The Doctor Posted 9 August 2012 Posted 9 August 2012 I was more thinking of cases where we pay money to people living abroad. Ah, so, bankers?
MooseBreath Posted 10 August 2012 Posted 10 August 2012 I think people have are justified in complaining when foreigners drive down wages because they're prepared to work for much less and also when it appears as though British people are missing out on jobs due to the number of foreigners coming in. Opening the floodgates to any number of unskilled but hard working foreigners will, and has, helped politicians to report positive headline growth figures but it hasn't actually helped the country, we just have more and more people so naturally economic activity increases and makes the high level figures look much better than the reality of life on the ground.
Jon the Hat Posted 10 August 2012 Posted 10 August 2012 I think people have are justified in complaining when foreigners drive down wages because they're prepared to work for much less and also when it appears as though British people are missing out on jobs due to the number of foreigners coming in. Opening the floodgates to any number of unskilled but hard working foreigners will, and has, helped politicians to report positive headline growth figures but it hasn't actually helped the country, we just have more and more people so naturally economic activity increases and makes the high level figures look much better than the reality of life on the ground. Those foreigners who drive down wages could also do an awful lot of those activities elsewhere for someone else. Take the huge seasonal workforce in the agricultural sector - you could argue that without that cheap labour farming would be even less profitable and more jobs would be lost to foreign food producers using much the same labour, and keeping the profits and downstream spending outside the UK.
Free Fox? Posted 11 August 2012 Posted 11 August 2012 @Large Al, morning...going to the match? The Human Rights Act. A few people taking advantage? Made me smile. You do know the re-offending rates right? If you think we should house and pay for all these foreign criminals, and then watch them possibly go out and kill someone else, all in the name of ideology, then I disagree entirely. We have enough problems with British criminal activity, to have that burden added to. And when did I ever say that people on benefits steal from the lower level workers? You are correct. people are ripped off by big business. It ties into the point made by Jon the Hat above. The foreign workforce is great for capitalism. Rich business owners can pay these pathetic wages because of the swell in workers. And as for marriage. It is not purely a state thing that got linked to the church. The other way around. It was a religious ceremony that the state adopted. At one point in time the church ruled the monarchy. That's how powerful it was. Remember the quote "Religion is the opium of the people"? Almost everyone was religious, so almost anyone could get married. Anybody that wasn't religious, couldn't. That has changed somewhat nowadays. I am not some bigot using the church as a smokescreen. I am someone who has listen to both sides of the argument, who doesn't go around spouting lies to further his own agenda.
The Doctor Posted 11 August 2012 Posted 11 August 2012 @Large Al, morning...going to the match? The Human Rights Act. A few people taking advantage? Made me smile. You do know the re-offending rates right? If you think we should house and pay for all these foreign criminals, and then watch them possibly go out and kill someone else, all in the name of ideology, then I disagree entirely. We have enough problems with British criminal activity, to have that burden added to. And when did I ever say that people on benefits steal from the lower level workers? You are correct. people are ripped off by big business. It ties into the point made by Jon the Hat above. The foreign workforce is great for capitalism. Rich business owners can pay these pathetic wages because of the swell in workers. And as for marriage. It is not purely a state thing that got linked to the church. The other way around. It was a religious ceremony that the state adopted. At one point in time the church ruled the monarchy. That's how powerful it was. Remember the quote "Religion is the opium of the people"? Almost everyone was religious, so almost anyone could get married. Anybody that wasn't religious, couldn't. That has changed somewhat nowadays. I am not some bigot using the church as a smokescreen. I am someone who has listen to both sides of the argument, who doesn't go around spouting lies to further his own agenda. And that is due to our prison system, not the Human Rights Act - as shown by the success of the prison system in Scandinavian countries - all of whom are signatories to said act. So then, why is it your party suggests removing benefits for immigrants? I said I should have it on shortcut: Marriage pre-dates organised religion, and most certainly Christianity. Hell, a look at Ancient Greece and the Roman Empire will show you that gay marriage pre-dates Christianity. Marriage is a state idea, that has been taken over by religion, but it isn't strictly a religious thing and the church should have no say over who can and can't get married.
Rincewind Posted 11 August 2012 Posted 11 August 2012 religious marrage ceromonies are a nice little earner for the church. Are the couple really married if they swear their love before God and are non-believers? The paper they sign has more validity than paying thousands of ponds out to a cult. After reading most of this thread I now have a clearer idea what the UKIP stand for. thank you.
Webbo Posted 11 August 2012 Posted 11 August 2012 I'm not religious and I got married in church (methodist, I'm certainly not one of those). Worth every penny.
Zingari Posted 11 August 2012 Posted 11 August 2012 I'm not religious and I got married in church (methodist, I'm certainly not one of those). Worth every penny. we never thought you were
Monk Posted 11 August 2012 Posted 11 August 2012 UK elections are only irrelevant in the sense that no single party is truly progressive enough to lose the dogma of British politics. On the other hand, I don't believe all the parties offer the same thing, I do believe they're all a crock of shite. Here in Scotland the SNP have a lot to answer for, but socially they have been extremely forward thinking compared to whitehall.
Bloomer Posted 13 August 2012 Posted 13 August 2012 There are only two things I hate more than Politics, one is counting and I forget what the other three are.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.