• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Dear oh dear Ed Milliband, what a joke of a man !!!

parklane1 said:
And he really means what he says about it :ross: the only reason he came out with that is because his party are losing MP's and voters to UKIP. There is no chance he will get any of that done and those who think he will are being conned.
Click to expand...

Even Millband came out the other day and said they wanted to ban immigrants from claiming and benefits for the first 2 years, so I think you could say UKIP are already influencing politics and policies in this country.

For the record I do not think giving immigrants tax credits is a big deal to me, immigration effects negatively those in unskilled and low paid jobs I actually got out of labouring due to a bad back and trained in locksmithing so I was some what ahead of the curve but for different reasons.

If I were to write a manifesto I would not even be looking to change the benefits immigrants get, I would put a quota on overall immigration so the country could plan better for housing, health care and schooling.

No most of my manifesto would be spent on looking outwards towards the world and not being so small minded and thinking we needed to be tied to an ageing and backward looking European Union.

UKIP is not without criticism in my eyes most notably their defence policies, there views on gay marriage and the idealogical hatred of wind turbines.

This will be last post of the weekend. The wife and kid are away and I am cycling tomorrow morning then going on a 20 hour bender with 2 mates I hope I wake up in time for the match Sunday.

Come On You Spurs.
 
scaramanga said:
Some much needed common sense on immigration from Cameron today.

Don't think it'll be enough for the UKIP mentals though.
Click to expand...

I actually don't agree about curbing migrant benefits. The problem is not a macroeconomic one, it's widely accepted that migrants are net contributors to the exchequer, it's a microeconomic and social problem. Immigrants don't move to each area of the UK equally, some towns see a much higher population increase than others, and it's in those areas where there is depression of wages, higher unemployment for low skilled workers and most problematically increased pressure on local services.
 
Richie said:
I actually don't agree about curbing migrant benefits. The problem is not a macroeconomic one, it's widely accepted that migrants are net contributors to the exchequer, it's a microeconomic and social problem. Immigrants don't move to each area of the UK equally, some towns see a much higher population increase than others, and it's in those areas where there is depression of wages, higher unemployment for low skilled workers and most problematically increased pressure on local services.
Click to expand...

It is not "widely accepted" that immigrants are net contributors to the Exchequer at all.
 
Richie said:
I actually don't agree about curbing migrant benefits. The problem is not a macroeconomic one, it's widely accepted that migrants are net contributors to the exchequer, it's a microeconomic and social problem. Immigrants don't move to each area of the UK equally, some towns see a much higher population increase than others, and it's in those areas where there is depression of wages, higher unemployment for low skilled workers and most problematically increased pressure on local services.
Click to expand...
I'm in favour of curbing any benefits.

Immigration as a whole is a net contributor. What this would do is ensure that each and every individual Immigrant is a net contributor. We keep immigration, we pay out less of our taxes - win/win.
 
scaramanga said:
I'm in favour of curbing any benefits.

Immigration as a whole is a net contributor. What this would do is ensure that each and every individual Immigrant is a net contributor. We keep immigration, we pay out less of our taxes - win/win.
Click to expand...
I'm in favour of reducing benefits across the board, but I don't feel immigrants should be singled out. Most immigrants will contribute more in their first 4 years than school leavers, why should they not be entitled to benefits that young people enjoy?
 
Richie said:
I'm in favour of reducing benefits across the board, but I don't feel immigrants should be singled out. Most immigrants will contribute more in their first 4 years than school leavers, why should they not be entitled to benefits that young people enjoy?
Click to expand...
I agree, but with politics the way it is, it makes sense to make the cuts that the public will accept first. Any cuts are good cuts.
 
Richie said:
Of the three featured people, the only one I feel sorry for is the haunted house woman. You shouldn't have to pay the bedroom tax if you're willing to leave but they don't have anywhere for you to go.
Click to expand...

Couldn't she claim that the room is indeed occupied by the ghost thus avoiding the bedroom tax?
 
scaramanga said:
How did I guess you'd have a sense of humour failure here?

Still, at least you have the pleasure of agreeing with the Daily Mail - how does that feel?
Click to expand...


Just another politician who has no idea what happens in the real word, anyone who finds that funny has no sense of humour to start with. No wonder the country is in a mess with silly cows like her running it
 
parklane1 said:
Just another politician who has no idea what happens in the real word, anyone who finds that funny has no sense of humour to start with. No wonder the country is in a mess with silly cows like her running it
Click to expand...

Agreed

She is probably one of those ones that does not understand the difference between debt and deficit.
 
parklane1 said:
Just another politician who has no idea what happens in the real word, anyone who finds that funny has no sense of humour to start with. No wonder the country is in a mess with silly cows like her running it
Click to expand...

You'll have to trust me when I tell you that she has every knowledge of what happens in the real world.

We have a factory in her constituency so I've had a few dealings with her and she's an excellent MP. If more MPs were as good at looking after their constituents as her, I think fewer people would have such a dislike of politics.

That said, her predecessor Sarah McCarthy-Fry was an excellent MP too - despite sitting on the wrong side of Parliament.
 
scaramanga said:
You'll have to trust me when I tell you that she has every knowledge of what happens in the real world.

We have a factory in her constituency so I've had a few dealings with her and she's an excellent MP. If more MPs were as good at looking after their constituents as her, I think fewer people would have such a dislike of politics.

That said, her predecessor Sarah McCarthy-Fry was an excellent MP too - despite sitting on the wrong side of Parliament.
Click to expand...

Fair enough I will trust you but she must be one of the few who do , still a silly cow though ;)
 
Gavin Shuker is a very good local MP here. Kelvin Hopkins also on the other side of Luton. Both Labour.

I am sure any Tory who was elected here would be just as good.

It's the policies of the main parties that are confusing me. Massively on the fence right now. Need to find what's best for me and for my children's future and vote that way.
 
B6Gbl4UCYAAaWeP.jpg
 
markysimmo said:
B6Gbl4UCYAAaWeP.jpg
Click to expand...
He's clearly spent too much but does anyone seriously see the tube comparison as a valid one?

I don't want the nation's cabinet ministers in a situation where any scummy Mirror reader can take a swipe at him - the extra security costs would probably be higher than renting limos. What about the security of the documents/laptops carried by ministers? They certainly can't take them on the tube.

A much more fair comparison would be between limos and taxis but you'd have to take out the sunk cost of having 2 limos on hand (I think 2 is pretty efficient for an entire department) out of it. It may be (I don't know how the limos are charged) that there's no added cost of usage once the guaranteed availability is paid for.
 
galeforce said:
he lives not far way from me (out in Essex), you can't get the tube out here
Click to expand...
I think the criticism is that he takes a limo from his office to Westminster.

Still, I'd like to know what the price difference is between a waiting limo and one being used.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back