Sex God
Just found this.... ....it's the small things in life that give most pleasure.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Question Time
Sex God
In my view it is inevitablle that at some point the majority of people will have to accept a lowering standards of living. I'm afraid i agree with Staggerlee when he says an answer is to tax more, but not indirectly, and invest in infrastructure.
Quote by gulsonroad30664
perhaps for the sake of paying lip service to those who will not answer my question, i should begin with...IN MY OPINION. not what is. people who come here and who have already come here will live in some form of accomadation, from a mansion to a tent, as they always have done. not my subjective opinion, fact.
people who come here will survive, hopefully, in whatever social condition presents to them. fact
this countries welfare and social system has always been underfunded, thats the way the system works and always have done (dont want to go into an expose at this moment)fact.
peoples of many cultures and colours have migrated here since the ice
the population of this country exploded from under tens of millions to 60 million during the industrial revolution, without a state welfare structure. fact
people will congregate together/combine in their interest of support for one another, as they always have done anywhere in humanity. fact
i do not have solutions for the present crisis but, solutions come from knowlege and i have every confidence that the solutions to all phenomina are out there. those solutions will not com from ignorance. blaming asylum seekers/imigrants, lazy bastards, work shy, claimants etc will definately not solve any of the problems we face, on the contrary, it will only create division.......IN WHO'S INTEREST'S DOES IT SERVE, WHO ARE THE BNP, WHO IS FUNDING THEM ?
these previous threads are my opinions. it is my opinion that kenty and people like him, inocently or not, expound veiws that serve the interests of the few, the economically most powerful in society. they do not serve the interest's of the vast majority who will be used as pawns in conflicts. it is in all our interest's to have a good quality of life, "foreigners" included. the cessation of imigration will not prevent a fall in all our living standards. repatriation will not improve our living standards and in the "final solution" gas chambers wont either.
the only thing that will improve man's quality of life, is the repudiation of DEPT !
You state several facts in your post, the one I have highlighted is far from fact. The industrial revolution occurred during the late 18th and mid nineteenth centuries. The population of England was 8 million in 1801, 16 million in 1851 and 30 million in 1901. The population of the UK has just reached 61 million.
No one that I can see here is advocating repatriation but surely we need to have a sensible approach to immigration? There are currently (at least) 2.5 million people unemployed, including many graduates......should our number 1 priority not be to help/retrain these people in order that they can find empoyment?
Quote by Lost
In my view it is inevitablle that at some point the majority of people will have to accept a lowering standards of living. I'm afraid i agree with Staggerlee when he says an answer is to tax more, but not indirectly, and invest in infrastructure.
Lost I agree with you that it's inevetable that the majority will have to accept a lowering of standards. China and India will eventually emerge as the economic power houses and our influence and importance will diminish. Maybe they will base their call centres over here?
Quote by Max777
In my view it is inevitablle that at some point the majority of people will have to accept a lowering standards of living. I'm afraid i agree with Staggerlee when he says an answer is to tax more, but not indirectly, and invest in infrastructure.
Lost I agree with you that it's inevetable that the majority will have to accept a lowering of standards. China and India will eventually emerge as the economic power houses and our influence and importance will diminish. Maybe they will base their call centres over here?
:laughabove:
the money for infrastructure and housing in the last 12 years has come from the city of london in the form of the p.f.i. private (city bankers) finance initiative. the main plank by which blair and brown were able to recruit the support of the city, and thereby the corporate media to convey them into office. the terms of p.f.i. are a total underwritting of of the dept at exorbitant interest rates (above market rates) ranging from 14 to 17%. the taxpayers and citizens of this country have been saddled with this dept in perpetuity. both conservative and labour governments would have sighned these contracts, in fact, the policy of p.f.i. was created by the previous conservative administration.
as money (credit) is not created by government but by private international banks and borrowed by government to pay for services, then repaid AT INTEREST from tax revenue. in an economic boom, the banks must continually increase the money supply, which they do by ever increasing and more easily available credit. when the interest on the ever increased credit becomes unsustainable, the banks stop lending and the money supply decreases and the value of everthing falls. recession/depression. an ever increasing money supply causes inflation and a fall in the money supply causes deflation. simple.
all the propaganda about higher wage demands being the cause of inflation when wage demands are a result of inflation. the banks have reduced lending to a trickle, so where will the credit come from to invest in infrastructure ?
to respond to max777, the industrial revolution began in the early 1700's and continued right up into the 20th century. the population grew expodentially up to the 1950's without a welfare state until after the second world war. during that time, imigrants, and i'll try to get the order right but i dont mind people nit picking specific's so long as they dont detract from the issue i'm addressing here, came by the boat load. irish (navies) to build the canals, africans and west indians, surplus to the slave trade, indians as contact with the empire and chinese as a result of the treaties of nanking and peking during the opium wars. germans and italians who accounted for about 80,000 out of a population of 36,000,000 by 1871 (census). by sept 1914, 19,000 belgian wounded soldiers and 250,000 belgian refugees were scattered around britain. in 1931, there were 44,000 polish born people living in england and by 1951 that figure understandably rose to over 160,000.
no doupt i have missed a lot out but without being padantic the gist is there. most came here as economic migrants or persecuted people. (asylum seekers). kept the timeline to max777 dates. revisit your research of censuses, not that specific population sizes are important here.
what is important is the aggregate productive capacity of society to sustain the population and the material conditions economically that prevailed during those times. throughout modern history minorities have been blamed for society's ills, particularily during periods of corrections of asset value's/deflation of bubbles, reduction of the money supply by banks. IMIGRATION/RACISM IS A DIVERSION. NOT TO UNDERSTAND THIS IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER. IT LEADS TO WAR AND SLAUGHTER OF A KIND NOT YET WITNESSED BY MANKIND. in my opinion.
as money (credit) is not created by government but by private international banks and borrowed by government to pay for services, then repaid AT INTEREST from tax revenue. in an economic boom, the banks must continually increase the money supply, which they do by ever increasing and more easily available credit. when the interest on the ever increased credit becomes unsustainable, the banks stop lending and the money supply decreases and the value of everthing falls. recession/depression. an ever increasing money supply causes inflation and a fall in the money supply causes deflation. simple.
all the propaganda about higher wage demands being the cause of inflation when wage demands are a result of inflation. the banks have reduced lending to a trickle, so where will the credit come from to invest in infrastructure ?
to respond to max777, the industrial revolution began in the early 1700's and continued right up into the 20th century. the population grew expodentially up to the 1950's without a welfare state until after the second world war. during that time, imigrants, and i'll try to get the order right but i dont mind people nit picking specific's so long as they dont detract from the issue i'm addressing here, came by the boat load. irish (navies) to build the canals, africans and west indians, surplus to the slave trade, indians as contact with the empire and chinese as a result of the treaties of nanking and peking during the opium wars. germans and italians who accounted for about 80,000 out of a population of 36,000,000 by 1871 (census). by sept 1914, 19,000 belgian wounded soldiers and 250,000 belgian refugees were scattered around britain. in 1931, there were 44,000 polish born people living in england and by 1951 that figure understandably rose to over 160,000.
no doupt i have missed a lot out but without being padantic the gist is there. most came here as economic migrants or persecuted people. (asylum seekers). kept the timeline to max777 dates. revisit your research of censuses, not that specific population sizes are important here.
what is important is the aggregate productive capacity of society to sustain the population and the material conditions economically that prevailed during those times. throughout modern history minorities have been blamed for society's ills, particularily during periods of corrections of asset value's/deflation of bubbles, reduction of the money supply by banks. IMIGRATION/RACISM IS A DIVERSION. NOT TO UNDERSTAND THIS IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER. IT LEADS TO WAR AND SLAUGHTER OF A KIND NOT YET WITNESSED BY MANKIND. in my opinion.
Sex God
Quote by gulsonroad30664
IMIGRATION/RACISM IS A DIVERSION. NOT TO UNDERSTAND THIS IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER. IT LEADS TO WAR AND SLAUGHTER OF A KIND NOT YET WITNESSED BY MANKIND. in my opinion.
Do you really belive that Gulson? It's a bloody bleak vision :sad:
Gulsonroad, I think historians will disagree with your concept of the industrial revolution. The fact that the UK was able to cope with its population doubling in the past does not mean that it can continue to do so. The numbers ARE important. The population is forecast to reach 77 million by 2050, to be the largest in Europe, outstripping that of France and Germany.
The figures I quoted can be found here:
Immigration is not a diversion, it is a fundemental problem right now in the UK that needs addressing.
The figures I quoted can be found here:
Immigration is not a diversion, it is a fundemental problem right now in the UK that needs addressing.
max i'm worried about your intentions here although i'm prepared to give you the benefit of doupt. whilst the population of france is on par with the u.k. the population of germany is in the region of 110,000,000 plus. this question of imigration, is important to you and many others because it is intended to be important to you. you are bombarded everyday from all mediums of communication/information with it. you are being propagandised with fear. fear that the jonny foriegners are stealing your job, blood sucking your welfare and taxation and thereby in a subtle way, leading you to believe that if it is stopped, at least some of your fears will go away. your also propagandised to believe there is an element of terrorism within the imigrant comunity and that creates prejudice and fear and if we bring a halt to imigration those fears will subside. all i'm asking you to consider is, do you think that your standard of living/quality of life would change one iota either way if imigration was halted ? if the answer is yes then you do not understand the economic processes in the economy. the issues of imigration/race/religeon/colour/sexuality are diversions propagated by the state and corporate media in order to DIVIDE AND RULE.
Quote by gulsonroad30664
max i'm worried about your intentions here although i'm prepared to give you the benefit of doupt. whilst the population of france is on par with the u.k. the population of germany is in the region of 110,000,000 plus. this question of imigration, is important to you and many others because it is intended to be important to you. you are bombarded everyday from all mediums of communication/information with it. you are being propagandised with fear. fear that the jonny foriegners are stealing your job, blood sucking your welfare and taxation and thereby in a subtle way, leading you to believe that if it is stopped, at least some of your fears will go away. your also propagandised to believe there is an element of terrorism within the imigrant comunity and that creates prejudice and fear and if we bring a halt to imigration those fears will subside. all i'm asking you to consider is, do you think that your standard of living/quality of life would change one iota either way if imigration was halted ? if the answer is yes then you do not understand the economic processes in the economy. the issues of imigration/race/religeon/colour/sexuality are diversions propagated by the state and corporate media in order to DIVIDE AND RULE.
Actually, I'm worried about your intentions......you are the one full of conspiricy theories. You don't have to worry about giving me any benefit of the doubt either but don't be so bloody patronising......I understand the economics of the economy only too well, what makes you think that you are so superior to the rest of us on here? 0h and I have no concerns about any "johny foreigner" taking my job either and I'm more than capable of thinking for myself and stripping out the propaganda and bullshit.
You really should start to get your facts right. The population of Germany is currently about 82 million but is forecast to decline ( immigration has virtually all but stopped)....stats provided by the United Nations.
My concern is that the UK will have problems coping with another 9 million people by the year 2031, of which 2/3 will be immigrants. We currently have 2.5 million unemployed.....will the UK be able to create a further 10 million jobs or will the unemployment numbers continue to rise to truly frightening numbers?
I'm not advocating a total ban on immigration but it can not continue unchecked. There is nothing any more sinsiter in my views other than being very fearful for the future of my daughter and her generation.
Quote by GnV
As I understand it, the rise in population across Europe is not borne on increasing immigration so much per-se, it comes from the already identified fact that Muslims are parenting far more children than white Caucasian parents by a significant factor.
when you are going to use 'facts' what about the source or did I just supply that by quoting you
I think that we definitely should be talking about Catholics too..... I know that my life would have been a lot better without my brothers.... infact most of my family to be honest.
Orgasminator
I did not watch Question Time....Coincided with Curb your Enthusiasm...I then watched Hung(which had recorded) followed by Family Guy...The only Griffin on TV worth paying any attention too....
I have read a fair bit about the ensuing public outcry so I guess in that respect the plan to put him(the other Griffin) on TV worked..
A) The papers got massive coverage so we the numptys buy them..
B)The Beeb got lots of exposure so we the numptys remember they exsist...
C)The Tories get more chance of getting back in Office because we the numptys are shit scared of having a racist in Office..
This could probably go on but the point im making is that for every action there is a reaction and the powers that be have certainly achieved that...
I have read a fair bit about the ensuing public outcry so I guess in that respect the plan to put him(the other Griffin) on TV worked..
A) The papers got massive coverage so we the numptys buy them..
B)The Beeb got lots of exposure so we the numptys remember they exsist...
C)The Tories get more chance of getting back in Office because we the numptys are shit scared of having a racist in Office..
This could probably go on but the point im making is that for every action there is a reaction and the powers that be have certainly achieved that...
Quote by splendid_
As I understand it, the rise in population across Europe is not borne on increasing immigration so much per-se, it comes from the already identified fact that Muslims are parenting far more children than white Caucasian parents by a significant factor.
when you are going to use 'facts' what about the source or did I just supply that by quoting you
I think that we definitely should be talking about Catholics too..... I know that my life would have been a lot better without my brothers.... infact most of my family to be honest.
Splendid.......your signature is such an understatement!! Quote by splendid_
As I understand it, the rise in population across Europe is not borne on increasing immigration so much per-se, it comes from the already identified fact that Muslims are parenting far more children than white Caucasian parents by a significant factor.
when you are going to use 'facts' what about the source or did I just supply that by quoting you
I think that we definitely should be talking about Catholics too..... I know that my life would have been a lot better without my brothers.... infact most of my family to be honest.
My reference was meant to be anecdotal rather than providing hard firm fact.
But since you would like a reference source, how about one? :roll:
I'm sure there are many more from "official" sources such as OECD data.
My post intended to counter the notion that the UK is being "overwhelmed" by immigration per-se - that is to say, by a continuing influx of people of Muslim persuasion entering the country.
In splendid fashion, you seem to have missed the point.
As I said somewhere earlier about the numbers SOME have, with regards to children.
I will try and Google this but.....if you check the stats British parents have something like kids, whereby SOME are up to 3.4. That is as an average btw.
Easter European familes tend on average to have four kids. The real worry is not only the ammount coming in, but how much it will rise to in another 20 years time, if the " average " child figures continue from some quarters.
Something that has to be taken into consideration for the future.
I will try and Google this but.....if you check the stats British parents have something like kids, whereby SOME are up to 3.4. That is as an average btw.
Easter European familes tend on average to have four kids. The real worry is not only the ammount coming in, but how much it will rise to in another 20 years time, if the " average " child figures continue from some quarters.
Something that has to be taken into consideration for the future.
Quote by kentswingers777
As I said somewhere earlier about the numbers SOME have, with regards to children.
I will try and Google this but.....if you check the stats British parents have something like kids, whereby SOME are up to 3.4. That is as an average btw.
Easter European familes tend on average to have four kids. The real worry is not only the ammount coming in, but how much it will rise to in another 20 years time, if the " average " child figures continue from some quarters.
Something that has to be taken into consideration for the future.
Oh splendid, I knew there was another reference somewhere :grin:
Quote by GnV
As I said somewhere earlier about the numbers SOME have, with regards to children.
I will try and Google this but.....if you check the stats British parents have something like kids, whereby SOME are up to 3.4. That is as an average btw.
Easter European familes tend on average to have four kids. The real worry is not only the ammount coming in, but how much it will rise to in another 20 years time, if the " average " child figures continue from some quarters.
Something that has to be taken into consideration for the future.
Oh splendid, I knew there was another reference somewhere:grin:
Very good GNV.
This is a readable article and IF true is a worrying thing.
Quote by Witchy
A quote from here:-
"The Muslim birth rate in Europe is three times higher than the non-Muslim one. If current trends continue, the Muslim population of Europe will nearly double by 2015, while the non-Muslim population will shrink by 3.5 percent."
I'm moving to Alaska.
Super. But lets hope the Alaskan National Party doesn't cotton on, eh?
Errrm............there is no Alaskan National Party. So, your post is a pointlessly inflammatory comment followed by an incorrect assertion. Are you a labour supporter who was in the QT audience by any chance?
If you're going to snipe, at least try and get it right.
Quote by Staggerlee_BB
A quote from here:-
"The Muslim birth rate in Europe is three times higher than the non-Muslim one. If current trends continue, the Muslim population of Europe will nearly double by 2015, while the non-Muslim population will shrink by 3.5 percent."
I'm moving to Alaska.
Apparently europe has a population of 1/2 million of these 3-4% are of non european descent so doubling this small percentage would still leave them as a tiny percentage of the total population...it's easy to distort the truth in order to advance your agenda..the B.N.P. are seasoned pros at it
Actually, I took my quote from a muslim publication, written by muslims for muslims. I don't bother quoting from such an unreliable source as wankipedia - even my cat says it's unreliable, but he's 15 years old which in human years makes him 105, so a fairly wise cat. Work our for yourself what the muslim population will be in 2020 using the above rates (you can use fingers AND toes).
what a lot of folks forget was that in the post war reconstruction of Europe, there was a massive labour shortage and the Europeans called on populations right across the globe to come to Europe and help rebuild.
When they came and helped rebuild they stayed, and their families, a couple of generations on, are still coming over to families they have across here.
What right have we once we had convinced them to come and help rebuild to say please go home as we're full?
Surely a different economic model and demographic model is required to help the global population shift and therefore enhance Europes population increase?
The 10 million point increase on our population is going to have many effects but the biggest burden isn't going to be from migrant workers/immigrants/asylum seekers but from our own aging population. it is estimated that at the current growth rate that we will have a 3 fold increase from 1 million to over 3 million people over the age of 85 who will require care, benefits, housing and the pension costs associated with it. The cost of this is paid for by NI and TAX, therefore we have to increase the number of workers to produce this NI and TAX increase.
Migrants, economic or otherwise, tend to be young and of workable age. Our population is getting older and less able and thereby we will need a younger populace and since we can't produce this labour force ourselves because of our declining child bearing population. Migrants will be required to fulfill the gap.
Our country remains at a population increase of including migrants this is a lot lower than the 2.1 required for sustaining the country.
When they came and helped rebuild they stayed, and their families, a couple of generations on, are still coming over to families they have across here.
What right have we once we had convinced them to come and help rebuild to say please go home as we're full?
Surely a different economic model and demographic model is required to help the global population shift and therefore enhance Europes population increase?
The 10 million point increase on our population is going to have many effects but the biggest burden isn't going to be from migrant workers/immigrants/asylum seekers but from our own aging population. it is estimated that at the current growth rate that we will have a 3 fold increase from 1 million to over 3 million people over the age of 85 who will require care, benefits, housing and the pension costs associated with it. The cost of this is paid for by NI and TAX, therefore we have to increase the number of workers to produce this NI and TAX increase.
Migrants, economic or otherwise, tend to be young and of workable age. Our population is getting older and less able and thereby we will need a younger populace and since we can't produce this labour force ourselves because of our declining child bearing population. Migrants will be required to fulfill the gap.
Our country remains at a population increase of including migrants this is a lot lower than the 2.1 required for sustaining the country.
Orgasminator
Quote by GnV
As I understand it, the rise in population across Europe is not borne on increasing immigration so much per-se, it comes from the already identified fact that Muslims are parenting far more children than white Caucasian parents by a significant factor.
You refer to Muslims having more children then the average white caucasion. Russia, has more Muslims than the populations of Libya and Jordan combined. Germany has more Muslims than Lebanon. China has a bigger Muslim population than Syria. A person can be white yellow black brown pink or green and still be a muslim. Your comment implies that it is part of Muslim religion to have large families. It may surprises you to know that a person can be a Muslim without having children and that having children is not part of that or any religion. Muslim is a religion, not a person. It is the person who decides to have the children not the religion.
If you mean to say that a non white person has more chidren then a white person then say so, and not a muslim has more children then a white person
Quote by SlurpySarah
A quote from here:-
"The Muslim birth rate in Europe is three times higher than the non-Muslim one. If current trends continue, the Muslim population of Europe will nearly double by 2015, while the non-Muslim population will shrink by 3.5 percent."
I'm moving to Alaska.
Apparently europe has a population of 1/2 million of these 3-4% are of non european descent so doubling this small percentage would still leave them as a tiny percentage of the total population...it's easy to distort the truth in order to advance your agenda..the B.N.P. are seasoned pros at it
Actually, I took my quote from a muslim publication, written by muslims for muslims. I don't bother quoting from such an unreliable source as wankipedia - even my cat says it's unreliable, but he's 15 years old which in human years makes him 105, so a fairly wise cat. Work our for yourself what the muslim population will be in 2020 using the above rates (you can use fingers AND toes).
That comment is so anti-French... :shock:
You do know that the French numbering system was devised by Napoleon who was basically innumerate and could only add up as far as 20 using fingers and toes, didn't you?
So, as well as being just slightly short of racism, your comment is also against the educationally challenged
Quote by Try2
As I understand it, the rise in population across Europe is not borne on increasing immigration so much per-se, it comes from the already identified fact that Muslims are parenting far more children than white Caucasian parents by a significant factor.
You refer to Muslims having more children then the average white caucasion. Russia, has more Muslims than the populations of Libya and Jordan combined. Germany has more Muslims than Lebanon. China has a bigger Muslim population than Syria. A person can be white yellow black brown pink or green and still be a muslim. Your comment implies that it is part of Muslim religion to have large families. It may surprises you to know that a person can be a Muslim without having children and that having children is not part of that or any religion. Muslim is a religion, not a person. It is the person who decides to have the children not the religion.
If you mean to say that a non white person has more chidren then a white person then say so, and not a muslim has more children then a white person
No, sorry, I cannot say that nor did I mean that either. I am simply referring to what is written elsewhere.
Quote by Try2
As I understand it, the rise in population across Europe is not borne on increasing immigration so much per-se, it comes from the already identified fact that Muslims are parenting far more children than white Caucasian parents by a significant factor.
You refer to Muslims having more children then the average white caucasion. Russia, has more Muslims than the populations of Libya and Jordan combined. Germany has more Muslims than Lebanon. China has a bigger Muslim population than Syria. A person can be white yellow black brown pink or green and still be a muslim. Your comment implies that it is part of Muslim religion to have large families. It may surprises you to know that a person can be a Muslim without having children and that having children is not part of that or any religion. Muslim is a religion, not a person. It is the person who decides to have the children not the religion.
If you mean to say that a non white person has more chidren then a white person then say so, and not a muslim has more children then a white person
Hi Try3...ready to say sorry for being racist towards us white folk earlier on in this thread yet?
Quote by Mr-Powers
As I understand it, the rise in population across Europe is not borne on increasing immigration so much per-se, it comes from the already identified fact that Muslims are parenting far more children than white Caucasian parents by a significant factor.
You refer to Muslims having more children then the average white caucasion. Russia, has more Muslims than the populations of Libya and Jordan combined. Germany has more Muslims than Lebanon. China has a bigger Muslim population than Syria. A person can be white yellow black brown pink or green and still be a muslim. Your comment implies that it is part of Muslim religion to have large families. It may surprises you to know that a person can be a Muslim without having children and that having children is not part of that or any religion. Muslim is a religion, not a person. It is the person who decides to have the children not the religion.
If you mean to say that a non white person has more chidren then a white person then say so, and not a muslim has more children then a white person
Hi Try3...ready to say sorry for being racist towards us white folk earlier on in this thread yet?
Obviously very trying Powers as you have upgraded them from 2 to 3 :giggle:
Quote by GnV
As I understand it, the rise in population across Europe is not borne on increasing immigration so much per-se, it comes from the already identified fact that Muslims are parenting far more children than white Caucasian parents by a significant factor.
You refer to Muslims having more children then the average white caucasion. Russia, has more Muslims than the populations of Libya and Jordan combined. Germany has more Muslims than Lebanon. China has a bigger Muslim population than Syria. A person can be white yellow black brown pink or green and still be a muslim. Your comment implies that it is part of Muslim religion to have large families. It may surprises you to know that a person can be a Muslim without having children and that having children is not part of that or any religion. Muslim is a religion, not a person. It is the person who decides to have the children not the religion.
If you mean to say that a non white person has more chidren then a white person then say so, and not a muslim has more children then a white person
Hi Try3...ready to say sorry for being racist towards us white folk earlier on in this thread yet?
Obviously very trying Powers as you have upgraded them from 2 to 3 :giggle:
thats big fingers for yah!
well then...Try2,you made some sweeping racist comments towards white people...will you apologise or should i take it further?
I'm not letting this one go,if it had been a white person making those remarks a moderator would have dealt with it by now...
