Waaay OT: Brown - what am I missing?

DonDaddyD

Always Tyred wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

The news report I saw was heavily edited. She did seem just to only mention Eastern Europeans.

So the question has to asked....

Are 'we' blaming Eastern Europeans for the fact that 'we' can't get jobs now? I must be out of touch, I'm still blaming Blacks and Irish. LIT you're usually up with all this?

No, no, the Irish are responsible for the falls in the stock markets. Keep up now.

Damn Irish. Price of gold has up too, its all them Blacks wearing all that bling. And how can they afford it when they all work for the NHS, thats were my taxes are going around some street youths neck!

But seriously, was Gordon's remark of 'bigot' simply relating to her remarks about 'em Eastern Europeans (who work bloody hard I have to say) or to everything she had to say, which I thought he answered reasonably well for a man who could pass as an ogre.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Always Tyred wrote:

In this case, the fact that he was rude, blunt, grumpy but ultimately correct, appears to have gone entirely unnoticed by everyone except his political oponents who are virtually falling over themselves not to comment.

Now if he'd pulled her up and called her a bigot to her face, you might have a point. But he was sweetness and light to her face. Then shat on her in the car. And tried to blame his long suffering aide for having set it all up.

I'm pretty amazed that anyone really likes this disingenuous old Stalinist. But wonders never cease, as they say.

TommyEss

Would you call her a bigot to her face?

I reckon she'd thump me - hard!

DonDaddyD

Greg66 wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

In this case, the fact that he was rude, blunt, grumpy but ultimately correct, appears to have gone entirely unnoticed by everyone except his political oponents who are virtually falling over themselves not to comment.

Now if he'd pulled her up and called her a bigot to her face, you might have a point. But he was sweetness and light to her face. Then shat on her in the car. And tried to blame his long suffering aide for having set it all up.

I'm pretty amazed that anyone really likes this disingenuous old Stalinist. But wonders never cease, as they say.

Who will you be voting?

greg66_tri_v2.0

DonDaddyD wrote:

for a man who could pass as an ogre.

Aye. I saw Shrek 2 as well last week ont telly.

greg66_tri_v2.0

TommyEss wrote:

Would you call her a bigot to her face?

I reckon she'd thump me - hard!

Truth be told (and it rarely is) but this rather right wing view on immigration is a lot more prevalent in the traditional working class core labour supporter than you'd think, I fear.

DonDaddyD

Greg66 wrote:

TommyEss wrote:

Would you call her a bigot to her face?

I reckon she'd thump me - hard!

Truth be told (and it rarely is) but this rather right wing view on immigration is a lot more prevalent in the traditional working class core labour supporter than you'd think, I fear.

+1 Even amongst the ethnic minorities.

TommyEss

Greg - I agree - and I think that's exactly what Brown spotted and moaned about back in the car.

Imagine realising that the people putting you back in power (yer-right!) are mainly like that.

greg66_tri_v2.0

DonDaddyD wrote:

Who will you be voting?

Well, you know, I'll have to think about that. I mean, it's a choice, isn't it? Between fairnesses. On the one hand there's the fairness that says you get to keep what you earn. And on the other there's the fairness that says you have to hand over what you earn to support the stupid, the lazy and the scroungers.

I'll probably flip a coin.

A guinea, or perhaps even a gold ducat

W1

Greg66 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Who will you be voting?

Well, you know, I'll have to think about that. I mean, it's a choice, isn't it? Between fairnesses. On the one hand there's the fairness that says you get to keep what you earn. And on the other there's the fairness that says you have to hand over what you earn to support the stupid, the lazy and the scroungers.

I'll probably flip a coin.

A guinea, or perhaps even a gold ducat

The problem is Greg, the turkeys won't vote for Christmas. When you say stupid, lazy scroungers are you also talking about the bloated public sector (not all of it, obviously)....?

greg66_tri_v2.0

W1 wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Who will you be voting?

Well, you know, I'll have to think about that. I mean, it's a choice, isn't it? Between fairnesses. On the one hand there's the fairness that says you get to keep what you earn. And on the other there's the fairness that says you have to hand over what you earn to support the stupid, the lazy and the scroungers.

I'll probably flip a coin.

A guinea, or perhaps even a gold ducat

The problem is Greg, the turkeys won't vote for Christmas. When you say stupid, lazy scroungers are you also talking about the bloated public sector (not all of it, obviously)....?

I have to confess, part of me offers a Chapeau to Gordo for having created a huge section of the working and voting public who are not just sympathetic to labour, but utterly fcuking dependent on then getting back in to save their jobs. More skilful than anything the Tories have ever done. That and the constituency boundaries make labour pretty hard to shift.

Still, at least i can console myself that when we all retire, me and my public sector chums will be on an even playing field. Oh, hold on a minute... :shock:

W1

Greg66 wrote:

W1 wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Who will you be voting?

Well, you know, I'll have to think about that. I mean, it's a choice, isn't it? Between fairnesses. On the one hand there's the fairness that says you get to keep what you earn. And on the other there's the fairness that says you have to hand over what you earn to support the stupid, the lazy and the scroungers.

I'll probably flip a coin.

A guinea, or perhaps even a gold ducat

The problem is Greg, the turkeys won't vote for Christmas. When you say stupid, lazy scroungers are you also talking about the bloated public sector (not all of it, obviously)....?

I have to confess, part of me offers a Chapeau to Gordo for having created a huge section of the working and voting public who are not just sympathetic to labour, but utterly fcuking dependent on then getting back in to save their jobs. More skilful than anything the Tories have ever done. That and the constituency boundaries make labour pretty hard to shift.

Still, at least i can console myself that when we all retire, me and my public sector chums will be on an even playing field. Oh, hold on a minute... :shock:

Not to mention massaging the unemployment figures.

I do find it hard to believe that for each three members of the country, there is one public sector worker. Not to mention the "non-jobs", excessive waste, and did anyone mention pensions?

It is very clever indeed - I'd be interested to know how many labour voters don't work in the public sector (or live off the state)....

ketsbaia

Massaging the unemployment figures? Changing the electoral boundaries? Disgraceful.

I expect a copyright writ to be issuing forth from Smith Square any minute.

always_tyred

Greg66 wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

In this case, the fact that he was rude, blunt, grumpy but ultimately correct, appears to have gone entirely unnoticed by everyone except his political oponents who are virtually falling over themselves not to comment.

Now if he'd pulled her up and called her a bigot to her face, you might have a point. But he was sweetness and light to her face. Then shat on her in the car. And tried to blame his long suffering aide for having set it all up.

I'm pretty amazed that anyone really likes this disingenuous old Stalinist. But wonders never cease, as they say.

Do you really think that other politicians (or other people) are any different? Good grief man.

Think about it. That bloke you gave a hard time to at the electricity company, you know, when you called about the rediculous estimates your bill is based on... yeah, I know he was polite on the phone, but he really thinks you are a right c***.

W1

Always Tyred wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

In this case, the fact that he was rude, blunt, grumpy but ultimately correct, appears to have gone entirely unnoticed by everyone except his political oponents who are virtually falling over themselves not to comment.

Now if he'd pulled her up and called her a bigot to her face, you might have a point. But he was sweetness and light to her face. Then shat on her in the car. And tried to blame his long suffering aide for having set it all up.

I'm pretty amazed that anyone really likes this disingenuous old Stalinist. But wonders never cease, as they say.

Do you really think that other politicians (or other people) are any different? Good grief man.

Think about it. That bloke you gave a hard time to at the electricity company, you know, when you called about the rediculous estimates your bill is based on... yeah, I know he was polite on the phone, but he really thinks you are a right c***.

And if he was caught saying that, and it was exposed all over the press, he'd be fired. So I agree, let's treat Brown the same.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Always Tyred wrote:

Think about it. That bloke you gave a hard time to at the electricity company, you know, when you called about the rediculous estimates your bill is based on... yeah, I know he was polite on the phone, but he really thinks you are a right c***.

You see, the thing is this. That bloke? He's not asking me to make him PM.


[This is uncannily close to an interview Dubya gave when he was running for President. He was asked who the Mexican Finance Minister was. He had ab-so-lute-ly no fricking idea. In a moment of madness that only the cornered and stupid can muster, he retorted to his interviewer "Well, I bet you don't know who the finance minister of Venezuela is."

"No", came the reply, "But I'm not running for President".

Dubya looked like a man beaten to a pulp]

alfablue

W1 wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

W1 wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Who will you be voting?

I do find it hard to believe that for each three members of the country, there is one public sector worker. Not to mention the "non-jobs", excessive waste, and did anyone mention pensions?

Well, it makes a change for blaming immigrants for all your failings I suppose. I presume you don't want your bins emptied, libraries staffed, your children educated, your streets policed, your prisons staffed, your wars fought, your vulnerable people protected, your taxes collected, your roads and transport systems administered, your universities funded, your wounds patched up, your diseases treated, your benefits paid when you mismanage your businesses, etc, etc etc. You private sector bods do need a lot of looking after!

TommyEss

alfablue wrote:

W1 wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

W1 wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Who will you be voting?

I do find it hard to believe that for each three members of the country, there is one public sector worker. Not to mention the "non-jobs", excessive waste, and did anyone mention pensions?

Well, it makes a change for blaming immigrants for all your failings I suppose. I presume you don't want your bins emptied, libraries staffed, your children educated, your streets policed, your prisons staffed, your wars fought, your vulnerable people protected, your taxes collected, your roads and transport systems administered, your universities funded, your wounds patched up, your diseases treated, your benefits paid when you mismanage your businesses, etc, etc etc. You private sector bods do need a lot of looking after!

There was an article on the front page of the metro yesterday about an equal pay dispute at Birmingham City Council (ma-hoosive disparity between men and women on ostensibly the same grades)

Anyway - refuse truck driver - £50,000!!!!

Where do I sign up? Seriously?!

W1

alfablue wrote:

W1 wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

W1 wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Who will you be voting?

I do find it hard to believe that for each three members of the country, there is one public sector worker. Not to mention the "non-jobs", excessive waste, and did anyone mention pensions?

Well, it makes a change for blaming immigrants for all your failings I suppose. I presume you don't want your bins emptied, libraries staffed, your children educated, your streets policed, your prisons staffed, your wars fought, your vulnerable people protected, your taxes collected, your roads and transport systems administered, your universities funded, your wounds patched up, your diseases treated, your benefits paid when you mismanage your businesses, etc, etc etc. You private sector bods do need a lot of looking after!

Remind me - what are my failings?

Anyway, we really don't need a lot of looking after, there have just been so many new rules and regs that then need to be enforced that it appears that way. Cut out the red tape, reduce the public sector monster, and reflect on the fact that a £1 saved in expenditure is actually £1.31 saved in taxes due to the cost of collection. You public sector bods do need to open your eyes and see that the gravy train can't go on, whowever is in power, but don't vote the worst of the self-serving hypocrites in - the current government.

alfablue

Ah, the Metro! Must be true then.

Eau Rouge

DonDaddyD wrote:

The news report I saw was heavily edited. She did seem just to only mention Eastern Europeans.

So the question has to asked....

Are 'we' blaming Eastern Europeans for the fact that 'we' can't get jobs now? I must be out of touch, I'm still blaming Blacks and Irish. LIT you're usually up with all this?

I really don't understand this immigration issue at all, none of the numbers are of concern, and how many people can actually claim to have both parents and all four grandparents be born in the UK, but, like Gordon Brown confronted by a women as he's leaving an engagement on his whistle-stop election tour, I also don't have a couple of hours to go through the numbers and concepts and ideas to explain fully why immigration shouldn't be the big issue some people seem to make it out to be, so I'll smile nicely, say it's nice to meet you for the cameras, then curse myself for reading this thread when I get back to doing what I'm supposed to be doing.

pastryboy

I think it's a bit harsh people saying she is a bigot. She might be but on the other hand she might have a perfectly valid concern about immigration in her area but wasn't eloquent enough to put it across given the hoarde of press around her and standing in front of the PM.

I'm surprised none of the press asked her to expand on her comment - it was a bit random and didn't follow from the rest of what she was saying.

rjsterry

bails87 wrote:

zanes
Have a read.


The 'bigotted woman' statement could have actually referred to the nonsense she was spouting about out of work benefits. She seemed to have formed an uninformed view in her head and wasn't going to change it, about people being on the dole for life, and others not being able to claim anything. Just a thought.

Interesting read. I'm always confused as to where this 'we're a very crowded island already' thing comes from. Sure, we are more densely populated than, say Norway, but that's not saying much. Due to the British (or English, let's not start that one) predilection for suburbia, our cities are pretty low density by international standards. and despite the general perception to the contrary, there is a hell of a lot of Britain that is not urbanised. If you want to see crowded, try Hong Kong, or any number of other places. So I think we have the space, and if we are one of the better off countries, so I think we can afford it.

I think it's mainly a problem is that the increases in population are concentrated in small areas and fairly short periods of time, making it very difficult to scale up public infrastructure at the same rate that population is increasing.

tailwindhome

I'm confused now

Is it dem immigrants or dem public sector workers?

merkin

I think it is them asylum seeking immigrants who cycle to their public sector jobs. (RLJing all the way to work

always_tyred

rjsterry wrote:

Interesting read. I'm always confused as to where this 'we're a very crowded island already' thing comes from. Sure, we are more densely populated than, say Norway, but that's not saying much. Due to the British (or English, let's not start that one) predilection for suburbia, our cities are pretty low density by international standards.

Umm.. Dude, the UK is the most densely populated country in Europe. Thats including Scotland and Wales. Its the 4th most densely populated country of any size.

Personally, I don't give a cr@p who lives here, providing that in total there aren't 70 million of us.

Greg66 - for sure Gordon is a walking distaster area. That's irrelevant to my point.

He has livened things up a bit though. I think he should punch someone tomorrow and he'll probably get back in.

To all those who gripe about boundary changes.... its not new and Labour didn't invent it. Yes they are as bad and self serving as each other.

Eau Rouge

Always Tyred wrote:

Umm.. Dude, the UK is the most densely populated country in Europe. Thats including Scotland and Wales. Its the 4th most densely populated country of any size.

Actually, The Netherlands and Belgium are the most densely populated countries in Europe, with the UK and Germany close together but a fair way behind in third and fourth.
NL - 393 people per km^2
Bel - 341
UK - 253
Ger - 242

England on it's own pips the Dutch, at 395. You can pretty much follow an axis all the way from Birmingham to Belgium, through Germany and on to Northern Italy though, and you'd find that level of pop density all along it.

For reference, the Randstad in the Netherlands, the Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht and the Hague conurbation has a pop density of 1,224.

Trailradar

sounds like 'ole Brown eye' is two-faced

cjcp

Eau Rouge wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

Umm.. Dude, the UK is the most densely populated country in Europe. Thats including Scotland and Wales. Its the 4th most densely populated country of any size.

Actually, The Netherlands and Belgium are the most densely populated countries in Europe, with the UK and Germany close together but a fair way behind in third and fourth.
NL - 393 people per km^2
Bel - 341
UK - 253
Ger - 242

England on it's own pips the Dutch, at 395. You can pretty much follow an axis all the way from Birmingham to Belgium, through Germany and on to Northern Italy though, and you'd find that level of pop density all along it.

For reference, the Randstad in the Netherlands, the Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht and the Hague conurbation has a pop density of 1,224.

I thought England had taken over from the Netherlands, but that the most densely populated was Malta. I was only half-listening to that story though, so could well be wrong.

always_tyred

Eau Rouge wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

Umm.. Dude, the UK is the most densely populated country in Europe. Thats including Scotland and Wales. Its the 4th most densely populated country of any size.

Actually, The Netherlands and Belgium are the most densely populated countries in Europe, with the UK and Germany close together but a fair way behind in third and fourth.
NL - 393 people per km^2
Bel - 341
UK - 253
Ger - 242

England on it's own pips the Dutch, at 395. You can pretty much follow an axis all the way from Birmingham to Belgium, through Germany and on to Northern Italy though, and you'd find that level of pop density all along it.

For reference, the Randstad in the Netherlands, the Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht and the Hague conurbation has a pop density of 1,224.

Sounds about right. Not exactly deserted, are we?

I'm alright jack, I can hop in the car and head north to somewhere spacious, or south to somewhere spacious, but I find the SE, where I'm from, intolerable.

.... ooh. Gordon is on telly right now. He appears to have entered a gurning competition. Oh, no, that's an ironic smile. Or wind.