What do you bring to forums?

[Syl]

First topic message reminder :

Something or nothing?
What kind of poster do you think you are....because we all fall into categories.
Interesting, interested, helpful, a watcher, a leader, a liar, argumentative, easily influenced, set in solid beliefs?
So many different times of posters.

I wonder if we see ourselves as others see us...I doubt it somehow.

[Guest]

I never gave one, so who did?

Her points were poor though and ill thought out

Well who cares, it’s not a scandal Hahahaha

Only way anyone can prove it is to take a screenshot.

Exactly, but some did care who did

Did they not?

To me,it does not matter

It was not me and yet people centre on something as lame as this

Like its a game of cluedo

[Guest]

I dont back Corbyn.

I don't particularly like him.

HE has been too anonymous for too much of his career to be a credible leader.
My preferences would be from Yvette Cooper, Sir Kier Starmer , Owen Smith or an outsider like David Miliband.

What I truly HATE, are lies smears and campaigns against individuals.

Ed Miliband got it from  Dacre, ably cheered on by Cameron and Osborn.

The paradox is, the more the rw and tories vilify and smear Corbyn, the more likely Labour will eventually elect a new leader who will totally railroad the Tories much as Blair did with Major.

Oddly, Cobyn is the Conservatives best chance of remaini g in power.

The mail was out of order on Miliband

Are you seriously claiming the evidence on Corbyn's complicity to terrorists is now a smear?

The only paradox, is why you are seeming to make excuses

he is far left and you should be very worried

He has been caught lying

You should join  me in being concrned at the far left

I dislike the Tories now

How many times do I need to say this, until it sinks in?

I see Corbyn and momentum, as a massive threat to this country

[Guest]

I dont back Corbyn.

I don't particularly like him.

HE has been too anonymous for too much of his career to be a credible leader.
My preferences would be from Yvette Cooper, Sir Kier Starmer , Owen Smith or an outsider like David Miliband.

What I truly HATE, are lies smears and campaigns against individuals.

Ed Miliband got it from  Dacre, ably cheered on by Cameron and Osborn.

The paradox is, the more the rw and tories vilify and smear Corbyn, the more likely Labour will eventually elect a new leader who will totally railroad the Tories much as Blair did with Major.

Oddly, Cobyn is the Conservatives best chance of remaini g in power.

[Tommy Monk]

Ok... I'll discuss each one of these topics in turn...

Firstly - Immigration...


"...Immigration… 76% want immigration reduced, 4% wanted it increased. 14% want it unchanged..."

[YouGov 8th March 2015]


Labour says a new immigration system, which by implication includes EU nationals, “may include employer sponsorship, work permits, visa regulations or a tailored mix of all these”.

Explicit statement that Brexit will mean an end to freedom of movement for EU nationals.

Labour’s 2017 manifesto stated that “Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union. Britain’s immigration system will change.”

In July, Jeremy Corbyn said that immigration “would be a managed thing on the basis of the skills required..."



Now... I support the view of the majority 76% of British people in the poll result shown above... and I support the official labour party promises above, as of their 2017 manifesto...!

And... around 10 million people voted for labour in last election, in support of this...!

So... please tell me where you stand on this... and explain how this makes you 'left wing' and me 'on the right'...???

Just like didge you always draw Left and Right down to purely party politics. My main gripe with the immigration system is how difficult it makes it for those married to foreign national may struggle to bring their partners over. I also still support free movement within the EU.

You do not.

And breaking each point I made down one by one is really a waste of time, plus, if you intend at some point to draw Left and Right down to solely economics, don't bother. The two sides are synonymous today with conservative and liberal social issues too.

That is a complete cop out of an answer!!!


You threw down the list of accusations here... and I have merely thrown down the challenge to you to justify your accusations...!


And I am more than willing to debate each in turn... which I think is important for us to get to the truth, and for you to learn a bit more about reality...!


So... either back up your accusations or withdraw them and apologise...!?

[Syl]

I dont support free movement, when more people come in than leave, especially if they dont have skills to contribute to the country, or they are working at jobs that are denying local people work, or vacancies are advertised in the EU without giving the people who already live here the chance to apply....thats wrong on so many levels.

Many doctors from India (for eg) are fully trained and eager to work in the UK, we are short of doctors, they cant come because of present immigration laws.
Free EU movement is preventing many people from outside the EU the chance to live here. Our NHS, schools, housing market is stretched to bursting. It stands to reason if parts of the world are given free entry other parts of the world will be more limited because of this...we are a small island..

Government statistics claim unemployment is low....thats because so many people have zero hour contracts and  unemployment regulations have been changed in recent years.

It makes me laugh when people who voted BREXIT are considered racist and small minded.....if it's done right it will open up the world for us, and that would include people from outside the EU who are married to Brits having a fairer chance of making their lives here.

I did not give you a red, but can garner either Ben or Eddie did based on their predicatment

So why they would red you is very evident and why they would be very pissed at yout very poor arguments of which i will answer now

1) It happened in the US where far more people came into the US and helped create the most economical powerhouse that still exists today.They never had the infrustruture as you claim is a problem. So how did they tackle this problem?
I mean do you have any idea on how the navvies formed from the Irish and Chinese built the US and in this country with the Irish the railroads. This helped the economy loads. The US is one of those nations that has been able to have mass immigration and succeed

2) The most ridiculous double stadard and quite frankly hypocritical argument I have heard
Do you want people to live here through free movememnt or not? You suggest they cannot and defend against this?
The reality is ion the Uk and Ben is a living example and how the press play poorly on this. Is that Unskilled people are unable to be here. Ben is skilled. The reality is outside the EU, Doctors and nurses have to pass a test. Within the EU, they do not. The US has always been stretched and they enabled for people to become part of a nation and what the problem is here. Is on money spent. The US overcame these problems. What we do in the UK is look to blame the immigrants and not the system.

3) Whilst i agree with how we have problems with importing poor beliefs. Tell that to the indegeneous of every single country that has now basically caused their extincition. What you are saying is the poor unethical bable you have been brought up on, which is Christian bullshit. Is some how morally superior

No it is not

The problem of immigration is not numbers

Its idiots in charge not having a clue.

It is why the US has a major less problem with Muslim integration and they have had far more than European countries have. We have had Muslim immigration ffor centuries

The problem is on what is being imported on beliefs and that is not immigration, but money from some countries supporting a view to indoctrinate

4) Unemployment. What a ridiculous argument. Is the view to employ people geographically or employ all people?

Seriously?

Where is your morals here?

People coming here to work is based on people not taking jobs. That is a fact and its not the immigrants fault

People coming here and not wanting to work is a problem

Do not conflate the two

Perhaps you should go back and read the post I actually made instead of putting your own slant on it.

[Syl]

Syl, I can quite assure you neither Ben nor I gave you a red?

I can only speak for myself really, but I’d rather argue my point.

I dont give a toss who gave the red tbh....but I didn't think it was anyone I respected on here anyway....which would include you two.

I think Ben totally misread my point....he doesn't live in the EU, he was not included in my comments about free movement. If he lived in an EU country he would have the right to live and work here, often without qualications in anything.... without all the problems he is facing, thats what free movement means....it only applies to EU countries, and as the goalposts are pretty uneven in re to what each country can offer, its an unfair system..

I have said in other threads, a person who marries a UK citizen should be given priority to live and work here.....thats not what this thread was about though, and I was surprised, given what I actually wrote, Ben grasped the wrong end of my post.
Im not surprised Didge jumped to the same conclusion, he often misinterpretates what is said.

[Tommy Monk]

There is no centre right dominance here.

You, me, veya, Ben, wolfie, quill, sassy, lurker and in lot of areas Lord Foul, are all left leaning. Most the rest are pretty centre, from my pov. Only a few, like tommy, sit solidly on the right

That said I like to think I bring some reasonability to the forum, along with that oh so boring word 'fairness' and a heavy dose of honesty

Really...?


Can you explain what views you think I have, that are views that define someone as being 'on the right'...?


Can hardly wait for the reply...!

Come on Les...!?


Show us this 'reasonability fairness & honesty' that you claim to bring...!?

[Syl]

Did I say British people should be hired over the best candidate?

I said many people come here with no special skills and do local people out of a job.
Local people cant even get the job in the first placee if it's advertised abroad and not here....which some companies do.
Butlins and Costa coffee are two that have been in the news for doing exactly that.
My son and his workforce were made redundant twice in a short space of time, only for the company to reopen with a complete Polish workforce who could afford to work and live for less.....they were not better, they were cheaper.

Do you live in an EU country btw??  No....so I wasnt referring to you. I said if the present policy of free movement was changed it would open up immigration from none EU countries.
Stop taking things so personally.

Okay, maybe I misunderstood you. I just took issue with this:

people come in than leave, especially if they dont have skills to contribute to the country, or they are working at jobs that are denying local people work,

I'd love the opportunity to show a British company that I would be a great fit for them, and I don't think my nationality should be a factor.

Yes you misunderstood.....I also pointed out but it was overlooked, if we manage the influx of EU citizens better in future,  that would give more of a chance for none EU citizens to settle here.


We need doctors, many fully trained Indian dr's cant get the appropriate papers to work here, but we allow thousands of untrained people from the EU to live and work here.....we are an island, we need to manage who enters (and leaves) better.

[Eilzel]

There is no centre right dominance here.

You, me, veya, Ben, wolfie, quill, sassy, lurker and in lot of areas Lord Foul, are all left leaning. Most the rest are pretty centre, from my pov. Only a few, like tommy, sit solidly on the right

That said I like to think I bring some reasonability to the forum, along with that oh so boring word 'fairness' and a heavy dose of honesty

Really...?


Can you explain what views you think I have, that are views that define someone as being 'on the right'...?


Can hardly wait for the reply...!

Come on Les...!?


Show us this 'reasonability fairness & honesty' that you claim to bring...!?

Calm down, you replied in the middle of the night here

I already replied to your points on immigration. If you are going to insist then do it all in one post. And convince me that contrary to years of threads you are actually not conservative at all. Cheers

PS: you want me to apologise for calling you RW?

[Tommy Monk]

You didn't answer my questions at all... you posted an admission of avoiding my questions...!


And of refusing to back up your (tar filled brush of false) claims about me...!


Now... I support the view of the majority 76% of British people in the poll result shown above... and I support the official labour party promises above, as of their 2017 manifesto...!

And... around 10 million people voted for labour in last election, in support of this...!

So... please tell me where you stand on this... and explain how this makes you 'left wing' and me 'on the right'...???

[Eilzel]

You didn't answer my questions at all... you posted an admission of avoiding my questions...!


And of refusing to back up your (tar filled brush of false) claims about me...!


Now... I support the view of the majority 76% of British people in the poll result shown above... and I support the official labour party promises above, as of their 2017 manifesto...!

And... around 10 million people voted for labour in last election, in support of this...!

So... please tell me where you stand on this... and explain how this makes you 'left wing' and me 'on the right'...???

I already replied to this in the first part of my first reply to you.

[Guest]

I did not give you a red, but can garner either Ben or Eddie did based on their predicatment

So why they would red you is very evident and why they would be very pissed at yout very poor arguments of which i will answer now

1) It happened in the US where far more people came into the US and helped create the most economical powerhouse that still exists today.They never had the infrustruture as you claim is a problem. So how did they tackle this problem?
I mean do you have any idea on how the navvies formed from the Irish and Chinese built the US and in this country with the Irish the railroads. This helped the economy loads. The US is one of those nations that has been able to have mass immigration and succeed

2) The most ridiculous double stadard and quite frankly hypocritical argument I have heard
Do you want people to live here through free movememnt or not? You suggest they cannot and defend against this?
The reality is ion the Uk and Ben is a living example and how the press play poorly on this. Is that Unskilled people are unable to be here. Ben is skilled. The reality is outside the EU, Doctors and nurses have to pass a test. Within the EU, they do not. The US has always been stretched and they enabled for people to become part of a nation and what the problem is here. Is on money spent. The US overcame these problems. What we do in the UK is look to blame the immigrants and not the system.

3) Whilst i agree with how we have problems with importing poor beliefs. Tell that to the indegeneous of every single country that has now basically caused their extincition. What you are saying is the poor unethical bable you have been brought up on, which is Christian bullshit. Is some how morally superior

No it is not

The problem of immigration is not numbers

Its idiots in charge not having a clue.

It is why the US has a major less problem with Muslim integration and they have had far more than European countries have. We have had Muslim immigration ffor centuries

The problem is on what is being imported on beliefs and that is not immigration, but money from some countries supporting a view to indoctrinate

4) Unemployment. What a ridiculous argument. Is the view to employ people geographically or employ all people?

Seriously?

Where is your morals here?

People coming here to work is based on people not taking jobs. That is a fact and its not the immigrants fault

People coming here and not wanting to work is a problem

Do not conflate the two

Perhaps you should go back and read the post I actually made instead of putting your own slant on it.

Copout alert

Run away, that is fine. It proves you cannot back up the poor views that you follow

[Syl]

Perhaps you should go back and read the post I actually made instead of putting your own slant on it.

Copout alert

Run away, that is fine. It proves you cannot back up the poor views that you follow

I never run away from a topic, and when your reply bares even a fraction of the truth to what I actually posted I will stay and debate.
As it is it doesn't, and I have far more on my plate today than to waste it arguing and going round in circles with you when you deliberately (it seems) misinterpret what I have said.

Over and out.

[The Devil, You Know]

Actually Tommy has expressed some views on economics that are full blown Communist not merely just socialist.

he is actually a 'Nationalist Socialist' in his views. Socially conservative, insular and anti-free market.

National Socialist = Nazi.

yep national socialist workers party

[The Devil, You Know]

I dont back Corbyn.

I don't particularly like him.

HE has been too anonymous for too much of his career to be a credible leader.
My preferences would be from Yvette Cooper, Sir Kier Starmer , Owen Smith or an outsider like David Miliband.

What I truly HATE, are lies smears and campaigns against individuals.

Ed Miliband got it from  Dacre, ably cheered on by Cameron and Osborn.

The paradox is, the more the rw and tories vilify and smear Corbyn, the more likely Labour will eventually elect a new leader who will totally railroad the Tories much as Blair did with Major.

Oddly, Cobyn is the Conservatives best chance of remaini g in power.

the problem of course for something to be a smear it has to be untrue. there is 40 years of corbyns treachery to pick from.
It would seem that jew bashing is a vote winner these days. Everyone who campaigns for corbyn to become PM is complicit int eh inherant antisemitism rife in teh labour party now.
Good to see that corbyn still comes third in a 2 horse race for best PM against TM.

[Tommy Monk]

You didn't answer my questions at all... you posted an admission of avoiding my questions...!


And of refusing to back up your (tar filled brush of false) claims about me...!


Now... I support the view of the majority 76% of British people in the poll result shown above... and I support the official labour party promises above, as of their 2017 manifesto...!

And... around 10 million people voted for labour in last election, in support of this...!

So... please tell me where you stand on this... and explain how this makes you 'left wing' and me 'on the right'...???

I already replied to this in the first part of my first reply to you.

You posted run away bullshit... not a proper answer!!!

[Guest]

Copout alert

Run away, that is fine. It proves you cannot back up the poor views that you follow

I never run away from a topic, and when your reply bares even a fraction of the truth to what I actually posted I will stay and debate.
As it is it doesn't, and I have far more on my plate today than to waste it arguing and going round in circles with you when you deliberately (it seems) misinterpret what I have said.

Over and out.

Copout again

I have no idea what is on your plate and am sorry if you are going through loads

However, I raised many points based on your answers

If you wish to avoid answering, just say so

Its not an argument but debate, and why people are here to debate

I will take that as you conceeding to my points on this

One thing that is wrong on the arguments on immigrations, is how its supercharged

The point is this. Nations should crate infrustucture for people

What is happenning in Sweden now is more based on a youth that has no jobs and nothing to look forward to in life, They are thus enticed into criminal gangs. Which shows the system is failing them. That does mena what they have done is in anyway right, its completely wrong, but it should be a wake up call.

If a nation is going to help refugees as they should. Then you cant just ignore them once they are in. Of course some that come have beliefs counter to what we have in the west, but you have to show our system does work and is better

Ben wants to be with the person he loves. He wants to work and yet at every courner is being denied this based more on a fear that has grown by a populace being anti people coming here

That is wrong

You are not going to change problems in the world, if we continually push people away

[Guest]

And before anyone says, that countries cannot cope. Well that is bullshit also

The US certainly did and had mass immigration, that makes what is happenning today, small fry

Yes we should be concerned about people coming in off the back of genuine refugees that are criminals.

That is not the refugees fault, but the system that allows in the criminals without any proper checks

Its also the fault of the Government not controlling numbers, when they have not a plan to cope with thise numbers coming in

Hence its not the many genuine refugees fault but the system and government of that nation

[Vintage]

Are you really trying to compare the US with European countries? I really don't understand anyone trying to do that. On the one hand European countries had already been settled into various countries with large populations, the US is a continent practically in its own right. Its roughly three times the land mass of western Europe and in comparison, although populated, it was sparesly so in comparison and just looked what happened to the original population when the unfettered immigration got into full swing.

[Guest]

Are you really trying to compare the US with European countries? I really don't understand anyone trying to do that. On the one hand European countries had already been settled into various countries with large populations, the US is a continent practically in its own right. Its roughly three times the land mass of western Europe and in comparison, although populated, it was sparesly so in comparison and just looked what happened to the original population when the unfettered immigration got into full swing.

I am actualy, when most immigration came from Europe and Asia

Well maybe you need to stop missing the actually history of the US

As it had mass immigration unseen by the west

Its why they have China town and little Italy

What the US did and where we fail is simple

They helped identify all people through one identity, which they could still retain their ethnicity

So it maybe 3 times ther land mass, but its taken on a hundred times the people and stil worled through this

Hence you need to learn by their example

Its why the US has little issue with Islamic extremism

[Vintage]

Thats the point though, size obviously matters as does the fact people in Europe already had a developed population and culture, the US had various peoples who grew into the US as it developed its culture. That has to be obvious. I haven't missed the history of anything - apparently you have.

[Guest]

Thats the point though, size obviously matters as does the fact people in Europe already had a developed population and culture, the US had various peoples who grew into the US as it developed its culture. That has to be obvious. I haven't missed the history of anything - apparently you have.

So if size matters, then why again has the US faired better than we do here?

Where again they have had mass immigration to cities?:

[Vintage]

Because its larger has less people per sq mile and the different cultures built their own American culture almost from the ground up together. What does it matter where there was immigration that's immaterial. Anyway we obviously will not see each others point of view, we never have on this issue, I have no idea why I even posted anything, you logic on this escapes me as always. So I'll agree to differ and bow out, I'm not going ove old ground againand again .

[Guest]

Because its larger has less people per sq mile and the different cultures built their own American culture almost from the ground up together. What does it matter where there was immigration that's immaterial. Anyway we obviously will not see each others point of view, we never have on this issue, I have no idea why I even posted anything, you logic on this escapes me as always. So I'll agree to differ and bow out, I'm not going ove old ground againand again .

No worries Vintage, but size to me does not matter here. When the Us faced similar issues based on infrustructure

So no problem, we will have to agree to disagree

[Tommy Monk]

I have a friend at work who is Bulgarian and who has been in UK for 10 years... he has a British passport and voted in the EU referendum...


And guess what...?


He voted to leave the EU!!!


For the exact same reasons that I voted leave!!!


And he also agreed that the leftys who support remain, are very confused about what they think the EU actually is... given that they are against privatisation in the public sector (as am I, and as he is too), but it is EU rules that force the public sector to open up large parts of their services to private companies, to bid for tenders to take over and run with taxpayers money and to be allowed to make huge profits from doing so...!!!


I am against privatisation of taxpayer funded public services... and this is one of the main reasons why I voted to leave the EU... (how very 'of the right' of me!!!)...!


Now... Les... you claim to be a lefty (as well as claim that I am 'of the right')... and as a lefty you are strongly against privatisation of taxpayer funded public services... and even advocate the renationalisation of the big ones like rail/elec/gas etc...


So please explain why you support the EU, when EU rules force privatisation of taxpayer funded public services...!?


And explain how my opinion on this is 'of the right'...?

[Guest]

"I have black mates, which means I'm not racist"

So one Eastern European, and a claim by them, is the bases for Tommy's agurment

ha ha ha ha

What about all the other countless people from the EU living here, who have been rightly concerned and scared about the future?

Seriously

[Tommy Monk]

"I have black mates, which means I'm not racist"

So one Eastern European, and a claim by them, is the bases for Tommy's agurment

ha ha ha ha

What about all the other countless people from the EU living here, who have been rightly concerned and scared about the future?

Seriously

What are you talking about Didge...???


Where in my post did I mention 'immigration'...!!!???


Or anything about (my Bulgarian friend and I) voting leave being about 'racism'...!!!???


????


Try reading my post again... and actually try understanding it... and then try answering what I actually said instead of projecting your own narrative onto it and then arguing against this narrative you have projected...!!!???

[Eilzel]

I have a friend at work who is Bulgarian and who has been in UK for 10 years... he has a British passport and voted in the EU referendum...


And guess what...?


He voted to leave the EU!!!


For the exact same reasons that I voted leave!!!


And he also agreed that the leftys who support remain, are very confused about what they think the EU actually is... given that they are against privatisation in the public sector (as am I, and as he is too), but it is EU rules that force the public sector to open up large parts of their services to private companies, to bid for tenders to take over and run with taxpayers money and to be allowed to make huge profits from doing so...!!!


I am against privatisation of taxpayer funded public services... and this is one of the main reasons why I voted to leave the EU... (how very 'of the right' of me!!!)...!


Now... Les... you claim to be a lefty (as well as claim that I am 'of the right')... and as a lefty you are strongly against privatisation of taxpayer funded public services... and even advocate the renationalisation of the big ones like rail/elec/gas etc...


So please explain why you support the EU, when EU rules force privatisation of taxpayer funded public services...!?


And explain how my opinion on this is 'of the right'...?

EU rules do not force thus though. The state still owns large amounts public utilities and rail networks in Europe, showing it's down to interpretation. Of course the rabid RW medis will tell us there is 'no choice' and that the EU 'dictatorship' is forcing us to do things. But then why is that not the case in France and Germany, for example? Nothing like Hyperbole from the Sun and Daily Mail, eh

Plus, the 'winningest' parties of the last 30 years, Tory and New Labour, were all pro privatisation, which is why are where are now. Not the EU.

Labour currently state we can nationalise some services while staying in the single market.

[nicko]

You Nationalise private companies and what happens ?

The workforce know they can't be sacked,[nless they commit a heinous crime] so a couldn't care less attitude slowly creeps in, and the company starts a slow slide to disaster !

[Guest]

I have a friend at work who is Bulgarian and who has been in UK for 10 years... he has a British passport and voted in the EU referendum...


And guess what...?


He voted to leave the EU!!!


For the exact same reasons that I voted leave!!!


And he also agreed that the leftys who support remain, are very confused about what they think the EU actually is... given that they are against privatisation in the public sector (as am I, and as he is too), but it is EU rules that force the public sector to open up large parts of their services to private companies, to bid for tenders to take over and run with taxpayers money and to be allowed to make huge profits from doing so...!!!


I am against privatisation of taxpayer funded public services... and this is one of the main reasons why I voted to leave the EU... (how very 'of the right' of me!!!)...!


Now... Les... you claim to be a lefty (as well as claim that I am 'of the right')... and as a lefty you are strongly against privatisation of taxpayer funded public services... and even advocate the renationalisation of the big ones like rail/elec/gas etc...


So please explain why you support the EU, when EU rules force privatisation of taxpayer funded public services...!?


And explain how my opinion on this is 'of the right'...?

EU rules do not force thus though. The state still owns large amounts public utilities and rail networks in Europe, showing it's down to interpretation. Of course the rabid RW medis will tell us there is 'no choice' and that the EU 'dictatorship' is forcing us to do things. But then why is that not the case in France and Germany, for example? Nothing like Hyperbole from the Sun and Daily Mail, eh

Plus, the 'winningest' parties of the last 30 years, Tory and New Labour, were all pro privatisation, which is why are where are now. Not the EU.

Labour currently state we can nationalise some services while staying in the single market.

But at what cost to the economy?

How much taxes will people ned to pay for this?

We already have a train system, where unions now pay train drivers near 50k.
Which is down to militant far lefty unions

I mean 50k or driving a train on rails. Which has very little skill compared to a bus or coach driver

That is simple ridiculous, when already this country now has people pay a third of the wages in train travel

And you think nationalizing this will help comabt this?

When its guaranteed to ensure people will actually end up paying more

Maybe you can weigh up how many times in history nationalization has been a benefit and failure here in history?

What on earth are you going on about france and Germany for here?

For example Deutsche Bahn, which controls railways pays no interest on the state loans and thus the tax payer ends up forking out on this

wow, gooooo socialism, what a way to ensure people end up being far worse off

What is even worse, is when Rail networks fail, the governement has to step in with more money, again based off the tax payer

Our rail system is a joke here, but so is many in western Europe.

Its seems mate, you really have turned further left and have still not learned from every single example of history, where its destroyed each and every single country that did

You are one of these people that will continue down the same trodeen path, that ends in failure and with no due care at what cause it causes the people of that nation

[Eilzel]

I have a friend at work who is Bulgarian and who has been in UK for 10 years... he has a British passport and voted in the EU referendum...


And guess what...?


He voted to leave the EU!!!


For the exact same reasons that I voted leave!!!


And he also agreed that the leftys who support remain, are very confused about what they think the EU actually is... given that they are against privatisation in the public sector (as am I, and as he is too), but it is EU rules that force the public sector to open up large parts of their services to private companies, to bid for tenders to take over and run with taxpayers money and to be allowed to make huge profits from doing so...!!!


I am against privatisation of taxpayer funded public services... and this is one of the main reasons why I voted to leave the EU... (how very 'of the right' of me!!!)...!


Now... Les... you claim to be a lefty (as well as claim that I am 'of the right')... and as a lefty you are strongly against privatisation of taxpayer funded public services... and even advocate the renationalisation of the big ones like rail/elec/gas etc...


So please explain why you support the EU, when EU rules force privatisation of taxpayer funded public services...!?


And explain how my opinion on this is 'of the right'...?

EU rules do not force thus though. The state still owns large amounts public utilities and rail networks in Europe, showing it's down to interpretation. Of course the rabid RW medis will tell us there is 'no choice' and that the EU 'dictatorship' is forcing us to do things. But then why is that not the case in France and Germany, for example? Nothing like Hyperbole from the Sun and Daily Mail, eh

Plus, the 'winningest' parties of the last 30 years, Tory and New Labour, were all pro privatisation, which is why are where are now. Not the EU.

Labour currently state we can nationalise some services while staying in the single market.

But at what cost to the economy?

How much taxes will people ned to pay for this?

We already have a train system, where unions now pay train drivers near 50k.
Which is down to militant far lefty unions

I mean 50k or driving a train on rails. Which has very little skill compared to a bus or coach driver

That is simple ridiculous, when already this country now has people pay a third of the wages in train travel

And you think nationalizing this will help comabt this?

When its guaranteed to ensure people will actually end up paying more

Maybe you can weigh up how many times in history nationalization has been a benefit and failure here in history?

What on earth are you going on about france and Germany for here?

For example Deutsche Bahn, which controls railways pays no interest on the state loans and thus the tax payer ends up forking out on this

wow, gooooo socialism, what a way to ensure people end up being far worse off

What is even worse, is when Rail networks fail, the governement has to step in with more money, again based off the tax payer

Our rail system is a joke here, but so is many in western Europe.

Its seems mate, you really have turned further left and have still not learned from every single example of history, where its destroyed each and every single country that did

You are one of these people that will continue down the same trodeen path, that ends in failure and with no due care at what cause it causes the people of that nation

Having used trains in Western and Central Europe, I can honestly say it was far, far more enjoyable and convenient (not to mention WAY cheaper) than trains in the UK. In the UK it is ALL about profit, sometimes at the cost and frustration of commuters.

I hear endlessly about how 'it didn't work in Britain before' and the problems with publicly run services here. So we are supposed to be the exception? It is the same BS argument Americans give when anyone points out the positives on gun control in other nations 'It wouldn't work in America'. It is disappointing how many on the Right in Britain and America are willing to admit to the shortcomings of their nations only when it suits their own agendas.

If nationalised rail services can be so good in Europe, they can be in the UK. We ARE good enough. We just don't want to try.

[Guest]

But at what cost to the economy?

How much taxes will people ned to pay for this?

We already have a train system, where unions now pay train drivers near 50k.
Which is down to militant far lefty unions

I mean 50k or driving a train on rails. Which has very little skill compared to a bus or coach driver

That is simple ridiculous, when already this country now has people pay a third of the wages in train travel

And you think nationalizing this will help comabt this?

When its guaranteed to ensure people will actually end up paying more

Maybe you can weigh up how many times in history nationalization has been a benefit and failure here in history?

What on earth are you going on about france and Germany for here?

For example Deutsche Bahn, which controls railways pays no interest on the state loans and thus the tax payer ends up forking out on this

wow, gooooo socialism, what a way to ensure people end up being far worse off

What is even worse, is when Rail networks fail, the governement has to step in with more money, again based off the tax payer

Our rail system is a joke here, but so is many in western Europe.

Its seems mate, you really have turned further left and have still not learned from every single example of history, where its destroyed each and every single country that did

You are one of these people that will continue down the same trodeen path, that ends in failure and with no due care at what cause it causes the people of that nation

Having used trains in Western and Central Europe, I can honestly say it was far, far more enjoyable and convenient (not to mention WAY cheaper) than trains in the UK. In the UK it is ALL about profit, sometimes at the cost and frustration of commuters.

I hear endlessly about how 'it didn't work in Britain before' and the problems with publicly run services here. So we are supposed to be the exception? It is the same BS argument Americans give when anyone points out the positives on gun control in other nations 'It wouldn't work in America'. It is disappointing how many on the Right in Britain and America are willing to admit to the shortcomings of their nations only when it suits their own agendas.

If nationalised rail services can be so good in Europe, they can be in the UK. We ARE good enough. We just don't want to try.

So we now have to based this on your view point as the standard

I have travelled more in life, whilst you were still a toddler and hence why your view is irrelevant. Based on personal preference.

Good, I back people to be successful, because that works a damn site better than socialism, which as seen continually fails.

Its not just about Britain. But based on a multitude of different nations, that have and used nationalization

Its not even the same arguments on gun control. That is a different ball park

Its like arguing cars with kites

Again you are under the impression they are good or good for the people, based on what reality?

[Eilzel]

But at what cost to the economy?

How much taxes will people ned to pay for this?

We already have a train system, where unions now pay train drivers near 50k.
Which is down to militant far lefty unions

I mean 50k or driving a train on rails. Which has very little skill compared to a bus or coach driver

That is simple ridiculous, when already this country now has people pay a third of the wages in train travel

And you think nationalizing this will help comabt this?

When its guaranteed to ensure people will actually end up paying more

Maybe you can weigh up how many times in history nationalization has been a benefit and failure here in history?

What on earth are you going on about france and Germany for here?

For example Deutsche Bahn, which controls railways pays no interest on the state loans and thus the tax payer ends up forking out on this

wow, gooooo socialism, what a way to ensure people end up being far worse off

What is even worse, is when Rail networks fail, the governement has to step in with more money, again based off the tax payer

Our rail system is a joke here, but so is many in western Europe.

Its seems mate, you really have turned further left and have still not learned from every single example of history, where its destroyed each and every single country that did

You are one of these people that will continue down the same trodeen path, that ends in failure and with no due care at what cause it causes the people of that nation

Having used trains in Western and Central Europe, I can honestly say it was far, far more enjoyable and convenient (not to mention WAY cheaper) than trains in the UK. In the UK it is ALL about profit, sometimes at the cost and frustration of commuters.

I hear endlessly about how 'it didn't work in Britain before' and the problems with publicly run services here. So we are supposed to be the exception? It is the same BS argument Americans give when anyone points out the positives on gun control in other nations 'It wouldn't work in America'. It is disappointing how many on the Right in Britain and America are willing to admit to the shortcomings of their nations only when it suits their own agendas.

If nationalised rail services can be so good in Europe, they can be in the UK. We ARE good enough. We just don't want to try.

So we now have to based this on your view point as the standard

I have travelled more in life, whilst you were still a toddler and hence why your view is irrelevant. Based on personal preference.

Good, I back people to be successful, because that works a damn site better than socialism, which as seen continually fails.

Its not just about Britain. But based on a multitude of different nations, that have and used nationalization

Its not even the same arguments on gun control. That is a different ball park

Its like arguing cars with kites

Again you are under the impression they are good or good for the people, based on what reality?

You talk about different ball parks while in another thread compare the right to smoke e-cigs to gay rights

So now anyone younger than you has an irrelevant view?
Exactly which nationalised rain services have you used to form your judgment, didge? Because I'll tell you now the national networks of France, Austria and the Czech Republic are all phenomenally good, more so compared to Britain's.

[Guest]

So we now have to based this on your view point as the standard

I have travelled more in life, whilst you were still a toddler and hence why your view is irrelevant. Based on personal preference.

Good, I back people to be successful, because that works a damn site better than socialism, which as seen continually fails.

Its not just about Britain. But based on a multitude of different nations, that have and used nationalization

Its not even the same arguments on gun control. That is a different ball park

Its like arguing cars with kites

Again you are under the impression they are good or good for the people, based on what reality?

You talk about different ball parks while in another thread compare the right to smoke e-cigs to gay rights

So now anyone younger than you has an irrelevant view?
Exactly which nationalised rain services have you used to form your judgment, didge? Because I'll tell you now the national networks of France, Austria and the Czech Republic are all phenomenally good, more so compared to Britain's.

The comparrison was based on a perceived view to be offended

Man alive, can you not grasp that actual point

Cathy Newman alert

Where did i say people younger than me, can not have any views?

Never did
How much better are these rails services are they than the UK

Then compare their economies and quality of life

[Eilzel]

So we now have to based this on your view point as the standard

I have travelled more in life, whilst you were still a toddler and hence why your view is irrelevant. Based on personal preference.

Good, I back people to be successful, because that works a damn site better than socialism, which as seen continually fails.

Its not just about Britain. But based on a multitude of different nations, that have and used nationalization

Its not even the same arguments on gun control. That is a different ball park

Its like arguing cars with kites

Again you are under the impression they are good or good for the people, based on what reality?

You talk about different ball parks while in another thread compare the right to smoke e-cigs to gay rights

So now anyone younger than you has an irrelevant view?
Exactly which nationalised rain services have you used to form your judgment, didge? Because I'll tell you now the national networks of France, Austria and the Czech Republic are all phenomenally good, more so compared to Britain's.

The comparrison was based on a perceived view to be offended

Man alive, can you not grasp that actual point

Cathy Newman alert

Where did i say people younger than me, can not have any views?

Never did
How much better are these rails services are they than the UK

Then compare their economies and quality of life

"I have travelled more in life, whilst you were still a toddler and hence why your view is irrelevant."

So because you were travelling when I was a child means my view is irrelevant???

How much better? Massively. In every aspect - punctuality, cleanliness, how modern they are, free wifi vs pay through your teeth wifi and most of all, COST.

So which nationalised railways have you used, didn't quite catch it there?

[Guest]

The comparrison was based on a perceived view to be offended

Man alive, can you not grasp that actual point

Cathy Newman alert

Where did i say people younger than me, can not have any views?

Never did
How much better are these rails services are they than the UK

Then compare their economies and quality of life

"I have travelled more in life, whilst you were still a toddler and hence why your view is irrelevant."

So because you were travelling when I was a child means my view is irrelevant???

How much better? Massively. In every aspect - punctuality, cleanliness, how modern they are, free wifi vs pay through your teeth wifi and most of all, COST.

So which nationalised railways have you used, didn't quite catch it there?

Oh dear, you made the view on your experince on travelling, as if it was a relevant point

I simple showed how dumb that was, by saying I have travelled more, than you will ever hope to in a lifetime

hence your personal experince counts for shit, as does mine

Has this point sunk in yet?

You get all the above on British railways here now, though not on cost

And the point goes over the Marxists head

How many of these economies are better than the UK?

And quality of life

I asked first and still waiting

[Eilzel]

The comparrison was based on a perceived view to be offended

Man alive, can you not grasp that actual point

Cathy Newman alert

Where did i say people younger than me, can not have any views?

Never did
How much better are these rails services are they than the UK

Then compare their economies and quality of life

"I have travelled more in life, whilst you were still a toddler and hence why your view is irrelevant."

So because you were travelling when I was a child means my view is irrelevant???

How much better? Massively. In every aspect - punctuality, cleanliness, how modern they are, free wifi vs pay through your teeth wifi and most of all, COST.

So which nationalised railways have you used, didn't quite catch it there?

Oh dear, you made the view on your experince on travelling, as if it was a relevant point

I simple showed how dumb that was, by saying I have travelled more, than you will ever hope to in a lifetime

hence your personal experince counts for shit, as does mine

Has this point sunk in yet?

You get all the above on British railways here now, though not on cost

And the point goes over the Marxists head

How many of these economies are better than the UK?

And quality of life

I asked first and still waiting

First off, it's SIMPLY, OK, not 'simple'. I've ignored this for months because I thought maybe it was deliberate, and maybe it is.

I have no idea how much you've travelled tbf, but I've travelled a fair bit in my oh so short life and my habit and goal in to travel to at least one new country a year. So who knows what the future holds, eh

And actually, it is relevant. Since the more you DO travel the more experience you get on what works in the world and what doesn't.

Having travelled on publicly owned railways in Europe, I know they are better. I even gave you three countries as examples, to your how many? Well, still waiting...

Btw, I use railways in Britain whenever I'm there.

- not punctual
- local trains are still the same crappy ones they've used for decades
- wifi either doesn't exist or isn't free (at least in the North)
- and as you say, still WILDLY expensive!

So which publicly owned railways have you used then, for comparison?

Btw quality of life is very subjective, but all three countries I've mentioned seem to be doing about as well as the UK, maybe a little better or worse. Czech I know has a lower income but that's about the only major difference.

[Guest]

Oh dear, you made the view on your experince on travelling, as if it was a relevant point

I simple showed how dumb that was, by saying I have travelled more, than you will ever hope to in a lifetime

hence your personal experince counts for shit, as does mine

Has this point sunk in yet?

You get all the above on British railways here now, though not on cost

And the point goes over the Marxists head

How many of these economies are better than the UK?

And quality of life

I asked first and still waiting

First off, it's SIMPLY, OK, not 'simple'. I've ignored this for months because I thought maybe it was deliberate, and maybe it is.

I have no idea how much you've travelled tbf, but I've travelled a fair bit in my oh so short life and my habit and goal in to travel to at least one new country a year. So who knows what the future holds, eh

And actually, it is relevant. Since the more you DO travel the more experience you get on what works in the world and what doesn't.

Having travelled on publicly owned railways in Europe, I know they are better. I even gave you three countries as examples, to your how many? Well, still waiting...

Btw, I use railways in Britain whenever I'm there.

- not punctual
- local trains are still the same crappy ones they've used for decades
- wifi either doesn't exist or isn't free (at least in the North)
- and as you say, still WILDLY expensive!

So which publicly owned railways have you used then, for comparison?

No its empahtically simplemided on your part, as you are driven by irrational fanatizies at times

You live by theis perpetual failed dream on socialism

Not sure how many times you need to see this fail for this to register

I still like and respect you, but just calling you out for what you are

So I have to take your hearsay views on travelling over mine

You see, what a really dumb argument, based on travel and personal experince

When people can face different experinces dependent on the day and time and possible problems

hence redundent argument
Your views on train travel

1) Your subjective view
2) Your subjective view
3) Your subjective view
4) Agreed

The last question is idiotic when you still keep avoding my point?

How many of these economies are better than the UK?

And quality of life

I asked first and still waiting


Third time asking

[Eilzel]

Oh dear, you made the view on your experince on travelling, as if it was a relevant point

I simple showed how dumb that was, by saying I have travelled more, than you will ever hope to in a lifetime

hence your personal experince counts for shit, as does mine

Has this point sunk in yet?

You get all the above on British railways here now, though not on cost

And the point goes over the Marxists head

How many of these economies are better than the UK?

And quality of life

I asked first and still waiting

First off, it's SIMPLY, OK, not 'simple'. I've ignored this for months because I thought maybe it was deliberate, and maybe it is.

I have no idea how much you've travelled tbf, but I've travelled a fair bit in my oh so short life and my habit and goal in to travel to at least one new country a year. So who knows what the future holds, eh

And actually, it is relevant. Since the more you DO travel the more experience you get on what works in the world and what doesn't.

Having travelled on publicly owned railways in Europe, I know they are better. I even gave you three countries as examples, to your how many? Well, still waiting...

Btw, I use railways in Britain whenever I'm there.

- not punctual
- local trains are still the same crappy ones they've used for decades
- wifi either doesn't exist or isn't free (at least in the North)
- and as you say, still WILDLY expensive!

So which publicly owned railways have you used then, for comparison?

No its empahtically simplemided on your part, as you are driven by irrational fanatizies at times

You live by theis perpetual failed dream on socialism

Not sure how many times you need to see this fail for this to register

I still like and respect you, but just calling you out for what you are

So I have to take your hearsay views on travelling over mine

You see, what a really dumb argument, based on travel and personal experince

When people can face different experinces dependent on the day and time and possible problems

hence redundent argument
Your views on train travel

1) Your subjective view
2) Your subjective view
3) Your subjective view
4) Agreed

The last question is idiotic when you still keep avoding my point?

How many of these economies are better than the UK?

And quality of life

I asked first and still waiting


Third time asking

So your point would be - UK has higher GDP and is therefore irrelevant how good their rail networks are. I'm not playing your loaded question games, didge, it's tiresome.

No idea the quality of life. Enlighten us all

[Guest]

No its empahtically simplemided on your part, as you are driven by irrational fanatizies at times

You live by theis perpetual failed dream on socialism

Not sure how many times you need to see this fail for this to register

I still like and respect you, but just calling you out for what you are

So I have to take your hearsay views on travelling over mine

You see, what a really dumb argument, based on travel and personal experince

When people can face different experinces dependent on the day and time and possible problems

hence redundent argument
Your views on train travel

1) Your subjective view
2) Your subjective view
3) Your subjective view
4) Agreed

The last question is idiotic when you still keep avoding my point?

How many of these economies are better than the UK?

And quality of life

I asked first and still waiting


Third time asking

So your point would be - UK has higher GDP and is therefore irrelevant how good their rail networks are. I'm not playing your loaded question games, didge, it's tiresome.

No idea the quality of life. Enlighten us all

Loaded questions

I would rather have a better quality of life that a more effficient rail service

a.k.a money spent on the homeless, not a national rail service

Period

[Eilzel]

No its empahtically simplemided on your part, as you are driven by irrational fanatizies at times

You live by theis perpetual failed dream on socialism

Not sure how many times you need to see this fail for this to register

I still like and respect you, but just calling you out for what you are

So I have to take your hearsay views on travelling over mine

You see, what a really dumb argument, based on travel and personal experince

When people can face different experinces dependent on the day and time and possible problems

hence redundent argument
Your views on train travel

1) Your subjective view
2) Your subjective view
3) Your subjective view
4) Agreed

The last question is idiotic when you still keep avoding my point?

How many of these economies are better than the UK?

And quality of life

I asked first and still waiting


Third time asking

So your point would be - UK has higher GDP and is therefore irrelevant how good their rail networks are. I'm not playing your loaded question games, didge, it's tiresome.

No idea the quality of life. Enlighten us all

Loaded questions

I would rather have a better quality of life that a more effficient rail service

a.k.a money spent on the homeless, not a national rail service

Period

I don't find the two to be mutually exclusive. Period.

[Guest]

Loaded questions

I would rather have a better quality of life that a more effficient rail service

a.k.a money spent on the homeless, not a national rail service

Period

I don't find the two to be mutually exclusive. Period.

I am sure you do not, but rail travel is not what many people even need to have daily

So then, how would this even be important to them

I walk 5 miles a day and back to Wye, from Ashford.

I take public foot paths, that allow me to see the real natural beauty of the countryside

I rarely come into contact with any transport and it takes me about an hour to walk

It provides great fitness and more than anything happiness.

Maybe people need to remember thay have legs and to start to use them

[Eilzel]

Loaded questions

I would rather have a better quality of life that a more effficient rail service

a.k.a money spent on the homeless, not a national rail service

Period

I don't find the two to be mutually exclusive. Period.

I am sure you do not, but rail travel is not what many people even need to have daily

So then, how would this even be important to them

I walk 5 miles a day and back to Wye, from Ashford.

I take public foot paths, that allow me to see the real natural beauty of the countryside

I rarely come into contact with any transport and it takes me about an hour to walk

It provides great fitness and more than anything happiness.

Maybe people need to remember thay have legs and to start to use them

In some cases. Not if people are travelling huge distances or city to city, for example. And just because not everyone uses trains is not a reason to not ensure they are run most efficiently.

Your walks in the country every day sound nice, it's good that you have to time for them between helping the homeless and the time you spend on here

[Guest]

I am sure you do not, but rail travel is not what many people even need to have daily

So then, how would this even be important to them

I walk 5 miles a day and back to Wye, from Ashford.

I take public foot paths, that allow me to see the real natural beauty of the countryside

I rarely come into contact with any transport and it takes me about an hour to walk

It provides great fitness and more than anything happiness.

Maybe people need to remember thay have legs and to start to use them

In some cases. Not if people are travelling huge distances or city to city, for example. And just because not everyone uses trains is not a reason to not ensure they are run most efficiently.

Your walks in the country every day sound nice, it's good that you have to time for them between helping the homeless and the time you spend on here

Well how long do you think I spend on here?

Do you want to put this to the test and apologise?

You see how and when your argumemnt fails you try and deligitimise me

During most of the week, I am not on here during the day, but only a leftist would make such an argument

Even worse you think its funny, and even think I do not help the poor

No problem, It just backs up my view, what an ungrateful spoilt brat you were as a child Eilzel

[Eilzel]

I am sure you do not, but rail travel is not what many people even need to have daily

So then, how would this even be important to them

I walk 5 miles a day and back to Wye, from Ashford.

I take public foot paths, that allow me to see the real natural beauty of the countryside

I rarely come into contact with any transport and it takes me about an hour to walk

It provides great fitness and more than anything happiness.

Maybe people need to remember thay have legs and to start to use them

In some cases. Not if people are travelling huge distances or city to city, for example. And just because not everyone uses trains is not a reason to not ensure they are run most efficiently.

Your walks in the country every day sound nice, it's good that you have to time for them between helping the homeless and the time you spend on here

Well how long do you think I spend on here?

Do you want to put this to the test and apologise?

You see how and when your argumemnt fails you try and deligitimise me

During most of the week, I am not on here during the day, but only a leftist would make such an argument

Even worse you think its funny, and even think I do not help the poor

No problem, It just backs up my view, what an ungrateful spoilt brat you were as a child Eilzel

I don't know (or care) how you figure that out, but good for you didge.

[Guest]

Well how long do you think I spend on here?

Do you want to put this to the test and apologise?

You see how and when your argumemnt fails you try and deligitimise me

During most of the week, I am not on here during the day, but only a leftist would make such an argument

Even worse you think its funny, and even think I do not help the poor

No problem, It just backs up my view, what an ungrateful spoilt brat you were as a child Eilzel

I don't know (or care) how you figure that out, but good for you didge.

well clearly you do when you make unfounded claims on me to try and deligitimise me

Do you know what mate

People fight for your rights daily and then you shit on this

You dont deserve it

Other gays do, but you do not

[Eilzel]

Well how long do you think I spend on here?

Do you want to put this to the test and apologise?

You see how and when your argumemnt fails you try and deligitimise me

During most of the week, I am not on here during the day, but only a leftist would make such an argument

Even worse you think its funny, and even think I do not help the poor

No problem, It just backs up my view, what an ungrateful spoilt brat you were as a child Eilzel

I don't know (or care) how you figure that out, but good for you didge.

well clearly you do when you make unfounded claims on me to try and deligitimise me

Do you know what mate

People fight for your rights daily and then you shit on this

You dont deserve it

Other gays do, but you do not

Cool. Not that the issues have anything to do with one another. But, cool.

[Guest]

well clearly you do when you make unfounded claims on me to try and deligitimise me

Do you know what mate

People fight for your rights daily and then you shit on this

You dont deserve it

Other gays do, but you do not

Cool. Not that the issues have anything to do with one another. But, cool.

There is nothing cool about your prejudice views

I now even compare you to Tommy

It makes you compatible

You want to get personal, so can I

[Eilzel]

well clearly you do when you make unfounded claims on me to try and deligitimise me

Do you know what mate

People fight for your rights daily and then you shit on this

You dont deserve it

Other gays do, but you do not

Cool. Not that the issues have anything to do with one another. But, cool.

There is nothing cool about your prejudice views

I now even compare you to Tommy

It makes you compatible

You want to get personal, so can I

Pffft. You instantly brought my sexuality into this, as you always do. That is also personal. Compare me how you like tbh.

[Guest]

There is nothing cool about your prejudice views

I now even compare you to Tommy

It makes you compatible

You want to get personal, so can I

Pffft. You instantly brought my sexuality into this, as you always do. That is also personal. Compare me how you like tbh.

Not to get at you dummy, but to show a comparrison to why your arguments were pisss poor

Now grow up you spoilt brat

[Sponsored content]