I have never been a big fan of a large majority, whichever party. Makes them feel unaccountable and lazy. Just a small working majority.
Happy new year to you.
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
I have never been a big fan of a large majority, whichever party. Makes them feel unaccountable and lazy. Just a small working majority.
Happy new year to you.
Its insane. You could get a cab to parliament. Go for a few pints in one of the (many) heavily subsidised bars. Get a cab back home. They'll pay for the cabs and give you £342 for your trouble.
This Cnut will now be in the House of Lords.
Yes. And they have got away with not telling the truth, or lying to the country for the last 13 years. In fact, telling lies has become the norm now to the extent that no one is even remotely surprised.
I'd love to punch that stupid lying face so, so much.
"Absolute power corrupts.." etc.
...and to you and yours my friend, hope its a good one.
So, do Tories think Cummings can pull off another con?
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...s-held-secret-election-talks-with-rishi-sunak
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...s-held-secret-election-talks-with-rishi-sunak
It may be a move to placate the right of the party?
In any event what the hell can they run on after 14 years of destroying the country?
That would work? Suppose that's one way to counter a Farage come back.
Gotta love community notes
They plan to throw up enough 'red-herrings' to retain the seats they need to prevent Starmer getting a good working majority, that is all the Tories are looking at now, other than a political void.
Cummings could be just the man to provide them with the levels of disorientation to muddy the waters in key areas and in key constituencies, especially to keep the One nation Tories from going over to the Lib-Dem's.
Imagine this as your first message of the new year. What a Cnut.
So without immigration and a falling birth rate can anyone explain to me how they’re going to keep wage inflation down?
By keeping economic productivity low of course.
They don't really care about impacts. Universities are already feeling the impact with lower numbers of international students this year. Some will be in real financial difficulties as a result.
You sound like one of those woke lefties, why do you hate Britain so much?!?!?
Not sure if this post is real or a piss take
LOOK OVER THERE!!! IMIGINT CRIMINILS coming to take your union flags and PENISES away!
I am aware of one losing £10m a year
Is immigration just Tory propaganda to get the idiots on board, or is there an economic angle for the elites and corporates? Genuine question.
I'd say the first. Generally speaking immigration benefits the economy and the corporate class - more possible workers mean less pressure for higher wages and so on.
The first. They recognise that fear plays on peoples emotions and decisions more strongly than hope. Therefore they aim to gain support from those in areas of poverty by aiming to convince them that immigrants will take what little employment opportunity they have. The upper class don’t typically vote conservative on immigration policy. It’s usually more financial.
Study after study has shown immigrants are a net positive to the UK. It’s undeniable at the point.
The other things, education is one of UK’s biggest exports. Sunak has just decimated the industry.
Last edited:
Sorry buddy I couldn’t resist!
They’re all a bunch of ghastly sycophants who don’t actually govern, they simply campaign or heckle 24/7.
They have been doing it for years. Tuition fees should be 12k by now taking inflation into account. They haven't risen and government funding was cut 80%. Every home student taken is a loss to universities. The only thing keeping them afloat is international students.
If there are less number of foreign students, does it mean the UK students get to join those courses? If that’s the case, wouldn’t this be a net positive for UK in the long term in terms of having a more educated population?
I sense I’m missing something here, can someone please explain what that is..
I sense I’m missing something here, can someone please explain what that is..
Tuition fees for home students are too low. Universities make a loss on every undergraduate home students they take.
Presumably, most of the UK candidates that can enter and want to do the courses are already doing the courses. Even if universities lower entry standards, there probably are not that many more UK students they can recruit.
Plus, UK students cannot really replace the revenue from international students, who pay much higher fees.
Last edited:
I know they obviously use it as a means to subvert the population away from the real issues and failings in the country, but there’s usually a private economic angle that their backers and donors are pushing for. That’s what brexit was after all. Interesting if there isn’t.
It is a way to win elections. There's no coincidence I think that this Government has railed against immigration for over 13 years whilst overseeing record amounts of immigration.
And then you have these cnuts...
Champagne worth £90,000 bought in House of Lords last year, FoI data shows
Sales of 1,589 bottles prove Lords is ‘archaic and out of touch’ during cost of living crisis, says the SNP
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ht-in-house-of-lords-last-year-foi-data-shows
Champagne worth £90,000 bought in House of Lords last year, FoI data shows
Sales of 1,589 bottles prove Lords is ‘archaic and out of touch’ during cost of living crisis, says the SNP
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ht-in-house-of-lords-last-year-foi-data-shows
What are they supposed to drink, sparkling wine?
To be fair £90,000 is only £1 per Lord so it's not that bad.
Immigration and by that I mean settlement (not just conquest) into mainland Britain has been going on for centuries. You could make a case that from 1066 onward that conquest was not an issue, since the Normans settled in Britain, and in effect took over most of it. Although not all immigration was always legal, or indeed welcomed at the time, it did nevertheless have some natural self-controlling features and/or was of such a scale that allowed over time immigrants to establish themselves and prosper, and the population benefit from the skills and expertise of the newcomers.
The economic influences overall have been beneficial and really started in the last two centuries in a massive way with Irish immigration, this influx of people helped to build much of the roadways, canals and railways in mainland Britain from the late eighteenth/nineteenth century well into the early twentieth century. In the 1950's there were people from the West Indies, arriving to help plug the gaps left after WW2 losses, these are referred to now as the Windrush Generation. They were followed by many of East Asian descent, who had been driven out of Kenya and who brought business and commercial expertise with them.
Overall and over time there has been a constant stream of immigration as well emigration to and from Britain that has allowed the country to flourish, in particular when preparations can be made and some-managed control can be exercised, which aids ongoing assimilation.
Latterly, and it could be argued initially through the 'free movement' aspect of being in the EU people have arrived, in many cases unexpectedly, and in such numbers both from inside and outside Europe that the 'disturbance' this causes in many local communities, because it was poorly estimated and then badly mismanaged, that immigration has become a highly politicised issue, that defies basic common sense/logic. In part this is because the criminal element of the 'small boats' issue, regardless of whether asylum seeking people or those just wanting a better life, has been used to inflame passions and became one of the PM's promise to stop,;because the process is illegal.
Sunak recognises that this has some resonance with a great many people regardless of their politics and it is what the Tories are now counting on to 'batten-down the hatches' in their own party (and shut out Reform) and maybe able to pressure enough of the returning red wall voters to think twice in the GE. It won't overcome the genuine desire for change within the vast majority British public, or stop Labour gaining office, but it could take the shine of a Labour majority.
In any case the country will not take a proper and serious look at the implications for the future of having a planned and robust policy and resource commitment to immigration, until the small boat thing is sorted.
The economic influences overall have been beneficial and really started in the last two centuries in a massive way with Irish immigration, this influx of people helped to build much of the roadways, canals and railways in mainland Britain from the late eighteenth/nineteenth century well into the early twentieth century. In the 1950's there were people from the West Indies, arriving to help plug the gaps left after WW2 losses, these are referred to now as the Windrush Generation. They were followed by many of East Asian descent, who had been driven out of Kenya and who brought business and commercial expertise with them.
Overall and over time there has been a constant stream of immigration as well emigration to and from Britain that has allowed the country to flourish, in particular when preparations can be made and some-managed control can be exercised, which aids ongoing assimilation.
Latterly, and it could be argued initially through the 'free movement' aspect of being in the EU people have arrived, in many cases unexpectedly, and in such numbers both from inside and outside Europe that the 'disturbance' this causes in many local communities, because it was poorly estimated and then badly mismanaged, that immigration has become a highly politicised issue, that defies basic common sense/logic. In part this is because the criminal element of the 'small boats' issue, regardless of whether asylum seeking people or those just wanting a better life, has been used to inflame passions and became one of the PM's promise to stop,;because the process is illegal.
Sunak recognises that this has some resonance with a great many people regardless of their politics and it is what the Tories are now counting on to 'batten-down the hatches' in their own party (and shut out Reform) and maybe able to pressure enough of the returning red wall voters to think twice in the GE. It won't overcome the genuine desire for change within the vast majority British public, or stop Labour gaining office, but it could take the shine of a Labour majority.
In any case the country will not take a proper and serious look at the implications for the future of having a planned and robust policy and resource commitment to immigration, until the small boat thing is sorted.
Last edited:
Oh feck off.
I assume he is going to take this objection to the church, or does he not realise that Easter is a moveable feast?