Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Nigel Farage named Briton of the year by the Times
Topic Started: Dec 27 2014, 03:42 PM (2,923 Views)
AndyK
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
The 50-year-old was described as "game-changing" politician and was honoured for "bulldozing" his party into the political mainstream during 2014.


http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/548896/Nigel-Farage-Ukip-UK-Independence-Party-Briton-of-the-Year-2014-The-Times
Edited by AndyK, Dec 27 2014, 03:43 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
The Buccaneer
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 11:17 AM
If you are further to the right than Cameron, then support Nigel.

If you are fooled by his rhetoric (he can't take us completely out of the EU), then vote Nigel.

If you didn't see the inner nasty side of Nigel in his Goebbels' like attack on Von Rompuy, then vote for the new 'nastier' party.

Right and left have become meaningless terms in modern politics since any slight deviation from the overwrought 'centre ground' is immediately labelled as some imaginary huge leap in either direction. All nonsense of course, especially when trying to bring a sense of reality and responsibility into it.

farage stands for many sensible and defensible policies, supported by a great many people, so the kind of loony accusations made against them, and him, are of course simply rejected and ignored by anyone who subscribes to them.

His description of Rompuy was masterly and accurate, not to mention very funny. Only those devoid of a SOH would drag out the pathetic jibe about Goebbels, thereby invoking the tedious Godwins law....................yawn.............
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
The Buccaneer
Jan 4 2015, 11:42 AM
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 11:17 AM
If you are further to the right than Cameron, then support Nigel.

If you are fooled by his rhetoric (he can't take us completely out of the EU), then vote Nigel.

If you didn't see the inner nasty side of Nigel in his Goebbels' like attack on Von Rompuy, then vote for the new 'nastier' party.

Right and left have become meaningless terms in modern politics since any slight deviation from the overwrought 'centre ground' is immediately labelled as some imaginary huge leap in either direction. All nonsense of course, especially when trying to bring a sense of reality and responsibility into it.

farage stands for many sensible and defensible policies, supported by a great many people, so the kind of loony accusations made against them, and him, are of course simply rejected and ignored by anyone who subscribes to them.

His description of Rompuy was masterly and accurate, not to mention very funny. Only those devoid of a SOH would drag out the pathetic jibe about Goebbels, thereby invoking the tedious Godwins law....................yawn.............
Your first point. Not true. In political terms the insinuation is an excuse used by those who do not wish to face up to the reality that there are real differences between centre-right and right-wing.

Farage stands for the wishful thinkers who are misled by his rhetoric. A hopeless crowd of dreamers.

If you think the Farage attack on Rompuy was funny and/or acceptable, then you are in with the right crowd with UKip. I just hope these nasties never get their hands on any sort of control.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 4 2015, 10:01 AM
Steve K
Jan 3 2015, 05:03 PM
krugerman
Jan 3 2015, 03:40 PM
. . . and as it is now becoming the norm to wait half an hour or 45 minutes for an emergency ambulance, . . .
Go on I challenge you to see if you can back that up with any evidence.

Even in the worst performing area (the Labour run Wales Health Service) most emergency calls are attended to in 8 minutes
Dear Sir / Madam,
I am writting to you chiefly in my capacity as a committee member of *************, but also simply as a concerned resident of Whitby.

On Saturday last ( 6th December ) a member of staff at ********* called 999 and requested an ambulance because a customer had collapsed and showed some worrying signs of illness, this call was put out at approximately 11.40 pm.

At 00.15 am the emergency ambulance arrived, the time between putting out the call and the ambulance arriving was between 30 and 35 minutes, we were quite shocked to discover that the crew had actually travelled from Scarborough, which as you know is 21 miles on the A171, a road notorious for hazardous conditions in winter.

According to bar staff, this was the fourth time an ambulance has been called to the club in little over a year, and it seems that on three out the four ocassions, the response time was about 30 minutes, would you agree with me that this situation is not really acceptable. ?

What is YAS policy regarding emergency cover for Whitby, how many emergency ambulances are on stand-by in the Whitby area, and what if there is only one ambulance available and that particular vehicle is required to go to James Cook or Scarborough hospital, does another crew move into the area for the duration that the local crew is out of the area, or is it simply down to whichever ambulance happens to be nearest, Scarborough or possibly further away, and is it true that the ambulance station in Whitby is virtually not used any more. ?

Finaly, I would like to add that the two paramedics who did eventually arrive were clearly very professional, they were very kind, very reassuring to the gentleman and were very thorough.

Thankyou in anticipation



Yes you posted that before and failed to respond to comments about it

Why you post that isolated experience again in an attempt to demonstrate what is "the norm" defeats me. Wouldn't it be easier for you to just admit you hopelessly exaggerated and extrapolated your own very local experience to try and gain false impact with that "the norm to wait half an hour or 45 minutes for an emergency ambulance" lie?

I could have countered with my experience where a relative last Sunday got an ambulance inside 10 minutes and was in A&E within 30 but being a responsible poster I went to the stats that show the worst area is Labour's Wales and even there the majority of urgent emergency cases get an ambulance inside 8 minutes

Debate is not about who can position the most plausible false statements. Perhaps you disagree.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Jan 4 2015, 01:48 PM
Off topic but mentioned in posts is an attack on Blair for the Iraq invasion.
I've posted this link before. It is the Hansard record of the Iraq debate ..... and the several hours of discussion during which the Conservative party pressed most vigorously for invasion.
The lead up to it in the Tory press the most insistent ....... pages of articles demanding an invasion.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmhansrd/vo030318/debtext/30318-06.htm

There was a vote ........ I believe with one Tory abstention, the rest went through the same door.


It must also be said that members voted according to the information that was given to them by Blair and the members took that information in good faith, how would you yourself have voted given that information?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
somersetli
Member Avatar
somersetli
[ *  *  * ]
The Buccaneer
Jan 4 2015, 11:13 AM
Happy Hornet
Dec 28 2014, 10:55 AM
I also note that Farrage partially blamed the latest gaffe by one of his party members that got said member banned on the fact that he was from a council estate and that's how lots of people from council estates talk.

How the hell would he know? I grew up on a council estate and if any of us had spoken to someone like that our mum would have beaten us black and blue.

Frankly Farrage ' s comments sound like the sort of sneering, patronising, out of touch views of the metropolitan elite that he claims to oppose.
I grew up on a council estate too, and many people used shorthand versions of names, viz, 'Just off to the chippy', 'nip along to the corner Paki shop for a loaf', 'going for a Chinky takeaway'.
None of these were said in any pejorative sense, they were merely shorthand terms.

I'm sick to death of the 'holier than thou' lot who constantly seem to look for things to be offended about, on someone else's behalf most of the time.
I think it's part of the dreaded PC Brigade who thrive on this kind of thing.
You see, they live under the misguided idea that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end..................they are best just ignored.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 01:53 PM
It must also be said that members voted according to the information that was given to them by Blair and the members took that information in good faith, how would you yourself have voted given that information?

If you read the debate you will retract this above statement.
The reasons for support given were many, and I defy you to discover where there is a single Tory spokesperson that gives the dossier information as his/her reason for their support for invasion.

In fact there are comments that totally dismiss the dossier as a reason, calling it flawed, unconvincing - which imo it was.

Sir George Young even went so far as to assert that in his opinion an invasion would be illegal - and yet would (and did) vote for the invasion/action.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HIGHWAY
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Jan 4 2015, 02:11 PM
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 01:53 PM
It must also be said that members voted according to the information that was given to them by Blair and the members took that information in good faith, how would you yourself have voted given that information?

If you read the debate you will retract this above statement.
The reasons for support given were many, and I defy you to discover where there is a single Tory spokesperson that gives the dossier information as his/her reason for their support for invasion.

In fact there are comments that totally dismiss the dossier as a reason, calling it flawed, unconvincing - which imo it was.

Sir George Young even went so far as to assert that in his opinion an invasion would be illegal - and yet would (and did) vote for the invasion/action.



He should be on trial for war crimes if he thought it was illegal,but voted for an invasion then
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
HIGHWAY
Jan 4 2015, 02:24 PM
Affa
Jan 4 2015, 02:11 PM
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 01:53 PM


Sir George Young even went so far as to assert that in his opinion an invasion would be illegal - and yet would (and did) vote for the invasion/action.



He should be on trial for war crimes if he thought it was illegal,but voted for an invasion then
4.37 pm

Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire): I plan to reach the same destination as the hon. Member for Brent, North (Mr. Gardiner), but I propose to take a slightly different route.

We are witnessing the most spectacular failure of diplomacy in my political lifetime. Here we are with the most sophisticated, best-resourced international institutions that the world has ever seen, peopled by the most civilised, best-educated diplomats in history, assisted by every modern communication device that technology can provide, and working at a time when many of the barriers that used to divide the world have come down—yet they have failed, with the inevitable apocalyptic consequences for Iraq.

First, those close to Iraq—those who may take a different view from that of the United States and the United Kingdom—have totally failed to convince Saddam that his country and his people were going to be hit hard by American and British troops, and that he would be annihilated, unless he agreed to what was being put before him. Many thought that Saddam would give way at the last moment, obliging the American and British troops to go home and leave him in control, without a regime change. But those close to Saddam, geographically and culturally, have failed to bring home to him the fate that lies in store, and that is the first diplomatic failure.

The second failure is more important. The world's democracies have failed to get their act together to present a coherent and united front to an obnoxious regime. It is that institutional failure, rather than the underlying case against Saddam, that has led to the equivocal response from public opinion.

We will need to revisit the whole architecture of international institutional peacekeeping, and re-engineer it radically to avoid future failure. I do not give that as a reason for going to war, but I happen to believe it will be easier to make the reforms that are necessary once the Iraq crisis has been resolved, than to do so with the crisis hanging over the United Nations indefinitely.

I believe there was a need for greater clarity at the inception of the resolution process, a need for more visible and better-defined milestones as we went along, and for greater certainty about the nature of the consequences if there was no progress. The traditional skills of diplomacy involve getting people to agree to something by persuading them that it means what they want it to mean, and saying that there is no harm in "signing up" because the eventuality is remote. All that has come horribly unstuck. There has been too much ambiguity and obfuscation in the process.

18 Mar 2003 : Column 825

The public squabbling about what resolution 1441 actually means baffles our constituents, as do discussions on "Newsnight" and "Today" between expensive barristers about whether the war is legal. I believe that if the process had been more open and transparent—if there had been more clarity—we would be receiving a more supportive response from our constituents, because the underlying case is strong.

That, however, is for tomorrow. What should we do today? I agree with my right hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Mr. Mackay) that the decision is close to call. I believe that, in a nutshell, the debate concerns the credibility of the United Nations on the one hand, and its unity on the other. The Prime Minister's view is that unless firm action is taken now, the UN's credibility will be fatally undermined. The alternative view is that moving too fast will shatter the unity of the UN, thus fatally undermining it.

With the benefit of hindsight, we may think it might have been possible for the United States and the United Kingdom to go a little more slowly, not to give Saddam more time, but to give the rest of the world more time. That is not possible now, though. The unity of the UN is no longer there—which makes it more important to assert its credibility.

When we last debated this issue I had some sympathy with the amendment that had been tabled, but I did not support it, for this reason: the best prospect for peace at that time was convincing Saddam that we were prepared to go to war. It seemed to me that the more people voted for the amendment, the more Saddam would get a picture of a country that was not prepared to go to war. Voting for the amendment ran the risk of encouraging Saddam to call the bluff. Having looked at the amendment tabled today, I feel that anyone who genuinely believes that the case for war has not been established should vote against the war. The amendment seeks to square a circle that is incapable of being squared.

Whatever the doubts and reservations about the process that brought us here, here we are. My constituency, like others, has a high military profile. Many of my voters are sitting on the hot yellow sand in Kuwait, wondering whether they will see the cool green fields of Hampshire again. I believe that they and their families are entitled to know that their Member of Parliament backs the risks they run in removing an obnoxious regime, and I shall therefore support the Government tonight.

Quoted from Hansard.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
C2: 1. Just like the post it referred to.

Not at all, you are incapable of separating fact from fiction.

C2: 2. I never posted you did say those things. You just, IMO dishonestly, changed the gist of the exchange.

You did and therefore you are a liar.

C2: 3. I have never claimed that NL bear absolutely no responsibility for the position we are in today. I have correctly claimed that the situation we are in today is primarily caused by the meltdown, and that many people like yourself do not like that reality.

You have spent years and wasted a lot of everyone's time repeatedly attempting to white-wash over the truth. Now under pressure you begrudgingly admit that which is obvious to everyone else and that is that this last recession was sponsored by NL.

C2: Oh how you wish the world would accept your nonsense.

Don't talk such playground drivel as I know that those of your ilk never learn anything. You are just background noise, the long whinge of the left.

C2: "What reality"?? Try answering the points in my earlier post, your reluctance to do so speaks volumes.

If you do not state the questions how can anyone determine whether or not they have been answered, fully or otherwise? my goodness C2 you do talk some rubbish.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 01:53 PM
Affa
Jan 4 2015, 01:48 PM
Off topic but mentioned in posts is an attack on Blair for the Iraq invasion.
I've posted this link before. It is the Hansard record of the Iraq debate ..... and the several hours of discussion during which the Conservative party pressed most vigorously for invasion.
The lead up to it in the Tory press the most insistent ....... pages of articles demanding an invasion.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmhansrd/vo030318/debtext/30318-06.htm

There was a vote ........ I believe with one Tory abstention, the rest went through the same door.


It must also be said that members voted according to the information that was given to them by Blair and the members took that information in good faith, how would you yourself have voted given that information?
Blair made it clear that he was using information given to him by the Intelligence Services. His comment was "and I believe them". The Intelligence services have since, as I have posted on this board/old board, that they got it wrong on Iraq.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Nigel will be pleased that the limelight has been taken off him. He can now get back to conning the public too many of whom are too easily led, IMO.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 10:42 AM
Tigger
Jan 3 2015, 07:00 PM
C-too
Jan 3 2015, 12:32 PM
Tigger
Jan 3 2015, 11:56 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
Definitely not all true. That is a ridiculous claim.

Years of paying mortgage plus interest mean that it is obvious that we pay more for the house than the original price asked. That means house prices inevitably rise over time.
That there are some ridiculous price rises in certain parts of the country should not be extrapolated to all houses.
Also, any excessive rises in value are quickly sorted by a short period of the economic reality as sales go from being a sellers market to a buyers market. Nothing new about that.

To point the finger at the housing market as if there was something new happening, or that it caused our present difficulties just does not make any sense.



Wishful thinking at best.

There is nothing at all ridiculous about my claims, the opposite in fact, for years it was sound economic practice to limit mortgages to three and a half times the wage of the main breadwinner, this naturally kept housing both affordable and prevented the pathetic price bubbles that almost wrecked the economy. You do not have the right to expect your house to triple in value in thirteen years of financial misrule especially as everyone else will end up bailing you out and paying for it. Labour are guilty as charged on that one, end of.

Sure the Tories started this but Blair's lot chucked a lot of petrol on that particular fire, when you have average house prices at eight times average income you have problems and New Labour ignored those problems and kept the Ponzi scheme going far longer than they should have done by looking the other way while the banks committed fraud with self cert mortgages and LTV'S of 125%+, and let me tell you as an employer the biggest threat to my business is retaining skilled younger staff because of frankly ridiculous housing costs.
Don't know were you live but as someone who has bought three houses since the 1970s, I have NEVER experienced any property of mine that has tripled in value in 13 years.

No house bubble has come anywhere near to wrecking the economy, you are hung up on a false assumption. I hope that's the end of your nonsense.

What of the house pricing collapse under the Tories in the 1990s?

Buying a house has always been financially difficult for the average skilled individual.

How many 125% mortgages were issued ??
As far as I'm aware such mortgages were two loans in one. Start to own your own home, and use a loan for buying or car, doing up your property, or whatever else you would normally have made a loan to do.

You are so intent on blaming NL you cannot see the wood for trees.
I'm blaming them because despite several warnings from some very prominent people Labour allowed the hosing market to spiral out of control.

And lets just remind ourselves that thick Brits almost consider it a birthright to make money from just owning a house and Labour simply copied the Tory policies that encourage feckless borrowing and property speculation, and that is all there is too it!

Guilty as charged!
Edited by Tigger, Jan 4 2015, 06:11 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
The Buccaneer
Jan 4 2015, 11:07 AM
Happy Hornet
Dec 28 2014, 09:27 AM
I think it shows what a god awful state British politics is in, when a man like Farrage, ex public schoolboy, city trader, tory and stooge of Rupert Murdoch is seen as a breath of fresh air.

I mean seriously, am I really the only one who can see it?
The problem here is that it is your prejudices that show through immediately :

1. Public schoolboy.........tick

2. City trader.................tick

3. 'Stooge' to newspaper proprietor.........tick

Any worthwhile criticism based on politics, zilch.

0/10 must try harder.
Seeing as most senior politicians have these credentials and considering the policies they invariably enact when in power you'd think people would start to get a bit tired of voting for political representatives from such an unrepresentative and select bunch.

But no! Lets try one who drinks beer and likes the odd ciggy instead because he is completely different to all the other ones we've tried before!

Give me strength! ;D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Buccaneer, I would be happy to discuss UKIP policy but there is precious little to discuss particularly since NF disowned UKIP ' S last manifesto. NF does however seem to dine out a lot on the notion that he is different from the privileged establishment elite and is on the side of ordinary folk like me, to me this seems to be wildly inaccurate.

And you're wrong about me, I have no problem with Farrage 's background only with him and his supporters treating me like a complete idiot by expecting me to believe it is something it isn't.

I notice as well Buccaneer that you didn't challenge anything I said but simply accused me of being prejudiced for pointing out facts.
Edited by Happy Hornet, Jan 4 2015, 06:41 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:11 PM
I'm blaming them because despite several warnings from some very prominent people Labour allowed the hosing market to spiral out of control.

And lets just remind ourselves that thick Brits almost consider it a birthright to make money from just owning a house and Labour simply copied the Tory policies that encourage feckless borrowing and property speculation, and that is all there is too it!

Guilty as charged!

No challenge to any of that.
The only rider being that most home owners were well aware that their property value was inflated above any realistic worth, but still would cry foul if the Market had collapsed to usher in negative equity.

The ones unable to get on the first step of that ladder were the losers, their rents adding to their distress ......... but for those with a home of their own it was "I'm all right Jack".
And the same culture still is with us!


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
somersetli
Member Avatar
somersetli
[ *  *  * ]
The sad thing about reading all these criticisms of the various political parties in this country, is that it has all been said before.
No matter wether the Tories or Labour have been in office the floating voter always finds "something wrong". The upshot of that being the re-election of the party they previously found fault with.
Currently we are approaching another general election and what do we find?........... The Tories are all for the rich........The Labour party are not fit to form a government at this time......... The Lib Dems? Who on earth would vote for them...........The Greens? They are on another planet......UKIP what do they stand for?.........Any of the others? Probably not.

It's not political parties we are short of...........it's Politicians.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Hard to disagree, all I long for is dull, insipid but competent politicians and policies that tackle our chronic problems.

Start at the top and work down, not the other way round.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:17 PM
The Buccaneer
Jan 4 2015, 11:07 AM
Happy Hornet
Dec 28 2014, 09:27 AM
I think it shows what a god awful state British politics is in, when a man like Farrage, ex public schoolboy, city trader, tory and stooge of Rupert Murdoch is seen as a breath of fresh air.

I mean seriously, am I really the only one who can see it?
The problem here is that it is your prejudices that show through immediately :

1. Public schoolboy.........tick

2. City trader.................tick

3. 'Stooge' to newspaper proprietor.........tick

Any worthwhile criticism based on politics, zilch.

0/10 must try harder.
Seeing as most senior politicians have these credentials and considering the policies they invariably enact when in power you'd think people would start to get a bit tired of voting for political representatives from such an unrepresentative and select bunch.

But no! Lets try one who drinks beer and likes the odd ciggy instead because he is completely different to all the other ones we've tried before!

Give me strength! ;D


So, O fount of all knowledge, how do you know what Nigel would be like in government seeing as how, as yet he is untested and yet with your magnificent foresight have him pigeonholed already?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 07:49 PM
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:17 PM
The Buccaneer
Jan 4 2015, 11:07 AM
Happy Hornet
Dec 28 2014, 09:27 AM
I think it shows what a god awful state British politics is in, when a man like Farrage, ex public schoolboy, city trader, tory and stooge of Rupert Murdoch is seen as a breath of fresh air.

I mean seriously, am I really the only one who can see it?
The problem here is that it is your prejudices that show through immediately :

1. Public schoolboy.........tick

2. City trader.................tick

3. 'Stooge' to newspaper proprietor.........tick

Any worthwhile criticism based on politics, zilch.

0/10 must try harder.
Seeing as most senior politicians have these credentials and considering the policies they invariably enact when in power you'd think people would start to get a bit tired of voting for political representatives from such an unrepresentative and select bunch.

But no! Lets try one who drinks beer and likes the odd ciggy instead because he is completely different to all the other ones we've tried before!

Give me strength! ;D


So, O fount of all knowledge, how do you know what Nigel would be like in government seeing as how, as yet he is untested and yet with your magnificent foresight have him pigeonholed already?
Only the misguided could want the UK to move to the right, wasn't Thatcher enough for you?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
krugerman
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Jan 4 2015, 12:18 PM
krugerman
Jan 4 2015, 10:01 AM
Steve K
Jan 3 2015, 05:03 PM
krugerman
Jan 3 2015, 03:40 PM
. . . and as it is now becoming the norm to wait half an hour or 45 minutes for an emergency ambulance, . . .
Go on I challenge you to see if you can back that up with any evidence.

Even in the worst performing area (the Labour run Wales Health Service) most emergency calls are attended to in 8 minutes
Dear Sir / Madam,
I am writting to you chiefly in my capacity as a committee member of *************, but also simply as a concerned resident of Whitby.

On Saturday last ( 6th December ) a member of staff at ********* called 999 and requested an ambulance because a customer had collapsed and showed some worrying signs of illness, this call was put out at approximately 11.40 pm.

At 00.15 am the emergency ambulance arrived, the time between putting out the call and the ambulance arriving was between 30 and 35 minutes, we were quite shocked to discover that the crew had actually travelled from Scarborough, which as you know is 21 miles on the A171, a road notorious for hazardous conditions in winter.

According to bar staff, this was the fourth time an ambulance has been called to the club in little over a year, and it seems that on three out the four ocassions, the response time was about 30 minutes, would you agree with me that this situation is not really acceptable. ?

What is YAS policy regarding emergency cover for Whitby, how many emergency ambulances are on stand-by in the Whitby area, and what if there is only one ambulance available and that particular vehicle is required to go to James Cook or Scarborough hospital, does another crew move into the area for the duration that the local crew is out of the area, or is it simply down to whichever ambulance happens to be nearest, Scarborough or possibly further away, and is it true that the ambulance station in Whitby is virtually not used any more. ?

Finaly, I would like to add that the two paramedics who did eventually arrive were clearly very professional, they were very kind, very reassuring to the gentleman and were very thorough.

Thankyou in anticipation



Yes you posted that before and failed to respond to comments about it

Why you post that isolated experience again in an attempt to demonstrate what is "the norm" defeats me. Wouldn't it be easier for you to just admit you hopelessly exaggerated and extrapolated your own very local experience to try and gain false impact with that "the norm to wait half an hour or 45 minutes for an emergency ambulance" lie?

I could have countered with my experience where a relative last Sunday got an ambulance inside 10 minutes and was in A&E within 30 but being a responsible poster I went to the stats that show the worst area is Labour's Wales and even there the majority of urgent emergency cases get an ambulance inside 8 minutes

Debate is not about who can position the most plausible false statements. Perhaps you disagree.
You will note that staff at these premises had called an emergency ambulance 4 times in just over a year, and that three out of those four times the response time was half an hour, strange when the location is half a mile from the ambulance station.

I just happened to be on these licensed premises when a man colapsed with a heart attack, fortunately this was the one time that the ambulance arrived quickly, but what if it had taken half an hour, would that man be still alive today. ?

It is now common place to hear of people waiting unacceptable lengths of time for emergency ambulances, there was an instance recently where a person in Hawes in North Yorkshire waited over an hour, the ambulance travelled from Stokesley, 50 miles away, with no crew been available from the nearest station 6 miles away.

Health care is been rationed due to cuts, and I know because I come from a medical family, managers with no clinical trainning are breathing down the necks of experienced consultants, questioning the use of expensive medications, and I can assure you that this is leading to terrible tragedies.

Sorry to tell you - but ambulance response times are getting worse, why do you think ambulance bosses are asking for response times and the categories of what qualifies as an emergency to be reviewed. ?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:11 PM
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 10:42 AM
Tigger
Jan 3 2015, 07:00 PM
C-too
Jan 3 2015, 12:32 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep


Wishful thinking at best.

There is nothing at all ridiculous about my claims, the opposite in fact, for years it was sound economic practice to limit mortgages to three and a half times the wage of the main breadwinner, this naturally kept housing both affordable and prevented the pathetic price bubbles that almost wrecked the economy. You do not have the right to expect your house to triple in value in thirteen years of financial misrule especially as everyone else will end up bailing you out and paying for it. Labour are guilty as charged on that one, end of.

Sure the Tories started this but Blair's lot chucked a lot of petrol on that particular fire, when you have average house prices at eight times average income you have problems and New Labour ignored those problems and kept the Ponzi scheme going far longer than they should have done by looking the other way while the banks committed fraud with self cert mortgages and LTV'S of 125%+, and let me tell you as an employer the biggest threat to my business is retaining skilled younger staff because of frankly ridiculous housing costs.
Don't know were you live but as someone who has bought three houses since the 1970s, I have NEVER experienced any property of mine that has tripled in value in 13 years.

No house bubble has come anywhere near to wrecking the economy, you are hung up on a false assumption. I hope that's the end of your nonsense.

What of the house pricing collapse under the Tories in the 1990s?

Buying a house has always been financially difficult for the average skilled individual.

How many 125% mortgages were issued ??
As far as I'm aware such mortgages were two loans in one. Start to own your own home, and use a loan for buying or car, doing up your property, or whatever else you would normally have made a loan to do.

You are so intent on blaming NL you cannot see the wood for trees.
I'm blaming them because despite several warnings from some very prominent people Labour allowed the hosing market to spiral out of control.

And lets just remind ourselves that thick Brits almost consider it a birthright to make money from just owning a house and Labour simply copied the Tory policies that encourage feckless borrowing and property speculation, and that is all there is too it!

Guilty as charged!
"Spiral out of control" is an exaggeration for something that came and went despite the worst international financial meltdown for 60 years.

The only time the economy spiralled out of control was after the meltdown. THAT IS A FACT, no meltdown then nothing to worry about. End of.

Drop your bias and open your eyes or you will continue to be guilty of misleading people and of giving support to the misguided.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 08:08 PM
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:11 PM
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 10:42 AM
Tigger
Jan 3 2015, 07:00 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
Don't know were you live but as someone who has bought three houses since the 1970s, I have NEVER experienced any property of mine that has tripled in value in 13 years.

No house bubble has come anywhere near to wrecking the economy, you are hung up on a false assumption. I hope that's the end of your nonsense.

What of the house pricing collapse under the Tories in the 1990s?

Buying a house has always been financially difficult for the average skilled individual.

How many 125% mortgages were issued ??
As far as I'm aware such mortgages were two loans in one. Start to own your own home, and use a loan for buying or car, doing up your property, or whatever else you would normally have made a loan to do.

You are so intent on blaming NL you cannot see the wood for trees.
I'm blaming them because despite several warnings from some very prominent people Labour allowed the hosing market to spiral out of control.

And lets just remind ourselves that thick Brits almost consider it a birthright to make money from just owning a house and Labour simply copied the Tory policies that encourage feckless borrowing and property speculation, and that is all there is too it!

Guilty as charged!
"Spiral out of control" is an exaggeration for something that came and went despite the worst international financial meltdown for 60 years.

The only time the economy spiralled out of control was after the meltdown. THAT IS A FACT, no meltdown then nothing to worry about. End of.

Drop your bias and open your eyes or you will continue to be guilty of misleading people and of giving support to the misguided.
House prices virtually tripled between 1995 and 2008, that by my book is spiralling out of control, wages did not triple to cover the increase in personal debt that was needed to prop up this house of cards.

Only dopes think they are getting rich when their wages stagnate but their house "earns" more than they do, any socially responsible person can see this is one big con, except of course when an alleged "socialist" government does it!

Accept it, move on, these are the facts.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 4 2015, 08:04 PM
. .Sorry to tell you - but ambulance response times are getting worse, why do you think ambulance bosses are asking for response times and the categories of what qualifies as an emergency to be reviewed. ?

No one is denying that Krugerman but that wasn't what you were challenged on was it? This was:
krugerman
Jan 3 2015, 03:40 PM
. . . and as it is now becoming the norm to wait half an hour or 45 minutes for an emergency ambulance, . . .
A false statement you falsely tried to back with an obviously irrelevant assertion. What's so hard about admitting you made a mistake or even just shutting up? But no you seek to swerve and spit back instead.

And yet you have the cheek to impugn the integrity of others.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 08:25 PM
House prices virtually tripled between 1995 and 2008, that by my book is spiralling out of control, wages did not triple to cover the increase in personal debt that was needed to prop up this house of cards.

Only dopes think they are getting rich when their wages stagnate but their house "earns" more than they do, any socially responsible person can see this is one big con, except of course when an alleged "socialist" government does it!

Accept it, move on, these are the facts.
If it helps, well said /8/

And also as you posted earlier that too many people think it is their god given right to have their house value outstrip inflation and effectively making them rich sitting on their arses. It's all been a latter day version of the South Sea Bubble. But it always was a clever election tactic to arrange for house prices to rise in the 2 year run in to an election

And guess what we are seeing again?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 08:25 PM
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 08:08 PM
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:11 PM
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 10:42 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
I'm blaming them because despite several warnings from some very prominent people Labour allowed the hosing market to spiral out of control.

And lets just remind ourselves that thick Brits almost consider it a birthright to make money from just owning a house and Labour simply copied the Tory policies that encourage feckless borrowing and property speculation, and that is all there is too it!

Guilty as charged!
"Spiral out of control" is an exaggeration for something that came and went despite the worst international financial meltdown for 60 years.

The only time the economy spiralled out of control was after the meltdown. THAT IS A FACT, no meltdown then nothing to worry about. End of. I
Drop your bias and open your eyes or you will continue to be guilty of misleading people and of giving support to the misguided.
House prices virtually tripled between 1995 and 2008, that by my book is spiralling out of control, wages did not triple to cover the increase in personal debt that was needed to prop up this house of cards.

Only dopes think they are getting rich when their wages stagnate but their house "earns" more than they do, any socially responsible person can see this is one big con, except of course when an alleged "socialist" government does it!

Accept it, move on, these are the facts.
Much of the house price increases in the 1990s was due to regaining some of the dramatic losses after the fall in house prices in 1990, and as I posted previously I'm not aware of any tripling of house values in that period. In my experience house prices were falling in 2007.

And when your so called house of cards collapsed, it was nothing more than a short term readjustment. It didn't cause either the deficit or government debt to rise sharply from 2008. The international financial meltdown did.

House prices have very little interest for people who have mortgages, most are aware that values go up and down. As they are neither buying or selling it makes no difference to them.

Do make an effort to recognise the INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL damage done by the INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL MELTDOWN. 'You know it makes sense'. ;D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
But misleading C-Too. That slide that ended in December 1995 was a correction for the phenomenal increase from 1985 to 1993 and still left prices 44% higher than in Dec 1985

The Nationwide has been tracking house prices since 1952.

http://www.nationwide.co.uk/~/media/MainSite/documents/about/house-price-index/downloads/uk-house-price-since-1952.xls

Even more interesting when you look at their adjusted for inflation figures

http://www.nationwide.co.uk/~/media/MainSite/documents/about/house-price-index/downloads/uk-house-prices-adjusted-for-inflation.xls

Here's some interesting snapshots index figures adjusted for inflation to now value

1975: £ 79,651
1985: £ 95,268
1995: £ 87,389
2005: £209,267
2014: £189,002

That 1995 to 2005 increase of 139% over inflation and just about all under NewLab's watch (it actually went higher til 2007) was obscene, unsustainable and a major element in our financial issue's since.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 07:55 PM
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 07:49 PM
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:17 PM
The Buccaneer
Jan 4 2015, 11:07 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
Seeing as most senior politicians have these credentials and considering the policies they invariably enact when in power you'd think people would start to get a bit tired of voting for political representatives from such an unrepresentative and select bunch.

But no! Lets try one who drinks beer and likes the odd ciggy instead because he is completely different to all the other ones we've tried before!

Give me strength! ;D


So, O fount of all knowledge, how do you know what Nigel would be like in government seeing as how, as yet he is untested and yet with your magnificent foresight have him pigeonholed already?
Only the misguided could want the UK to move to the right, wasn't Thatcher enough for you?
But that is NOT what I asked of you.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 09:30 PM


House prices have very little interest for people who have mortgages, most are aware that values go up and down. As they are neither buying or selling it makes no difference to them.

WTF are you on about! ;D

I occasionally get an invite to social do's in my village, I'd say the state of the housing market is THE number one topic! The middle classes are obsessed with house prices!

The Tories even tried to frighten middle class potential UKIP voters in the recent Kent by election by claiming that having a UKIP MP would reduce house prices, that is how engrained this nonsense is!

And London and the City that the Labour government should have been regulating was at the very centre of the financial shenanigans that brought down the markets, we even had our own version of sub prime ffs! With liar loans, 125% mortgages and low starts, the plan was that ever increasing prices had banished boom and bust!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
somersetli
Member Avatar
somersetli
[ *  *  * ]
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 07:49 PM
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:17 PM
The Buccaneer
Jan 4 2015, 11:07 AM
Happy Hornet
Dec 28 2014, 09:27 AM
I think it shows what a god awful state British politics is in, when a man like Farrage, ex public schoolboy, city trader, tory and stooge of Rupert Murdoch is seen as a breath of fresh air.

I mean seriously, am I really the only one who can see it?
The problem here is that it is your prejudices that show through immediately :

1. Public schoolboy.........tick

2. City trader.................tick

3. 'Stooge' to newspaper proprietor.........tick

Any worthwhile criticism based on politics, zilch.

0/10 must try harder.
Seeing as most senior politicians have these credentials and considering the policies they invariably enact when in power you'd think people would start to get a bit tired of voting for political representatives from such an unrepresentative and select bunch.

But no! Lets try one who drinks beer and likes the odd ciggy instead because he is completely different to all the other ones we've tried before!

Give me strength! ;D


So, O fount of all knowledge, how do you know what Nigel would be like in government seeing as how, as yet he is untested and yet with your magnificent foresight have him pigeonholed already?
Well Rich you have a point.
If the electorate had been so timid in 1926, they would never have tried the Labour Party.
Like all other governments since then, they could always be turned out in 2020. Or before if necessary.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
somersetli
Jan 4 2015, 10:25 PM
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 07:49 PM
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:17 PM
The Buccaneer
Jan 4 2015, 11:07 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
Seeing as most senior politicians have these credentials and considering the policies they invariably enact when in power you'd think people would start to get a bit tired of voting for political representatives from such an unrepresentative and select bunch.

But no! Lets try one who drinks beer and likes the odd ciggy instead because he is completely different to all the other ones we've tried before!

Give me strength! ;D


So, O fount of all knowledge, how do you know what Nigel would be like in government seeing as how, as yet he is untested and yet with your magnificent foresight have him pigeonholed already?
Well Rich you have a point.
If the electorate had been so timid in 1926, they would never have tried the Labour Party.
Like all other governments since then, they could always be turned out in 2020. Or before if necessary.
UKIP is based on fear, distrust and outright lies that will explode in it's face should it ever get anywhere near the levers of power.

You cannot take on the challenges of the 21st century if you have a mindset from the nineteen fifties.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 10:25 PM
WTF are you on about! ;D

I occasionally get an invite to social do's in my village, I'd say the state of the housing market is THE number one topic! The middle classes are obsessed with house prices! . . .
;D

That's a relief. I was beginning to think I must live in some weird place isolated from reality

Anyone who owes money secured on their house and doesn't occasionally look to see how much it's worth must have had a lobotomy. We've paid ours off and still estate agent windows have that certain fascinating draw.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 10:30 PM
somersetli
Jan 4 2015, 10:25 PM
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 07:49 PM
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:17 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep


So, O fount of all knowledge, how do you know what Nigel would be like in government seeing as how, as yet he is untested and yet with your magnificent foresight have him pigeonholed already?
Well Rich you have a point.
If the electorate had been so timid in 1926, they would never have tried the Labour Party.
Like all other governments since then, they could always be turned out in 2020. Or before if necessary.
UKIP is based on fear, distrust and outright lies that will explode in it's face should it ever get anywhere near the levers of power.

You cannot take on the challenges of the 21st century if you have a mindset from the nineteen fifties.
All politicians spout the same shite, which of any party is telling the truth O fount of all knowledge?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tig: 'm blaming them because despite several warnings from some very prominent people Labour allowed the hosing market to spiral out of control. And lets just remind ourselves that thick Brits almost consider it a birthright to make money from just owning a house and Labour simply copied the Tory policies that encourage feckless borrowing and property speculation, and that is all there is too it! Guilty as charged!

Seconded. There were warnings that the housing market was overheating every year from 2002 onwards with predictions that the bubble would eventually burst. The Gov. instead of reacting to the situation exacerbated this through own example and did nothing to moderate a domestic Bank, namely Northern Wreck, from offering credit to those not worthy of such. It is within the authority of Gov. to establish such as a "Mortgage Cap" and define the boundaries of sensible risk taking. At that time the UK needed not more expensive housing, but more affordable. However, the Gov. was happy to see and spend the increasing amounts of Stamp Duty.
Thank goodness new regulations make it much harder for those who are not credit worthy to obtain a mortgage on property.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Jan 4 2015, 10:17 PM
But misleading C-Too. That slide that ended in December 1995 was a correction for the phenomenal increase from 1985 to 1993 and still left prices 44% higher than in Dec 1985

The Nationwide has been tracking house prices since 1952.

http://www.nationwide.co.uk/~/media/MainSite/documents/about/house-price-index/downloads/uk-house-price-since-1952.xls

Even more interesting when you look at their adjusted for inflation figures

http://www.nationwide.co.uk/~/media/MainSite/documents/about/house-price-index/downloads/uk-house-prices-adjusted-for-inflation.xls

Here's some interesting snapshots index figures adjusted for inflation to now value

1975: £ 79,651
1985: £ 95,268
1995: £ 87,389
2005: £209,267
2014: £189,002

That 1995 to 2005 increase of 139% over inflation and just about all under NewLab's watch (it actually went higher til 2007) was obscene, unsustainable and a major element in our financial issue's since.
I don't know why but I'm unable to open your website addresses.

The slide that ended in 1995 can only be assessed on some unknown actual value of ones property. At what point does one decide upon a 'correct' value of houses? Doesn't the market play a major role in this in our capitalist society?

1995 would have been a market that had bottomed out, a rise in prices was inevitable especially as the economy grew stronger. For anyone to insinuate that the only reason the economy grew stronger was because of house prices would be very misleading. As you yourself have pointed out, deregulation of the Stock Exchange was financially beneficial to the economy. (That was before Thatcher's Deregulation, Financial Services, Free Market Economy went pear shaped in 2008).

I would agree that there was a problem in the housing market, one that was already beginning to sort itself out as it had become a buyers market before the international meltdown hit.

Any suggestion that it was house prices that created our present predicament is utterly ridiculous.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 10:25 PM
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 09:30 PM


House prices have very little interest for people who have mortgages, most are aware that values go up and down. As they are neither buying or selling it makes no difference to them.

WTF are you on about! ;D

I occasionally get an invite to social do's in my village, I'd say the state of the housing market is THE number one topic! The middle classes are obsessed with house prices!

The Tories even tried to frighten middle class potential UKIP voters in the recent Kent by election by claiming that having a UKIP MP would reduce house prices, that is how engrained this nonsense is!

And London and the City that the Labour government should have been regulating was at the very centre of the financial shenanigans that brought down the markets, we even had our own version of sub prime ffs! With liar loans, 125% mortgages and low starts, the plan was that ever increasing prices had banished boom and bust!
"We even had our own version of 'sub prim" LOL, a US liner sank, well so did my rubber dingy! ;D Get real.

I suggest you shift the local conversation away from desperately seeking to find some way of attacking NL, and get to grips with the reality of the worst international financial tsunami for sixty years. That's the real fly in the ointment the rest is mostly political biased red herrings.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
somersetli
Member Avatar
somersetli
[ *  *  * ]
Rich
Jan 5 2015, 12:50 AM
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 10:30 PM
somersetli
Jan 4 2015, 10:25 PM
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 07:49 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
Well Rich you have a point.
If the electorate had been so timid in 1926, they would never have tried the Labour Party.
Like all other governments since then, they could always be turned out in 2020. Or before if necessary.
UKIP is based on fear, distrust and outright lies that will explode in it's face should it ever get anywhere near the levers of power.

You cannot take on the challenges of the 21st century if you have a mindset from the nineteen fifties.
All politicians spout the same shite, which of any party is telling the truth O fount of all knowledge?
The truth.............none of them!
No matter who is elected in May, it won't be long before the public wants them out again.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
krugerman
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Jan 4 2015, 08:42 PM
krugerman
Jan 4 2015, 08:04 PM
. .Sorry to tell you - but ambulance response times are getting worse, why do you think ambulance bosses are asking for response times and the categories of what qualifies as an emergency to be reviewed. ?

No one is denying that Krugerman but that wasn't what you were challenged on was it? This was:
krugerman
Jan 3 2015, 03:40 PM
. . . and as it is now becoming the norm to wait half an hour or 45 minutes for an emergency ambulance, . . .
A false statement you falsely tried to back with an obviously irrelevant assertion. What's so hard about admitting you made a mistake or even just shutting up? But no you seek to swerve and spit back instead.

And yet you have the cheek to impugn the integrity of others.
In Yorkshire and elsewhere it is becoming ( becoming(bɪˈkʌmɪŋ) 1 any process of change 2 any change from the lower level of potentiality to the higher level of actuality ) more common to wait half an hour or longer for emergency ambulances, it is a more frequent occurance, whereas at one time it was a very rare occurance.

The ambulance service together with the NHS has gone downhill since this government took over, not a debatable opinion, not an assumption or or a theory - its a fact.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Where I live it is not possible to expect an ambulance to attend in under 15 minutes, even if the one ambulance is in the nearest ambulance station and not available elsewhere . If it is at the nearest A&E it will be 20 miles away. There re many parts of the country where they are much further away, and you will be lucky to get one in under half an hour , with the best will in the word.
We should all have a knowledge of first aid, know the emergency numbers and help lines to ring, for the most important part of first aid is to stabilize the patient. It was not so long ago in the distant past that most people had to go to the local telephone box to call the help they needed now we have mobile or land line telephones, so that in some serious incidents the emergency services are overwhelmed by calls for help for the emergency.
From the time the call is made and processed,, to the arrival of emergency services at the scene is always going to be longer than people expect.
I think that today our expectations have been raised to too high a level, and we also live in an age when we expect provisions for our needs to be perfect, and immediate and at no direct cost to ourselves.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 10:18 PM
C-too
Jan 4 2015, 07:55 PM
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 07:49 PM
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 06:17 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep


So, O fount of all knowledge, how do you know what Nigel would be like in government seeing as how, as yet he is untested and yet with your magnificent foresight have him pigeonholed already?
Only the misguided could want the UK to move to the right, wasn't Thatcher enough for you?
But that is NOT what I asked of you.
Well you did not ask anything of me, I was just offering a little clarification on the subject.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Jan 5 2015, 12:50 AM
Tigger
Jan 4 2015, 10:30 PM
somersetli
Jan 4 2015, 10:25 PM
Rich
Jan 4 2015, 07:49 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
Well Rich you have a point.
If the electorate had been so timid in 1926, they would never have tried the Labour Party.
Like all other governments since then, they could always be turned out in 2020. Or before if necessary.
UKIP is based on fear, distrust and outright lies that will explode in it's face should it ever get anywhere near the levers of power.

You cannot take on the challenges of the 21st century if you have a mindset from the nineteen fifties.
, which of any party is telling the truth O fount of all knowledge?
"All politicians spout the same shite"


That is why we should demand more objectiveness and less political bias and insinuation from the media and from the press in particular.

It is also why individuals need to be more objective when discussing issues.

I don't doubt that most people will remain subjective and therefore constant conflict will remain the normal position.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply