bongo bongo land
Comments
-
Frank the tank wrote:
Very true, however, it's ok spouting what appear to be popular policies but when placed under the microscope and the bones start to be picked at that's when some things start to be not so simple.Ballysmate wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:UKIP's fundamental problem is too many of them are stupid. Have stupid political ideas - attract stupid people.
You can't dismiss people who hold different political views to yours as being stupid. UKIP have been quite astute so far, in identifying a concern that a lot of people hold, and subsequently playing on it. As 47b states, that is how the game works. Say something that people want to hear and the votes will follow.
Politics in a democracy are difficult and compromises have to be reached and promises get broken.
Bloody hell Frank! We seem to agree. Don't know whether to be surprised or disappointed that we can' have a full and frank (Sorry) exchange of views.
0 -
Yes, it would appear so fella this time, I must go and have a lie down.Ballysmate wrote:Frank the tank wrote:
Very true, however, it's ok spouting what appear to be popular policies but when placed under the microscope and the bones start to be picked at that's when some things start to be not so simple.Ballysmate wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:UKIP's fundamental problem is too many of them are stupid. Have stupid political ideas - attract stupid people.
You can't dismiss people who hold different political views to yours as being stupid. UKIP have been quite astute so far, in identifying a concern that a lot of people hold, and subsequently playing on it. As 47b states, that is how the game works. Say something that people want to hear and the votes will follow.
Politics in a democracy are difficult and compromises have to be reached and promises get broken.
Bloody hell Frank! We seem to agree. Don't know whether to be surprised or disappointed that we can' have a full and frank (Sorry) exchange of views.
TBH, while a person will "politically" favour left/right it's not all black and white.Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
If your vote counted for anything do you think "they" would let you have it, call me a cynic but
0 -
Ballysmate wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:UKIP's fundamental problem is too many of them are stupid. Have stupid political ideas - attract stupid people.
You can't dismiss people who hold different political views to yours as being stupid. UKIP have been quite astute so far, in identifying a concern that a lot of people hold, and subsequently playing on it. As 47b states, that is how the game works. Say something that people want to hear and the votes will follow.
I'm not saying anyone who has different views to me is stupid. I'm saying ukip specifically is stupid.
I remember during the general election their chairman didn't know their own manifesto when he went live on the bbc to discuss his new manifesto. When people looked at their figures and what they quoted - they literally didn't add up.
This bongo bongo thing is just a man being stupid and continuing to dig himself into a hole with more stupidity. The advice he got given is also stupid. I bet plenty of tories think the same and even say the same privately. But they're not stupid.
Every interview I see with a ukip member that isn't Farage, my overwhelming impression is that they're stupid and haven't thought it through. Seriously.
As much as I disagree with tories I very rarely think they are just fundamentally not capable of governing.
I therefore struggle to really take them seriously. The interview with bongo man on channel 4 news was laughable. He got torn to shreds. You absolutely should watch it. http://youtu.be/LD4NgHxylF00 -
Wrong choice of words, but he was absolutely spot on with the point he was trying to make.
In the lifetime of this parliament we will (for example) have given over £1bn to Nigeria, at the same time we are only spending £500m on fixing the A&E NHS 'crisis'....
Nigeria currently has a space program (same for India). We should not be subsidising poor countries to have space programs while the vast majority (over 70% in Nigeria) live below the poverty line (less that $1.20 -ish per day).0 -
SpainSte wrote:Wrong choice of words, but he was absolutely spot on with the point he was trying to make.
In the lifetime of this parliament we will (for example) have given over £1bn to Nigeria, at the same time we are only spending £500m on fixing the A&E NHS 'crisis'....
Nigeria currently has a space program (same for India). We should not be subsidising poor countries to have space programs while the vast majority (over 70% in Nigeria) live below the poverty line (less that $1.20 -ish per day).
Did you read what I said? For every £1 in aid we give we get £7 back in resources, trade and goods.
Nigeria has oil. Of course we are going to give them some 'aid'. Keep the status quo sweet or else we might have to grovel to Venezuela or go cap in hand to the OPEC countries (again).
Now if you want to have a discussion about the foreign policy and trade, then lets have one. Unless you are a Scandinavian country, there is not a single developed nation that provides aid on a uniquely moral basis. Wake up and smell the coffee: Foreign policy has always been about self preservation and on the public face - give a little aid out to make us look good.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
pinarello001 wrote:SpainSte wrote:Wrong choice of words, but he was absolutely spot on with the point he was trying to make.
In the lifetime of this parliament we will (for example) have given over £1bn to Nigeria, at the same time we are only spending £500m on fixing the A&E NHS 'crisis'....
Nigeria currently has a space program (same for India). We should not be subsidising poor countries to have space programs while the vast majority (over 70% in Nigeria) live below the poverty line (less that $1.20 -ish per day).
Did you read what I said? For every £1 in aid we give we get £7 back in resources, trade and goods.
Nigeria has oil. Of course we are going to give them some 'aid'. Keep the status quo sweet or else we might have to grovel to Venezuela or go cap in hand to the OPEC countries (again).
Now if you want to have a discussion about the foreign policy and trade, then lets have one. Unless you are a Scandinavian country, there is not a single developed nation that provides aid on a uniquely moral basis. Wake up and smell the coffee: Foreign policy has always been about self preservation and on the public face - give a little aid out to make us look good.
I didnt read what you said, because my comment was not in response to yours, it was a general comment on the international aid budget.
With reference to your exact point, I would be interested to see the report that state that aid we give to Nigeria and India (as two prime examples) is repaid 7-fold in terms of resources etc. Its almost as if you assume that we get the oil for free from them, which isnt the case, we're still paying through the nose for it.
Whilst I agree with the general point you made " give a little aid out to make us look good" - thats all very well and good during times of growth and when there is plenty of money to throw around. There simply is no justification in providing billions to countries in aid (who obviously don't really need it if they were to prioritise their own spending), when we are cutting the spending of government departments at home to tune of approximately 20%.0 -
SpainSte wrote:
With reference to your exact point, I would be interested to see the report that state that aid we give to Nigeria and India (as two prime examples) is repaid 7-fold in terms of resources etc. Its almost as if you assume that we get the oil for free from them, which isnt the case, we're still paying through the nose for it.pinarello001 wrote:SpainSte wrote:Wrong choice of words... day).
Did...good.
...tune of approximately 20%.
We rely on oil - recession or not. We rely heavily on trade with India. Aid incentivises international relations and lubricates the mutuality.
Oil can be sold to anyone and if we don't buy it someone esle will. Nigeria has terrible poverty and endemic corruption, yet we still trade with them because, like many developed nations, we cannot ecnomically survive without the constant transfusion of oil.
It is therefore, in the eyes of the foreign office and our economic integrity, imperative that we keep these nations sweet regardless of human rights and atrocities (Kazahkstan, Re: Foreign diplomat Murray looses job over criticism of the regime where the president was boiling his subjects in oil is a good example).
Foreign policy and foreign aid is intrisically linked to the bottom line: Money, oil, goods, resources and trade.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Ok, its Wiki, so take most of it with a pinch of salt, but he does seem like an utter weapon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfrey_Bloom
Oh - and next time you're on tv, do your shirt and tie up property and roil down your sleeves you farmer wannabe.
And people vote/believe in these people? Seriously? It does make you weep.0 -
Yossie wrote:Ok, its Wiki, so take most of it with a pinch of salt, but he does seem like an utter weapon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfrey_Bloom
Oh - and next time you're on tv, do your shirt and tie up property and roil down your sleeves you farmer wannabe.
And people vote/believe in these people? Seriously? It does make you weep.
using godfrey bloom as an example of ukip could be paralled with using anne widdecombe as an example of womanhood.
but bar big nige and the bloke with the funny moustache it does get a bit iffy.0 -
pinarello001 wrote:SpainSte wrote:
With reference to your exact point, I would be interested to see the report that state that aid we give to Nigeria and India (as two prime examples) is repaid 7-fold in terms of resources etc. Its almost as if you assume that we get the oil for free from them, which isnt the case, we're still paying through the nose for it.pinarello001 wrote:SpainSte wrote:Wrong choice of words... day).
Did...good.
...tune of approximately 20%.
We rely on oil - recession or not. We rely heavily on trade with India. Aid incentivises international relations and lubricates the mutuality.
Oil can be sold to anyone and if we don't buy it someone esle will. Nigeria has terrible poverty and endemic corruption, yet we still trade with them because, like many developed nations, we cannot ecnomically survive without the constant transfusion of oil.
It is therefore, in the eyes of the foreign office and our economic integrity, imperative that we keep these nations sweet regardless of human rights and atrocities (Kazahkstan, Re: Foreign diplomat Murray looses job over criticism of the regime where the president was boiling his subjects in oil is a good example).
Foreign policy and foreign aid is intrisically linked to the bottom line: Money, oil, goods, resources and trade.
My point didnt relate to human rights abuses - if we didnt trade with countries who had questionable human rights, we would trade with very few people.
The point I am making is that we should not be giving foreign aid to countries that have space programs and therefore could do without our aid if they readdressed their spending priorities, given the reduction in spending at home.
Many developed countries, have, in recent years reduced the amounts of foreign aid they give as a direct result of recession etc etc. The US, Russia, Italy, Japan to name but a few have all reduced their budgets as a percentage of GDP - the UK on the other hand has increased ours, so perhaps the US and the others do not agree with your point either about the link between foreign aid and trade. Our international aid budget is growing quicker than any other G8 nation.
If you (and others) wish to continue giving money to such countries we would be best served labelling it correctly - "bribes to foreign countries so that a) people like us, and b) so they will continue to trade with us (even though there is no evidence that suggests they would stop if we didnt give them this money in the first place and no other major developed economy is following suit).0 -
the playing mantis wrote:Yossie wrote:Ok, its Wiki, so take most of it with a pinch of salt, but he does seem like an utter weapon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfrey_Bloom
Oh - and next time you're on tv, do your shirt and tie up property and roil down your sleeves you farmer wannabe.
And people vote/believe in these people? Seriously? It does make you weep.
using godfrey bloom as an example of ukip could be paralled with using anne widdecombe as an example of womanhood.
but bar big nige and the bloke with the funny moustache it does get a bit iffy.
Why? He is an elected member (I use that word in both senses) of UKIP - he put his name forward, they interviewed him, reviewed his history, beliefs, understanding of their manifesto, personal beliefs and put him forward for election under the name, face and banner of the BNP. I mean UKIP.
If we didn't know about your mate Nige then we would think that Bloomtool is UKIP - you can't pick and choose your politicians because you don't like them. If you vote for the BNP - I mean UKIP - you get Bloomtool, his mates and all that comes with them.
Nigel Falange is a weapon as well - you can't honestly tell me that you think he's anything good? Seriously?0 -
pinarello001 wrote:SpainSte wrote:Wrong choice of words, but he was absolutely spot on with the point he was trying to make.
In the lifetime of this parliament we will (for example) have given over £1bn to Nigeria, at the same time we are only spending £500m on fixing the A&E NHS 'crisis'....
Nigeria currently has a space program (same for India). We should not be subsidising poor countries to have space programs while the vast majority (over 70% in Nigeria) live below the poverty line (less that $1.20 -ish per day).
Did you read what I said? For every £1 in aid we give we get £7 back in resources, trade and goods.
Nigeria has oil. Of course we are going to give them some 'aid'. Keep the status quo sweet or else we might have to grovel to Venezuela or go cap in hand to the OPEC countries (again).
Now if you want to have a discussion about the foreign policy and trade, then lets have one. Unless you are a Scandinavian country, there is not a single developed nation that provides aid on a uniquely moral basis. Wake up and smell the coffee: Foreign policy has always been about self preservation and on the public face - give a little aid out to make us look good.
So we have to bribe the overlords of Bongo Bongo Land so they'll sell us their oil?“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
pinarello001 wrote:
Nigeria has oil. Of course we are going to give them some 'aid'. Keep the status quo sweet or else we might have to grovel to Venezuela or go cap in hand to the OPEC countries (again).
Incidentally, Nigeria has been a member of OPEC since 1971, so not sure how wasting billions giving 'aid' to Nigeria is stopping is from going "cap in hand" to OPEC, because we already are.
Time we took a long hard look at some of countries we are funding and whether we should continue to do so. Exactly the point the UKIP bloke was on about, although his choice of words was terrible.0 -
My take on international aid.
Give "Bongo Bongo Land" MY tax pound to educate their people and build up their industry. Then give their workforce my job because their labour rate is rock bottom cheap and I end up out of work. Then I get told there are no benefits and to go get a job you idle b@st@rd.Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
Frank the tank wrote:My take on international aid.
Give "Bongo Bongo Land" MY tax pound to educate their people and build up their industry. Then give their workforce my job because their labour rate is rock bottom cheap and I end up out of work. Then I get told there are no benefits and to go get a job you idle b@st@rd.
What's going on? That's twice now Frank.
The world must have fallen off its axis.0 -
That's the ugly face of capitalism.Ballysmate wrote:Frank the tank wrote:My take on international aid.
Give "Bongo Bongo Land" MY tax pound to educate their people and build up their industry. Then give their workforce my job because their labour rate is rock bottom cheap and I end up out of work. Then I get told there are no benefits and to go get a job you idle b@st@rd.
What's going on? That's twice now Frank.
The world must have fallen off its axis.
Just to put the world back on its axis. Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
Frank the tank wrote:
That's the ugly face of capitalism.Ballysmate wrote:Frank the tank wrote:My take on international aid.
Give "Bongo Bongo Land" MY tax pound to educate their people and build up their industry. Then give their workforce my job because their labour rate is rock bottom cheap and I end up out of work. Then I get told there are no benefits and to go get a job you idle b@st@rd.
What's going on? That's twice now Frank.
The world must have fallen off its axis.
Just to put the world back on its axis.
Get a job you idle b@st@rd. 0 -
SpainSte wrote:pinarello001 wrote:SpainSte wrote:
With...pinarello001 wrote:SpainSte wrote:Wrong choice of words... day).
Did...good.
...tune of approximately 20%.
We......and trade.
If you (and others) 1 wish to continue giving money to such countries we would be best served labelling it correctly - "bribes to foreign countries so that a) people like us, and b) so they will continue to trade with us (even though there is no evidence that suggests they would stop if we didnt give them this money in the first place and no other major developed economy is following suit).
1. It ain't 'me'. Its how the UK does things
2. Since we moved away from an industrial economy to a fragile service economy, we have to constantly compromise.
For every 1 industrial position lost, you have to replace it with 3 in the service sector to generate the same income.TailWindHome wrote:pinarello001 wrote:
So we have to bribe the overlords of Bongo Bongo Land so they'll sell us their oil?
Yep and other goods of course - cocoa, minerals, bauxite and all those lovely precious metals that go into computers and smart phones that are wreaking havoc on the environment. If you think that there is one iota of alturism in foreign aid/foreign policy, you're wrong - we recently sold armaments to Argentina!
I don't agree with the way foreign aid is spent. I was trying to put the spotlight on why or how its spent.
The govt. put x million aside for foreign aid for reasons calculated by themselves. When a crises: hurricane, famine, earthquake occurs, it is outwith that budget of x and thats when they have these emergency 'appeals'. We end up donating because the govt. have not calculated those 'acts of god' in.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
The whole thing has exposed Labour's lack of policy on foreign aid. The party's International Aid Spokesperson was on the TV and would not give a straight answer (or any answer of that matter) of whether aid to countries which had space programs, etc was the right thing to be doing when we are cutting back at home. The party are stuck between the Left who want to give money to "poor" countries and the more popular opinion which is to scale these payments down.
Anyway, why do we give money to these countries ? If they need agricultural machinery, lets build it in this country and give them some tractors (or what ever), in stead of giving money which is then spent on Presidential private jets, space or nuclear programs or to buy tractors from the Chinese !0 -
Most of the time any aid given is sucked up by the ruling powers for their own needs but generally they give aid in two forms: financial (to try an get these countries own industrial economies going again by making their own tractors - it means that they can get simple things like spare parts and the locals know how to repair them) and in the form of food, clothes, blankets, etc - these things cost money so are simply added to the financial figure.
Another factor is that if the western world wasn't so desperate for yet another shyt telephone that they really, really, really must have and spend all night queuing outside the local Vodafone shop for then the 3rd world countries wouldn't have such a grip over us.0 -
Mr_Cellophane wrote:The...
If they need agricultural machinery, lets build it in this country and give them some tractors (or what ever), in stead of giving money which is then spent on Presidential private jets, space or nuclear programs or to buy tractors from the Chinese !
In 1978, Canada supplied (through he UN) the whole of East Africa with 2000 tractors. Within no time at least 8 were distributed. Of those 8, quite a few broke down. Some smart alec decided that they should train some 'Fundi's' (mechanics) to service and fix the tractors.
In the first instance, they found that 9 out of 10 Fundis were illiterate. A long way from being able to fix diesels. In the second instance, diesel was hard to come by in rural areas. The most common fault was running out of diesel and fundis not being able to bleed the system which was a relatively simple procedure. Most of the tractors sat rusting away until they were sold commercially all over Southern Africa at knock down prices. All the best advice of local agriculturalists was ignored. Most agreed that they should be taught irrigation, water retention and be given 'Jembe's' (a commonly used heavy headed hoe for want of a better word that was used for hand ploughing, weeding etc) and not complex machinery.
My brother in law is a civil engineer and is funded by Denmark and the UN to fix roads and bridges in Kenya.
http://www.krb.go.ke/
The whole project almost came to a halt because the money was given to the govt. and then 're-distributed' to the engineering project. At least 50% of funds went missing. The funders decided that the only way to get anything done was to have sole control over the funds. Money still goes adrift and it is common practice to factor in a loss of 20% minimum for corruption and the syphoning of funds in any project in Africa.
The distribution of aid is a very complex thing peculiar to each culture. The West is incredibly naieve when it comes to aid.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Yossie wrote:the playing mantis wrote:Yossie wrote:Ok, its Wiki, so take most of it with a pinch of salt, but he does seem like an utter weapon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfrey_Bloom
Oh - and next time you're on tv, do your shirt and tie up property and roil down your sleeves you farmer wannabe.
And people vote/believe in these people? Seriously? It does make you weep.
using godfrey bloom as an example of ukip could be paralled with using anne widdecombe as an example of womanhood.
but bar big nige and the bloke with the funny moustache it does get a bit iffy.
Why? He is an elected member (I use that word in both senses) of UKIP - he put his name forward, they interviewed him, reviewed his history, beliefs, understanding of their manifesto, personal beliefs and put him forward for election under the name, face and banner of the BNP. I mean UKIP.
If we didn't know about your mate Nige then we would think that Bloomtool is UKIP - you can't pick and choose your politicians because you don't like them. If you vote for the BNP - I mean UKIP - you get Bloomtool, his mates and all that comes with them.
Nigel Falange is a weapon as well - you can't honestly tell me that you think he's anything good? Seriously?
sunday times new review interviewd bloom, havent had a chance to read it yet. as for nige, well yes as a politician, he is good value, an actual charachter,and he is very eloquent, he brings some interest into the otherwise insipid political world.0 -
the playing mantis wrote:Yossie wrote:the playing mantis wrote:Yossie wrote:Ok, its Wiki, so take most of it with a pinch of salt, but he does seem like an utter weapon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfrey_Bloom
Oh - and next time you're on tv, do your shirt and tie up property and roil down your sleeves you farmer wannabe.
And people vote/believe in these people? Seriously? It does make you weep.
using godfrey bloom as an example of ukip could be paralled with using anne widdecombe as an example of womanhood.
but bar big nige and the bloke with the funny moustache it does get a bit iffy.
Why? He is an elected member (I use that word in both senses) of UKIP - he put his name forward, they interviewed him, reviewed his history, beliefs, understanding of their manifesto, personal beliefs and put him forward for election under the name, face and banner of the BNP. I mean UKIP.
If we didn't know about your mate Nige then we would think that Bloomtool is UKIP - you can't pick and choose your politicians because you don't like them. If you vote for the BNP - I mean UKIP - you get Bloomtool, his mates and all that comes with them.
Nigel Falange is a weapon as well - you can't honestly tell me that you think he's anything good? Seriously?
sunday times new review interviewd bloom, havent had a chance to read it yet. as for nige, well yes as a politician, he is good value, an actual charachter,and he is very eloquent, he brings some interest into the otherwise insipid political world.
He voices some racism formerly spouted by the BNP until they realised that they needed a white collar platform with which to push their hated onto the mainstream without people viewing them as a bunch of bomber jacketed hate spreading bovver boys.
There you go my friend, sorted that sentence for you.
F'lange is a dangerous weapon: I must admit that I don't even find him that much of a public speaker but that's probably only because I can't see beyond his so very punchable face (which is a probably a failing on my part I must admit)0 -
so does that mean my love of nige makes me one by proxy, and anyone who agrees with ukip policy?
if so i think thats a bit unfair.0 -
the playing mantis wrote:so does that mean my love of nige makes me one by proxy, and anyone who agrees with ukip policy?
if so i think thats a bit unfair.
UJIP only have one policy - send 'em back! Problem is, they don't specify who they want to send back - should I go back being a 1st generation immigrant (father is Italian) considering what I do for a living? Or is it only "new" immigrants? How about doctors, nurses, etc - should they go back as well? Or only people serving you in restaurants, bars, cafes, etc? How about the nation of shopkeepers that keep us going?
Post Scottish devolution (should it happen next year) then Scotland will be a separate country - economically, politically, culturally, etc - much like France, Italy, Poland, Lithuania, does this mean that all Scots have to feck off home you don't come from here?
Tricky, tricky, tricky.
"Love of F'lange" is only a strong term - do you really love him or just admire his oratory skills, presence in a room, etc?
The BNP - sorry, UKIP - have only one policy: that has been exposed many times. Should they ever get any decent electoral power than I'm afraid the UK is shafted. Well, more shafted than it already is (and you can't blame the level of shaftedness on immigrants I'm afraid).
Sorry if it seems unfair.0 -
'There's a good fellow'
I cringed at the whole thing but that bit made my toes curl. What an idiot."That's it! You people have stood in my way long enough. I'm going to clown college! " - Homer0 -
Yossie wrote:the playing mantis wrote:so does that mean my love of nige makes me one by proxy, and anyone who agrees with ukip policy?
if so i think thats a bit unfair.
UJIP only have one policy - send 'em back! Problem is, they don't specify who they want to send back - should I go back being a 1st generation immigrant (father is Italian) considering what I do for a living? Or is it only "new" immigrants? How about doctors, nurses, etc - should they go back as well? Or only people serving you in restaurants, bars, cafes, etc? How about the nation of shopkeepers that keep us going?
Post Scottish devolution (should it happen next year) then Scotland will be a separate country - economically, politically, culturally, etc - much like France, Italy, Poland, Lithuania, does this mean that all Scots have to feck off home you don't come from here?
Tricky, tricky, tricky.
"Love of F'lange" is only a strong term - do you really love him or just admire his oratory skills, presence in a room, etc?
The BNP - sorry, UKIP - have only one policy: that has been exposed many times. Should they ever get any decent electoral power than I'm afraid the UK is shafted. Well, more shafted than it already is (and you can't blame the level of shaftedness on immigrants I'm afraid).
Sorry if it seems unfair.
so its dependent on my love of flange?!0 -
pinarello001 wrote:SpainSte wrote:pinarello001 wrote:SpainSte wrote:
With...pinarello001 wrote:SpainSte wrote:Wrong choice of words... day).
Did...good.
...tune of approximately 20%.
We......and trade.
If you (and others) 1 wish to continue giving money to such countries we would be best served labelling it correctly - "bribes to foreign countries so that a) people like us, and b) so they will continue to trade with us (even though there is no evidence that suggests they would stop if we didnt give them this money in the first place and no other major developed economy is following suit).
1. It ain't 'me'. Its how the UK does things
2. Since we moved away from an industrial economy to a fragile service economy, we have to constantly compromise.
For every 1 industrial position lost, you have to replace it with 3 in the service sector to generate the same income.
And that is no justification, and frankly a terrible argument for giving Nigeria (as the example mentioned previously) over £1bn in aid over the life of the current parliament. To be honest that argument hardly even seems related to the point of aid, and if it is then it certainly shouldn't be.
The UK should not have the highest aid budget in the G8 and our relationships should be based on trade, not aid.
Supporting the status quo, merely because it is the status quo is a folly.0 -
the playing mantis wrote:Yossie wrote:the playing mantis wrote:so does that mean my love of nige makes me one by proxy, and anyone who agrees with ukip policy?
if so i think thats a bit unfair.
UJIP only have one policy - send 'em back! Problem is, they don't specify who they want to send back - should I go back being a 1st generation immigrant (father is Italian) considering what I do for a living? Or is it only "new" immigrants? How about doctors, nurses, etc - should they go back as well? Or only people serving you in restaurants, bars, cafes, etc? How about the nation of shopkeepers that keep us going?
Post Scottish devolution (should it happen next year) then Scotland will be a separate country - economically, politically, culturally, etc - much like France, Italy, Poland, Lithuania, does this mean that all Scots have to feck off home you don't come from here?
Tricky, tricky, tricky.
"Love of F'lange" is only a strong term - do you really love him or just admire his oratory skills, presence in a room, etc?
The BNP - sorry, UKIP - have only one policy: that has been exposed many times. Should they ever get any decent electoral power than I'm afraid the UK is shafted. Well, more shafted than it already is (and you can't blame the level of shaftedness on immigrants I'm afraid).
Sorry if it seems unfair.
so its dependent on my love of flange?!
Utterly!0
