General News

[purpleronnie]

8 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

I think voters of any party are automatically assuming international law shan’t be broken, by way as leaving people to drown as per your example. 
 

Locking illegal immigrants up rather than housing them in any form of hotel or place of comfort should absolutely be standard whilst processing takes place. 
 

Any form of benefit should cease immediately until said people have put back into the economy for a set period. Yes, I’m talking access to healthcare, access to food banks etc. 

 

I’m not a fan of the right of access to state education either.

 

Once asylum has been granted, they by and largely deserve nothing more than the very basic level of support, particularly if showing a complete unwillingness to put back into society, or an unwillingness to learn the ways of their new countries life. 
 

It’s all fairly harsh stuff I know, but it’s what’s clearly required at this stage I think. 

 

 

Where are we housing illegal immigrants in hotels?

So what exactly do you class as benefits?  Allow people to die because they're ill and claiming asylum from persecution?  For what ends?

 

[The Year Of The Fox]

Just now, purpleronnie said:

Where are we housing illegal immigrants in hotels?

So what exactly do you class as benefits?  Allow people to die because they're ill and claiming asylum from persecution?  For what ends?

 

Well enough to travel over on a dangerous boat though. 
 

Claiming asylum from persecution from France? Italy? Poland? Holland? Germany? Hungary?

[purpleronnie]

Just now, The Year Of The Fox said:

Well enough to travel over on a dangerous boat though. 
 

Claiming asylum from persecution from France? Italy? Poland? Holland? Germany? Hungary?

So people never get ill at different times?

Why do you think they are claiming persecution from those countries?

[The Year Of The Fox]

9 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Where are you going to lock them up?

 

Prisons are full and we can’t build anything. 

There was absolutely nothing wrong with the Bibby Stockholm idea, though maybe it should’ve been anchored offshore. 

[The Year Of The Fox]

1 minute ago, purpleronnie said:

So people never get ill at different times?

Why do you think they are claiming persecution from those countries?

Of course they might.

 

They’re not. They’re the safe haven countries they travel through on their way to the UK. You know that 😝

[purpleronnie]

3 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

Of course they might.

 

They’re not. They’re the safe haven countries they travel through on their way to the UK. You know that 😝

What difference does that make?  You think we shouldn't take any?  Most will have to pass through other countries.  What about those trafficked here?  What about those with family connections that want to be here?, what about those who have english as a second language and hope that will help them settle?

Edited 2 May 2025 by purpleronnie

[Footballwipe]

Protest vote or not, this debate is a clear show that the whole election vote is built on sand.

 

This election was on how the local council will run subsidised buses, SEND services, potholes, rights of way, adult social care, foster care, waste sites amongst so many other things.

 

All you lot are talking about is fvcking immigration and stopping the boats.

 

Local services suffer at the incompetence of the electorate desperate to sock it to parliament at the detriment of the functions that so many people need, yet so many people don't seem to care about.

[The Year Of The Fox]

1 minute ago, purpleronnie said:

What difference does that make?  You think we shouldn't take any?  Most will have to pass through other countries.  What about those trafficked here?  What about those with family connections that want to be here?, what about those who have english as a second language and hope that will help them settle?

None of the above makes our country any larger you know?

 

 

 

[Lionator]

3 minutes ago, Footballwipe said:

Protest vote or not, this debate is a clear show that the whole election vote is built on sand.

 

This election was on how the local council will run subsidised buses, SEND services, potholes, rights of way, adult social care, foster care, waste sites amongst so many other things.

 

All you lot are talking about is fvcking immigration and stopping the boats.

 

Local services suffer at the incompetence of the electorate desperate to sock it to parliament at the detriment of the functions that so many people need, yet so many people don't seem to care about.

Hey, stop that! They’re cutting DEI in your local council building!! That’s real change 

[Lionator]

1 minute ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

None of the above makes our country any larger you know?

 

 

 

The point is that you have to cut it off at source

[Trav Le Bleu]

3 minutes ago, Footballwipe said:

Protest vote or not, this debate is a clear show that the whole election vote is built on sand.

 

This election was on how the local council will run subsidised buses, SEND services, potholes, rights of way, adult social care, foster care, waste sites amongst so many other things.

 

All you lot are talking about is fvcking immigration and stopping the boats.

 

Local services suffer at the incompetence of the electorate desperate to sock it to parliament at the detriment of the functions that so many people need, yet so many people don't seem to care about.

It's not an implausible situation at all that your party of choice to govern the country is entirely different to the one which would best care for your local needs.

[The Year Of The Fox]

Just now, Lionator said:

The point is that you have to cut it off at source

Yeah I understand that.

 

My point is that my ‘harsh’ ideas might start to do that.

[Parafox]

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

And a quick reminder about the person that Farage et al carry water for:

 

 

 

But by "we" does he actually mean "us" as in the allies supported by the USA?

 

His use of grammar is not great and posting a tweet requires no intellect.

[Parafox]

30 minutes ago, Sampson said:

The issue here isn’t people growing older per se, it’s the fact that for decades people in the west suddenly started having way less children and so there is not enough workers to support them, general rule of thumb is you need around 3 workers per retired person for the pension and healthcare systems to function - and in most western countries we’re on course to reach the point where it’s like 1.5 workers for every retired person (or even 1:1 in some places). For years it was assumed we’d solve this problem by just importing workers, but the western world has obviously taken a sharp turn against this and being pro-immigration is becoming a more and more politically unelectable position.

 

I'm not sure how that squares with the initial point in that how do we support an ageing population that provides little or no contribution. That post suggests that the elderly are a burden on us.

 

Birth rates have nothing to do with what LcFcSmiv was suggesting.

[leicsmac]

16 minutes ago, Footballwipe said:

Protest vote or not, this debate is a clear show that the whole election vote is built on sand.

 

This election was on how the local council will run subsidised buses, SEND services, potholes, rights of way, adult social care, foster care, waste sites amongst so many other things.

 

All you lot are talking about is fvcking immigration and stopping the boats.

 

Local services suffer at the incompetence of the electorate desperate to sock it to parliament at the detriment of the functions that so many people need, yet so many people don't seem to care about.

And that's why the local, national and global issues need their own "lanes" rather than getting enmeshed as they have.

 

All of them are important.

 

4 minutes ago, Parafox said:

 

But by "we" does he actually mean "us" as in the allies supported by the USA?

 

His use of grammar is not great and posting a tweet requires no intellect.

Looking at the context, no, no he doesn't.

 

He means the US.

[the fox]

41 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Yep but these are problems that Reform are going to make worse not better because they’re for low tax, low wages.

I think there is a slight misunderstanding  I was not siding with reform nor a man like Farage. I was only speaking in general with no political agenda but i understand the confusion do to the topic being discussed and the previous post by others.

[bovril]

2 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Vietnam?

 

Korea?

 

Very much the Spurs of international warfare.

 

Besides, being good at war isn't something to be proud of. (That'll raise a few hackles!)

It's funny that in America and across the Anglosphere the French have a reputation of being effete weaklings prone to surrender and defeat when they are probably among the most militarily successful nations in history. 

[Lionator]

2 minutes ago, the fox said:

I think there is a slight misunderstanding  I was not siding with reform nor a man like Farage. I was only speaking in general with no political agenda but i understand the confusion do to the topic being discussed and the previous post by others.

I’m with ya 

[urban.spaceman]

[purpleronnie]

54 minutes ago, The Year Of The Fox said:

None of the above makes our country any larger you know?

 

 

 

So now its all to do with geographical size?  Not sure if you're trolling or not lol.

 

 

[Parafox]

43 minutes ago, Parafox said:

 

But by "we" does he actually mean "us" as in the allies supported by the USA?

 

His use of grammar is not great and posting a tweet requires no intellect.

 

36 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Looking at the context, no, no he doesn't.

 

He means the US.

 

I thought that to be the case and that is further proof, for me anyway, of his narcissism.

 

The man has no knowledge and/or no acceptance of anything outside of 'Murica.

 

I seem to recall something his mother supposedly said about the young Donald about him being stupid and ignorant and hoping he never goes into politics. 

[The Year Of The Fox]

4 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

So now its all to do with geographical size?  Not sure if you're trolling or not lol.

 

 

Of course it is, and of course I’m not.

 

You might have a bigger heart than me, but our infrastructure and our countries size doesn’t get any bigger

[purpleronnie]

Just now, The Year Of The Fox said:

Of course it is, and of course I’m not.

 

You might have a bigger heart than me, but our infrastructure and our countries size doesn’t get any bigger

So you'll be happy in the fact we take far less than other countries then.  But still want less right?

[Parafox]

1 hour ago, Footballwipe said:

Protest vote or not, this debate is a clear show that the whole election vote is built on sand.

 

This election was on how the local council will run subsidised buses, SEND services, potholes, rights of way, adult social care, foster care, waste sites amongst so many other things.

 

All you lot are talking about is fvcking immigration and stopping the boats.

 

Local services suffer at the incompetence of the electorate desperate to sock it to parliament at the detriment of the functions that so many people need, yet so many people don't seem to care about.

 

I believe they do care but because so much of what local people are concerned with is largely ignored by those they are represented by, or by a greater political power, the default position then becomes "why bother, it makes no difference"

 

This translates into wider politics and a national vote where people can't be arsed as they see nothing that will make a big difference to them as individuals.

 

If local voting makes no difference, why think that national voting will?

Edited 2 May 2025 by Parafox

[urban.spaceman]

138 pages.

 

That’s the best we’ve done for a long while.

 

See you in the next one.