Brexit - Leave or Remain poll

Who in their right mind could possibly argue for education that is not egalitarian? You want to deny somebody a fair crack at the whip - why? Stifle potential before it has had a chance to bloom... That seems like a really odd stance for anybody to take.

Obviously with no frontiers and borders immigration, by definition, would cease to exist. Job done.

Crime should be punished. I've no problems there. I'm not sure why you might think I do. I just don't go thinking the punishment itself is a complete solution because it isn't.

"Social and cultural revolution" is probably over-egging the pudding a little. I'd stop at radical reform quite happily.

Not that it matters a jot because you have your own, unique definition of Marxist. Or at least it appears that way because you don't seem to really have a handle on the whole Marxism thing at all. It's just a word, that you think is nasty, to throw at me, isn't it?

And I have not said that being Marxist is a bad thing at all. Merely that it is contradictory to fascist. Oh and, since then, Liberal.

It seems I'm all things to all people. Or something like that.

After continually calling people racists don't be surprised if some crass and maybe untrue barbs come back your own way, don't act the cnut then go all precious on us. You've thrown as much shit as anybody else, deal with the fall out.

Lord Biro wrote:

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

I would say, going by previous posts, that for SFD the following beliefs would apply.

Education to be egalitarian, our history to be denied and rewritten, atheism, abolition of frontiers and borders, open immigration, preference to understanding of crime rather than punishment, social and cultural revolution.

That's a Marxist in my book.

You have since denied the "rewrite history" bit. But not the others.

Since when has being called Marxist an insult. It's not meant as an insult and you're acting a bit precious.

Probably since the 1950s. Reds under the bed here and many many insults and worse under McCarthyism over there.
It has since become a term of ridicule. Where have you been this last 50 years ?

Marxism is a political idea that paves the way for communism. Fine, no problem.

A term of ridicule. Why?

Amsterdamage wrote:

After continually calling people racists don't be surprised if some crass and maybe untrue barbs come back your own way, don't act the cnut then go all precious on us. You've thrown as much shit as anybody else, deal with the fall out.

I don't recall calling anybody racist.

If I've been doing it continually then find a quote. It shouldn't be hard.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

After continually calling people racists don't be surprised if some crass and maybe untrue barbs come back your own way, don't act the cnut then go all precious on us. You've thrown as much shit as anybody else, deal with the fall out.

I don't recall calling anybody racist.

If I've been doing it continually then find a quote. It shouldn't be hard.

Memory not what it was huh? It's an age thing, use it or lose it.

You're a self obsessed, keyboard fascist Franny, nothing odd there, the world is full of them nowadays, you would never dare front anybody up and say the bowlocks you post on here direct to somebody's face.

Lord Biro wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Lord Biro wrote:

there were poverty wages in Victorian England, and there was no immigrant labour to blame that one on then. Get real.

Uh duh, you missed the whole Irish thing then?.

As usual with you, the Irish thing is not very far beneath the surface. So, who doesn't qualify as an immigrant in your sad world ? I assume Scottish folk are stealing good English jobs too. Maybe the Cornish too, you know, the 6 fingered ones you refer to.  If it wasn't for all these immigrants, the fair minded employers would be paying shed loads. Yeah ok.
I'm all for a debate on the EU and the UK, as I don't care which way it swings. But I don't have truck with your thinly disguised racist stuff, and never have on here. I won't be bothering with you again. You're an oaf.

You thick tw@!

The economy of Victorian Britain was based heavily on immigrant Irish labour, I was merely pointing out that you were posting rubbish, as usual.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Dunno about the polls but sterling gas gone through the floor.

The immigrration thing is almost the same as the UKIP thing. Not all people anti-immigration will be racist but all racists will be anti-immigration.

And while I am here which immigrant is it we are supposed to dislike?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

The price of Sterling has nothing to do with the state of the economy and the "floor" is long ways off yet.

Your schrodinger analogy is utter bowlocks as well, there are immigrants who come here, work hard, integrate and are a huge benefit to the country, there are immigrants who come here, work hard but don't integrate and because they get paid poorly claim huge amounts of benefits, there are immigrants that never lift a finger and get massive taxpayer support, an excellent case in point being a Somali couple who rocked up in 1997, have dropped five kids since and have been supported by the UK taxpayer to the tune of over a £100k a year, neither having done a stroke of work in this country.

I 4-1 don't hate them or any of the others, I hate the politicians who allow anything but the first option to happen.

The cat on the other hand is either dead or alive, tbh honest I couldn't care which.

Going over there, taking their jobs, creating pressure on their housing, schools and hospitals, drinking their beer etc

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Game, set and match to sir................ Or maybe not.

The population density of the European Union is 320 people to each square mile.

The population density of the United Kingdom is 680 people per each square mile.

Far easier to get lost in Europe than over here.

We can all come up with figures to prove a point.

Plus a lot of those will be retired people so not that much pressure on Schools and Jobs.

I just don't get Frannies obsession with immigration, it's not even half the problem with Europe in my eyes in fact I don't know anybody who is so obsessed with immigration. Im sure there's a graph to illustrate it somewhere.

I don't suppose many of them are claiming benefits and clogging up social housing either, got any figures Frank?

No.

Might I suggest that you read back through this thread and see who it was that brought up immigration first?

Or Syrians?

Or Turks?

Or refugees?

Or muslims?

Or borders?

Or anything vaguely like it?

Here's a clue: it wasn't me.

No to my request for figures.

I'm guessing the rest of the post is aimed at damage?

Please be clearer in future.

I don't know the bloody figures.

Perish the thought.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

No.

Might I suggest that you read back through this thread and see who it was that brought up immigration first?

Or Syrians?

Or Turks?
M
Or refugees?

Or muslims?

Or borders?

Or anything vaguely like it?

Here's a clue: it wasn't me.

I read back through the first two pages and immigration was briefly discussed by Frank and Tis but not in depth, I didn't mention it although I laid out why I was keen to leave maybe you should read it Frank. You have this obsession that the BNP thinly disguised as UKIP are engineering the out vote and what's more some of us are supporting that stance. There is not a lot of evidence on this thread.
Truth is I can see the good and bad in immigration but it's not the be all and end all. You seem to think that no borders is the way to go and you're entitled to that opinion but not agreeing with you doesn't make me a racist. The extra layers of government, loss of say over our own lives and the cost of being in Europe is why I want out before the problems that unlimited immigration will bring. Bang your drum but pick the right target to fire at.

I have been back to read it.

I have never accused you, or anyone else, of being racist. It's to your, and his, credit that you and Moist were the only two posters, when faced with a rather simplistic and clumsy metaphorical question, willing to agree to pull someone into a boat and not leave them to drown. Why anybody would hesitate (a point you pretty much made yourself) completely baffles me but there you are. Nobody else was willing to.

I've challenged you, or anybody else (and there's one or two on here who would be in like a shot if they could as you are well aware) who cares to look to produce the quotes where I have accused anybody of being racist. Nobody has. And they will not because they do not exist.

My major point, on this thread, has been that the older voters, as evidenced by every single picture I have seen from every single Out gathering, are frothing at the bit in their eagerness to vote Out despite, in many cases, not really having many years left ahead of them. I think this is the latest unfairness of many being visited upon our youth (many of whom will be denied a vote) who largely have disengaged from political process as a result. That same younger generation will not only be outnumbered by far but is also far less likely to vote and yet it is them who will have to live with the consequences for many, many years.

I am not and have not been obsessed by immigration but, unless you've been on a desert island or something for the last few years, you could not have failed to witness the bombardment of anti-immigration stories in the media with some being rather less tasteful than others and much of that feeds into the In/Out debate whether you or I like it or not.

Probably the lowest point was the diatribe from Katie Hopkins who actually advocated machine-gunning those fleeing across the Med but for a while our own government was advocating pulling our Navy out of the Med explicitly so that it wouldn't be there to save any refugees who might be in danger of drowning and although rather less aggressive it would have had pretty much the same result.

This is the level of rhetoric opined by ministers, defended on political programming and printed in the country's biggest-selling newspapers, mostly owned by vociferous outers mostly living off-shore and some of whom are not even British citizens.

I don't understand how anybody can see all of that and still be completely convinced that racism has nothing whatsoever to do with any of it.

All of which is very different from me accusing you, or anybody else, of being racist because, and please excuse the reiteration, I have not done so.

And if I have, like I said before, put up the quote.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

My major point, on this thread, has been that the older voters, as evidenced by every single picture I have seen from every single Out gathering, are frothing at the bit in their eagerness to vote Out despite, in many cases, not really having many years left ahead of them. I think this is the latest unfairness of many being visited upon our youth (many of whom will be denied a vote) who largely have disengaged from political process as a result. That same younger generation will not only be outnumbered by far but is also far less likely to vote and yet it is them who will have to live with the consequences for many, many years.

There you go again with the age/generation thing. And the "not many years in front of them" comment is frankly a bit disturbing. Does that make them undeserving ? You've swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Have you been got at ?
As for youngsters being disinterested in politics, we all should expect to have an unattended valuable stolen.
Voting is such a small part of political engagement. When people live under such a rigged system, be it UK or Brussels influenced, you only get out what you are prepared to stand up for in your daily life. If youngsters can't be arsed, as you seem to imply, then they will soon find out the cost of that apathy.
If there are more old folk than young blades, then that's how it is. There's nothing that can be done about that unless you are willing to seriously undermine the basic concept of personal human rights and democratic representation. I could quite as easily say it is unfair the younger kids are able to breathe deeper and sweeter than the old codgers. It's pointless indulgence that goes nowhere. The "generation war" is well trailed as being the next version of divide and rule. Please don't encourage it.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I have never accused you, or anyone else, of being racist. It's to your, and his, credit that you and Moist were the only two posters, when faced with a rather simplistic and clumsy metaphorical question, willing to agree to pull someone into a boat and not leave them to drown. Why anybody would hesitate (a point you pretty much made yourself) completely baffles me but there you are. Nobody else was willing to.

I 'hesitated' because it's a stupid question.  There is only one answer to give unless you want to be labelled an arsehole.

It really is third form stuff.

Having two kids (and 3 stepkids) of course I have sympathy with the younger generations but LB makes all the salient points. Each generation has to deal with life as it is, ask some young homeowners how they fancy 15% mortgage rates or electricity for 4 days a week.

How on earth does Sir Francis know they won't be better served by a UK outside of the European Union, quite simply he doesn't, he's just laying his personal preference on all, young and old.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I have been back to read it.

I have never accused you, or anyone else, of being racist. It's to your, and his, credit that you and Moist were the only two posters, when faced with a rather simplistic and clumsy metaphorical question, willing to agree to pull someone into a boat and not leave them to drown. Why anybody would hesitate (a point you pretty much made yourself) completely baffles me but there you are. Nobody else was willing to.

I've challenged you, or anybody else (and there's one or two on here who would be in like a shot if they could as you are well aware) who cares to look to produce the quotes where I have accused anybody of being racist. Nobody has. And they will not because they do not exist.

My major point, on this thread, has been that the older voters, as evidenced by every single picture I have seen from every single Out gathering, are frothing at the bit in their eagerness to vote Out despite, in many cases, not really having many years left ahead of them. I think this is the latest unfairness of many being visited upon our youth (many of whom will be denied a vote) who largely have disengaged from political process as a result. That same younger generation will not only be outnumbered by far but is also far less likely to vote and yet it is them who will have to live with the consequences for many, many years.

I am not and have not been obsessed by immigration but, unless you've been on a desert island or something for the last few years, you could not have failed to witness the bombardment of anti-immigration stories in the media with some being rather less tasteful than others and much of that feeds into the In/Out debate whether you or I like it or not.

Probably the lowest point was the diatribe from Katie Hopkins who actually advocated machine-gunning those fleeing across the Med but for a while our own government was advocating pulling our Navy out of the Med explicitly so that it wouldn't be there to save any refugees who might be in danger of drowning and although rather less aggressive it would have had pretty much the same result.

This is the level of rhetoric opined by ministers, defended on political programming and printed in the country's biggest-selling newspapers, mostly owned by vociferous outers mostly living off-shore and some of whom are not even British citizens.

I don't understand how anybody can see all of that and still be completely convinced that racism has nothing whatsoever to do with any of it.

All of which is very different from me accusing you, or anybody else, of being racist because, and please excuse the reiteration, I have not done so.

And if I have, like I said before, put up the quote.

Maybe there should be a sub poll-to drown or not to drown.

And,debating the youth thing,is there not a valid "not knowing your arse from your elbow" argument to be put forward? Certainly was in my case.

Frank would lower the voting age if he could, a 4yr old has the same right to have their voice heard as a 40yr old, life experience optional.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I have been back to read it.

I have never accused you, or anyone else, of being racist. It's to your, and his, credit that you and Moist were the only two posters, when faced with a rather simplistic and clumsy metaphorical question, willing to agree to pull someone into a boat and not leave them to drown. Why anybody would hesitate (a point you pretty much made yourself) completely baffles me but there you are. Nobody else was willing to.

I've challenged you, or anybody else (and there's one or two on here who would be in like a shot if they could as you are well aware) who cares to look to produce the quotes where I have accused anybody of being racist. Nobody has. And they will not because they do not exist.

My major point, on this thread, has been that the older voters, as evidenced by every single picture I have seen from every single Out gathering, are frothing at the bit in their eagerness to vote Out despite, in many cases, not really having many years left ahead of them. I think this is the latest unfairness of many being visited upon our youth (many of whom will be denied a vote) who largely have disengaged from political process as a result. That same younger generation will not only be outnumbered by far but is also far less likely to vote and yet it is them who will have to live with the consequences for many, many years.

I am not and have not been obsessed by immigration but, unless you've been on a desert island or something for the last few years, you could not have failed to witness the bombardment of anti-immigration stories in the media with some being rather less tasteful than others and much of that feeds into the In/Out debate whether you or I like it or not.

Probably the lowest point was the diatribe from Katie Hopkins who actually advocated machine-gunning those fleeing across the Med but for a while our own government was advocating pulling our Navy out of the Med explicitly so that it wouldn't be there to save any refugees who might be in danger of drowning and although rather less aggressive it would have had pretty much the same result.

This is the level of rhetoric opined by ministers, defended on political programming and printed in the country's biggest-selling newspapers, mostly owned by vociferous outers mostly living off-shore and some of whom are not even British citizens.

I don't understand how anybody can see all of that and still be completely convinced that racism has nothing whatsoever to do with any of it.

All of which is very different from me accusing you, or anybody else, of being racist because, and please excuse the reiteration, I have not done so.

And if I have, like I said before, put up the quote.

Francis, it was such a silly question, with such an obvious answer, maybe that's why most didn't bother. BTW, you are not averse to avoiding questions when it suits.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

One for you then SFD, you've gone mountaineering and your mate, who's tethered to you, slips and is left hanging over the precipice. He's going to take you with him unless you cut the rope.

What do you reckon, sainthood or murder?

I'm still waiting for a fairly obvious answer from St Francis of Assissi but it might expose him as less than saintly.

Just admit you'd cut the rope.

By the way, the two questions have nothing in common with each other except that they are at the opposite ends of morality.

Franny you have inferred racism by two quotes by memory, one was "you don't have to be racist to support UKIP but it helps" and more recently something along the lines of "all anti immigration supporters are racist" can't be bothered to scroll back and find them but there they are, like it or not.
As for the generational thing you ignored my assertion that my twenty year old said that he will vote out (remote government making crazy rules for him was the main reason given), migration not mentioned and also most of his friends would vote out also (no reasons given but I could ask if I thought you'd be interested?) His demographic is about fifty/fifty averagely qualified GCSE level school leavers to a level achievers with the odd uni educated one thrown in. Most are working, non are communist or Marxist (as far as I know) but Rollo would call most of them "lefties".