Not read all yet, but Milestone 2 caught my attention.
He want to deport the "estimated 500,000 to 1 million illegal immigrants believed to be residing in the UK".
First thing that jumps to mind, is that if you don't even know whether there are 500k or 1m, then arranging to deport them might be quite tricky.
The fact we simply don't know how many illegals are in the UK rather SUPPORTS his thesis that we have lost control of borders and migration, not the opposite
But that's not what I said.
I suggested it would be tricky to deport people when you haven't even got a clue whether they exist or not.
Exactly, if you don't check people leaving the country you waste a lot of time looking for e.g. visa overstayers who are no longer here.
Not read all yet, but Milestone 2 caught my attention.
He want to deport the "estimated 500,000 to 1 million illegal immigrants believed to be residing in the UK".
First thing that jumps to mind, is that if you don't even know whether there are 500k or 1m, then arranging to deport them might be quite tricky.
Better idea deport all members of political parties
Carswell has already deported himself. He now lives in Mississippi.
Good luck to the Magnolia state.
I do an internal eye roll when Douglas Carswell rears his head, but I do agree with a lot of his solutions. Quicker to say what I don't agree with, which is his no-tariff policy, his military 3% of GDP policy (it may be the right figure, but we should lead with capability, not spending), his military 'expeditionary divisions' to support Europe and the anglosphere - No. Any such large force in the hands of a British Prime Minister would be like giving a gambling addict a thousand pounds. We should have a large Navy, and the ability to assist with the odd supportive bombardment. That is it. Also the aid cut.
There may well be other bits I object to but I've only skimmed it.
It's just a neo-Trumpite wank, designed to appeal to people of limited intelligence.
UKTV industry apparently in crisis, although from the article it is the Beeb and itv.
The solution to this non problem is, of course, more money from taxpayers rather than finding new streams of income, nice timing too given the current debate on future funding of the BBC.
The BBC seems to favour a sliding scale with wealthier homes paying more than less well off homes.
It’s time to get rid of the license fee, fund the network from general taxation, and let the BBC seek its funding in the open market.
That would be really short sighted. The BBC is one of the best institutions in this country and has been responsible for nurturing some extraorinary talent. The media is one area where the UK punches well above it's weight and much of this is down to the BBC. Holywood is full of talent originally nurtured by the BBC The Scott brothers to name but two but if you add those lower down the scale the British expertise and influence thanks to the BBC is everywhere
But the license fee is becoming less and less tenable. Why should I pay £15 a month to fund it when the majority goes to the BBC just for the privilege of receiving live TV signals. An institution I rarely watch and don’t really value. If the change to license fee comes and wealthier homes have to pay more, as some beeboid has suggested, how is that fair ?
Pay for the distribution system from general taxation but let the BBC compete for its funds.
By all means use taxpayers money to subsidise apprenticeships and trainee schemes that helps people. As they do in other industries. I’ve never heard of the Scott Brothers but good luck to them.
Ridley and Tony
Thanks, I have heard of Ridley Scott and enjoyed his work. Over many years.
His filmography is insane
Two all time top 100 movies: Alien and Blade Runner. Possibly Top 20
Gladiator might also make that list
Plus
The Duellists Thelma and Louise Black Hawk Down The Martian
I really enjoyed Napoleon, as well
In the list of all time movie directors, he must himself be in the top 10, up there with the likes of Scorsese and Spielberg
You enjoyed Napoleon?
Man, you must have been wasted.
Three tramadol and two xanax on a long haul flight to Colombia. So, maybe
I also think the anti-hype helped. Everyone told me it was terrible, so I found it surprisingly enjoyable, skilful, well-crafted
It's not a GREAT movie, but it is good and very watchable
It's not a great movie. It's not even a very good movie. It's ok. It's fine. It's well shot.
The acting is decent.
But ultimately, it took a fascinating story and made it quite boring.
Waterloo, from 1970, is better.
Starring what seems like the whole Ukrainian army, in fancy dress.
Nowadays it would mostly be CGI.
Shows how warfare has changed in a couple of centuris. Today, the whole Ukrainian army in fancy dress, formed up in squares, would last about four minutes as the drones got to work...
Putin's dream.
It’s like a game of rock, scissors, paper. Infantry, in open order, are vulnerable to cavalry. Formed in square, they can easily beat cavalry. But, they then get mauled by artillery. Who in turn, can’t stop a cavalry charge, or do much harm to infantry in open order.
I think Carney will win a majority, and it probably won't even be close.
The Canadian Conservatives can't seem to escape being seen as apologists for Trump and, in a patriotic election, that will do for them.
Probably a problem for the right across the world.
Trumpism will attract a slice of the right, but repel most. The quirks of the American system that allowed Trump to triumph (primaries, infinite money, closed media bubbles) don't exist elsewhere.
UKTV industry apparently in crisis, although from the article it is the Beeb and itv.
The solution to this non problem is, of course, more money from taxpayers rather than finding new streams of income, nice timing too given the current debate on future funding of the BBC.
The BBC seems to favour a sliding scale with wealthier homes paying more than less well off homes.
It’s time to get rid of the license fee, fund the network from general taxation, and let the BBC seek its funding in the open market.
That would be really short sighted. The BBC is one of the best institutions in this country and has been responsible for nurturing some extraorinary talent. The media is one area where the UK punches well above it's weight and much of this is down to the BBC. Holywood is full of talent originally nurtured by the BBC The Scott brothers to name but two but if you add those lower down the scale the British expertise and influence thanks to the BBC is everywhere
But the license fee is becoming less and less tenable. Why should I pay £15 a month to fund it when the majority goes to the BBC just for the privilege of receiving live TV signals. An institution I rarely watch and don’t really value. If the change to license fee comes and wealthier homes have to pay more, as some beeboid has suggested, how is that fair ?
Pay for the distribution system from general taxation but let the BBC compete for its funds.
By all means use taxpayers money to subsidise apprenticeships and trainee schemes that helps people. As they do in other industries. I’ve never heard of the Scott Brothers but good luck to them.
Ridley and Tony
Thanks, I have heard of Ridley Scott and enjoyed his work. Over many years.
His filmography is insane
Two all time top 100 movies: Alien and Blade Runner. Possibly Top 20
Gladiator might also make that list
Plus
The Duellists Thelma and Louise Black Hawk Down The Martian
I really enjoyed Napoleon, as well
In the list of all time movie directors, he must himself be in the top 10, up there with the likes of Scorsese and Spielberg
You enjoyed Napoleon?
Man, you must have been wasted.
Three tramadol and two xanax on a long haul flight to Colombia. So, maybe
I also think the anti-hype helped. Everyone told me it was terrible, so I found it surprisingly enjoyable, skilful, well-crafted
It's not a GREAT movie, but it is good and very watchable
It's not a great movie. It's not even a very good movie. It's ok. It's fine. It's well shot.
The acting is decent.
But ultimately, it took a fascinating story and made it quite boring.
Waterloo, from 1970, is better.
Starring what seems like the whole Ukrainian army, in fancy dress.
Nowadays it would mostly be CGI.
Shows how warfare has changed in a couple of centuris. Today, the whole Ukrainian army in fancy dress, formed up in squares, would last about four minutes as the drones got to work...
Putin's dream.
It’s like a game of rock, scissors, paper. Infantry, in open order, are vulnerable to cavalry. Formed in square, they can easily beat cavalry. But, they then get mauled by artillery. Who in turn, can’t stop a cavalry charge, or do much harm to infantry in open order.
A game that Wellington knew how to play by hiding his infantry behind the reverse slope, so the cannonballs would shoot harmlessly overhead.
He'd neutralise French sharpshooters with his light infantry, and then advance to fire two volleys at short range when they hit the crest. Followed by a bayonet charge. If their cavalry were nearby he'd keep some in square on the flanks.
His cavalry were always short, and mainly focused on reconnaissance, but if he could get at the guns too, he would.
Not read all yet, but Milestone 2 caught my attention.
He want to deport the "estimated 500,000 to 1 million illegal immigrants believed to be residing in the UK".
First thing that jumps to mind, is that if you don't even know whether there are 500k or 1m, then arranging to deport them might be quite tricky.
The fact we simply don't know how many illegals are in the UK rather SUPPORTS his thesis that we have lost control of borders and migration, not the opposite
The civil service has a long-term plan to re-introduce the exit controls we binned in the 80s, but in a low-impact way by scanning faces as they walk through a corridor at an airport or port. Combined with info from airlines. It is because of our lack of exit controls that we have little data. We do surveys only.
It's not enough. Britain's decline is frightening and accelerating. Like, how come this isn't headline news? A mob of fifty kids with knives and machetes invades a function at a primary school in Essex? Last night?
BREAKING Two teens stabbed at primary school event 'gatecrashed by youths with knives'
I went to a teen birthday disco at a youth centre in late 70s birmingham and a local gang of mad skinheads attacked the place smashing all the windows and breaking in the, by then locked, front door and proceeded to threaten and beat people and smash up furniture.
They were a well-known local gang who spent their time marauding the neighbourhood randomly beating up other teenagers for no reason.
Late 70s UK was pretty fucking violent, as I recall, at least in urban areas. The NF were everywhere in my area.
It is total cods that we are suddenly and frighteningly declining.
Is it now? Total bollocks? Let’s have a look at the rape statistics shall we
Oh
Recorded.
Rottenborough is right, the 70s were a near continuous reporting of organised crime, riots, violent strikes, violent demonstrations, football hooliganism and terrorism.
I don’t deny it. I remember the 70s, just about
My point is that we are spiralling BACK to those dark times and with new added anxieties and dangers
We really aren't - football hooligans, Sweeney style gangsters, the NUM, the NF, even the IRA aren't worried about any more.
Its true that the country has problems, as there always will be.
And some things are worse but more things are better.
As it always has been.
And I wouldn't swap living now for living back then or any other time.
Whether teenagers feel the same you'll have to ask them but you'd have to drag them away from their phones to do so.
Yes to the last point.
And yes every generation has a different set of problems to handle.
I remember people in mid 1970s saying quite seriously that there would have to be some kind of quasi-military takeover or martial law to try and deal with the anarchic violence and mass strikes and fighting on picket lines etc etc.
On this I think it's a weird one. There's little doubt we're a less violent, richer society than 40-50 years ago (not old enough to remember - but know those who do). However, lots of people feel "locked in" to a fairly stagnant economic and social position and locked out of comforts and feelings of prosperity in a way did not in the past.
To take some obvious examples - housing costs and quality. We generally live in better homes, but if you're on a low to median, and in some limited cases a decent, salary then you're trapped with huge housing costs that were possible to avoid by slumming it a bit in the past - or having the security of a council house.
Take leisure - sport and gig tickets for things that used to foster community are now often hugely expensive and difficult to obtain. Pubs and clubs have disappeared a lot, in part due to similar cost/value pressures and those that remain often charge a premium.
Work is a lot more based around rigid systems and feel tied into it. Obviously positive in many ways - but can feel like more of a thankless treadmill if not getting the financial rewards, in a way maybe wouldn't have done in the past when work was often more informal and social.
And as for violence, well we're a much less violent society but we're both exposed to fear of horrific violence more - every dreadful incident being online. Plus know that people can be radicalised in a way that was maybe not possible before and commit acts that were very different to the more prevalent meathead violence of before which we could comprehend better.
There also much less covering up and much more reporting.
@DavidL talks of seeing so many historic prosecutions for serious offences that the prisons are becoming retirement homes.
This trip to Uruguay is looking like my first proper solid trip to a very foreign country where I will not withdraw a single unit of hard foreign currency nor use or see cash in any way. Ten days in Uruguay
@Anabobazina is being vindicated and he’s not here to exult!
First?
I've been doing that at home and abroad for years.
And I thought you were well travelled?
That’s why I said “very foreign”. I don’t mean going to the EU or the USA and not withdrawing or spending a euro or a dollar. I’ve done that plenty of times
I mean a really obscure country in the global south - Uruguay. Have you been here? No, of course not. I checked my briefing notes from the tour op and they said “you will need cash, cards are often not accepted”
And yet it’s not true. Cards - indeed contactless - are now ubiquitous even in tiny shops, and in every taxi or train. Even out in the sticks. And if that’s the case in a country like Uruguay then cash is going to disappear worldwide really fast
Is it? Norway and Sweden are the most cashless countries in the world. And both governments have recently advised citizens to keep a week's supply of cash, and to regularly use cash to strengthen preparedness and reduce exclusion. Norway also last year passed a law compelling businesses to accept cash, and Sweden may introduce something similar.
According to the Bundesbank half of payments in Germany are still made using cash (and that's just the ones they are counting, which probably misses loads).
It's going to be a long time before cash disappears worldwide.
Comments
The Canadian Conservatives can't seem to escape being seen as apologists for Trump and, in a patriotic election, that will do for them.
NEW THREAD
Trumpism will attract a slice of the right, but repel most. The quirks of the American system that allowed Trump to triumph (primaries, infinite money, closed media bubbles) don't exist elsewhere.
They love being fickle with their vote.
He'd neutralise French sharpshooters with his light infantry, and then advance to fire two volleys at short range when they hit the crest. Followed by a bayonet charge. If their cavalry were nearby he'd keep some in square on the flanks.
His cavalry were always short, and mainly focused on reconnaissance, but if he could get at the guns too, he would.
@DavidL talks of seeing so many historic prosecutions for serious offences that the prisons are becoming retirement homes.
According to the Bundesbank half of payments in Germany are still made using cash (and that's just the ones they are counting, which probably misses loads).
It's going to be a long time before cash disappears worldwide.