Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

While we're at it, why don't we ban knives, and all wear government-mandated chastity belts, to be released only on production of evidence that the lady of your intentions is not your sister? (we'll have to come up with some other criteria to cover the fens, obviously).

Yes......hand over total control and responsibility to 'the state' because whatever they do they do it for our own good.

This is what is known as Socialism. Deep down, you aren't one because you believe in freedom of the individual.

I believe socialism in the form of helping people in need and not allowing the powerful to take physical and financial advantage of the weak. Socialism in this form is a force for good. 

I certainly do not believe in a totalitarian state of any description. Freedom to make our own choices is paramount.

That isn't Socialism. Its fairness and basic human decency. The left would like us all to believe that they have ownership of this, but it doesn't take a sharp mind or a masters on history to demonstrate this to be completely untrue. 
Socialism and individual freedom are incompatible. Socialism is about society as opposed to individuals. I cant think of any country which has had a socialist system which hasn't greatly restricted the rights of individuals, which is why I'm am utterly opposed to it.
Remember that Jeremy Corbyns first response to the Grenfell fire was to demand the state confiscate private property in the form of seizing empty homes in the area. 

[Doctor Gollum]

Well, when you put it like that...

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

While we're at it, why don't we ban knives, and all wear government-mandated chastity belts, to be released only on production of evidence that the lady of your intentions is not your sister? (we'll have to come up with some other criteria to cover the fens, obviously).

Yes......hand over total control and responsibility to 'the state' because whatever they do they do it for our own good.

This is what is known as Socialism. Deep down, you aren't one because you believe in freedom of the individual.

I believe socialism in the form of helping people in need and not allowing the powerful to take physical and financial advantage of the weak. Socialism in this form is a force for good. 

I certainly do not believe in a totalitarian state of any description. Freedom to make our own choices is paramount.

That isn't Socialism. Its fairness and basic human decency. The left would like us all to believe that they have ownership of this, but it doesn't take a sharp mind or a masters on history to demonstrate this to be completely untrue. 
Socialism and individual freedom are incompatible. Socialism is about society as opposed to individuals. I cant think of any country which has had a socialist system which hasn't greatly restricted the rights of individuals, which is why I'm am utterly opposed to it.
Remember that Jeremy Corbyns first response to the Grenfell fire was to demand the state confiscate private property in the form of seizing empty homes in the area. 

Up to a point yes.

Generally speaking Conservative governments are unconcerned with high unemployment. Thatcher averaged around 3 million during the eleven years she held the reins.

They are relaxed because this gives 'unscrupulous private business' an easy ride. An opportunity to take advantage of it's workers. The higher the unemployment the more that people are worried about their jobs. The less likely they are to stand up for workers rights.

The same applied during the great depression in the 1930's. Huge unemployment meant that people put up with shit they shouldn't have to. Rogue employers took advantage of this.   

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

The less they pay you the worse they treat you the more they expect of you.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Funnily enough I have just spent an hour watching a fascinating interview with Nigel Lawson where he was aked about unemployment during the Thatcher years.
He explained that had they not taken on the very difficult task of reshaping the economy and industry of the country, unemployment would have not only been higher, but would have been permanent.
We were the sick man of Europe (which is why it made some sense to join the common market when we did) with huge overmanning in both the public and private sectors. The situation was completely unsustainable and had to change.
They came up against the miners first. Joe Gormley (Scargills predecessor) and moderate Labour MP,s warned Lawson that Scargil was a Marxist, who was even too far left for the British Communist party. His only aim would be to bring down the elected Govt.and he would use the Union and its members to try to do this.
As we know, they took on Scargill and beat him, which killed off militant unionism in the private sector and allowed for the British economy to be completely reshaped.
This resulted in high unemployment, which caused much consternation and argument within the Govt. but Thatcher and Lawson knew there was no real alternative, and within 5 years we had one of the strongest economies in the world, and unemployment falling sharply.
What was done, wasn't nice or pleasant, but due to the unions being allowed to virtually run the country (and run it into the ground) during the 70,s, it was absolutely necessary.
If only we had someone in Govt. now with the vision and guts to do what really needs doing, rather than pandering to every bleeding heart liberal pressure group.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

And lastly (maybe ) substitute high unemployment, for mass uncontrolled immigration and you get the same result on wages and job security, plus all the other consequences on culture, social cohesion etc. it brings.
Remind me which Govt. did this ? 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

As well as being an arsehole Scargill was an agitator who was drunk on his own importance. I believe many miners have the same view of him.

Thatcher took too much glee and pleasure from destroying the mining industry.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

That's just a subjective view, which I doubt is true. Although I'm sure she took great satisfaction from beating Scargill. If she hadn't, the country was probably doomed.
Interestingly, Norman Tebbit said about five years ago, that with hindsight, his only big regret is that they didn't do a lot more to rebuild industry in the North, once they had curbed the unions.

[Varche]

That's just a subjective view, which I doubt is true. Although I'm sure she took great satisfaction from beating Scargill. If she hadn't, the country was probably doomed.
Interestingly, Norman Tebbit said about five years ago, that with hindsight, his only big regret is that they didn't do a lot more to rebuild industry in the North, once they had curbed the unions.

The North.... northern powerhouse. Yes the mistake was concentrating on London.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Rumour has it that Maggie, Dennis, and Cecil Parkinson danced naked around a fire in the woods after the last of the miners returned to work.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Isn't this supposed to be a thread about modern motor cars being too fast for dear old STMO?

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

I think we put that argument out of its misery on page one. 

[STEMO]

Isn't this supposed to be a thread about modern motor cars being too fast for dear old STMO?

Don't worry. It's quite entertaining listening to two old farts going on about prehistoric politics. 

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

You don't know where your going, unless you know where you've been. 

[TheBoy]

The EDR has data which shows....



Whether or not the driver and passenger seat belts were buckled.

How far the accelerator was being pressed by the driver.

How fast the car was travelling.


Jaguar say that if the police ask for the data they will provide it.

Would you have purchased it with that knowledge?

Probably not, Al. But I imagine there is a similar device fitted to every recently manufactured Audi, BMW, Merc.....etc...etc.

As do 15yr old Omegas....