at as a massive economic opportunity.

 

[DaGaffer]

Holland?


View: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eE_IUPInEuc

Meh.

 

[Raven]

Except you're assuming growth continues unfettered; it won't. As other EU countries improve, the immigration rate drops, and as the UK economy waxes and wanes, same story (Ireland had relatively higher immigration from the EU until 2009, and its all dropped away, despite similarly liberal rules on identity etc.)

As for "natural" growth, there isn't any. Which is part of the problem for the pensions hole. The birth rate is low, and there are currently 5 million plus British passport holders living abroad.

The rest of it is as I said in the previous post, a problem of planning, not people. Instead of looking at building thousands of houses and hospitals as a problem, it should be looked at as a massive economic opportunity.

Its been increasing year on year nearly every year since 1992 so I can't see it stopping any time soon, even the worst recession since the war hasn't slowed it.

...and like I said, having that number over a longer period of time is fine but that number in such a short space of time just isn't working, we cannot keep up, I am not sure how better planning would help. The only planning that could cope with these numbers are new towns, lots of them...but to do that you also have to attract business to the new towns or there will be little to no work so you can't rush that either. Especially when a fair amount of the new population are low earning, low skilled people, who should pay for it all?

Its also not just a problem of housing but a problem of social and cultural integration.

 

[DaGaffer]

Its been increasing year on year nearly every year since 1992 so I can't see it stopping any time soon, even the worst recession since the war hasn't slowed it.

...and like I said, having that number over a longer period of time is fine but that number in such a short space of time just isn't working, we cannot keep up, I am not sure how better planning would help. The only planning that could cope with these numbers are new towns, lots of them...but to do that you also have to attract business to the new towns or there will be little to no work so you can't rush that either. Especially when a fair amount of the new population are low earning, low skilled people, who should pay for it all?

Its also not just a problem of housing but a problem of social and cultural integration.

First of all, if the growth has been relentless since 1992, that's a clear planning window, and by the way if you look at the actual year on year growth, its not that high; sensible management could more than offset sub 1% PA growth (at no point has UK growth been higher than 0.8% since...1960!) Second, building new towns is not the answer, once again a failure of planning has led to a ridiculously small brownfield utilisation, which has to be addressed. There's plenty of brownfield space if the will is there to use it. You'd still need to build schools and hospitals, but with an ageing default population you were going to have to build the hospitals anyway.

Finally, the low-skilled, low-earning thing isn't as true as you think. The public perception of Polish builders and Estonian baristas hides the fact that a huge proportion of immigrants (especially the EU ones) are actually pretty well qualified and doing more skilled jobs. Any of us with half a brain notices the management meetings they sat in ten years ago would have been entirely attended by locals (with maybe the odd Aussie or Irish person for flavour), now half the meeting will be Germans or Spaniards (or in my case, Greeks) We've all heard the line about London now being France's 6th largest city; its true, and that's not a low-skilled group. Even the Indians coming over are usually graduates these days. Yes there is a large cohort of labour doing low-paid work, but the bulk of those will go home; they're the modern itinerant worker, here today, gone to the next opportunity tomorrow.

As for the social and cultural integration...there are hotspots of problems, but an awful lot of it is overstated, or frankly, xenophobic.

I liked this article when came out, as it really brought home the gulf between perception and reality, not just in the UK, but in most western countries.

 

[Scouse]

 

[Raven]

Nice and misleading, perfect for the left.

It has nothing to do with multi-millionaires seeing as multi usually means more than one.

 

[Scouse]

Nice and misleading, perfect for the left.

It has nothing to do with multi-millionaires seeing as multi usually means more than one.

Wow, you're such a raving fanboi. You're almost as bad as Bodhi and Sony.

It's *funny* - who gives a fuck how accurate it is?

 

[Raven]

Well it is sort of funny I guess, would be much funnier if true.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32142307

That however is golden (and a cross post) because is certainly is true.

 

[Scouse]

Well it is sort of funny I guess, would be much funnier if true.

Actually - cursory google.

It IS true.

 

[Raven]

Well, no. Its 1ish million, not 2+ so not really "multi"

 

[Scouse]

Well, no. Its 1ish million, not 2+ so not really "multi"

Fanboi Pedant!

Like the mugs are "technically accurate"


Edit: And raising the IHT ceiling is *still* a cut for the rich, whichever way you look at it.

 

[Raven]

While it does, it also benefits a lot of the middle-class too.

...and it was me saying the mugs are true

That however is golden (and a cross post) because is certainly is true.

 

[Job]

Just watching CH4 news and they are in the small town of Nelson in Yorkshire where the Pakistani population has grown to 40% and they don't integrate at all and all the whites have moved out of the town centre.
So every white person interviewed is talking like a politician, scared stiff to even mention it.
One old guy very carefully explained that out of 250 members in the local municipal golf club only two are pakistani.
Westernised Pakistanis are scared to go out in the town for fear of disapproval in their western clothes.

 

[Gwadien]

Just watching CH4 news and they are in the small town of Nelson in Yorkshire where the Pakistani population has grown to 40% and they don't integrate at all and all the whites have moved out of the town centre.
So every white person interviewed is talking like a politician, scared stiff to even mention it.
One old guy very carefully explained that out of 250 members in the local municipal golf club only two are pakistani.
Westernised Pakistanis are scared to go out in the town for fear of disapproval in their western clothes.

So Job, if you were in some kind of position of authority, how would solve this?

 

[Job]

Start with the truth, if you begin discussion based on what people think they should say you are going nowhere.
The whites don't like the immigrants, they won't say it, but actions talk a lot louder than words , and this is repeated all over the country, we are heading towards segregation, in a hundred years this country may need a new Ghandi.

 

[Scouse]

OK. So it's borderline racist, but...

Spoiler

...I couldn't stop laughing

 

[Job]

The ironic thing is the Welsh national costume was invented overnight by the wife of an English politician cos they didn't have one, that's why it's crap.