UKIP

[hilts]

I disagree.

Knowing information and deciding not to act on it is actually slightly less stupid than not only not understanding but actively denying one of the largest, widespread and most evidenced phenomena in the history of scientific endeavour.

I accept people who sort of understand that it's happening but aren't really sure to what extent or what to do about it. However, people who deny the very idea that man is having an effect on the global climate are fucking idiots. Beavers are having an effect on the global climate, the idea that man isn't is ridiculous beyond all logic.

-- Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:11 pm --



The funny thing is, the anti-immigration crowd should be screaming about doing something about it.

My point is not accepting climate change makes you stupid which is at least an excuse, accepting it but not doing anything about it makes you morally bankrupt and not fit to hold any position of power

i have more sympathy for a stupid person than a dishonest one, obviously neither should be running a country

Although you will probably find Farage is maybe seeking votes from people who prefer not to accept the truth

Tell me how a UK government can do anything (of benefit) to stop ACM?

Globally we can do nothing unless others follow, but as energy is a major problem not just for us but the rest of the world and is only going to get worse maybe if for once we led on this issue and used it as a benefit to our economy others would follow suit

As a country it would be nice to lead the world as we used to rather than follow, it could be the making of us

 

[Damocles]

Decent ethical argument, this is one of those times when JohnnyCrossan is actually a decent poster to listen to.

I suppose that I sympathise with people who know about climate change but don't act because there's so much misinformation surrounding it and so much political force at work that it's hard to be sure about anything at all. I actually changed my view over the last view years (you can still find posts of mine on here from way back stating that although climate change is occurring, the extent is vastly exaggerated). I changed my view because the new science started coming back and the evidence was absolutely overwhelming.

However, I'm also conscious of the fact that most people don't spend their Friday nights drinking beer and reading papers from arvix, Nature and other scientific literature, nor do they have friends studying the raw data in the Met Office. The press coverage of this is as such where if you don't actually read the papers completely yourself, you've got feck all chance of making head nor tail of anything. Saying that in the non-scientific literature the issue of climate change is muddied is vastly understating the problem.

Due to this, some hesitation to act when the economic concerns are as such may not only be seen as a good idea, but actually rational judgement. But this rationality falls apart once you start reading science and moves into the idea of exasperation.<br /><br />-- Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:30 pm --<br /><br />

No, because you've made up what overpopulation means to England.

Overpopulation means above the best possible population for the country. There are ways of determining the best possible population for the country that is a complicated and time consuming task. You haven't even given this any thought at all, you've just randomly made something up as a number which is the "correct" population based on absolutely nothing.

Your whole argument is stupid and moronic.

-- Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:17 pm --

There's no precise number and you know it. Let's not try and turn it into some academic statistical debate. Using eyes, ears and commonsense most people would say the UK's finances, housing stock and services are already under enough strain to justify controlling population numbers carefully right now.

Ah, common sense. That thing that tell us that the Earth is flat and the Sun and Moon orbit the Earth in semi circle patterns. Yeah, we should totally trust that about a complex and national issue instead of actually looking into it in any way.

As a moderator you could do with keeping the smart-arsed comments to yourself.

Only if you agree to keep the stupid ones to yourself.

 

[Johnsonontheleft]

Strangely, Rascal is probably the only poster on this thread that has ever called for the forced repatriation of an immigrant (thaksin), so It's perhaps a little unfair to call him a leftie unless you mean like Stalin.

Thaksin's human rights record probably played some part in that.

And seeing as he's a Communist, I think it's quite easy to bracket Rascal with Stalin. Especially when he probably wouldn't think twice about executing 20m slightly right-thinking people.

Yes his human rights record wasnt the best.

Im not a Stalinist, im a Socialist with some Marxist tendencies.

Immigration is good for the country, the UK needs workers as strange as that may sound with so many unemployed. But a man laid off from a building site cant suddenly become an aerospace engineer and such. We also have the problem of low birthrates. We need people in the future to work to pay for our pensions etc. If the population falls the people in work wil be left with a bigger tax burden or we will have smaller pensions.

As for Europe im not rabidly pro or anti. I think it needs a drastic overhaul if we are to stay members. If we stay in I would like to see it become Democratic, perhaps even have an elected EU president and again if we stay in we have to at some point join the single currency. If we leave and thats a possibilty, i worry we will be isolated in the world. We no longer have an empire and the Commonwealth no longer relies on us. I worry that the CBI predict leaving will cost a million jobs.

Much is made in parts of our press about bonkers Brussels directives such as the ridiculous straight banana nonsense, yet can any of you really say the EU has a big impact on your life. It doesnt in my opinion as our parliament remains soveriegn and passes laws relevant to the UK.

UKIP to me is a party of the far right who cleverly marriage far right ideology with soft left social policy. It does appeal to voters across the political spectrum as it uses the politics of fear especially with its rhetoric on immigration. I recall a party called NSDAP once doing it vry succesfully.

You're bang on - most of our immigrants ARE aerospace engineers and such. Anyone who says otherwise is racist.

 

[SWP's back]

Thaksin's human rights record probably played some part in that.

And seeing as he's a Communist, I think it's quite easy to bracket Rascal with Stalin. Especially when he probably wouldn't think twice about executing 20m slightly right-thinking people.

Yes his human rights record wasnt the best.

Im not a Stalinist, im a Socialist with some Marxist tendencies.

Immigration is good for the country, the UK needs workers as strange as that may sound with so many unemployed. But a man laid off from a building site cant suddenly become an aerospace engineer and such. We also have the problem of low birthrates. We need people in the future to work to pay for our pensions etc. If the population falls the people in work wil be left with a bigger tax burden or we will have smaller pensions.

As for Europe im not rabidly pro or anti. I think it needs a drastic overhaul if we are to stay members. If we stay in I would like to see it become Democratic, perhaps even have an elected EU president and again if we stay in we have to at some point join the single currency. If we leave and thats a possibilty, i worry we will be isolated in the world. We no longer have an empire and the Commonwealth no longer relies on us. I worry that the CBI predict leaving will cost a million jobs.

Much is made in parts of our press about bonkers Brussels directives such as the ridiculous straight banana nonsense, yet can any of you really say the EU has a big impact on your life. It doesnt in my opinion as our parliament remains soveriegn and passes laws relevant to the UK.

UKIP to me is a party of the far right who cleverly marriage far right ideology with soft left social policy. It does appeal to voters across the political spectrum as it uses the politics of fear especially with its rhetoric on immigration. I recall a party called NSDAP once doing it vry succesfully.

You're bang on - most of our immigrants ARE aerospace engineers and such. Anyone who says otherwise is racist.

No they aren't but nor do they need to be.

 

[hilts]

And when our immigrants get old and need their pensions paying for do we need to accelerate immigration even further but what happens when they get old, more immigration no doubt, maybe the world as a whole just needs more people to use up more resources

 

[Damocles]

And when our immigrants get old and need their pensions paying for do we need to accelerate immigration even further but what happens when they get old, more immigration no doubt, maybe the world as a whole just needs more people to use up more resources

This is a good point.

 

[Johnsonontheleft]

Yes his human rights record wasnt the best.

Im not a Stalinist, im a Socialist with some Marxist tendencies.

Immigration is good for the country, the UK needs workers as strange as that may sound with so many unemployed. But a man laid off from a building site cant suddenly become an aerospace engineer and such. We also have the problem of low birthrates. We need people in the future to work to pay for our pensions etc. If the population falls the people in work wil be left with a bigger tax burden or we will have smaller pensions.

As for Europe im not rabidly pro or anti. I think it needs a drastic overhaul if we are to stay members. If we stay in I would like to see it become Democratic, perhaps even have an elected EU president and again if we stay in we have to at some point join the single currency. If we leave and thats a possibilty, i worry we will be isolated in the world. We no longer have an empire and the Commonwealth no longer relies on us. I worry that the CBI predict leaving will cost a million jobs.

Much is made in parts of our press about bonkers Brussels directives such as the ridiculous straight banana nonsense, yet can any of you really say the EU has a big impact on your life. It doesnt in my opinion as our parliament remains soveriegn and passes laws relevant to the UK.

UKIP to me is a party of the far right who cleverly marriage far right ideology with soft left social policy. It does appeal to voters across the political spectrum as it uses the politics of fear especially with its rhetoric on immigration. I recall a party called NSDAP once doing it vry succesfully.

You're bang on - most of our immigrants ARE aerospace engineers and such. Anyone who says otherwise is racist.

No they aren't but nor do they need to be.

You think they don't need to be skilled workers? Because that was the point.

 

[hilts]

You're bang on - most of our immigrants ARE aerospace engineers and such. Anyone who says otherwise is racist.

No they aren't but nor do they need to be.

You think they don't need to be skilled workers? Because that was the point.

I think immigration based on shortages in certain skills as always happened and is a good thing, it would be nice if governments could be mofe proactive in determining what skills we need in the future, i wouldnt have a problem for instance with having university paid for students in certain area's, but anyone who lives in manchester london etc knows a lot immigrants take up low paid jobs and actually drive down wages.

Maybe if we could get some of our own residents to do these jobs it would make more sense, i have no problem with anyone wanting to earn a living and work hard

I honestly believe labour was carrying out a social experiment for their own benefit, i am not sure that's what people voted for

 

[stonerblue]

No, because you've made up what overpopulation means to England.

Overpopulation means above the best possible population for the country. There are ways of determining the best possible population for the country that is a complicated and time consuming task. You haven't even given this any thought at all, you've just randomly made something up as a number which is the "correct" population based on absolutely nothing.

Your whole argument is stupid and moronic.

-- Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:17 pm --

There's no precise number and you know it. Let's not try and turn it into some academic statistical debate. Using eyes, ears and commonsense most people would say the UK's finances, housing stock and services are already under enough strain to justify controlling population numbers carefully right now.

Ah, common sense. That thing that tell us that the Earth is flat and the Sun and Moon orbit the Earth in semi circle patterns. Yeah, we should totally trust that about a complex and national issue.

Go to places like Bradford and Oldham and you will see why many are voting UKIP and BNP.

i was in bradofrd and oldham last week and there was no sign of any reason to vote ukip.

 

[MCFCTrick]

No, because you've made up what overpopulation means to England.

Overpopulation means above the best possible population for the country. There are ways of determining the best possible population for the country that is a complicated and time consuming task. You haven't even given this any thought at all, you've just randomly made something up as a number which is the "correct" population based on absolutely nothing.

Your whole argument is stupid and moronic.

-- Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:17 pm --



Ah, common sense. That thing that tell us that the Earth is flat and the Sun and Moon orbit the Earth in semi circle patterns. Yeah, we should totally trust that about a complex and national issue.

Go to places like Bradford and Oldham and you will see why many are voting UKIP and BNP.

i was in bradofrd and oldham last week and there was no sign of any reason to vote ukip.

Try living there.....it's very different then.