This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
| Hoof Hearted 15 Apr 17 12.09pm | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
The world's population isn't going backwards and neither is the UK's, immigration or no immigration. Air traffic will increase unless it becomes more unaffordable. Anyway, you don't believe in all that man-made global warming, harmful-to-the-environment stuff so why suddenly the braided beads and So insincere but so entertaining. Please carry on I haven't changed my opinions on animal welfare, the environment etc since I was a young kid with a housefull of pets. Sadly you just seem to be a cynic of everything with no sense of direction these days. You provide entertainment very rarely these days, but I appreciate those moments as it reminds me of the pleasant chap you used to be on here most of the time. What happened to you Michael? Edited by Hoof Hearted (15 Apr 2017 12.10pm)
|
|
 susmik  PLYMOUTH -But Made in Old Coulsdon... 15 Apr 17 1.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Nest
Who is this 'us'? I thought it was obvious from the post I was commenting on...... "US" is UK citizens which he implied were lazy and not as good as immigrants!
Supported Palace for over 69 years since the age of 7 and have seen all the ups and downs and will probably see many more ups and downs before I go up to the big football club in the sky. |
|
| susmik PLYMOUTH -But Made in Old Coulsdon... 15 Apr 17 1.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by europalace
Edited by europalace (15 Apr 2017 2.36am)
Supported Palace for over 69 years since the age of 7 and have seen all the ups and downs and will probably see many more ups and downs before I go up to the big football club in the sky. |
|
| Stirlingsays 15 Apr 17 3.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by legaleagle
Pathetic... Tips hat.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Penge Eagle Beckenham 16 Apr 17 1.35am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Save Just over a hundred quid a year to f*** up the environment. Bargain. Who says that the UK govt still won't go for the same green targets but on a more achievable timescale?? I care about the environment – but also having money in my pocket too. You can get the right balance when a sovereign nation is in control – and not a bunch of ideological elites sitting in Brussels who couldn't care less about the cost to people's pockets.
|
|
| Penge Eagle Beckenham 16 Apr 17 1.38am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by europalace
Are you British? Or plan to live in the UK in the future? It might make sense with the nature of your postings.
|
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 16 Apr 17 1.44am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Penge Eagle
Who says that the UK govt still won't go for the same green targets but on a more achievable timescale?? I care about the environment – but also having money in my pocket too. You can get the right balance when a sovereign nation is in control – and not a bunch of ideological elites sitting in Brussels who couldn't care less about the cost to people's pockets.
Why is there a narrative against renewable energy? Surely getting rid of a reliance on fossil fuels is something to be aimed for sooner rather than later. Is it something to do with wind wave and sun being freely available?
|
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 16 Apr 17 1.48am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
I haven't changed my opinions on animal welfare, the environment etc since I was a young kid with a housefull of pets. You provide entertainment very rarely these days, but I appreciate those moments as it reminds me of the pleasant chap you used to be on here most of the time. What happened to you Michael? Edited by Hoof Hearted (15 Apr 2017 12.10pm) With a houseful of pets you'd need to be worrying about the environment.
|
|
| Penge Eagle Beckenham 16 Apr 17 1.48am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Why is there a narrative against renewable energy? Surely getting rid of a reliance on fossil fuels is something to be aimed for sooner rather than later. Is it something to do with wind wave and sun being freely available? Ah, you cynic! Don't let your hatred of the Tories get in the way of anything! And if the British people don't like the British govt's green policies then they can be voted out. Or a party with green policies can be voted into govt. Democracy, innit. Edited by Penge Eagle (16 Apr 2017 2.05am)
|
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 16 Apr 17 1.57am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by davenotamonkey
He's a net drain on resources if his household income is less than ca. £33,000. This is the break-even point between being a net contributor or net beneficiary to the state. Now. What's the population of Bristol? Let's ignore those "economically inactive" ones and concentrate on the 3-million-odd that are in work - "doing the jobs lazy Brit scum won't do". How many of those earn a salary above the threshold above? Many Pret's baristas earn anything near that? Don't bother linking me to the UCL CReAM study, or gleeful reporting of it's derivatives - there's plenty of study and re-analysis about the assumptions put into that EU-funded group's efforts. What we should be doing is incentivising the British "economically inactive" to take up the jobs these migrants are doing. Yes, it might well still be a net cost to the treasury, but what's the point in importing that cost whilst having a non-zero unemployment rate? Let me put it in a way you socialists can understand: We have fields and fields of turnips in the ground. Turnip production remains steady, comrade. We only need to import turnips (from other comrade brothers also involved in the struggle, of course) when we will use up all the turnips in our fields. 1.6m Brits are unemployed. There are 3m+ EU employed. So, it is clear we need some migration, where the demand exists beyond what is available in-situ. No one, except the fictional strawmen you lot love to construct, wants to stop all migration, but it needs to come down and we need to mobilise the stagnant human resources currently unused. How do we do that? I'm not the politician - that's their job, but it is their duty to provide the means and mechanisms to get these people working. Have them plant turnips or something if they won't. Which is exactly what Corbyn's plans for investment in local areas for entrepreneurs, start ups and helping small businesses as per what he said in his speech to the federation of small businesses (papers only managed to report on him refusing to comment on Syria (in fact was asking if the question could be answered later as Syria wasn't pertinent to the event) not the crux of his very sensible plans. Can't think why they'd do that.
|
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 16 Apr 17 7.52am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Which is exactly what Corbyn's plans for investment in local areas for entrepreneurs, start ups and helping small businesses as per what he said in his speech to the federation of small businesses (papers only managed to report on him refusing to comment on Syria (in fact was asking if the question could be answered later as Syria wasn't pertinent to the event) not the crux of his very sensible plans. Can't think why they'd do that. At what point do these small businesses become Capitalist exploiters of the people and subject to all the force of Socialist fury?
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 16 Apr 17 8.17am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
At what point do these small businesses become Capitalist exploiters of the people and subject to all the force of Socialist fury? Stop being an arse.
|
|
| Hoof Hearted 16 Apr 17 11.25am | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Stop being an arse. That is a valuable lesson you could learn yourself. In your case I would say "Stop continually being an arse" though. I won't hold my breath..... as I said earlier this morning I can't even post 'Happy Easter' without you misinterpreting it FFS.
|
|
| davenotamonkey 16 Apr 17 11.56am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Seems like the EU are playing hardball and galvanising after May's tax haven threats... Who'd have thought that might happen. -.-' Edited by nickgusset (16 Apr 2017 1.17am) Well done. You've just basically reposted what is essentially a Grauniad repost of the same "doom-and-gloom". I responded to it in the post below. I'll reiterate my complete lack of surprise that EU-specific bloat is going to leave a country that will not be a member of the EU in (less than!) two years time. As is exactly the case with banking, I can't help thinking that a Brext-UK should join forces with the other pharmaceutical giant of Europe. Nope, it's not Malta. It's not Latvia. It's not Belgium. The Swiss have (again) managed absolutely fine outside (and highly likely as a result) of not being chained to the EMA and their associated directives. Originally posted by davenotamonkey
Fantastic news. The EU Clinical Trials directive, as enforced by this body, has very severely curtailed clinical trial-led research in this country, with output dropping sharply after the directive was rubber-stamped. This has impacted cancer and HIV research. The next millstone around the neck of biomedical research, due next year, is an EU Regulation: so wouldn't even be rubber-stamped by the Commons, it just passes into law with ZERO debate here. This regulation will be even more restrictive (the EU just love top-down Soviet-style red tape). Our biomedical research industry is huge, but has been throttled (as with a lot of science shoehorned into lobbyist-driven "EU frameworks" Moreover, to suggest a regulatory body in existence, purely because of (excessive) EU oversight, would remain in a non-EU country is hilarious. My bet is a vast number of actual (ie useful, and not pen-pushing) jobs in the EMA will move to the Wellcome Trust, Sanger Institute etc. Dropping the excessive over-regulation of research will accelerate bio-funding into the UK, generate more jobs and (hopefully) lead to advances that will combat scourges like AIDS and Parkinson's. I won't be sad to see the EMA go.
|
|
| Hoof Hearted 16 Apr 17 12.03pm | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by davenotamonkey
Well done. You've just basically reposted what is essentially a Grauniad repost of the same "doom-and-gloom". I responded to it in the post below. I'll reiterate my complete lack of surprise that EU-specific bloat is going to leave a country that will not be a member of the EU in (less than!) two years time. As is exactly the case with banking, I can't help thinking that a Brext-UK should join forces with the other pharmaceutical giant of Europe. Nope, it's not Malta. It's not Latvia. It's not Belgium. The Swiss have (again) managed absolutely fine outside (and highly likely as a result) of not being chained to the EMA and their associated directives. Sadly Dave.... you have probably wasted your time again. He'll regurgitate this again in a few weeks time. Edited by Hoof Hearted (16 Apr 2017 12.04pm)
|
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 16 Apr 17 12.17pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
That is a valuable lesson you could learn yourself. In your case I would say "Stop continually being an arse" though. I won't hold my breath..... as I said earlier this morning I can't even post 'Happy Easter' without you misinterpreting it FFS. Nope he was being an arse, making a snide comment rather than addressing what Corbyn said.
|
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 16 Apr 17 1.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Nope he was being an arse, making a snide comment rather than addressing what Corbyn said. I wasn't making a snide comment. I was merely pointing out the contradiction of Labour supposedly supporting small businesses while their dogma says that all means of production, distribution and exchange should be nationalised. My specific point was asking when a business becomes big enough and successful enough to be regarded as that bad for society by Labour.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Mr_Gristle In the land of Whelk Eaters 16 Apr 17 3.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
their dogma says that all means of production, distribution and exchange should be nationalised. But it doesn't, does it? That's Marxist / Leninist communuism and not, despite what you'd perhaps like to assert, the doctrine of "Corbynistas". Originally posted by hedgehog50
My specific point was asking when a business becomes big enough and successful enough to be regarded as that bad for society by Labour. On the other hand this is a good question and, as someone who doesn't consider social democratic policies to be dirty, I'll bite on: IMO, "bad for the country" includes any and all private monopolies / cartels and any operation that runs non-discretionary services for profit. If profit is the return for risk taking and innovation, where's the risk in supplying mains water and sewerage, or for running prisons just as a couple of examples? Placing profits and investor rewards above the best interests of the (large) majority of a country's population is plain wrong - as we could well see if this government can break the back of the NHS.
Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune) |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 16 Apr 17 4.32pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mr_Gristle
But it doesn't, does it? That's Marxist / Leninist communuism and not, despite what you'd perhaps like to assert, the doctrine of "Corbynistas". But the original clause 4 says: Corbyn in 2015 said:
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.