Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Undefined discussion subject.

13»

Comments

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    JackW said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @JackW

    I think you're a wee bit confused.

    PM Robert (Bob) Cecil, Marquees of Salisbury, was the uncle to his successor Arthur Balfour - hence "Bob's your Uncle"


    Now it is your age that is showing, dear boy

    You're right that Salisbury, PM, was the uncle to his successor.

    But Salisbury's son, Robert Cecil, was also the KC in 4 Paper Buildings, which was the first set that Attlee worked in as a barrister. Hence, because technically, the Head of Chambers is a primus inter pares, Robert Cecil was Attlee's "leader among peers". There were also - hotly denied - allegations of nepotism (Attlee's father had conncetions with the Chambers) so "Bob's my uncle" might have been an aposite way of describing how he got the job.

    But I don't know what Robert Cecil KC's views were on minorities. Perhaps they were similar to his father's, perhaps not.

    Gawd help us Charles you are simply wrong.

    The question was not only to identify the three parliamentarians but also their shared link.

    What was the Marquess of Salisbury's son distinct link to Lord Rosebery or Lord Home ??

    "Leader among peers" clearly relates to Attlee's view of Salisbury as the best PM in Attlee's lifetime and also an indirect clue to the three subjects being peers.

    Your tenuous "Bob's you uncle" reference is so thin that it doesn't require scrutiny whereas the widely accepted derivation of the term is as I quoted.

    And lastly .... but most importantly ....

    The referee's decision is final .... especially so when I'm 100% accurate.

    Although I wasn't playing the game, just educating you...
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    May I suggest that mass immigration is capitalism in it purest form?

    The rich (English businesses) find a source of cheap willing labour (Eastern European immigrants) that they can pay very low wages, therefore increasing their profit margin.

    The businessman are delighted, as they are getting more work done per £££ paid in wages

    The immigrants are delighted, as they are getting a up to a 400% rise in wages compared to their homeland, even at the UK minimum wage

    The English working class are the losers, as they are forced to work longer hours for worse pay, if they can find work at all, because of the increase in cheap labour.

    In purely financial terms it makes complete sense to do what the rich and the immigrants are doing.. and I wonder if the English working class have an any argument really?

    Do they have to get in the real world, were they previously overpaid?

    Is it fair to resent a wave of competition for their jobs that has a massive advantage over them in experience and wage expectation?

    Would businesses simply move their factories to where the cheap labour was if the supply line (mass immigration) were stopped?

    Whatever the answers, I believe both major parties principles are compromised.

    Labour are supposed to be the party that values society before than profit, yet they introduced a system where the British worker is much worse off socially and financially, and justify it by the bottom line

    Conservatives are supposed to be the party of capitalism over socialism, so they should agree with mass immigration as it is proven to increase GDP, but how does that tally with their views on immigration?

  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Big UKIP surge coming next year. Can feel it in the waters.

    Agreed. The papers have already decided that we are going to be overrun by criminals from Bulgaria and Romania in 2014.

    Whether we are or not.

  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Charles said:

    JackW said:

    Charles said:

    FPT @JackW

    I think you're a wee bit confused.

    PM Robert (Bob) Cecil, Marquees of Salisbury, was the uncle to his successor Arthur Balfour - hence "Bob's your Uncle"


    Now it is your age that is showing, dear boy

    You're right that Salisbury, PM, was the uncle to his successor.

    But Salisbury's son, Robert Cecil, was also the KC in 4 Paper Buildings, which was the first set that Attlee worked in as a barrister. Hence, because technically, the Head of Chambers is a primus inter pares, Robert Cecil was Attlee's "leader among peers". There were also - hotly denied - allegations of nepotism (Attlee's father had conncetions with the Chambers) so "Bob's my uncle" might have been an aposite way of describing how he got the job.

    But I don't know what Robert Cecil KC's views were on minorities. Perhaps they were similar to his father's, perhaps not.

    Gawd help us Charles you are simply wrong.

    The question was not only to identify the three parliamentarians but also their shared link.

    What was the Marquess of Salisbury's son distinct link to Lord Rosebery or Lord Home ??

    "Leader among peers" clearly relates to Attlee's view of Salisbury as the best PM in Attlee's lifetime and also an indirect clue to the three subjects being peers.

    Your tenuous "Bob's you uncle" reference is so thin that it doesn't require scrutiny whereas the widely accepted derivation of the term is as I quoted.

    And lastly .... but most importantly ....

    The referee's decision is final .... especially so when I'm 100% accurate.

    Although I wasn't playing the game, just educating you...
    You might think you were "educating" me bit I've just schooled you !!

    With panto season with us you remind me of the one of the ugly sister's desperately trying to fit a swollen ankle onto the wrong slipper.

    I have to advise you that I placed a beautifully and well rounded ankle into that slipper many moons ago and Mrs Cinderlla W went to the ball with her prince, the charming JackW.

    Sighs ....




  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,079
    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    If you have an area with a settled population with a roughly balanced number of young males and young females and then you add thousands of extra young men you get this

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513653/Sexual-violence-gang-neighbourhoods-like-war-zones-girls-young-11-groomed-raped.html

    "Britain's worst gang hit neighbourhoods are seeing levels of sexual violence as bad as in war zones, it was claimed today."

    The political class can ignore it and pretend it's not happening but it is.

    The political class will only take action when UKIP start winning seats from them.
    Yes
    No.
    You think the political class will stop ignoring this before Ukip start winning seats?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513653/Sexual-violence-gang-neighbourhoods-like-war-zones-girls-young-11-groomed-raped.html
    I think UKIP has sod all to do with evil men doing nasty things. And even if it won power (let alone seats), I doubt they could do much about it.

    I also think you might be confusing UKIP with BNP. Don't worry, it is a common mistake.
    Yeah but my point was about the political class ignoring it so none of that is relevant.
    I hate to tell you of this, but UKIP has MEPs, including relatively high-profile ones.

    They are as much the 'political class' as Labour, the Conservatives, the Lib Dems and the SNP.
    Also not relevant to my point.
    It was very relevant to the quote: "You think the political class will stop ignoring this before Ukip start winning seats?" which I think you made above.

    If you do not agree, please explain:
    a) Your point.
    b) How UKIP are *not* the political class.
    c) What you think anyone can do to stop such behaviour from anyone, of any political persuasion or background?
    Westminster seats

    and

    "c) What you think anyone can do to stop such behaviour from anyone, of any political persuasion or background?"

    Exactly the same thing as could be done with the grooming gangs once the political class' wall of silence was broken by the Times.
    That is a rather nonsensical reply. D-

    Please try again.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,079
    isam said:

    May I suggest that mass immigration is capitalism in it purest form?

    The rich (English businesses) find a source of cheap willing labour (Eastern European immigrants) that they can pay very low wages, therefore increasing their profit margin.

    The businessman are delighted, as they are getting more work done per £££ paid in wages

    The immigrants are delighted, as they are getting a up to a 400% rise in wages compared to their homeland, even at the UK minimum wage

    The English working class are the losers, as they are forced to work longer hours for worse pay, if they can find work at all, because of the increase in cheap labour.

    In purely financial terms it makes complete sense to do what the rich and the immigrants are doing.. and I wonder if the English working class have an any argument really?

    Do they have to get in the real world, were they previously overpaid?

    Is it fair to resent a wave of competition for their jobs that has a massive advantage over them in experience and wage expectation?

    Would businesses simply move their factories to where the cheap labour was if the supply line (mass immigration) were stopped?

    Whatever the answers, I believe both major parties principles are compromised.

    Labour are supposed to be the party that values society before than profit, yet they introduced a system where the British worker is much worse off socially and financially, and justify it by the bottom line

    Conservatives are supposed to be the party of capitalism over socialism, so they should agree with mass immigration as it is proven to increase GDP, but how does that tally with their views on immigration?

    You fall at the first fence: the idea that "English businesses" are the rich.

    Most businesses will be people like you and me who work like the devil to make money for their families, often paying more to their employees in wages than they get themselves.
  • Options
    Interesting comment by Peston on the banking union agreement:
    "But it is striking that finance ministers have not wholly delegated the decision-making on whether to close or take over an ailing bank to a new resolution board they are creating. They have reserved powers to determine the fate of struggling banks for themselves - which does not augur well for the most speedy action in a crisis.

    Equally, for at least 10 years - and possibly forever - it is individual member states that will remain the ultimate underwriters of the costs when one of their banks fail, rather than eurozone members collectively."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25445326
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    No Yougov leaked yet ?

    Not good for the Avery LP crossover if not. Tic toc tic toc.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523


    That is a rather nonsensical reply. D-

    Please try again.

    One of the factors driving Ukip support among the bitter ex-labour segment of the electorate is the political class pretending this isn't happening.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513653/Sexual-violence-gang-neighbourhoods-like-war-zones-girls-young-11-groomed-raped.html

    Is that simple enough?

  • Options
    MrJones said:


    That is a rather nonsensical reply. D-

    Please try again.

    One of the factors driving Ukip support among the bitter ex-labour segment of the electorate is the political class pretending this isn't happening.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513653/Sexual-violence-gang-neighbourhoods-like-war-zones-girls-young-11-groomed-raped.html

    Is that simple enough?

    You do realise that when someone links a post to the Daily Heil, it's actually a negative for their argument?
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    taffys said:

    Big UKIP surge coming next year. Can feel it in the waters.

    Agreed. The papers have already decided that we are going to be overrun by criminals from Bulgaria and Romania in 2014.

    Whether we are or not.

    Peak Kipper will be around April 2014 - then be in terminal decline.
  • Options
    Mr Jones - For example

    OMG - The Daily Mail Ice Age is coming....again

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-206588/UK-braced-Arctic-weather.html
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    MrJones said:


    That is a rather nonsensical reply. D-

    Please try again.

    One of the factors driving Ukip support among the bitter ex-labour segment of the electorate is the political class pretending this isn't happening.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513653/Sexual-violence-gang-neighbourhoods-like-war-zones-girls-young-11-groomed-raped.html

    Is that simple enough?

    You do realise that when someone links a post to the Daily Heil, it's actually a negative for their argument?
    "shocking Children's Commissioner report"
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,079
    MrJones said:


    That is a rather nonsensical reply. D-

    Please try again.

    One of the factors driving Ukip support among the bitter ex-labour segment of the electorate is the political class pretending this isn't happening.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513653/Sexual-violence-gang-neighbourhoods-like-war-zones-girls-young-11-groomed-raped.html

    Is that simple enough?

    Where have the 'political class' (which, according to your ridiculous interpretation does not include UKIP) pretended that this is not going on?

    I am also rather alarmed by the fact you do not deign to mention all the other rapes that are going on, and repeatedly concentrate on (what a surprise) ones done my apparent gangs of immigrants.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,079
    Hugh said:



    "That the Government made a mess of the economy for years."

    If by 'Government', you mean the Labour government, then you might have a point.

    "Fix the mess in the NHS."

    Now I know you're having a joke. Look at today's news about breast cancer patients, and note when it occurred. Also read the PB posts by people in the know within the NHS - the NHs post-Lansley isn't as bleak as you'd try to make out. Besides, the situation in Wales is directly relevant as it is in Labour's control.

    Labour supporters might want to set a Year Zero in 2010. Unfortunately, the same people tend to mention 'Fatcher' a great deal, making it seem that certain periods of history are verboten. In particular, those when they f*ck up whilst in power.

    Your point would compute if it was not laughable, for the reasons given above and more. Labour cannot just attack the current government,; they need to develop defence lines over their time in power.

    I'm not trying to convert you to Labour's position.

    I'm trying to get you to comprehend why it's developing in a way that's both coherent and, possibly, given the makeup of their current coalition of support, enough to deliver a decent majority.

    Baby steps and all that, but clearly even that's asking too much, so as you were!
    It's wishful thinking, though. Your argument is one where only Labour's lies arguments are put forward, and the coalition parties' lies counter arguments are not.

    In other words, they are positions that would appeal to Labour voters, but ones that are easy to counter (see my reply). They would appeal to core Labour voters who already believe that Tories are evil, but possibly not the important sectors of the electorate who will look at both sides before deciding how to vote. Appealing to the core is good for GOTV alone, but it won't win you the election.

    You are a general going into battle with a plan, but no contingency - or even care - of what your enemy's plans are.

    Oh., and just to let you know, the attack lines you wrote are far from coherent. It is a position based on lies.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,405
    I think we have seen from Sam of this parish how frustrated people get when they are told that unbridled immigration is a good thing when it has in fact changed whole neighbourhoods.

    And of course Sam is a bolted on ex-Labour Kipper switcher with appropriate left-wing credentials (certainly @Sam your recent post about the capitalist class was indicative of this).

    But those arguments speak more of a boss and worker class struggle than they do a nationalist argument against free movement of labour. Yet there is no party available to fight that fight, short of the RCP (in whichever incarnation they are at the moment or even if they are extant). So those Kippers who have genuine concerns about the nature of our society and immigration's effect on it, have to make a stark choice.

    They can keep Kipper in a long game with a real chance of never attaining their goal. Or they can choose between the existing three parties.

    And that is why even on a Kipper hot button I believe there will be a return to the larger parties.

  • Options
    Stormageddon has hit EC2.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    MrJones said:


    That is a rather nonsensical reply. D-

    Please try again.

    One of the factors driving Ukip support among the bitter ex-labour segment of the electorate is the political class pretending this isn't happening.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513653/Sexual-violence-gang-neighbourhoods-like-war-zones-girls-young-11-groomed-raped.html

    Is that simple enough?

    Where have the 'political class' (which, according to your ridiculous interpretation does not include UKIP) pretended that this is not going on?

    I am also rather alarmed by the fact you do not deign to mention all the other rapes that are going on, and repeatedly concentrate on (what a surprise) ones done my apparent gangs of immigrants.
    Perhaps I missed the Mayor's comments on this children's Commissioner report? Or any of the front bench speakers from the three main parties?

    You're alarmed at people concentrating on crimes that are being covered up rather than the ones that aren't?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,079
    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:


    That is a rather nonsensical reply. D-

    Please try again.

    One of the factors driving Ukip support among the bitter ex-labour segment of the electorate is the political class pretending this isn't happening.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513653/Sexual-violence-gang-neighbourhoods-like-war-zones-girls-young-11-groomed-raped.html

    Is that simple enough?

    Where have the 'political class' (which, according to your ridiculous interpretation does not include UKIP) pretended that this is not going on?

    I am also rather alarmed by the fact you do not deign to mention all the other rapes that are going on, and repeatedly concentrate on (what a surprise) ones done my apparent gangs of immigrants.
    Perhaps I missed the Mayor's comments on this children's Commissioner report? Or any of the front bench speakers from the three main parties?

    You're alarmed at people concentrating on crimes that are being covered up rather than the ones that aren't?
    How often do you take your tinfoil hat off?.

    You obviously missed the Saville cover-up, or the numerous ones in the Catholic church. But you're probably not bothered about them due to the identities of the perpetrators. Or is one rape somehow more noteworthy than another because of who committed the crime?

    In addition, why do you think that UKIP are not part of the 'political class'?
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    @Topping
    And that is why even on a Kipper hot button I believe there will be a return to the larger parties.
    ---------------
    You can believe what you want Topper, (and the many of your type on PB) but there will be no big returning to the bosom of the Lab/lib/Con party this time round. The people are finally beginning to see what a mess the main parties have made of Britain, and want something different. UKIP is growing; UKIP is advancing and UKIP will make you eat your heart out.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:


    That is a rather nonsensical reply. D-

    Please try again.

    One of the factors driving Ukip support among the bitter ex-labour segment of the electorate is the political class pretending this isn't happening.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513653/Sexual-violence-gang-neighbourhoods-like-war-zones-girls-young-11-groomed-raped.html

    Is that simple enough?

    Where have the 'political class' (which, according to your ridiculous interpretation does not include UKIP) pretended that this is not going on?

    I am also rather alarmed by the fact you do not deign to mention all the other rapes that are going on, and repeatedly concentrate on (what a surprise) ones done my apparent gangs of immigrants.
    Perhaps I missed the Mayor's comments on this children's Commissioner report? Or any of the front bench speakers from the three main parties?

    You're alarmed at people concentrating on crimes that are being covered up rather than the ones that aren't?
    How often do you take your tinfoil hat off?.

    You obviously missed the Saville cover-up, or the numerous ones in the Catholic church. But you're probably not bothered about them due to the identities of the perpetrators. Or is one rape somehow more noteworthy than another because of who committed the crime?

    In addition, why do you think that UKIP are not part of the 'political class'?
    You're proving my point. You won't accept those bits of reality that contradict the PC religion and a lot of other people have to pay the price for that.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,405
    edited December 2013
    MikeK said:

    @Topping
    And that is why even on a Kipper hot button I believe there will be a return to the larger parties.
    ---------------
    You can believe what you want Topper, (and the many of your type on PB) but there will be no big returning to the bosom of the Lab/lib/Con party this time round. The people are finally beginning to see what a mess the main parties have made of Britain, and want something different. UKIP is growing; UKIP is advancing and UKIP will make you eat your heart out.

    haha very funny Mikey. But you prove my point.

    "The People" is straight out of Wolfie Smith.

    And as for the mess the parties have made of Britain - what amazing plans do you jokers have to make it all better?

    very funny Mikey.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,073
    MikeK said:

    @Topping
    And that is why even on a Kipper hot button I believe there will be a return to the larger parties.
    ---------------
    You can believe what you want Topper, (and the many of your type on PB) but there will be no big returning to the bosom of the Lab/lib/Con party this time round. The people are finally beginning to see what a mess the main parties have made of Britain, and want something different. UKIP is growing; UKIP is advancing and UKIP will make you eat your heart out.

    And, you I'm afraid, will discover that those parties live in the land of the possible
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    MikeK said:

    @Topping
    And that is why even on a Kipper hot button I believe there will be a return to the larger parties.
    ---------------
    You can believe what you want Topper, (and the many of your type on PB) but there will be no big returning to the bosom of the Lab/lib/Con party this time round. The people are finally beginning to see what a mess the main parties have made of Britain, and want something different. UKIP is growing; UKIP is advancing and UKIP will make you eat your heart out.

    You really want the shambles of Kipper MEP' s to be replicated in Westminster? They are rotten to the core, grasping every last cent they can, while expended the least amount of energy possible.
  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @JosiasJessop

    'Where have the 'political class' (which, according to your ridiculous interpretation does not include UKIP) pretended that this is not going on?'

    Perhaps Mr Jones or MikeK could explain why being on the Brussels gravy train is somehow different from the Westminster one, other than the Brussels one being far more lucrative.
  • Options
    MikeK said:

    @Topping
    And that is why even on a Kipper hot button I believe there will be a return to the larger parties.
    ---------------
    You can believe what you want Topper, (and the many of your type on PB) but there will be no big returning to the bosom of the Lab/lib/Con party this time round. The people are finally beginning to see what a mess the main parties have made of Britain, and want something different. UKIP is growing; UKIP is advancing and UKIP will make you eat your heart out.

    Agree 100% Mike.

    The sheer arrogance of the main parties is breathtaking. The Tories just assume that Kippers will return to the fold without considering that Cameron is not a Tory, Labour believe that WWC will always vote for them because that's what their Dad and Grandad, and the Lib Dems may (but by no means certain) lose the NOTA voters to UKIP.

    I find the whole Vote UKIP get Ed pathetic, every UKIP supporter I know takes the view vote Tory get Lib/Lab/Con. They have a big shock coming to them.
  • Options
    New Thread
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    TOPPING said:

    MikeK said:

    @Topping
    And that is why even on a Kipper hot button I believe there will be a return to the larger parties.
    ---------------
    You can believe what you want Topper, (and the many of your type on PB) but there will be no big returning to the bosom of the Lab/lib/Con party this time round. The people are finally beginning to see what a mess the main parties have made of Britain, and want something different. UKIP is growing; UKIP is advancing and UKIP will make you eat your heart out.

    haha very funny Mikey. But you prove my point.

    "The People" is straight out of Wolfie Smith.

    And as for the mess the parties have made of Britain - what amazing plans do you jokers have to make it all better?

    very funny Mikey.
    Oh Topping doesn't like the "People": even makes fun of the people. So what are you around for Topping? Someone to lick your arse.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,079
    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:

    MrJones said:


    That is a rather nonsensical reply. D-

    Please try again.

    One of the factors driving Ukip support among the bitter ex-labour segment of the electorate is the political class pretending this isn't happening.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2513653/Sexual-violence-gang-neighbourhoods-like-war-zones-girls-young-11-groomed-raped.html

    Is that simple enough?

    Where have the 'political class' (which, according to your ridiculous interpretation does not include UKIP) pretended that this is not going on?

    I am also rather alarmed by the fact you do not deign to mention all the other rapes that are going on, and repeatedly concentrate on (what a surprise) ones done my apparent gangs of immigrants.
    Perhaps I missed the Mayor's comments on this children's Commissioner report? Or any of the front bench speakers from the three main parties?

    You're alarmed at people concentrating on crimes that are being covered up rather than the ones that aren't?
    How often do you take your tinfoil hat off?.

    You obviously missed the Saville cover-up, or the numerous ones in the Catholic church. But you're probably not bothered about them due to the identities of the perpetrators. Or is one rape somehow more noteworthy than another because of who committed the crime?

    In addition, why do you think that UKIP are not part of the 'political class'?
    You're proving my point. You won't accept those bits of reality that contradict the PC religion and a lot of other people have to pay the price for that.
    You are cherry-picking your data to pick the 'reality' you want to see.

    And I like the way you turn it around so it is somehow *my* fault when bad things happen.

    Classy.
This discussion has been closed.