comment by CoutinhosHappyFeet (U18971)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
posted 1 minute ago
Experts say foreign born workers graft more than brits......their analysis thus justifying mass immigration.
Rich bosses and our globalization elite love migrant workers for cheap labour, and less rights.
Brit workers cannot or will notwork for less, so weare being pushed out, creating an underclass.
Many, many more foreign born people are also on benefits, bursting the myth all immigrants are graftin...I work in DWP, jsa so know the reality here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're confusing "grafting" with working 50-60 hours pw because they are paid less than minimum wage. The issue isn't foreign workers it's companies offering these wages which is illegal and the government should crack down on, although they aren't keen to do so.
Quite right UK workers should refuse to work for less than minimum wage and less rights. Ideally anyone, regardless of where they're from, should refuse to work for less than minimum wage and with less rights. Your argument is the epitome of shifting the blame on foreign workers when it's the government, and businesses applying these practices, who should be scrutinsed.
How many foreign born people are on benefits? Do the DWP ask for place of birth when applying for benefits? (I'm glad to say I wouldn't know the answer to this). I recall we had this discussion before and asked the same question.
I don't subscribe to the notion that UK workers don't "graft" when, as highlighted in my previous post, we work the longest hours in Europe, have less bank holidays and less paid time off. We also retire later than our European counterparts. Suggesting we should be working more is detrimental and leading to us living to work, eroding work/life balance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Judging by need for habitual residence tests, asylum and lack of English it is easy to get an idea of customers.
Plus names are a clue too.
You could guess a Smyth in china may not be chinese, or an Evans in Nigeria, may not be local.
Mr Goldberg in Kabul may not be an Afghan, etc etc
Of course, this is not always true, but from experience, huge numbers of recent and not sorecent arrivals are on benefit, along with brits, who are either workshy, ill or better off letting immigrants work, and claimng Jsa themselves.
You know the drill
comment by rossobianchi says WUBBA LUBBA DUB DUB! (U17054)
posted 8 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi says WUBBA LUBBA DUB DUB! (U17054)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
posted 6 minutes ago
Experts say foreign born workers graft more than brits......their analysis thus justifying mass immigration.
Rich bosses and our globalization elite love migrant workers for cheap labour, and less rights.
Brit workers cannot or will notwork for less, so weare being pushed out, creating an underclass.
Many, many more foreign born people are also on benefits, bursting the myth all immigrants are graftin...I work in DWP, jsa so know the reality here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really do talk some utter claptrap.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Top repost😉
After recent election results and the populism in global polotics, you may be wrong.
Just imagine, another view from yours......go on, live a little.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can imagine it. The problem is what you post is contrary to actual facts.
Numerous posters, including myself, have posted links on this very thread to statistics that demonstrate that, for example, immigrants contribute more to the state coffers, as well as drawing less than native Brits; that they rely less on Jobseeker's Allowance or on Housing Benefit.
But you continue to come out with stuff like, "...many more foreign born people are also on benefits."
Which is just demonstrably untrue bluebells. It's a lie.
It's impossible to debate with people who just ignore cold, hard facts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said many more foreign born people than we think, or who we are told, are on benefit....factual.
My point is, those numbers getting handouts, housing and nhs help are downplayed, as we are told we cannot live without mass immigration....lie.
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 4 hours, 52 minutes ago
It's not narrow minded in the least, it's a comment on the current reality - i.e. a country that views immigrants as a threat rather than an asset and is in a mind to curb their numbers as much as possible.
---------
That in itself is narrow minded in thinking that people that live in this country will never need/want to leave to other territories.
Wtf are people going to do if a natural disaster hits the UK? We aren't immune to such phenomena, would they refuse to be a refugee/migrant?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Evening Mr jag😃 is the motor coping with bad weather.
I am not opposed to people from anywhere coming to work here, and who says keep themall out, outwith a few really sad racist muppets?
Even milliband and corbyn now want immigration down....too easy to label this coomonsense view as racism, bud.
Mass illegal and uncontrolled movement puts pressure on us all, and asian and black brits backed brexit for that reason.
Low wages, zero hr contracts, pressure on schools, hospital and jobs and areas changed rapidly...this is not good for commu ity cohesion.
I blame the rich few, global capitalism, and men such as Blair and woman like Merkle, who wish to change society by mass immigration.
National identity, pride, community spirit are being eroded by rapid demographic change to keep the rich at the top, and crush populismand patriotism.
However, from Russia, through Euroe, us lot and America, times are achangin😉
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 5 hours, 34 minutes ago
It's not narrow minded in the least, it's a comment on the current reality - i.e. a country that views immigrants as a threat rather than an asset and is in a mind to curb their numbers as much as possible.
---------
That in itself is narrow minded in thinking that people that live in this country will never need/want to leave to other territories.
Wtf are people going to do if a natural disaster hits the UK? We aren't immune to such phenomena, would they refuse to be a refugee/migrant?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So commenting on what I reckon is workable or not in the current climate is narrow minded because the situation itself has been brought about by the (perceived) narrow-mindedness of others?
Dunno if that's what you meant to imply, you half lost me there.
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 hour, 25 minutes ago
comment by Mourinho delenda est (U6426)
posted 7 hours, 40 minutes ago
Struttocks, an interesting link for you on worldwide fertility rates:
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/fertility/world-fertility-patterns-2015.pdf
The table on p.16 shows trends in fertility rates since 1970 and projections through to 2030. Not fast enough perhaps, but certainly some encouragement to be taken from there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is encouraging although I agree not fast enough.
At the moment there seems to be very little thought out change to what to do when rightfully people do start being responsible and having less children.
I think what Germany are doing on a humanitarian level is right however economically it's not a sustainable answer to an aging population.
Constantly feeding people in at the bottom just creates a larger and larger bubble. As mentioned before the climate damage of say 1000 UK citizens could be the equivalent of 100,000 Rwandans (I've obviously made those figures up but you get the jist). Moving populations from the less-developed world to Europe will make things far worse long term climate wise.
Economically, the papers have just come out today with figures on underpaid, zero hour contracts in the care industry. This isn't the fault of anyone but a greedy government who are refusing to put anyone but their wealthy chums first.
You need stronger workers rights, better taxation and to build a future economic plan that involves less jobs and better welfare.
Instead we have idiots constantly voting in the people who drive down wages, cut services and reduce tax all the while blaming foreigners.
An immigrant, a worker and a politician are sitting at the table with 10 cookies. The politician takes 9 and then tells the worker "watch out, the immigrant is going to steal your cookie".
This quote was originally about bankers but IMO greedy bankers are just another symptom of a failing government.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, I'm going to be a bit cynical here, but at least as far as an individual country's economy is concerned, I'm not sure that importing labour is so unsustainable.
Surely the cost of paying benefits to a minority of them for a relatively restricted time span is far lower than the cost of putting citizens who are born nationally through the education system for 15-20 years and paying their healthcare and whatsoever other costs are generated until they are able to contribute themselves.
As for bankers/politicians, bit like the scene in the farmhouse at the end of Animal Farm, imo.
While I can fully understand why many people might be seduced by the false promises of opportunistic demagogues, personally speaking I think the system is facked beyond repair.
Hmm I don't think it's facked beyond repair but it is truly facked without a serious turnaround in thinking from top to bottom.
Unfortunately the top love their position and control the majority of the bottoms thinking through a self-interested media.
Obama, like warmonger witch hilary urging the west to stand up to russia .......why?
Do reactionary democrats want a new cold war, and all the left wing feminists thinking hilary was a role model?
Yea, those are the educated elite, backing hilary for her gender, disregarding her war history, corrupt Foundation, and egomania.
Trump is also an Ivy Leaguer.
Does his pretending he just crawled out of a cave mean he's not "educated elite" then?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
What's the point in patriotism.
How familier http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-goldman-sachs-economic-council-director-gary-cohn-coo-president-a7466006.html
The US vote has so many similarities to the Brexit vote
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 9 hours, 38 minutes ago
How familierhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-goldman-sachs-economic-council-director-gary-cohn-coo-president-a7466006.html
The US vote has so many similarities to the Brexit vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If only corbyn was in charge of it all.
Are you saying warmonger hilary was the answer, even though she messed up before, as part of the global elite who helped create the shambles, with the banks?
Of course Trump isa rich guy, but a poor man or woman could not fund a campaign, sadly.
Workng class Paul Nuttal should fit your non Goldman Sachs agenda, right?
Goldman Sachs were firmly Hillary.
comment by Sir Digby (U6039)
posted 1 minute ago
Goldman Sachs were firmly Hillary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said, but that. Does not fit the left leaning agendas.
Experts are ok, if they are remainers or anti-populist.
thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
Clinton wasn't the answer unless the question was who is the better candidate out of Trump and her. She was still an awful candidate.
This is about the tidal wave of delusion from Trump supporters thinking they're "Sticking it to the man" or "taking back control" - actually as everyone with half a brain cell knew he's handing more power to the man and hiring staff hell bent on exploitation of the working class and the environment.
The bloke took all the idiots of America on a magical ride saying exactly what they wanted to hear and now he along with his already wealthy chums are laughing all the way to the bank.
comment by thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 9 hours, 38 minutes ago
How familierhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-goldman-sachs-economic-council-director-gary-cohn-coo-president-a7466006.html
The US vote has so many similarities to the Brexit vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If only corbyn was in charge of it all.
Are you saying warmonger hilary was the answer, even though she messed up before, as part of the global elite who helped create the shambles, with the banks?
Of course Trump isa rich guy, but a poor man or woman could not fund a campaign, sadly.
Workng class Paul Nuttal should fit your non Goldman Sachs agenda, right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The people who fund UKIP give not one millionth of a sheet about working class people.
They care not one sheet about immigration, social cohesion or British traditional values either.
What they do care about is shifting the public's discussion away from money and power, and their relentless stockpiling of wealth, to any other subject.
They want the public to think low corporation tax is necessary, there is no hypocrisy in championing a 'meritocracy for all' whilst abolishing inheritance tax, all of the problems in their lives are caused by immigrants, benefit fraud is bankrupting the country, Corbyn is an extremist, Muslims are all dangerous people, higher income tax on the wealthiest will lead to some sort of catastrophic brain drain, the public sector can't run a tap, the only aspirations should be to fortune and celebrity, that those with the same are the greatest and most valuable contributors to society...
And they are winning and very quickly getting richer, whilst the poorest struggle.
If people think union-bashing, regulation-deriding, Tory-funded, free market-championing UKIP is the answer to the needs of the working man and woman, well, they are a bit thick, in my opinion.
comment by Got_Bianchi (U17054)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 9 hours, 38 minutes ago
How familierhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-goldman-sachs-economic-council-director-gary-cohn-coo-president-a7466006.html
The US vote has so many similarities to the Brexit vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If only corbyn was in charge of it all.
Are you saying warmonger hilary was the answer, even though she messed up before, as part of the global elite who helped create the shambles, with the banks?
Of course Trump isa rich guy, but a poor man or woman could not fund a campaign, sadly.
Workng class Paul Nuttal should fit your non Goldman Sachs agenda, right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The people who fund UKIP give not one millionth of a sheet about working class people.
They care not one sheet about immigration, social cohesion or British traditional values either.
What they do care about is shifting the public's discussion away from money and power, and their relentless stockpiling of wealth, to any other subject.
They want the public to think low corporation tax is necessary, there is no hypocrisy in championing a 'meritocracy for all' whilst abolishing inheritance tax, all of the problems in their lives are caused by immigrants, benefit fraud is bankrupting the country, Corbyn is an extremist, Muslims are all dangerous people, higher income tax on the wealthiest will lead to some sort of catastrophic brain drain, the public sector can't run a tap, the only aspirations should be to fortune and celebrity, that those with the same are the greatest and most valuable contributors to society...
And they are winning and very quickly getting richer, whilst the poorest struggle.
If people think union-bashing, regulation-deriding, Tory-funded, free market-championing UKIP is the answer to the needs of the working man and woman, well, they are a bit thick, in my opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly
As heart-wrenching as it is for many, Brexit is a very British revolution. No fuss (except from the anti democratic), no populist leader elected, or even threatening to.
Business as usual
Scruttocks... Trump hasn't taken office, Brexit hasn't happened and your blaming them for the problems in society the rich and powerful and all Hollywood and celebrities supported Remain/Hillary. Reagan has tonnes of similarities to Trump, everyone said he would be terrible and a foreign policy disaster and turned out to one of the most popular presidents in history. How about waiting 4 years and seeing what happens?
I'll tell you what will happen... More of the same.
Electing a millionaire who surrounds himself with millionaires with stakes in massive multinationals will not help the working class one iota.
It would've been more or less the same under Hillary.
We really need to shift the discussion away from all the rhetoric and smokescreens on to the issues that really matter, namely distribution of wealth and sustainability.
How can you say trump is more of the same? The only reason to say it is when people are fearful he may turn into a success
When Trump calls the Taiwanese president and pi$$es off China he's slated for breaking protocol, when he hires millionaires he's slated for being the same. He can't win with you guys being an ex banker isn't automatically bad, Steve Bannon isn't an 'establishment' figure. We can't just get random guys off the street to run the economy, these people understand how it works.
Define a success.
Do you think America's poorest are going to see an increase in their employment prospects, disposable income, living standards and working conditions and protections?
Do you think social cohesion will improve?
Do you think the country will improve its record on the environment and address its massive issues with sustainability?
What is a success to you?
The first two he will improve imo, not sure about that last. He's not a total climate change denier the way the media makes out though.
Sign in if you want to comment
LIVE: Great Britain EU Referendum
Page 393 of 395
391 | 392 | 393 | 394 | 395
posted on 17/11/16
comment by CoutinhosHappyFeet (U18971)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
posted 1 minute ago
Experts say foreign born workers graft more than brits......their analysis thus justifying mass immigration.
Rich bosses and our globalization elite love migrant workers for cheap labour, and less rights.
Brit workers cannot or will notwork for less, so weare being pushed out, creating an underclass.
Many, many more foreign born people are also on benefits, bursting the myth all immigrants are graftin...I work in DWP, jsa so know the reality here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're confusing "grafting" with working 50-60 hours pw because they are paid less than minimum wage. The issue isn't foreign workers it's companies offering these wages which is illegal and the government should crack down on, although they aren't keen to do so.
Quite right UK workers should refuse to work for less than minimum wage and less rights. Ideally anyone, regardless of where they're from, should refuse to work for less than minimum wage and with less rights. Your argument is the epitome of shifting the blame on foreign workers when it's the government, and businesses applying these practices, who should be scrutinsed.
How many foreign born people are on benefits? Do the DWP ask for place of birth when applying for benefits? (I'm glad to say I wouldn't know the answer to this). I recall we had this discussion before and asked the same question.
I don't subscribe to the notion that UK workers don't "graft" when, as highlighted in my previous post, we work the longest hours in Europe, have less bank holidays and less paid time off. We also retire later than our European counterparts. Suggesting we should be working more is detrimental and leading to us living to work, eroding work/life balance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Judging by need for habitual residence tests, asylum and lack of English it is easy to get an idea of customers.
Plus names are a clue too.
You could guess a Smyth in china may not be chinese, or an Evans in Nigeria, may not be local.
Mr Goldberg in Kabul may not be an Afghan, etc etc
Of course, this is not always true, but from experience, huge numbers of recent and not sorecent arrivals are on benefit, along with brits, who are either workshy, ill or better off letting immigrants work, and claimng Jsa themselves.
You know the drill
posted on 17/11/16
comment by rossobianchi says WUBBA LUBBA DUB DUB! (U17054)
posted 8 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by rossobianchi says WUBBA LUBBA DUB DUB! (U17054)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
posted 6 minutes ago
Experts say foreign born workers graft more than brits......their analysis thus justifying mass immigration.
Rich bosses and our globalization elite love migrant workers for cheap labour, and less rights.
Brit workers cannot or will notwork for less, so weare being pushed out, creating an underclass.
Many, many more foreign born people are also on benefits, bursting the myth all immigrants are graftin...I work in DWP, jsa so know the reality here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really do talk some utter claptrap.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Top repost😉
After recent election results and the populism in global polotics, you may be wrong.
Just imagine, another view from yours......go on, live a little.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can imagine it. The problem is what you post is contrary to actual facts.
Numerous posters, including myself, have posted links on this very thread to statistics that demonstrate that, for example, immigrants contribute more to the state coffers, as well as drawing less than native Brits; that they rely less on Jobseeker's Allowance or on Housing Benefit.
But you continue to come out with stuff like, "...many more foreign born people are also on benefits."
Which is just demonstrably untrue bluebells. It's a lie.
It's impossible to debate with people who just ignore cold, hard facts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said many more foreign born people than we think, or who we are told, are on benefit....factual.
My point is, those numbers getting handouts, housing and nhs help are downplayed, as we are told we cannot live without mass immigration....lie.
posted on 17/11/16
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 4 hours, 52 minutes ago
It's not narrow minded in the least, it's a comment on the current reality - i.e. a country that views immigrants as a threat rather than an asset and is in a mind to curb their numbers as much as possible.
---------
That in itself is narrow minded in thinking that people that live in this country will never need/want to leave to other territories.
Wtf are people going to do if a natural disaster hits the UK? We aren't immune to such phenomena, would they refuse to be a refugee/migrant?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Evening Mr jag😃 is the motor coping with bad weather.
I am not opposed to people from anywhere coming to work here, and who says keep themall out, outwith a few really sad racist muppets?
Even milliband and corbyn now want immigration down....too easy to label this coomonsense view as racism, bud.
Mass illegal and uncontrolled movement puts pressure on us all, and asian and black brits backed brexit for that reason.
Low wages, zero hr contracts, pressure on schools, hospital and jobs and areas changed rapidly...this is not good for commu ity cohesion.
posted on 17/11/16
I blame the rich few, global capitalism, and men such as Blair and woman like Merkle, who wish to change society by mass immigration.
National identity, pride, community spirit are being eroded by rapid demographic change to keep the rich at the top, and crush populismand patriotism.
However, from Russia, through Euroe, us lot and America, times are achangin😉
posted on 17/11/16
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 5 hours, 34 minutes ago
It's not narrow minded in the least, it's a comment on the current reality - i.e. a country that views immigrants as a threat rather than an asset and is in a mind to curb their numbers as much as possible.
---------
That in itself is narrow minded in thinking that people that live in this country will never need/want to leave to other territories.
Wtf are people going to do if a natural disaster hits the UK? We aren't immune to such phenomena, would they refuse to be a refugee/migrant?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So commenting on what I reckon is workable or not in the current climate is narrow minded because the situation itself has been brought about by the (perceived) narrow-mindedness of others?
Dunno if that's what you meant to imply, you half lost me there.
posted on 17/11/16
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 hour, 25 minutes ago
comment by Mourinho delenda est (U6426)
posted 7 hours, 40 minutes ago
Struttocks, an interesting link for you on worldwide fertility rates:
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/fertility/world-fertility-patterns-2015.pdf
The table on p.16 shows trends in fertility rates since 1970 and projections through to 2030. Not fast enough perhaps, but certainly some encouragement to be taken from there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is encouraging although I agree not fast enough.
At the moment there seems to be very little thought out change to what to do when rightfully people do start being responsible and having less children.
I think what Germany are doing on a humanitarian level is right however economically it's not a sustainable answer to an aging population.
Constantly feeding people in at the bottom just creates a larger and larger bubble. As mentioned before the climate damage of say 1000 UK citizens could be the equivalent of 100,000 Rwandans (I've obviously made those figures up but you get the jist). Moving populations from the less-developed world to Europe will make things far worse long term climate wise.
Economically, the papers have just come out today with figures on underpaid, zero hour contracts in the care industry. This isn't the fault of anyone but a greedy government who are refusing to put anyone but their wealthy chums first.
You need stronger workers rights, better taxation and to build a future economic plan that involves less jobs and better welfare.
Instead we have idiots constantly voting in the people who drive down wages, cut services and reduce tax all the while blaming foreigners.
An immigrant, a worker and a politician are sitting at the table with 10 cookies. The politician takes 9 and then tells the worker "watch out, the immigrant is going to steal your cookie".
This quote was originally about bankers but IMO greedy bankers are just another symptom of a failing government.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, I'm going to be a bit cynical here, but at least as far as an individual country's economy is concerned, I'm not sure that importing labour is so unsustainable.
Surely the cost of paying benefits to a minority of them for a relatively restricted time span is far lower than the cost of putting citizens who are born nationally through the education system for 15-20 years and paying their healthcare and whatsoever other costs are generated until they are able to contribute themselves.
As for bankers/politicians, bit like the scene in the farmhouse at the end of Animal Farm, imo.
While I can fully understand why many people might be seduced by the false promises of opportunistic demagogues, personally speaking I think the system is facked beyond repair.
posted on 17/11/16
Hmm I don't think it's facked beyond repair but it is truly facked without a serious turnaround in thinking from top to bottom.
Unfortunately the top love their position and control the majority of the bottoms thinking through a self-interested media.
posted on 17/11/16
Obama, like warmonger witch hilary urging the west to stand up to russia .......why?
Do reactionary democrats want a new cold war, and all the left wing feminists thinking hilary was a role model?
Yea, those are the educated elite, backing hilary for her gender, disregarding her war history, corrupt Foundation, and egomania.
posted on 18/11/16
Trump is also an Ivy Leaguer.
Does his pretending he just crawled out of a cave mean he's not "educated elite" then?
posted on 18/11/16
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 18/11/16
What's the point in patriotism.
posted on 9/12/16
How familier http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-goldman-sachs-economic-council-director-gary-cohn-coo-president-a7466006.html
The US vote has so many similarities to the Brexit vote
posted on 10/12/16
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 9 hours, 38 minutes ago
How familierhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-goldman-sachs-economic-council-director-gary-cohn-coo-president-a7466006.html
The US vote has so many similarities to the Brexit vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If only corbyn was in charge of it all.
Are you saying warmonger hilary was the answer, even though she messed up before, as part of the global elite who helped create the shambles, with the banks?
Of course Trump isa rich guy, but a poor man or woman could not fund a campaign, sadly.
Workng class Paul Nuttal should fit your non Goldman Sachs agenda, right?
posted on 10/12/16
Goldman Sachs were firmly Hillary.
posted on 10/12/16
comment by Sir Digby (U6039)
posted 1 minute ago
Goldman Sachs were firmly Hillary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said, but that. Does not fit the left leaning agendas.
Experts are ok, if they are remainers or anti-populist.
posted on 10/12/16
thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
Clinton wasn't the answer unless the question was who is the better candidate out of Trump and her. She was still an awful candidate.
This is about the tidal wave of delusion from Trump supporters thinking they're "Sticking it to the man" or "taking back control" - actually as everyone with half a brain cell knew he's handing more power to the man and hiring staff hell bent on exploitation of the working class and the environment.
The bloke took all the idiots of America on a magical ride saying exactly what they wanted to hear and now he along with his already wealthy chums are laughing all the way to the bank.
posted on 10/12/16
comment by thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 9 hours, 38 minutes ago
How familierhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-goldman-sachs-economic-council-director-gary-cohn-coo-president-a7466006.html
The US vote has so many similarities to the Brexit vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If only corbyn was in charge of it all.
Are you saying warmonger hilary was the answer, even though she messed up before, as part of the global elite who helped create the shambles, with the banks?
Of course Trump isa rich guy, but a poor man or woman could not fund a campaign, sadly.
Workng class Paul Nuttal should fit your non Goldman Sachs agenda, right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The people who fund UKIP give not one millionth of a sheet about working class people.
They care not one sheet about immigration, social cohesion or British traditional values either.
What they do care about is shifting the public's discussion away from money and power, and their relentless stockpiling of wealth, to any other subject.
They want the public to think low corporation tax is necessary, there is no hypocrisy in championing a 'meritocracy for all' whilst abolishing inheritance tax, all of the problems in their lives are caused by immigrants, benefit fraud is bankrupting the country, Corbyn is an extremist, Muslims are all dangerous people, higher income tax on the wealthiest will lead to some sort of catastrophic brain drain, the public sector can't run a tap, the only aspirations should be to fortune and celebrity, that those with the same are the greatest and most valuable contributors to society...
And they are winning and very quickly getting richer, whilst the poorest struggle.
If people think union-bashing, regulation-deriding, Tory-funded, free market-championing UKIP is the answer to the needs of the working man and woman, well, they are a bit thick, in my opinion.
posted on 10/12/16
comment by Got_Bianchi (U17054)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by thebluebellsareblue (U9292)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 9 hours, 38 minutes ago
How familierhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-goldman-sachs-economic-council-director-gary-cohn-coo-president-a7466006.html
The US vote has so many similarities to the Brexit vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If only corbyn was in charge of it all.
Are you saying warmonger hilary was the answer, even though she messed up before, as part of the global elite who helped create the shambles, with the banks?
Of course Trump isa rich guy, but a poor man or woman could not fund a campaign, sadly.
Workng class Paul Nuttal should fit your non Goldman Sachs agenda, right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The people who fund UKIP give not one millionth of a sheet about working class people.
They care not one sheet about immigration, social cohesion or British traditional values either.
What they do care about is shifting the public's discussion away from money and power, and their relentless stockpiling of wealth, to any other subject.
They want the public to think low corporation tax is necessary, there is no hypocrisy in championing a 'meritocracy for all' whilst abolishing inheritance tax, all of the problems in their lives are caused by immigrants, benefit fraud is bankrupting the country, Corbyn is an extremist, Muslims are all dangerous people, higher income tax on the wealthiest will lead to some sort of catastrophic brain drain, the public sector can't run a tap, the only aspirations should be to fortune and celebrity, that those with the same are the greatest and most valuable contributors to society...
And they are winning and very quickly getting richer, whilst the poorest struggle.
If people think union-bashing, regulation-deriding, Tory-funded, free market-championing UKIP is the answer to the needs of the working man and woman, well, they are a bit thick, in my opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly
posted on 10/12/16
As heart-wrenching as it is for many, Brexit is a very British revolution. No fuss (except from the anti democratic), no populist leader elected, or even threatening to.
Business as usual
posted on 10/12/16
Scruttocks... Trump hasn't taken office, Brexit hasn't happened and your blaming them for the problems in society the rich and powerful and all Hollywood and celebrities supported Remain/Hillary. Reagan has tonnes of similarities to Trump, everyone said he would be terrible and a foreign policy disaster and turned out to one of the most popular presidents in history. How about waiting 4 years and seeing what happens?
posted on 10/12/16
I'll tell you what will happen... More of the same.
Electing a millionaire who surrounds himself with millionaires with stakes in massive multinationals will not help the working class one iota.
It would've been more or less the same under Hillary.
We really need to shift the discussion away from all the rhetoric and smokescreens on to the issues that really matter, namely distribution of wealth and sustainability.
posted on 10/12/16
How can you say trump is more of the same? The only reason to say it is when people are fearful he may turn into a success
posted on 10/12/16
When Trump calls the Taiwanese president and pi$$es off China he's slated for breaking protocol, when he hires millionaires he's slated for being the same. He can't win with you guys being an ex banker isn't automatically bad, Steve Bannon isn't an 'establishment' figure. We can't just get random guys off the street to run the economy, these people understand how it works.
posted on 10/12/16
Define a success.
Do you think America's poorest are going to see an increase in their employment prospects, disposable income, living standards and working conditions and protections?
Do you think social cohesion will improve?
Do you think the country will improve its record on the environment and address its massive issues with sustainability?
What is a success to you?
posted on 10/12/16
The first two he will improve imo, not sure about that last. He's not a total climate change denier the way the media makes out though.
Page 393 of 395
391 | 392 | 393 | 394 | 395