Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: Filo on March 26, 2014, 11:05:56 am
-
A nice contest tonight on BBC news Channel at. 19.00 hrs over Europe, I expect Clegg to get a good seeing to by Farage
-
Aye, he's effectively up against Mick.
-
Its also being broadcast on LBC dab radio
-
Interesting premise for the "debate". Neither participant is trying to win supporters from the other one. Farage is talking to right wing Tories, or disenfranchised working class Labour supporters. Clegg is talking to the flabby middle class liberal centre-lefties who voted for him in 2010 then left in their droves when they realised in horror what they had done.
-
Farage will wipe the floor with him. After this debate, Clegg will be totally finished (if he isn't already).
Those of you that think leaving the EU would be a disaster just need to remember that the likes of Clegg wanted us to join the Euro. He predicted doom and gloom if we didn't . Much like he's doing now if we leave the EU. He got that one badly wrong which just goes to show he hasn't got a clue about the EU.
Come on Nige. Spell it out to the British public just what a terrible thing it would be if we don't leave.
-
Are we in for an evening of "I agreee with Mick"?
-
Answer the question Nick instead of waffling!
-
Who won?
-
For me, Farage by a mile, Clegg avoided answering most of the questions
-
If you go on body lanuage then clegg had a Worse time due to fact
I lost count on number Of times he had a drink Of his water.
The UKIP Chap never had one drink Of water at all ,so took the show
In his stride.
But that dont mean fcuk all on how general Public think.
Now you have a labour mp from Leicester on sky news having his
Say on the 'side show' as he put it
Just shows what that particular mp is all about ,as he is more Than happy
To take the piss out Of the 'side show' When his party could not be arsed
To have a member in the show.
Same can be said for conservatives i guess
-
Both won of course. That was the whole point. Neither of them were trying to convince the others' potential supporters so they could not possibly lose. Both of them got free exposure as serious politicians. Which is exactly what they wanted.
-
For me, Farage by a mile, Clegg avoided answering most of the questions
Whereas I thought Clegg was the better of them by far. Farage was a blustering hot head, Clegg much more professional. It was like a tabloid against a broadsheet I thought.
-
I didn't watch it, but I'm guessing Clegg looked straight down the camera and used that earnest "you can trust me" face. Yep?
-
I didn't watch it, but I'm guessing Clegg looked straight down the camera and used that earnest "you can trust me" face. Yep?
I wonder if he made any pledges?
-
Did he sign a pledge on video saying that he will vote to keep us in the EU?
-
Clegg did lots of avoiding answering the questions asked, and drank about a gallon of water
-
Farage won by a mile. A Yougov poll straight after said Farage was a clear winner. 56% for Farage and 36% for Clegg. Even 20% of liberal party members said Farage won.
-
For those following the Scottish Independence debate, every argument used by the Stay Together campaign is a dress rehearsal for the EU in-out referendum.
Those that smile when Alec Sammond is faced with Businesses such as RBS setting up companies and offices in England to mitigate the risks of independence, will face the same scenario with the EU referendum.
-
Moses
I'm sure you're right.
We'll also hear lots of arguments about how we could be like Switzerland who trades successfully with the EU despite not being in it.
-
Thing is, even if we somehow wangle a free-trade agreement if we leave the EU, the costs of importing and exporting will go up because of the newly re-instated declarations, extra paperwork and Customs clearance delays.
-
I suspect we would be able to do so Glyn. And then we could be as economically successful as Switzerland.
-
If norway was ever to join the EU ,i be looking for somewhere Else
To call home .
Finland,iceland or maybe another non EU country
-
If norway was ever to join the EU ,i be looking for somewhere Else
To call home .
Finland,iceland or maybe another non EU country
just nice to see you back "home" on here !
-
Oslo
Not only is Finland already in the EU, but it's ex Finance Minister is the deputy president of the European Commission, and is the man more responsible than anyone for the mad austerity policies that have put tens of millions of EU citizens on the dole.
-
UKIP conference to be held in Donny:
http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news/ukip-to-hold-its-biggest-ever-annual-conference-in-doncaster-1-6520205?WT.mc_id=Outbrain_text&obref=obinsite
-
If norway was ever to join the EU ,i be looking for somewhere Else
To call home .
Finland,iceland or maybe another non EU country
Norway won't join the EU for the same reasons they said No in 1973. The Common Fisheries Policy would destroy their fishing industry.
-
If norway was ever to join the EU ,i be looking for somewhere Else
To call home .
Finland,iceland or maybe another non EU country
Norway won't join the EU for the same reasons they said No in 1973. The Common Fisheries Policy would destroy their fishing industry.
What would fcuk the country up Even more would be the amount Of immirgrants wanting to set up home Here,since the benefit system must
Be one Of best in europe.
Things that have Been part Of norwegian social life since before it found oil
In 1970s are getting run out by the muslim community.
Its was set in Stone that one day a week the kids in school would go
Out into the woods whatever the weather and Build a fire and have sasuages
But some schools with muslims in are Now knocking the taking Of sasuages by students as not to upset the muslims in the class.
Its fcuking stupid as you can buy a turkey sasuage that does the same job
As the, normall bog standard norwegian pork sausage ,but some muslims
Wont have it for whatever reasons.
My lad is out in woods today with his class and he loves it
-
I suspect we would be able to do so Glyn. And then we could be as economically successful as Switzerland.
AS I say, the costs of importing and exporting will still go up even if we were given the same status as Switzerland. Even though most of the trade with Switzerland is Duty free, Customs declarations still have to be made, as the goods have to qualify for that status (the goods have to be of Swiss, or another allowable country's, origin - otherwise China would just use Switzerland as a conduit to get their goods into the EU duty free).
-
AS I say, the costs of importing and exporting will still go up even if we were given the same status as Switzerland.
Maybe. It depends on the deal we make with the EU. We import a lot more into the UK than we export to the EU. It would be massively in the interest of the EU to give us a very favourable deal as they would get much more out of it than we would.
We are now Germany's largest trade partner in the world and as the most powerful nation in the EU it is not in Germany's interests to make trade between the two countries difficult. The balance of trade is also heavily in their favour.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/9816643/Britain-becomes-Germanys-biggest-trade-partner-as-Berlin-London-pact-deepens.html
-
For once I agree with Mick (it had to happen eventually). We could do as well as Switzerland if we left the EU.
-
AS I say, the costs of importing and exporting will still go up even if we were given the same status as Switzerland.
Maybe. It depends on the deal we make with the EU.
No it doesn't in the slightest. I have worked as specialist in this for twenty years so don't try and pretend you know what you're talking about like you normally do because you haven't a clue.
Regardless of any deal we'd be lucky enough to strike with the EU, there would have to be the reimposition of all the bureaucracy (Customs declarations, Customs clearance delays, VAT declarations etc.) we lost when we joined the Single Market...because we'll be leaving the Single Market.
Thererfore all your cut and pasted guff after your first sentence is, as is usual with you, completely irrelevant to the point at hand as the bureaucracty will be reinmposed by the UK, not the EU.
So go and patronise someone else with your pretentiousness.
-
For once I agree with Mick (it had to happen eventually). We could do as well as Switzerland if we left the EU.
I don't doubt it, but as I said Mick is missing the point again, either as one of his usual deliberate tactics or because he's as clueless as usual I can't quite tell.
Imports/exports to/from Switzerland have to have all the bureaucracy of declarations and clearance etc. because they're not in the Single Market, even if there's no actual Duty or VAT payable. When we leave the Single Market, all that bureaucracy will be reintroduced for all and every movement to and from the countries we're currently in the Single Market with. And it adds costs. To every consignment. We might still trade as much as before we leave the EU, but it'll put prices up.
-
When we leave the Single Market, all that bureaucracy will be reintroduced for all and every movement to and from the countries we're currently in the Single Market with. And it adds costs. To every consignment. We might still trade as much as before we leave the EU, but it'll put prices up.
You need to start thinking outside the box like what I do. You automatically assume we would have the same trading arrangement as Switzerland. It doesn't have to be this way and I don't think it will be.
Switzerland is a very different case history to ourselves. Switzerland has never been part of the EU so different rules apply. As we have been part of the EU it would be very easy to leave all the current trading arrangements in place to make life easier for us and for the other countries of the EU (especially Germany).
If you like it could be described as a partial withdrawal. We could withdraw from everything except the trading aspect of membership. Don't forget, that's what the British public thought they had initially signed up for.
Sorted.
-
Yep. I'm all in on this one. The relationship that we have had with the EU has been substantially different to the one which countries like Switzerland have enjoyed. They have been able to pick and choose how their relationship with Europe works, to their best advantage. We have had to sign up to all the bits of the EU that no-one really wants. We have missed out in not having the same sort of relationship as Switzerland.
-
At last. You are starting to agree with me. There is light at the end of the tunnel. I'll eventually have you voting Tory before I'm finished with you.
-
Every once in a while, even YOU get something right Mick. On this one, I'm fully with you that Switzerland has enjoyed a different relationship with the EU to the one that we have had. We could have chosen to be like them, but we didn't. We went into the core of the EU instead of staying as an outsider with trading agreements. Our economy has felt the effect of that decision.
-
Right, it's your turn. I've yet to find anything you've posted that I agree with. I'd appreciate it if you could try to put that matter right.
Oh, hang on a minute I forgot about that ad hominem post on the other thread.
Sorted.
-
Yep Mick, we agree that Switzerland had a different relationship with the EU to the one that we had.
Thing is, YOU, in your usual fuddle-headed manner, YOU assume that they had a better deal. Which is strange, because even a cursory look at the numbers throws up something really interesting. Since the mid 1970s, our GDP per capita has grown at about 1.9% per year on average. Switzerland's has grown at a bit less than 1.3% per year. Fancy that, eh?
It's the same story for most other countries in the EU. France's GDP per capita has grown at about 1.6% over that time. Holland's by about 1.8%. Spain's by about 2.5%. Even Italy for all it's problems over the last decade has done better than Switzerland over the whole period, seeing growth of about 1.5%. Germany is difficult to judge because of reunification, but the best guess is that the Western part at least has grown at about 2%. Denmark has grown at about 1.8%.
So. Yep, we could have been like Switzerland over the past 40 years. If we'd grown at that rate, we'd be about £6000 per year now worse off for every man woman and child in the country. And since that is cumulative, the overall wealth of the country would be something like £5trillion less than it currently is.
See Mick. You could have found those numbers out for yourself if you cared to have a look. They are not hard to find.
-
Where did I say Switzerland had a better deal? I think you'll find I didn't. I have said that we could get a better deal. That is all.
-
So what was the point of this post?
http://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=245585.msg430791#msg430791
-
Just stating facts and showing that the countries with the highest GDP per capita aren't part of the EU.
-
Just stating facts eh?
Firstly, it's wrong. As in "not a fact".
Secondly, Switzerland had for decades had a high GDP per capita. It's got a lot to do with them not wasting billions on WWI and WWII and acting as bankers for pilfered loot instead. They had a FAR higher GDP per capita than us in the 1970s. They have a smaller lead over us now. So, whichever way you look at it, our performance since joining the EU has been markedly better than Switzerland's over the same time.
So, even if your "fact" WAS a fact (which it isn't) it'd not in any way support the argument that a country is better off outside the EU.
-
I don't class Luxembourg as a 'proper' country. So if we exclude them it is a fact. Switzerland and Norway have a far higher standard of living than we do. Fact.
http://www.globalpropertyguide.com/Europe/gdp-per-capita
I stand by my statement that I didn't say Switzerland had a better deal. You've imagined that.
-
Right. So what you meant was that your two countries have the highest GDP per capita in Europe apart from the ones that the UN classes as countries but you don't.
Glad we've cleared that one up.
But there's a question for you. Do you accept that we have done better than Switzerland in terms of our relative growth of GDP per capita over the last 40 years when we have been in the EEC/EU? Simple yes or no will do. Your usual waffle isn't necessary.
On the other point, if you don't believe that Switzerland has had a better deal than us, why on earth introduce such a random fact into the discussion. Hawaii has more rain than us but I wouldn't mention it when talking about whether we are better off in or out of the EU.
So. Straight question. Why did you mention Switzerland's GDP if you are now saying it has no relevance to the discussion?
-
I don't class Luxembourg as a 'proper' country.
What an utterly ridiculous statement. I wish I could say I was surprised but I'm not.
-
I've no reason to doubt you over your assertion that we have done better than Switzerland in terms of our relative growth of GDP per capita over the last 40 years. However I would make 2 points. You imply that this is because we are in the Eu and they are not. It is my contention that we would have done even better if we'd not been in the EU. Also it is easier for us to perform better because we were coming from a much lower base.
I mentioned Switzerland's GDP just to show that the 'proper' countries in Europe that aren't in the EU are the ones with the highest standards of living (Norway included). The point of this was to dispel the myth that not being in the EU would be disastrous to our economy. In fact the opposite is true. I didn't say Switzerland's GDP had no relevance to the discussion. You are imagining things again.
-
Mick
The GDP of Switzerland and Norway have nothing to do with whether they are inside or outside the EU.
Switzerland already had an extremely high GDP per capita back in the 50s. The fact is that since the EEC and EU were founded, the gap between Swiss GDP and that of EVERY one of the early accession EU countries has fallen. Simple fact. So what point are you trying to make by bringing Switzerland into the discussion?
You say that you think (warning bells) that we would have done better outside the EU? Where is your evidence (warning bells) for this? What would the mechanism have been whereby we would have done better? And crucially, how come Switzerland (who YOU brought into the discussion) were unable to reap that reward?
Now, Norway. Go and sit down and think long and hard about why Norway has such a stellar GDP per capita. And think if it had anything to do with their trading arrangements with the EU. And then think if their case has anything to add to the debate about whether we should be in or out.
-
Switzerland already had an extremely high GDP per capita back in the 50s. The fact is that since the EEC and EU were founded, the gap between Swiss GDP and that of EVERY one of the early accession EU countries has fallen. Simple fact. So what point are you trying to make by bringing Switzerland into the discussion?
The gap has fallen but whose to say it wouldn't have fallen further if the EU didn't exist? Also as I've said before it is much easier to close a gap than it is to maintain a gap when you are already so far ahead. I'd have thought you'd have heard of the law of diminishing returns being a scientologist.
I bring Switzerland and Norway into the discussion to prove that being out of the EU is not the end of the world as people like you would want us to believe. Be honest, I would put my life on it that you were one of the same crowd saying it would be an economic disaster if we didn't join the Euro. It is the same people now saying that it would be an economic disaster if we left. How they have got the nerve to claim any credibility when their track record is so blatantly poor is beyond me.
-
You say that you think (warning bells) that we would have done better outside the EU? Where is your evidence (warning bells) for this? What would the mechanism have been whereby we would have done better?
There are many reasons but I'll list a few of the most important ones.
By joining the EU we made it much harder for us to trade with the rest of the world (including for us most importantly the Commonwealth).
Membership of the EU prevents us from negotiating our own trade accords with non-EU states.
The plethora of regulations from Brussels makes it much harder for us to be competitive in the world.
We should be trading a lot more with the emerging economies of the world rather than doing so much trade with stagnant or shrinking economies in the EU.
Trade is one issue. Immigration is another. Having open borders to so many people is madness and we can see the consequences in the rise of UKIP.
-
Mick
It's a crying shame that you didn't bet your life on my Euro opinion because then we wouldn't have to listen to your witless blatherings. On that assumption, as on so many of your assumptions, you are 100% wrong.
-
What an utterly ridiculous statement. I wish I could say I was surprised but I'm not.
I'll have you know that the population of Yorkshire is 10 times that of Luxembourg. The population of Doncaster is over half of that of Luxembourg. Go figure.
-
What an utterly ridiculous statement. I wish I could say I was surprised but I'm not.
I'll have you know that the population of Yorkshire is 10 times that of Luxembourg. The population of Doncaster is over half of that of Luxembourg. Go figure.
But Yorkshire isn't an independent state, so..
-
And Norway's population is one twelfth of the UK's.
What's your point? Ever?
-
Yorkshire has got more reason than Luxembourg to be classified as a country.
-
Shame about your lads' result today Mick.
-
I wanted Rovers to win. Leeds have nothing to play for. It would have been a different matter if they were pushing for promotion.
-
That right Mick?
What was the last Rovers match you went to by the way?
-
Yorkshire has got more reason than Luxembourg to be classified as a country.
Difference is... it isn't a country and Luxembourg is.
-
Thank you RedJ for trying to get Billy back on topic.
-
Funny how the only time you refuse to answer a question is when it will make you look a right dick.
-
As I've said before I'll answer anything as long as it isn't silly. You are being a silly Billy.
-
Night night Mick
-
Nothing silly about asking when you last went to a Rovers game...
-
By joining the EU we made it much harder for us to trade with the rest of the world (including for us most importantly the Commonwealth).
That is so wrong it's breathtaking. Please, please show me how.
-
That is so wrong it's breathtaking. Please, please show me how.
You are so dopey at times. OK I'll spell it out seeing as you can't work out the blindingly obvious for yourself. By being part of the EU we get trade benefits such as a lack of import tariffs. Countries that aren't part of the EU have import tariffs imposed on them. So for example we might want to trade with India with no import tariffs but because we're now part of the EU and India isn't then import tariffs restrict the amount of trade we can do.
Also countries that want to trade with the EU will have to meet all the bureaucratic restrictions that Brussels imposes. We wouldn't have to if we could sort our own trade deals out. Duh.
-
But Mick. I thought you wanted us to EXPORT more to the rest of the world, not import more from them?
What was your favourite Rovers match of the last 3 years by the way?
-
So for example we might want to trade with India with no import tariffs but because we're now part of the EU and India isn't then import tariffs restrict the amount of trade we can do.
Goods of Indian origin are part of the GSP trade agreement. Duh.
As I've already said, I'm specialist in the this area and you know **** all about it. Please, for your own self-respect, stop proving it.
-
If we make it easier for other countries to be able to export to us then it makes it easier for us to export to them. Duh.
I used India as a hypothetical example. It is fact that we could make it easier for other countries to export to us if we weren't restricted by the EU. Duh.
-
Mick
I make it easy for Tesco to sell to me.
I went down there with a bag full of Panini sticker books and asked them to buy them off me.
They told me to f*** off.
-
I used India as a hypothetical example. It is fact that we could make it easier for other countries to export to us if we weren't restricted by the EU. Duh.
Give me a non-hypothetical example then, as you want to deal in facts.
-
Nigeria.
-
Nigeria.
They are very good at exporting emails offering me lots and lots of money, perhaps I should forward a few or better still ask the senders to contact you direct so you can expand your Gold Mines and Guitar Emporium or even better set up a betterware franchise or you could even get into Avon ;)
-
Nigeria.
Another GSP country. Another massive fail on your part. I told you, you know **** all about it and you're so stupid you don't even realise it.
-
So what. We could negotiate a better deal than GSP if we weren't hamstrung by the EU. Duh.
-
So what. We could negotiate a better deal than GSP if we weren't hamstrung by the EU. Duh.
Better deals than free trade on goods of these countries origin, negotiated by the EU as a trading partnership? So much for 'facts' then. Gobshite.
http://exporthelp.europa.eu/thdapp/display.htm?page=cd/cd_NewGSPAsOf2014.html&docType=main&languageId=EN
-
So why have West African countries failed to agree on a trade deal with the EU after 10 years of talks? Duh.
-
So why have West African countries failed to agree on a trade deal with the EU after 10 years of talks? Duh.
Source. Because you've shown such an utter lack of understanding of the subject I don't believe you understand whatever it is you've found on Google.
And which West African countries are these that aren't already GSP countries and benefitting from free trade with the EU?
-
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/29/uk-africa-eu-trade-idUKBREA2S0DJ20140329
The GSP isn't the be all and end all of everything.
Game, set and match.
-
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/29/uk-africa-eu-trade-idUKBREA2S0DJ20140329
The GSP isn't the be all and end all of everything.
Game, set and match.
Read it, it's the West African countries that are refusing full free trade, not the EU. Fool.
-
Look it's very simple. Quite rightly West Africa is refusing full free trade because there would only be one winner and that is the EU. The EU negotiates as a bully boy and the poor African countries get the rough end of the deal.
The EU is large, but old-fashioned, bureaucratic, corrupt and inefficient. It still thinks Government knows best.
If we were able to negotiate our own deal it certainly wouldn't take us 10 years. We could then tailor the deal to suit each African country so they were happy and we were happy. Trying to get a one size fits all trade deal is ludicrous. No wonder it's taken 10 years and counting.
Outside the EU, we would be free to negotiate our own trade deals with countries like India, China, Japan, the US, Brazil and Australia. These are the growing regions of the world. EU rules prevent us from negotiating with these countries for ourselves. The EU does it for us. Size may give the EU negotiating clout, but the objectives of the negotiation are French and German, not British. We could make much better deals for ourselves, deals that suit British trade, not the trade of Continental Europe.
Sorted.
-
I make it easy for Tesco to sell to me.
I went down there with a bag full of Panini sticker books and asked them to buy them off me.
They told me to f*** off.
I'm not surprised. You don't strike me as being very good at negotiating. Unless someone totally agrees with everything you say you don't want to know. Anyone that is happy for the EU to do it on our behalf is similarly condemned.
-
Let me get this right. The EU tries to impose conditions on smaller economies that are detrimental to those economies' interests. I assume that is what you mean by "The EU negotiates as a bully boy and the poor African countries get the rough end of the deal."
Right so far?
So, the logical consequence in Mickonomics is that the UK negotiates its own deals with countries like the USA, China and Japan. A small country negotiating with economic giants.
And then Mick tells us that we, as a country, should negotiate with each of the West African countries individually, tailoring our negotiations to suit each country.
See, if he's going to post links, Mick really ought to read them first.
"We need to negotiate an EPA that is beneficial to our sub-region and will contribute to the prosperity of our people," said Ghana's President John Mahama, who assumed the bloc's rotating chairmanship at the two-day summit.
"We can only do that united as a sub-region,"
Is that right or have I missed some important aspect of Mickonomics?
-
So, the logical consequence in Mickonomics is that the UK negotiates its own deals with countries like the USA, China and Japan. A small country negotiating with economic giants.
You really are clueless. We are not a small country. In 2001 we were the fourth largest economy in the world. In 2014 we are still the seventh largest.
The EU is run for mainly for Germany's benefit. In 2001 they were the world's 3rd largest economy with a GDP of $1.9 (trillions of dollars). We were fourth at $1.5. Today Germany is the fourth largest economy with a GDP of $3.7 (overtaken only by China).
We have slipped to seventh with a GDP of $2.5. So as you can see the gap between us and Germany is increasing as we fall down the league tables. However we are still not a small country as you would have people believe. If we pull out of Europe there is no reason why we can't climb the league tables and eventually overtake Germany. If we carry on being hamstrung by the EU we will continue to fall down the league tables.
http://money.cnn.com/news/economy/world_economies_gdp/
-
And then he tells us that we, as a country, should negotiate with each of the West African countries individually, tailoring our negotiations to suit each country.
Correct. It wouldn't take more than 10 years to conclude a deal (10 years of lost trade) and we could trade ethically instead of being part of a bloc that is trying to screw these poor countries as hard as they can. Where are your ethics man.
-
See, if he's going to post links, he really ought to read them first.
"We need to negotiate an EPA that is beneficial to our sub-region and will contribute to the prosperity of our people," said Ghana's President John Mahama, who assumed the bloc's rotating chairmanship at the two-day summit.
"We can only do that united as a sub-region,"
Is that right or have I missed some important aspect of Mickonomics?
He obviously feels that when up against the might of the bully boy EU that these small economies only chance of getting anything like a reasonable deal is if they all club together. A perfectly reasonable point of view.
You then imply that because we are a small country (which patently we are not) we should also do the same and club together with the EU. Countries as diverse as Canada, Mexico, Australia and India all have smaller economies than ours, yet all manage somehow to trade with the EU and the world without being in the EU.
Are we so uniquely weak and useless that we cannot do the same? You obviously think so. I do not.
You really show your total lack of comprehension for world trade. As a large economy we would carry plenty of clout with this sub region on our own. We could negotiate a deal with this sub region (and it wouldn't take over 10 years) and we could do individual deals with each country as well. We have a lot of history in Africa that would also be useful to us.
Game, set and match.
-
Source. Because I've shown such an utter lack of understanding of the subject I don't believe I understand whatever it is you're on about.
Asking for the source shows to me that I know a lot more about the subject than you do. You called yourself an expert. I'll let the readers decide if they think you were right to make such an extravagant claim.
How on earth didn't you know that West African countries have failed to agree on a trade deal with the EU? The EU has only been trying to conclude this deal for the last 10 years. Duh.
-
Iam against the EU and Its stance on certian points with the main part
Been any country within the EU will never have 100 % controll Of Its boarders.
Just look how many eastern europeans have landed in uk for sole reason
That the UKs benafits system is far better.LBH how Much money will likes
Of Latvia pay into the EU?fvuk all When put against likes Of UK and germany.
But UK end with all Their dead legs landing on Its shores wanting house and benafits.how many People Across EU land in Latvia claiming a house and benafits ....fcuk all for obvious reasons.
For every latvian that lands in UK and ends up on benafits,UK should be Able to bill Latvia
A fixed % for Their upkeep.same if a UK passport holder should ever end up in Latvia and claim
Benafits ,Latvia gets an upkeep payment from UK.
With a lot Of shit landing in UK from poland,Latvia,Bulgaria,Romania ,When i say shit i mean
The criminal element the streets are getting more and more unsafe to walk down.
Also how can any fcuker from say poland live in the uk and claim payments for Their kids back
In poland is beyond me.figures say about 43.000 kids that live out Of the UK the parents are getting
Payments while they live in the UK
Russia must be happy fcukers after the Berlin Wall came down
God Help any country within the EU if they should ever have a gold rush within Its boarders ,as
Millions upon millions would land on Its shores wanting a claim
-
You make many good points Oslo.
-
For those following the Scottish Independence debate, every argument used by the Stay Together campaign is a dress rehearsal for the EU in-out referendum.
Those that smile when Alec Sammond is faced with Businesses such as RBS setting up companies and offices in England to mitigate the risks of independence, will face the same scenario with the EU referendum.
The tactics are not working, though, because the YES campaign is increasing its share of the vote. Where the No campaign has failed so far is in setting out the benefits of staying in the Union rather than the dis-benefits of leaving. There is a subtle difference.
Of course, the pro-EU camp may learn lessons from this. But if they simply bang on about "pulling up drawbridges" they will not succeed in swaying opinion.
-
Iam against the EU and Its stance on certian points with the main part
Been any country within the EU will never have 100 % controll Of Its boarders.
Just look how many eastern europeans have landed in uk for sole reason
That the UKs benafits system is far better.LBH how Much money will likes
Of Latvia pay into the EU?fvuk all When put against likes Of UK and germany.
But UK end with all Their dead legs landing on Its shores wanting house and benafits.how many People Across EU land in Latvia claiming a house and benafits ....fcuk all for obvious reasons.
For every latvian that lands in UK and ends up on benafits,UK should be Able to bill Latvia
A fixed % for Their upkeep.same if a UK passport holder should ever end up in Latvia and claim
Benafits ,Latvia gets an upkeep payment from UK.
With a lot Of shit landing in UK from poland,Latvia,Bulgaria,Romania ,When i say shit i mean
The criminal element the streets are getting more and more unsafe to walk down.
Also how can any fcuker from say poland live in the uk and claim payments for Their kids back
In poland is beyond me.figures say about 43.000 kids that live out Of the UK the parents are getting
Payments while they live in the UK
Russia must be happy fcukers after the Berlin Wall came down
God Help any country within the EU if they should ever have a gold rush within Its boarders ,as
Millions upon millions would land on Its shores wanting a claim
On a clear day you can see the whole of the UK from Oslo.
-
Don't forget. Nige wipes the floor with Clegg again tomorrow on BBC2 at 7.00pm.
-
A bit like everyone wiping the floor with your boys lately Mick eh?
-
A bit like me wiping the floor with you and Mr Wigley on this thread.
-
Yes Mick. Of course.
What was the last time you saw a Rovers match by the way?
-
You need to stop trying to change the subject when you've been comprehensively battered. Just accept defeat, dust yourself down and try again. I like a fighter.
-
Shall we mark that up as a "Not for 3 years" then, or a "Never"?
-
Iam against the EU and Its stance on certian points with the main part
Been any country within the EU will never have 100 % controll Of Its boarders.
Just look how many eastern europeans have landed in uk for sole reason
That the UKs benafits system is far better.LBH how Much money will likes
Of Latvia pay into the EU?fvuk all When put against likes Of UK and germany.
But UK end with all Their dead legs landing on Its shores wanting house and benafits.how many People Across EU land in Latvia claiming a house and benafits ....fcuk all for obvious reasons.
For every latvian that lands in UK and ends up on benafits,UK should be Able to bill Latvia
A fixed % for Their upkeep.same if a UK passport holder should ever end up in Latvia and claim
Benafits ,Latvia gets an upkeep payment from UK.
With a lot Of shit landing in UK from poland,Latvia,Bulgaria,Romania ,When i say shit i mean
The criminal element the streets are getting more and more unsafe to walk down.
Also how can any fcuker from say poland live in the uk and claim payments for Their kids back
In poland is beyond me.figures say about 43.000 kids that live out Of the UK the parents are getting
Payments while they live in the UK
Russia must be happy fcukers after the Berlin Wall came down
God Help any country within the EU if they should ever have a gold rush within Its boarders ,as
Millions upon millions would land on Its shores wanting a claim
On a clear day you can see the whole of the UK from Oslo.
And Your point is
-
Well, Oslo, let's take this line for starters:
"With a lot Of shit landing in UK from poland,Latvia,Bulgaria,Romania ,When i say shit i mean
The criminal element the streets are getting more and more unsafe to walk down."
Where is your evidence for this?
-
Whilst the vast bulk of immigrants are decent hard working people it is true that we have imported criminal gangs from Eastern Europe due to to our open border policy. I know police officers and if they get involved in a crime involving an Eastern European it take days to sort out instead of minutes or hours if the crime was committed by a native. It is also very expensive as nearly always an expensive interpreter will be needed. This takes up a lot of police time that could be used to better effect especially now when their budgets are being cut. The frustrating thing for the police is that most of the time the criminal gets away with a caution.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23339979
-
Well, Oslo, let's take this line for starters:
"With a lot Of shit landing in UK from poland,Latvia,Bulgaria,Romania ,When i say shit i mean
The criminal element the streets are getting more and more unsafe to walk down."
Where is your evidence for this?
If you want to be all left Wing or PC and dont think it happens
Then you carry on fella,dont let what ever i say cloud Your outlook
You just keep using the card machines without looking over Your shoulder
Or walk down a city street with Your wallet hanging out Of Your back pocket and hope for the best.
-
Oslo, let's try and leave the politics out of this.
"With a lot Of shit landing in UK from poland,Latvia,Bulgaria,Romania ,When i say shit i mean
The criminal element the streets are getting more and more unsafe to walk down."
I'll ask you again, what is your evdience for this?
-
Oslo, let's try and leave the politics out of this.
"With a lot Of shit landing in UK from poland,Latvia,Bulgaria,Romania ,When i say shit i mean
The criminal element the streets are getting more and more unsafe to walk down."
I'll ask you again, what is your evdience for this?
I dont have to bring any evidence to the table to back up
My views fella,as iam more Than happy to stand by what i say or think.
If you Cant smell the coffee,then that is Your view which i take
On board and will never Ask or feal the need for you or any other to back up their stance,as i can live with it.
-
So basically anything goes? No need for there to be a shred of truth in it, the rationale is "these are my views".
-
For info gents around 13% of the prison poulation are foreign nationals, slightly lower than the high point of 14% in 2006. In comparison 10% of prisoners are ex-service personel, so you are slightly more likely to be attached by an east european than an ex-squaddie.
Of the breakdown of countries, Oslo is correct that Poland is among the top three, along with those other east european hotspots, Jamaica and the Republic of Ireland.
www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn04334.pdf
-
I think the Country tonight saw the dying embers of Clegg's political career. Farge owned him!
-
Don't worry about prison stats Wilts, they're based on facts.
The real trouble is on 'the streets'.
-
Thankfully Oslo's ridiculous post was removed. Here's the truth behind his claims:
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/4451633/
-
Daily Mail in slur against eastern Europeans shocker.
Daily Mail talking b*llocks shocker.
-
It's appalling, and people like Oslo are the unwitting victims of it.
The fact it was the Met who had to apologise and not the Mail beggars belief.
-
10% of prisoners are ex-service personel
No they are not.
The statistic bandied about is "between 3 and 10% are ex forces (http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/criminology/research/current-projects/jt146soldiers)" but even that I'd take issue with:
former soldiers the highest occupational culture claimed by prisoners
(my bold)
Far be it from me to cast aspersions on the word of these convicted criminals but if some of them told me the sky is blue I'd have to look up. I've heard of homeless people being picked up by ex-forces Police officers who've claimed to be ex-army but when asked for their regimental number they've "forgotten" it. - some people will claim almost anything if they think they'll derive benefit from it.
Sorry for dragging this OT but the 10% stat. is a pet hate of mine, makes it too easy for people to tar ex-servicemen / women with the "they're all mental / alcoholics / violent " brush.
-
10% of prisoners are ex-service personel
No they are not.
The statistic bandied about is "between 3 and 10% are ex forces (http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/criminology/research/current-projects/jt146soldiers)" but even that I'd take issue with:
former soldiers the highest occupational culture claimed by prisoners
(my bold)
Far be it from me to cast aspersions on the word of these convicted criminals but if some of them told me the sky is blue I'd have to look up. I've heard of homeless people being picked up by ex-forces Police officers who've claimed to be ex-army but when asked for their regimental number they've "forgotten" it. - some people will claim almost anything if they think they'll derive benefit from it.
Sorry for dragging this OT but the 10% stat. is a pet hate of mine, makes it too easy for people to tar ex-servicemen / women with the "they're all mental / alcoholics / violent " brush.
That is one number no serviceman/exserciceman will never ever "forget" crikey I can still recite mine backwards and I left in 86
-
Exactly Daggers. Plus some that claim to be ex-forces have only actually completed 4 weeks in the depot before PVR / DAOR, hardly ex-forces in the eyes of most people.
-
I think the Country tonight saw the dying embers of Clegg's political career. Farge owned him!
Valuable publicity for both of them, I thought. Farage seemed to have the better of it, but I think it will have garnered a few votes for the Lib Dems as well.
After his spirited defence of Brussels, I expect Cleggy will be off to become a European Commissioner. He'll then wield much more power than he ever did as Deputy PM.
-
I'm bored now by the Farage v Clegg debate. Two fringe players trying desperately to raise their profiles.
If there are going to be more televised debates, cant we have BST v MadMick? It would be far more entertaining.
-
The more entertaining show was the Farage C4 documentary the other day.
Following him around Strasbourg trying to make sense of the enormous bureacratic infrastructure they have constructed there was enlightening.
-
Very enjoybe program River Don, mostly to see loony lefty Yasmin Alibhai-Brown saying media should be "controlled" to stop Farage. So censorship, basically.
-
Farage came across as a likable enough - if not slightly manic - chap. I still wouldn't vote for him though.
-
Exactly Daggers. Plus some that claim to be ex-forces have only actually completed 4 weeks in the depot before PVR / DAOR, hardly ex-forces in the eyes of most people.
a couple for your perusal S-R and those that may never have seen owt like it (a bit off topic but hey)
This is what an Exocet Missile does (Sir Tristram)
(http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z72/dagenhamrover/SirTristram.jpg) (http://s194.photobucket.com/user/dagenhamrover/media/SirTristram.jpg.html)
Sir Tristram (Bridge)
(http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z72/dagenhamrover/BridgeSirTristram.jpg) (http://s194.photobucket.com/user/dagenhamrover/media/BridgeSirTristram.jpg.html)
and this is what the SAS does
(http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z72/dagenhamrover/TheSASgottherefirst.jpg) (http://s194.photobucket.com/user/dagenhamrover/media/TheSASgottherefirst.jpg.html)
-
Are they your photos Daggers? What did you do down there?
I was down the Falklands in 07, part of the resident Inf company and did the tumbledown battlefield tour. Fair play to the blokes that fought down there, we patrolled West Falkland and its awful ground to cover; boggy, babies heads and cold. Fighting in that must have been hellish.
Believe it or not there are still loads of "stuff" down there, bits of Puccaras, Argi field kitchens, brass... All interesting stuff for a geek like me. I'll post up my photos later, all tame compared to yours, obviously.
-
Are they your photos Daggers? What did you do down there?
I was down the Falklands in 07, part of the resident Inf company and did the tumbledown battlefield tour. Fair play to the blokes that fought down there, we patrolled West Falkland and its awful ground to cover; boggy, babies heads and cold. Fighting in that must have been hellish.
Believe it or not there are still loads of "stuff" down there, bits of Puccaras, Argi field kitchens, brass... All interesting stuff for a geek like me. I'll post up my photos later, all tame compared to yours, obviously.
Yes mate they are mine got a few more in an album upstairs somewhere, got a nice picture of a Chinook nicknamed zebadee (it used to go up and nearly always came straight back down :silly: ) surrounded by sheep in the middle of a field after its latest 30 metre attempt at flying :lol: a few of me hanging out the back of one hill hopping clearing up.
I was there during and about 8/10 months after the conflict (Royal Engineers),
Later the lower decks/front end of the Tristram were used as troop accommodation as it was basically unscathed apart from the bridge and upper decks
-
Thankfully Oslo's ridiculous post was removed. Here's the truth behind his claims:
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/4451633/
Thats quite shocking tbh
But i still stand by my views on the subject Of immigration
1....on open door europe
If the sign on the lift says 'Max 8 people'and 30 Get in,there is going
To be an accident.
2....on europe
Cant keep on handing over £20 and getting £10 back with nothing
Inside the shopping bag
3....on infrastructure
People Cant come into the pub and keep on having large
Vodkas out Of the whip if they have not put into the whip
EXcerpt from tower hamlets
-
10% of prisoners are ex-service personel
No they are not.
The statistic bandied about is "between 3 and 10% are ex forces (http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/criminology/research/current-projects/jt146soldiers)" but even that I'd take issue with:
former soldiers the highest occupational culture claimed by prisoners
(my bold)
Far be it from me to cast aspersions on the word of these convicted criminals but if some of them told me the sky is blue I'd have to look up. I've heard of homeless people being picked up by ex-forces Police officers who've claimed to be ex-army but when asked for their regimental number they've "forgotten" it. - some people will claim almost anything if they think they'll derive benefit from it.
Sorry for dragging this OT but the 10% stat. is a pet hate of mine, makes it too easy for people to tar ex-servicemen / women with the "they're all mental / alcoholics / violent " brush.
Which was my reason for posting in the first place, it is easy to grossly simplfy, one eastern european is in a gang - therefore all eastern europeans are criminals.
I dont think anyone would claim that about ex-service personel, but compared to the ratio of people in the services to the general population the number of people in prison is shocking. A more in depth report here:
http://www.howardleague.org/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Veterans_inquiry/Military_inquiry_final_report.pdf
I have worked for the military (RLC and currently a related records organisation), been a prison visitor and worked with homeless charities if that helps my quedos.
-
Which was my reason for posting in the first place, it is easy to grossly simplfy, one eastern european is in a gang - therefore all eastern europeans are criminals.
I dont think anyone would claim that about ex-service personel, but compared to the ratio of people in the services to the general population the number of people in prison is shocking. A more in depth report here:
http://www.howardleague.org/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Veterans_inquiry/Military_inquiry_final_report.pdf
I have worked for the military (RLC and currently a related records organisation), been a prison visitor and worked with homeless charities if that helps my quedos.
If it was your intent to state the ease at which figures are skewed why post a black and white statement like:
10% of prisoners are ex-service personel
without providing any sort of context?
From the source you cite:
At the present time the most accurate figure would seem to be the product of a joint quantitative study carried out by the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Justice. This asserts that approximately 2,820, or some 3.5 per cent of all those currently in custody in England and Wales, had served in the Forces.
(my bold)
What sort of percentage of the prison population is made up of males 18 - 40, what percentage of forces leavers are also in that bracket? It's very easy to bandy figures about with no context.
-
Let's put things another way, the RBL say there are currently 5.5 million veterans in the UK, 2820 are in prison. Percentage of ex-forces population in prison: 0.0512%
Total population of UK 63.23 million, prison population 85382 gives a rate of 0.135% well over double the ex-forces rate.
-
Aahh yes of course, silly me, you have done a wonderful job of disproving my figures and thus proving what a wonderful job the MOD is doing at helping people leaving the services assimilate back into civilian life. What a waste of time the Howard League report was.
End of debate.
-
Aahh yes of course, silly me, you have done a wonderful job of disproving my figures and thus proving what a wonderful job the MOD is doing at helping people leaving the services assimilate back into civilian life. What a waste of time the Howard League report was.
End of debate.
I'm glad we agree.