This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
| jamiemartin721 |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by leifandersonshair
Cameron is only going to get more and more desperate as the vote approaches. He knows his position as leader will be untenable if the public vote Leave, and there will be a political scrum as leading Tories try to position themselves as successor. Cameron gambled- by pushing hard for the Remain camp, he knew a Remain vote would have sunk Boris and IDS (politically), but the Remain vote looked a lot safer months ago when first announced... I'm actually in the Remain camp, but neither camp has really done a great job getting it's message across. Looking forward to the political mayhem that will result whatever the outcome! I think Cameron can probably weather an exit, provided its close. The larger the margin the more untenable his position may be, especially to ambitious pro-exit candidates. Usually in referendums, the 'change' campaign prospers early on, but closer to the date the 'bravado' starts to waiver and people start to change their minds. People start to think more about consequences and risk, as they get closer to having to make a decision. Whilst its a more distant thing, they tend to be more idealistic than pragmatic. Out!
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
Hahaha... very amusing Johnny.... I like it mate.
I've portrayed an image on here that you have captured exactly.... bravo sir! X Perhaps when this blo@dy war is over Hoof and the borders are reopened in say 40 years time we could meet at one of those memorial arches, remembering fallen comrades and wondering at the futility of it all...
|
|
|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
The name's Hunt Kermy.. not C U Next Tuesday. Cameron is playing a game. When the EU demanded a further £1.8M a couple of years ago he was as Eurosceptic as it was possible to be... probably on a par with Corbyn. Now the two are lining up fully behind the Remain campaign because it suits their political agenda, not because they believe in it. You bigging up Cameron is just the same thing Kermy. Outside of this referendum debate you wouldn't have a good word to say about him or Osborne would you? As somebody else said on here recently - it's the "muppets" that will decide it and right now the message that immigration is choking our country to death is resonating with those who are most affected by it. Talk of the economy being stronger doesn't cut it. Billion wasn't it?
Optimistic as ever |
|
|
Originally posted by Willo
I am firmly in the "Brexit" camp and my position is entrenched. Whatever gave that impression I'm sure I don't know. OUT OUT OUT !
"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'" |
|
|
Originally posted by JohnyBoy
You definitely sound like you are wavering to me Danny, c'mon over, you will be much more prosperous, liberated and safe....plus there are lots of good lads over here: kermit, bigpalacefan and lankygit to name but a few And i forgot to mention you will be £4300 a year better off Danny, thats nearly 1500 pints of wetherspoons beer, surely thats enough to tip you over...
|
|
|
Originally posted by Cucking Funt
Absolutely not, old fruit. Furthermore, I'm all for reclaiming the Empire, too. To quote the great Winston: Thank you for your honesty on this one Cucking, it is quite refreshing compared to the denials over the threat to the economy, financial markets, security, household prosperity and trade. You do not need to understand rational expectations theory to form the view that all would be significantly worse off (although admitedly we dont know exactly by how much) in thd event if brexit.
|
|
|
How are the French allowed to go above their own parliament and Europe when we're at the sharp end of things like this?
|
|
| legaleagle |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Cucking Funt
Absolutely not, old fruit. Furthermore, I'm all for reclaiming the Empire, too. To quote the great Winston: You have surpassed yourself here Cucking! Will you commence the reclamation of Empire by leading a one person re-invasion of Mesopotamia (Iraq) to reactivate the mandate,start a new opium War in China to get back the "treaty port" of Shanghai ,or perhaps hide in a container of tea headed for Boston to sort those damn uppity Yankees out?
|
|
| legaleagle |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by johnfirewall
How are the French allowed to go above their own parliament and Europe when we're at the sharp end of things like this? Umm...The same way we have changed our labour laws (at times controversially) a number of times over the years since joining the EU,and the same way our governments have "got round" the hassle of parliamentary democracy to introduce laws regularly over the years by using the Royal Prerogative...
|
|
|
Originally posted by legaleagle
Umm...The same way we have changed our labour laws (at times controversially) a number of times over the years since joining the EU,and the same way our governments have "got round" the hassle of parliamentary democracy to introduce laws regularly over the years by using the Royal Prerogative... We've just been told we can't make people work for benefits
|
|
| jamiemartin721 |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by johnfirewall
We've just been told we can't make people work for benefits Quite right to, as this undermines people in low skill and manual labour jobs. Its seems on the surface a good idea, until you can't find a job, because employers can get someone to do it for free. Its really a dangerous concept, that like cheap migrant labour, will be used to reduce costs (wages) against the interests of working (because employers public and private are driven by costs, and will use such labour where ever possible). Then there is the issue to the person in question. When I was unemployed, the job centre sent people for interviews. If we're going to make people work, fine, lets make them work and pay them a fair rate for their work. Not make them some cheap alternative where by employers can cut wages.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| jamiemartin721 |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Billion wasn't it? Wasn't that because we'd changed how we measured capital and decided to include black market income against the economic growth (which made them look great) but then got shirty when it was time to pay 'the dues'. Its like people who engage in tax avoidance, and then complain about public services....
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Quite right to, as this undermines people in low skill and manual labour jobs. Its seems on the surface a good idea, until you can't find a job, because employers can get someone to do it for free. Its really a dangerous concept, that like cheap migrant labour, will be used to reduce costs (wages) against the interests of working (because employers public and private are driven by costs, and will use such labour where ever possible). Then there is the issue to the person in question. When I was unemployed, the job centre sent people for interviews. If we're going to make people work, fine, lets make them work and pay them a fair rate for their work. Not make them some cheap alternative where by employers can cut wages. True. I forget that these people are actually made to work in Poundland, where instead the perfect solution would be to place them in roles which otherwise would be funded directly by the government, providing a triple benefit. If people are so against outsourcing of public services, maybe cancel all the contracts and employ the unemployed. No one should be above sweeping the streets if they've not bothered to find anything else. It would stop the 'jobs the English won't do' falacy as well.
|
|
| Hoof Hearted 11 May 16 4.55pm | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by JohnyBoy
Perhaps when this blo@dy war is over Hoof and the borders are reopened in say 40 years time we could meet at one of those memorial arches, remembering fallen comrades and wondering at the futility of it all... In 40 years I will be but a faded memory to my nephews and nieces who will still be benefiting from my estate hopefully. I am fast approaching 62 and have Parkinson's and Diabetes. I doubt that I'll get to see Corbyn's nose rubbed in it, in 2020. I'm hoping that I'll have seen Palace win the FA Cup though! Take care Johnny. X
|
|
| Hoof Hearted 11 May 16 4.57pm | |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Billion wasn't it? indeed it was Stuk my faithful friend. Yes... £1.8 Billion.... not an inconsequential amount!
|
|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Wasn't that because we'd changed how we measured capital and decided to include black market income against the economic growth (which made them look great) but then got shirty when it was time to pay 'the dues'. Its like people who engage in tax avoidance, and then complain about public services.... No, we have to include the black market due to EU rules because other countries, like Germany, have taxed prostitution as the Netherlands has taxed drugs. They claim it's not fair so everyone else has to guesstimate a black market economy which is then added to GDP figures etc. which they then use to work out who should contribute what to the EU budget. The real reason we had to pay more is below.
Optimistic as ever |
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.