MEP Elections

Derbymanc wrote:I'm baffled by all this too Skye, can anyone tell me what the actual problem is with CONTROLLED immigration ???

Aye Dm, you mentioned a while back about MP's not wanting to live in their consticuency.

Margaret Hodge of Barking. Where does she live  

Derbymanc wrote:Cause it's you doing it ;-)

A youtube channel hahah that is like you saying I'm lying because I said I have a facebook profile haha It seems to me that you didn't know how easy it was to make money on youtube and you can't believe I did it.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:How did I get shown up? I have a youtube channel where I discuss boxing. .

I might get one where I discuss nuclear fusion.

Rowley wrote:Given none of the parties apparently have any controls over immigration can anyone explain to me why my job is so frigging difficult?

Let's have a referendum   

Rowley wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:How did I get shown up? I have a youtube channel where I discuss boxing. .

I might get one where I discuss nuclear fusion.

The point is to discuss a topc that is popular as more views = more money. I know you are trying to say my knowledge of boxing is limited but I am not discussing boxing on youtube to show off my knowledge I am doing it because it gets views and makes money. I can release a video where I talk about how Victor Ortiz would win the rematch with mayweather. Of course he wouldn't but even if I released a video saying he would I would get a lot of views and make money, doesn't matter if I'm talking crap or not.

Don't worry stick around with me for a while and you will learn how to make easy money

I don't see how some things seem so simple become so complicated.

1. Live in the worst area of your constituency (or at least live in your constituency)
2. Use common sense with expenses (no claiming for mortgages/second homes etc)
3. Controlled immigration/deportation (criminals are sent straight home, no benefits for x amount of time.) And before Rodders pops up - yes the same should apply to our expats.
4. Stop sending money abroad until our own issues are sorted out. As a country we need
- More Homes
- More Schools
- More Hospitals/Dentists/GP's
5. Close all the tax loopholes (my favourite thought is the moment is that Starbucks gets all of their shops repossed due to them not making a profit and are therefore unworthy.)
6. Make the manifesto's of parties legal documents
7. Stop the spin doctors

@ Rowley - That did make me chuckle

I do not hate Labour, but without doubt they are the party that have caused this mess and the others are not far behind.

Give the British electorate the EU referendum. Let them have their say.

Derbymanc wrote:I don't see how some things seem so simple become so complicated.

1. Live in the worst area of your constituency (or at least live in your constituency)
2. Use common sense with expenses (no claiming for mortgages/second homes etc)
3. Controlled immigration/deportation (criminals are sent straight home, no benefits for x amount of time.) And before Rodders pops up - yes the same should apply to our expats.
4. Stop sending money abroad until our own issues are sorted out. As a country we need
- More Homes
- More Schools
- More Hospitals/Dentists/GP's
5. Close all the tax loopholes (my favourite thought is the moment is that Starbucks gets all of their shops repossed due to them not making a profit and are therefore unworthy.)
6. Make the manifesto's of parties legal documents
7. Stop the spin doctors

@ Rowley - That did make me chuckle

All criminals are sent home? How about a chinese banker who earns 400k a year and who is convicted for drink driving, should we deport him? How about an Indian doctor who is convicted of domestic violence should we send him home?

I should have a YouTube channel where I can reach out to all the bent people who have a right-wing political ideology.

It'll be very popular as there's lots of us....not!

Duty281 wrote:I should have a YouTube channel where I can reach out to all the bent people who have a right-wing political ideology.

It'll be very popular as there's lots of us....not!

I don't know I am sure a lot of 'things' happened at night at their boarding schools....

Anyways, i am done venting my concerns for a while. Gonna stick to the sports. See you all a week today for the byelection result.

It has been an up and down debate, but on the whole, good natured  

TTFN.

Don't disappear too long, bar the obvious it's been a good debate by all involved and whether we agree or disagree with each other it's been a giggle.

21 pages on the off-topic section and I haven't been banned!

    for the off topic section

Derbymanc wrote:Don't disappear too long, bar the obvious it's been a good debate by all involved and whether we agree or disagree with each other it's been a giggle.

Yes it has been 

Duty281 wrote:21 pages on the off-topic section and I haven't been banned!

YET        

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Duty281 wrote:John Major was average..Truss.

But we can sleep soundly knowing that he didn't commit such a grand list of errors upon his people and his nation.

If you actually look at your life most of the helpful things were because of Blair. Your application to Uni, the welfare you received when on JSA, the Ema you received at college, the extra funding he pumped into rimary/secondary schools.

Not to mention the Civil Partnerships Act, eh, Duty..?

What is the actual point of a civil partnership? Or marriage?

If I love someone, and they love me back (which never happens, haha!), I don't need some bit of paper confirming it for me. I don't need some ceremony to justify a happy relationship.

How was the application to Uni and the whole welfare bill down to Blair? as for the extra funding for primary/secondary schools I'd love to know where that money went as I never seen it.

@Duty/Four lion
What was the civil partnerships act? My understanding is civil partnerships have only been recognised for the last 2 years.

I get what your saying Duty, but there's something about marriage that sticks everything together under a lovely bow. And regardless of who was actually responsible for Civil Partnerships happening it had to happen for equality. And the reasons for not allowing it were stupid.

I think Civil Partnerships were enacted under Blair, might be wrong though.

Either way, a pointless bit of legislation and a cheap substitute that didn't bring equality for same-sex couples - they wanted Coke, but Blair gave them Pepsi!

Marriage is important to some people as an official declaration of your love....

Not everyone is as modern thinking as you Duty..

I really haven't got a clue tbh Duty, Not being in your position i'm not sure what would be worse. A half arsed attempt to give 'equality' or someone pushing for proper equality.

Derbymanc wrote:How was the application to Uni and the whole welfare bill down to Blair? as for the extra funding for primary/secondary schools I'd love to know where that money went as I never seen it.

@Duty/Four lion
What was the civil partnerships act? My understanding is civil partnerships have only been recognised for the last 2 years.

I get what your saying Duty, but there's something about marriage that sticks everything together under a lovely bow. And regardless of who was actually responsible for Civil Partnerships happening it had to happen for equality. And the reasons for not allowing it were stupid.

Because under Blair Labour made it their priority to get poor disadvantaged kids to uni. They increased funding such as grants etc and increased awareness that going to uni can be a possibility even if you are oor due to the funding you will receive (close to 15k a year in loans and grants).

Under Labour they created EMA which is a form of welfare paid to poor chioldren who attend college. They also created working tax credits and child tax credits for the working poor.

Civil partnerships came about in 2004 I remember, so under Blair.

Getting married/civil partnership gives you legal rights eg tax advantages/mortgage advantages etc etc

Something that gets unnoticed is the children leaving care act 2000. This iece of law gave children who were in care and reaching the age of 18 a lot more rights regarding funding for education and the support they can continue to receive from local authorities after they leave care. Children who were in care make up the highest proportion of the prison population and the lowest porportion of the university poulation and this Act went about to try and change that. Also under Blair children leaving care are now band B when applying for a council home which guarantees them a council house within about 3-6 months which is great as children in care often become homeless when leaving childrens homes etc due to a lack of family connections and having a council house really gives them a solid foundation to build their life on.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Marriage is important to some people as an official declaration of your love....

Not everyone is as modern thinking as you Duty..

I'm a liberal at heart. Modern, forward-thinking, keen to move on from the religious relics on our medieval past.

I eventually plan to get married. Have kids. Not liking marriage doesn't make you anymore forward thinking than eating lettuce with my chicken makes me a vegan.

If you think your politics is bad take a look over here in n Ireland.

A party has collapsed and their candidate retired from politics whisker her name was still on the ballot due to a sex scandal breaking (about the leader of the party) the evening before the mep elections.

It took us 3 days to count our mep votes.

Our health minister declared the political landscape of the south of Ireland irrelevant - we have 2 major health link ups and share our paediatric intensive care beds. We have a £100+ million road development for renegotiation and planning.

If you think ukip have shady intentions we have the tuv, formed by a man who found the dup too soft on nationalists who's local counsellor posted rants against asylum seekers, gypos, Catholics and the police

http://bula.ie/2014/05/27/unionist-councillors-sectarian-comments-exposed/

And the latest is our first minister has come out and said he wouldn't trust Muslims, backed an evangelical preacher who said Islam was the spawn of satan and then said but he would trust a Muslim to go to the shop for him.

When the deputy 1st minister said he should attempt to create a culture of acceptance (paraphrasing) he responded by saying he wouldn't take a lecture from the leader of a bloody terrorist organisation.

Amazing stuff.

Let's get one thing straight, nothing happening in the isles would top what's currently happening over here.

President with a £15m homestead
Economy just shrunk
Platinum belt on strike since Feb
The Cabinet just expanded, again. Having cost £20m in 2007, our cabinet now cost four times that.

The opposition leader, a white woman of privileged upbringing, lashed out at her departing parliamentary leader, a young black lady, telling newspapers she made her... That's right, that's exactly how you alienate the majority vote in South Africa. Idiot.

The far left leader just made a deal with the taxman, and despite this, showed up to parliament in overalls, representing the "working class".

Oh, and the Afrikaans right still want their "deserved" Volkstad, the black left want their land back, and our rhinos are being murdered for fun

Ent, in all my time I never knew you were also from NI....

The past while surely has been surreal. Is sectarianism being replaced by racism?

I'd honestly favour direct rule. Stormont isn't working. Has it really ever?

No there is still a healthy dose of sectarianism lol.

Tbh I expect xenophobia and racism - we've spent 100s of years not being able to get on with each other, 2 denominations of the same religion, how on earth could we cope with other religions and races.

Joey Barton. What a frigging idiot on QT. He was an embarrassment. The audience laughed at him.

Might see it on the IPlayer tomorrow, Skye.

I think with both the odious figures of Morgan and Barton on there, coupled with the traditional left-wing audience, I'll need my punchbag at the ready!

To be fair they just stated the obvious. Piers highlighted that UKIPs only policies are the EU and immigration and said that they woud not win a GE on just those issues and Barton was mainly talking about the heathrow extension but he did make it clear UKIP were crap

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/05/29/future-labour-government-will-not-undo-hugely-unpopular-coalition-cuts_n_5413596.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cukt2%7Cdl1%7Csec3_lnk4%26pLid%3D267999

Why not?

Ent wrote:If you think your politics is bad take a look over here in n Ireland.

Absolutely - the mind boggles. Robinson would probably get turfed out of UKIP for those comments. Sometimes I really do despair,...ah well thank flip its Friday.....

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:I really don't get how you can debate with someone like that. Black catters we call them in work. Since they Youtube channel debacle I'm hard pressed to believe anything he says.

Didn't he get shown up on the laywer thing a while back?

Shown up about my youtube channel? How did I get shown up? I have a youtube channel where I discuss boxing. It is pretty easy to get a youtube channel haha Don't see why you think I'm lying as it is very easy to get.

No one has ever shown me up about working in law foirms/having a degree/masters in law.

1. Send us a link to your Youtube channel then? You refused to last time, for all your boasting, hence (I think) the 'shown up' comment.

2. Wasn't the law thing (a debate I was not involved in) something to do with you not knowing the difference between two key legal definitions? Like the difference between beyond all reasonable doubt and balance of probabiity?

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:How was the application to Uni and the whole welfare bill down to Blair? as for the extra funding for primary/secondary schools I'd love to know where that money went as I never seen it.

@Duty/Four lion
What was the civil partnerships act? My understanding is civil partnerships have only been recognised for the last 2 years.

I get what your saying Duty, but there's something about marriage that sticks everything together under a lovely bow. And regardless of who was actually responsible for Civil Partnerships happening it had to happen for equality. And the reasons for not allowing it were stupid.

Because under Blair Labour made it their priority to get poor disadvantaged kids to uni. They increased funding such as grants etc and increased awareness that going to uni can be a possibility even if you are oor due to the funding you will receive (close to 15k a year in loans and grants).

    

And now we've a massive youth unemployment problem because Labour conned an entire generation into thinking you could get into any old muck of a Uni, with any old grades, get any old degree at whatever level and you'd be set for a life of big-bucks.  

And the one's not unemployed are mostly working in dead-end retail jobs or the like as reality bit upon graduation and they were forced to realise their dougie from Anglia Poly wasn't worth sh*t, let alone the 10s of thousands of pounds (after Labour tripled course fees) it cost them.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:I really don't get how you can debate with someone like that. Black catters we call them in work. Since they Youtube channel debacle I'm hard pressed to believe anything he says.

Didn't he get shown up on the laywer thing a while back?

Shown up about my youtube channel? How did I get shown up? I have a youtube channel where I discuss boxing. It is pretty easy to get a youtube channel haha Don't see why you think I'm lying as it is very easy to get.

No one has ever shown me up about working in law foirms/having a degree/masters in law.

1. Send us a link to your Youtube channel then? You refused to last time, for all your boasting, hence (I think) the 'shown up' comment.

2. Wasn't the law thing (a debate I was not involved in) something to do with you not knowing the difference between two key legal definitions? Like the difference between beyond all reasonable doubt and balance of probabiity?

Why would I post my part-time business on here? I will post my youtube channel when you post your home address.

You have no part time business, you tried to come across as a smart savvy kind of guy and was exposed for a bit of a fraud (lawyer bit and youtube channel.)

Why would you not publish your youtube channel??? More hits means more money for you (apparently,) more advertisement for your amazing channel etc etc. Unless of course you told a couple of fibs. Posting a home address is completely different and is the last thing idiots on the internet use to not do something, (I'll pay my bet, I'll let you see my homepage if you tell me where you live,) the fact you don't understand this tells me you need a bit more business schooling.

I don't know what to laugh more about, you calling that your 'part-time business' or that you have equated it to posting one's home address......

That's about as stupid as Charlize Theron equating being pap'd to being r@ped.

And this is why people mock you on here, because you regail us with all these boasts all the time but never back them up. As far as anyone knows, you're talking out your backside re your Youtube channel/'part-time business'.

Nelson Mandela is my grandfather, I posted a video of him attending my eighteenth birthday on my YouTube channel. You all of course understand why I can't provide a link?

 

I once got off with the aforementioned Charlize Theron (well strictly speaking it was her and Eva Mendez, but I don't like to boast). Footage of that is on my youtube channel, but pretty much goes without say I can't provide a link.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

I don't know what to laugh more about, you calling that your 'part-time business' or that you have equated it to posting one's home address......

That's about as stupid as Charlize Theron equating being pap'd to being r@ped.

And this is why people mock you on here, because you regail us with all these boasts all the time but never back them up. As far as anyone knows, you're talking out your backside re your Youtube channel/'part-time business'.

Why would I need to back up I have a youtube channel    do you want to back up you have a home address??? They are both sensitive pieces of information... And of course it is a part-time business just making £5 a day is about an extra £2000 a year.

I won't post my youtube channel but please continue to ask   I enjoy the attention

Rowley wrote:I once got off with the aforementioned Charlize Theron (well strictly speaking it was her and Eva Mendez, but I don't like to boast). Footage of that is on my youtube channel, but pretty much goes without say I can't provide a link.

No offence but you are 41...........

Derbymanc wrote: You come across as a smart savvy kind of guy

Why thank you

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Rowley wrote:I once got off with the aforementioned Charlize Theron (well strictly speaking it was her and Eva Mendez, but I don't like to boast). Footage of that is on my youtube channel, but pretty much goes without say I can't provide a link.

No offence but you are 41...........

I know.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Rowley wrote:I once got off with the aforementioned Charlize Theron (well strictly speaking it was her and Eva Mendez, but I don't like to boast). Footage of that is on my youtube channel, but pretty much goes without say I can't provide a link.

No offence but you are 41...........

you are middle aged and over weight, I don't think you are in a position to try and mock anyone   

Want some cake for that belly of yours    

bwahahahahahahahahhahahahaah a Youtube channel is now a sensitive piece of information.

Obviously if it exists you make absolutely zilch off it as it's sooo sensitive you'll only allow your family to see it, and of course that's after they give you a family tree of how they're related and once they've signed the official secrets act.

 

You do know that editing someone's on post to make you look better makes everything look worse?

Would love some but am too busy setting up an imaginary you tube channel.