The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (17 Viewers)

As of right now, how are thinking of voting? In or out

  • Remain

    Votes: 23 37.1%
  • Leave

    Votes: 35 56.5%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 3 4.8%
  • Not registered or not intention to vote

    Votes: 1 1.6%

  • Total voters
    62
  • Poll closed .

Astute

Well-Known Member
How is it changing the subject? I'm not the one who always has to be 'right' here.

You were the one who started droning on about mobility benefits and 'scroungers', so I pointed out an example where it is fair enough if people need to use if for a car, which I believe you actually agreed with.

One man crusade? You certainly have a very inflated sense of importance.
Not at all.....as usual. I say about scroungers. You try to make out that I am against those who need help. You made out that we were talking about people with MS. We're they scroungers?

My self importance? Yeah let's get rid of monarchy because they are worthless. Let's get rid of private schools because it isn't fair on those who can't afford to send their children to private schools. So what if some can afford it.

If I had made comments lime that I would be on a one man crusade.

You are like Mart. You don't live in the UK but you want to change everything in the UK.
 

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
Not at all.....as usual. I say about scroungers. You try to make out that I am against those who need help. You made out that we were talking about people with MS. We're they scroungers?

No I didn't, that's something you've made up. I didn't make out we were talking about MS, I used it as an example to agree with you, ffs. I would get that need to play the victim all of the time looked into.

My self importance? Yeah let's get rid of monarchy because they are worthless. Let's get rid of private schools because it isn't fair on those who can't afford to send their children to private schools. So what if some can afford it.

Again, more nonsense that you have made up.

My reasons for not being pro-monarchy have nothing to do with them being 'worthless'. My reasons for not liking private schools have nothing to do with it being unfair on those who can't afford to go to them.

You've just made that up or made your usual assumptions about someone's opinions.
If I had made comments lime that I would be on a one man crusade.

You are like Mart. You don't live in the UK but you want to change everything in the UK.

I didn't actually make those comments, you've just made them up.

I don't want to change everything in the UK, surprise surprise...again, you've made it up.

We are both still citizens of the country, moving away does not change that.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Sometimes I pop on this thread and think I comprehend the English language very differently to some others...
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Sometimes I pop on this thread and think I comprehend the English language very differently to some others...

I’m still wondering which countries around the globe you’d like to live in that do not allow private education
 

martcov

Well-Known Member
Not at all.....as usual. I say about scroungers. You try to make out that I am against those who need help. You made out that we were talking about people with MS. We're they scroungers?

My self importance? Yeah let's get rid of monarchy because they are worthless. Let's get rid of private schools because it isn't fair on those who can't afford to send their children to private schools. So what if some can afford it.

If I had made comments lime that I would be on a one man crusade.

You are like Mart. You don't live in the UK but you want to change everything in the UK.

Actually I have nothing against the major royals. Several have been on my stand at events. My best sales day on an exhibition was when Edward turned up. Stand was so full he didn’t even make it to the bar. He is quite small and the Germans, who are generally big, wouldn’t let him through. He gave up. Philipp referred to Chancellor Kohl as Herr Reichskanzler ( last Reichskanzler was Adolf Hitler ) when he was at event where my stand was.

And, I don’t want to change everything in the UK. I want the UK to stay in the EU. No change there.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I'm still wondering why you ask obliquely tangential questions in order to try and throw a position off track.

Well I’m wondering given your mantra of fairness and equality which examples of that you can supply to support the assertion that forced denial of freedom and choices will actually be represented in the societies where such beliefs exist
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
No I didn't, that's something you've made up. I didn't make out we were talking about MS, I used it as an example to agree with you, ffs. I would get that need to play the victim all of the time looked into.



Again, more nonsense that you have made up.

My reasons for not being pro-monarchy have nothing to do with them being 'worthless'. My reasons for not liking private schools have nothing to do with it being unfair on those who can't afford to go to them.

You've just made that up or made your usual assumptions about someone's opinions.


I didn't actually make those comments, you've just made them up.

I don't want to change everything in the UK, surprise surprise...again, you've made it up.

We are both still citizens of the country, moving away does not change that.
View attachment 11390




Not sure what that has to do with someone having severe MS, but oh well.
Lie 1 proven.

So why should private schools be banned?
My feelings about private schools have nothing to do with prejudice, just wanting to see a fairer system for all and more investment into the education sector.
A fairer system for all? As in not all can afford private education? Or would you like to explain for once.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Well I’m wondering given your mantra of fairness and equality which examples of that you can supply to support the assertion that forced denial of freedom and choices will actually be represented in the societies where such beliefs exist
You do make me laugh. This board wouldn't be the same without you.
 

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
It's either:

1. Move House
2. Blag they have moved house
3. Pay for school

Not much choice really.

Parenting pays a part as well, I'm by no means Super Nanny but when there are kids going to school and the teachers have to dress them, take them to the toilet and generally act like a parent to them they don't have time to do much else.

The problem is that other agencies that used to pick up this kind of thing are simply not there anymore. Surestart centres, multi-agency support networks which where often offshoots from social work have been axed. It seems strange that this kind of thing would even be necessary, but this vicious circle begins where you have vulnerable young people that can't access the support they need. It manifests itself, often meaning they're kicked out of school, no qualification etc and no future prospects. Then they procreate and often the circle starts again.

At the centre of this is a government that has deliberately underfunded an entire network for young people from birth through to adulthood. Not because they could never afford it, but because they simply don't give two shits.
 

Nick

Administrator
The problem is that other agencies that used to pick up this kind of thing are simply not there anymore. Surestart centres, multi-agency support networks which where often offshoots from social work have been axed. It seems strange that this kind of thing would even be necessary, but this vicious circle begins where you have vulnerable young people that can't access the support they need. It manifests itself, often meaning they're kicked out of school, no qualification etc and no future prospects. Then they procreate and often the circle starts again.

At the centre of this is a government that has deliberately underfunded an entire network for young people from birth through to adulthood. Not because they could never afford it, but because they simply don't give two shits.

I agree but there's only so much parents can blame others and agencies. There are generations of them, people who I went to school with have kids like it and they will have kids etc.

Used to feel sorry for some of the kids in the playground, no matter how bright you could tell how they will end up.

That's not being snobby, it's just how it is / was. :(
 

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
I agree but there's only so much parents can blame others and agencies. There are generations of them, people who I went to school with have kids like it and they will have kids etc.

Used to feel sorry for some of the kids in the playground, no matter how bright you could tell how they will end up.

That's not being snobby, it's just how it is / was.

So how do you break the cycle? You start by investing in communities, local schools, nurseries. It has to be preventative, not just reactive. You pay for these things where you have the capacity to make a difference, instead of merely throwing money at a problem once it has happened. If you have to spend money to put a social worker in every inner-city primary and secondary school as an example, does that not ultimately work out cheaper than if that means you can influence young peoples lives to stop them falling into the penal system or things like that? It's perhaps a crude example I know, but you get the point.
 

Nick

Administrator
So how do you break the cycle? You start by investing in communities, local schools, nurseries. It has to be preventative, not just reactive. You pay for these things where you have the capacity to make a difference, instead of merely throwing money at a problem once it has happened. If you have to spend money to put a social worker in every inner-city primary and secondary school as an example, does that not ultimately work out cheaper than if that means you can influence young peoples lives to stop them falling into the penal system or things like that? It's perhaps a crude example I know, but you get the point.

No I agree. If they put somebody like that in a school it would take the responsibility off the teacher of parenting the kids. (as well as trying to teach and do everything else).

School to some people is just somewhere that looks after their kids for a few hours every day. They had / have no interest in their child's education.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Lie 1 proven.

So why should private schools be banned?

A fairer system for all? As in not all can afford private education? Or would you like to explain for once.

Private schools should be banned for the same reason gated communities (and burkas :O ) should IMHO. They prevent integration and the embed privilege and hidden social networks.

Any system that puts the likes of Johnson, Osborne and Cameron in charge of the country needs serious questions asking of it (and for that matter, grammar schools for the middle classes, see Corbyn in power).

Also you shouldn’t be able to opt out of the National systems becau
 
Last edited:

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
I agree but there's only so much parents can blame others and agencies. There are generations of them, people who I went to school with have kids like it and they will have kids etc.

Used to feel sorry for some of the kids in the playground, no matter how bright you could tell how they will end up.

That's not being snobby, it's just how it is / was. :(

As much as I support massive increases in funding for social services, I agree wholeheartedly with this. We need a net to catch the kids that are dropped, but we also need to stop pussyfooting around the fact that too many lazy fuckers are dropping them.
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
Private schools should be banned for the same reason gated communities (and burkas :eek: ) should IMHO. They prevent integration and the embed privilege and hidden social networks.

Any system that puts the likes of Johnson, Osborne and Cameron in charge of the country needs serious questions asking of it (and for that matter, grammar schools for the middle classes, see Corbyn in power).

Also you shouldn’t be able to opt out of the National systems becau
So if it wasn't for gated communities the rich would live on council estates?

They live in gated communities for safety reasons. If they didn't they still wouldn't live next door to you. They would buy a property that would be in an area the vast majority couldn't afford to live in.

Where do you live? Would you like to live in a very rough place where you don't feel safe? Why not? Why don't you live there? Because you can afford to live somewhere better. The rich can afford somewhere better again.
 

Nick

Administrator
I don't get the gated community thing either.

If I won the lottery I'd buy a big house surrounded by a huge fence and gates.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I don't get the gated community thing either.

If I won the lottery I'd buy a big house surrounded by a huge fence and gates.

So would those who complain. It’s the politics of envy and a desire to drag everyone down to their level
 

Nick

Administrator
What's the issue with people living behind gates? They do go outside them, they aren't (well, not the ones I have seen) are cults where they live there and only there.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
It’s ridiculous to claim those who oppose it are living in envy and relative poverty.
Especially as gated communities aren't even for the uber well off half the time!

I could afford to live in one... so could many others.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
What's the issue with people living behind gates? They do go outside them, they aren't (well, not the ones I have seen) are cults where they live there and only there.
They create a divide, and offer a physical division. Place is used as a marker of division and difference.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
It’s ridiculous to claim those who oppose it are living in envy and relative poverty.

How many of them can afford to take advantage who oppose them then? Name some.
 

Nick

Administrator
They create a divide, and offer a physical division. Place is used as a marker of division and difference.

A divide from what though? My front wall divides mine and my neighbours houses from the path. We have a fence inbetween at the back to divide.

I wouldn't want to live in one to divide myself from the outside world. I would still go outside.

Does the gated office I work in means it thinks it is better than others or just likes the security of knowing who comes in and out?
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
So would those who complain. It’s the politics of envy and a desire to drag everyone down to their level

I could afford to live in a gated community, (you don't really need that much money), but I'd rather stick pins in my eyes.
Wouldn't see them banned, if people want to live in them that's up to them, but to suggest it's envy is nonsense.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
I think many disagree with my opinion on the nonsense of leaving without a deal or at all and that’s ok. Hopefully after tonight we can pull together to make sure whatever happens we seek unity and shared responsibility for making things better in this country and the world. We need to hold our parliament to account for allowing deep division but are also responsible for ensuring it doesn’t tear the fabric of our society apart
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top