Re: The Brexit Party.
Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2019 5:51 pm
You have been warned.iarmhiman wrote:As long as they still allow Marxists I'm happy.
Kind regards, Welsh Marxists
The definitive rugby union forum. Talk to fans from around the world about your favourite team
https://forum.planetrugby.com/
You have been warned.iarmhiman wrote:As long as they still allow Marxists I'm happy.
I was talking about what sewa said he wanted. It's not pheasable. Convergence will continue and it's something EU citizens have to accept and embrace.Leffe wrote:What you want to do here is to quite literally throw the baby out with the bath water. fudge em both out!Anonymous. wrote:So you are happy if the last 40 years of closer and closer union stops at this point in time with just the addition of an army.sewa wrote: Well that's a question that requires a very detailed answer and I am not in a position to answer it right now. The status quo with a common EU army would do me for now off the top of my head
Would you like to buy a bridge?
Pheasable is not even a word ffsAnonymous. wrote:I was talking about what sewa said he wanted. It's not pheasable. Convergence will continue and it's something EU citizens have to accept and embrace.Leffe wrote:What you want to do here is to quite literally throw the baby out with the bath water. fudge em both out!Anonymous. wrote:So you are happy if the last 40 years of closer and closer union stops at this point in time with just the addition of an army.sewa wrote: Well that's a question that requires a very detailed answer and I am not in a position to answer it right now. The status quo with a common EU army would do me for now off the top of my head
Would you like to buy a bridge?
OKsewa wrote:Pheasable is not even a word ffsAnonymous. wrote:I was talking about what sewa said he wanted. It's not pheasable. Convergence will continue and it's something EU citizens have to accept and embrace.Leffe wrote:What you want to do here is to quite literally throw the baby out with the bath water. fudge em both out!Anonymous. wrote:So you are happy if the last 40 years of closer and closer union stops at this point in time with just the addition of an army.sewa wrote: Well that's a question that requires a very detailed answer and I am not in a position to answer it right now. The status quo with a common EU army would do me for now off the top of my head
Would you like to buy a bridge?
That's not federalismMick Mannock wrote:Are you not someone who wants to see central power resting with the EU at the expense of national govts?sewa wrote:What an accusation Mick, I am shocked hereMick Mannock wrote:That is because you are a federalist.
Anti-Zionists?bimboman wrote:Insane_Homer wrote:A welcome action but of course nothing to do with recent spate of bad press in the last few days or how Leave.EU and the like leveraged FB advertising to target such groups and their supporters...
https://www.joe.co.uk/news/facebook-dan ... rst-228335
I wonder if JRM's supports group is affect?Facebook permanently bans EDL, Britain First and BNP for being 'dangerous'
Users will be kicked off the social media platform if they support far-right groups
Facebook has permanently banned several far-right groups from its platform under its "dangerous individuals and organisations" policy.
Several individuals and organisations, including the BNP, Britain First and the English Defence League.
Supporting the groups is now also against the site's community guidelines. As of midday Thursday, the ban affects more than just hate organisations, users coordinating support for the groups will now be banned, as well as posts and other content "expressing praise or support" for them.
The ban includes Britain First leader Paul Golding and his former deputy Jayda Fransen (Credit: Charles McQuillan) The ban includes Britain First leader Paul Golding and his former deputy Jayda Fransen
In a statement, Facebook said: "Individuals and organisations who spread hate, or attack or call for the exclusion of others on the basis of who they are, have no place on Facebook. Under our dangerous individuals and organisations policy, we ban those who proclaim a violent or hateful mission or are engaged in acts of hate or violence.
"The individuals and organisations we have banned today violate this policy, and they will no longer be allowed a presence on Facebook or Instagram. Posts and other content which expresses praise or support for these figures and groups will also be banned. Our work against organised hate is ongoing and we will continue to review individuals, organisations, pages, groups and content against our community standards."
Knights Templar International, National Front and National Action have also been banned, as well as their leaders and spokespeople.
Two months ago Tommy Robinson, real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, was also branded a dangerous individual.
This type of ban is much harsher than those previously applied to Britain First as it prevents individuals from supporting the group too.
Yesterday journalist Carole Cadwalladr gave a TED talk in Silicon Valley, attacking Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Google's co-founders and Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg. She decried the tech giants' total apathy toward the spread of hate through their platforms.
No you don’t it’s clear who has been banned and why.
OK then how about this...bimboman wrote:But IH that’s still the NHS not a radical over haul and change of financing model. It’s also from the useless Independent about the inept Mrs May. You’ll believe any old shite if you accepted that as evidence.
In other news, the useless MEP bureaucrat was...Let American firms run hospitals, urges free trade group
Oliver Wright, Policy Editor
September 19 2018, 12:01am,
The Times
The report, from the Initiative for Free Trade, has been edited by Daniel Hannan, a Tory MEP [and the founding President of the Initiative for Free Trade, one of the founder and prominent board member of vote Leave, being described in The Guardian as "the man who brought you Brexit"]
Ministers should allow American healthcare companies to compete with the NHS to run hospitals as part of a free-trade pact after Brexit, a think tank recommends.
The Initiative for Free Trade (IFT) said that Britain should also end its ban on imports of products such as chlorinated chicken and accept American environmental and food safety regulations as equivalent to those in the UK.
The moves, it claimed, would help clear the way for a UK-US trade deal that would “rewrite the rules” of global commerce and allow Britain to take advantage of trade freedoms offered by Brexit. The IFT has received backing from Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, and Boris Johnson.
Hannan ranks 738 out of 751 MEPs for his participation in roll call votes in the European Parliament
c69 wrote:Please stop quoting and engaging ffs.
He knows as much about the NHS as he does about roundabouts and self awareness.
Nigel Farage second most popular choice among Conservative Party councillors to be next Tory leader, finds new poll..
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... ive-party/Spoiler: show
iarmhiman wrote:So long term is the NHS sustainable?
Should the UK government stop pouring money into it and the focus by on private healthcare?
Source? Forecast for 2020 us that the NHS will consume slightly less than 23% of government spending, so you're forecasting a near 50% increase over the next 3 years (in reality far more than that unless the economy shrinks dramatically)bimboman wrote:iarmhiman wrote:So long term is the NHS sustainable?
Should the UK government stop pouring money into it and the focus by on private healthcare?
By 2023 the NHS will take 38% of all state spending. We will be a state health system with a country attached.
Saint wrote:Source? Forecast for 2020 us that the NHS will consume slightly less than 23% of government spending, so you're forecasting a near 50% increase over the next 3 years (in reality far more than that unless the economy shrinks dramatically)bimboman wrote:iarmhiman wrote:So long term is the NHS sustainable?
Should the UK government stop pouring money into it and the focus by on private healthcare?
By 2023 the NHS will take 38% of all state spending. We will be a state health system with a country attached.
Forecasts are that NHS expenditure as a % of GDP will stay relatively constant over the near to.mid term, at around 9.8% of GDP
And the people working in the NHS pay huge taxesSaint wrote:Source? Forecast for 2020 us that the NHS will consume slightly less than 23% of government spending, so you're forecasting a near 50% increase over the next 3 years (in reality far more than that unless the economy shrinks dramatically)bimboman wrote:iarmhiman wrote:So long term is the NHS sustainable?
Should the UK government stop pouring money into it and the focus by on private healthcare?
By 2023 the NHS will take 38% of all state spending. We will be a state health system with a country attached.
Forecasts are that NHS expenditure as a % of GDP will stay relatively constant over the near to.mid term, at around 9.8% of GDP
ffs.sewa wrote:And the people working in the NHS pay huge taxesSaint wrote:Source? Forecast for 2020 us that the NHS will consume slightly less than 23% of government spending, so you're forecasting a near 50% increase over the next 3 years (in reality far more than that unless the economy shrinks dramatically)bimboman wrote:iarmhiman wrote:So long term is the NHS sustainable?
Should the UK government stop pouring money into it and the focus by on private healthcare?
By 2023 the NHS will take 38% of all state spending. We will be a state health system with a country attached.
Forecasts are that NHS expenditure as a % of GDP will stay relatively constant over the near to.mid term, at around 9.8% of GDP
Not got the time to investigate that report tonight, but there's something wrong or distorted with the numbers. NHS is at 23% for 2020, a bit less than that today. That is provable fact. That report claims that it was at 23% years ago, and is already miles over that number. I suspect that it's something to do with what they're describing as public spending, as opposed to the government expenditure.bimboman wrote:Saint wrote:Source? Forecast for 2020 us that the NHS will consume slightly less than 23% of government spending, so you're forecasting a near 50% increase over the next 3 years (in reality far more than that unless the economy shrinks dramatically)bimboman wrote:iarmhiman wrote:So long term is the NHS sustainable?
Should the UK government stop pouring money into it and the focus by on private healthcare?
By 2023 the NHS will take 38% of all state spending. We will be a state health system with a country attached.
Forecasts are that NHS expenditure as a % of GDP will stay relatively constant over the near to.mid term, at around 9.8% of GDP
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-ot ... s-11542202
IFS.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48034732Former Conservative MP Ann Widdecombe has announced she is set to return to politics - for the Brexit Party.
She is on Boulton's show on SKY News at this moment..... Christ, you have lost it when you need to wheel that nutter out.Druid wrote:Nigel Farage Unleashes his secret weapon:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48034732Former Conservative MP Ann Widdecombe has announced she is set to return to politics - for the Brexit Party.
WTFsewa wrote:And the people working in the NHS pay huge taxesSaint wrote:Source? Forecast for 2020 us that the NHS will consume slightly less than 23% of government spending, so you're forecasting a near 50% increase over the next 3 years (in reality far more than that unless the economy shrinks dramatically)bimboman wrote:iarmhiman wrote:So long term is the NHS sustainable?
Should the UK government stop pouring money into it and the focus by on private healthcare?
By 2023 the NHS will take 38% of all state spending. We will be a state health system with a country attached.
Forecasts are that NHS expenditure as a % of GDP will stay relatively constant over the near to.mid term, at around 9.8% of GDP
sewa wrote:And the people working in the NHS pay huge taxesSaint wrote:Source? Forecast for 2020 us that the NHS will consume slightly less than 23% of government spending, so you're forecasting a near 50% increase over the next 3 years (in reality far more than that unless the economy shrinks dramatically)bimboman wrote:iarmhiman wrote:So long term is the NHS sustainable?
Should the UK government stop pouring money into it and the focus by on private healthcare?
By 2023 the NHS will take 38% of all state spending. We will be a state health system with a country attached.
Forecasts are that NHS expenditure as a % of GDP will stay relatively constant over the near to.mid term, at around 9.8% of GDP
Lovely Ann.The Sun God wrote:She is on Boulton's show on SKY News at this moment..... Christ, you have lost it when you need to wheel that nutter out.Druid wrote:Nigel Farage Unleashes his secret weapon:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48034732Former Conservative MP Ann Widdecombe has announced she is set to return to politics - for the Brexit Party.
I see you are in some difficulty here. When the government gives money to the people in the NHS they pay income taxes, PRSI, sales taxes when they buy things, duty on fuels, alcohol, cigarettes etc. The bulk of it ends up back in the governments pocket. Its not exactly a difficult conceptRodneyRegis wrote:WTFsewa wrote: And the people working in the NHS pay huge taxes
sewa wrote:I see you are in some difficulty here. When the government gives money to the people in the NHS they pay income taxes, PRSI, sales taxes when they buy things, duty on fuels, alcohol, cigarettes etc. The bulk of it ends up back in the governments pocket. Its not exactly a difficult conceptRodneyRegis wrote:WTFsewa wrote: And the people working in the NHS pay huge taxes
Yeah.......she is straight out of Macbeth.c69 wrote:There is something of the night about her.RodneyRegis wrote:Lovely Ann.The Sun God wrote:She is on Boulton's show on SKY News at this moment..... Christ, you have lost it when you need to wheel that nutter out.Druid wrote:Nigel Farage Unleashes his secret weapon:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48034732Former Conservative MP Ann Widdecombe has announced she is set to return to politics - for the Brexit Party.
I hear there's a vacancy as governor of the Bank of England coming up. You should apply.sewa wrote:I see you are in some difficulty here. When the government gives money to the people in the NHS they pay income taxes, PRSI, sales taxes when they buy things, duty on fuels, alcohol, cigarettes etc. The bulk of it ends up back in the governments pocket. Its not exactly a difficult conceptRodneyRegis wrote:WTFsewa wrote: And the people working in the NHS pay huge taxes
Thanks but I am happy in my current roleRodneyRegis wrote:I hear there's a vacancy as governor of the Bank of England coming up. You should apply.sewa wrote:I see you are in some difficulty here. When the government gives money to the people in the NHS they pay income taxes, PRSI, sales taxes when they buy things, duty on fuels, alcohol, cigarettes etc. The bulk of it ends up back in the governments pocket. Its not exactly a difficult conceptRodneyRegis wrote:WTFsewa wrote: And the people working in the NHS pay huge taxes
sewa wrote:Thanks but I am happy in my current roleRodneyRegis wrote:I hear there's a vacancy as governor of the Bank of England coming up. You should apply.sewa wrote:I see you are in some difficulty here. When the government gives money to the people in the NHS they pay income taxes, PRSI, sales taxes when they buy things, duty on fuels, alcohol, cigarettes etc. The bulk of it ends up back in the governments pocket. Its not exactly a difficult conceptRodneyRegis wrote:WTFsewa wrote: And the people working in the NHS pay huge taxes
The pheasants are revoltingsewa wrote:Pheasable is not even a word ffsAnonymous. wrote:I was talking about what sewa said he wanted. It's not pheasable. Convergence will continue and it's something EU citizens have to accept and embrace.Leffe wrote:What you want to do here is to quite literally throw the baby out with the bath water. fudge em both out!Anonymous. wrote:So you are happy if the last 40 years of closer and closer union stops at this point in time with just the addition of an army.sewa wrote: Well that's a question that requires a very detailed answer and I am not in a position to answer it right now. The status quo with a common EU army would do me for now off the top of my head
Would you like to buy a bridge?
Trostan wrote:Like a lot of major organisations, the NHS is a great engine for the national distribution of wealth.
Sewa is right to a significant extent; the local spin offs, not just in tax revenue but the purchase of local services and equipment, the creation of skills, the housing distribution; take into account not just money, but add in the wellbeing across your nation.
Of course, overall benefits are limited by the waste due to inefficiencies within the system
No idea what their assumptions are around migration, the ageing population and tax receipts. But still it sounds like they've mashed together health care and pensions, or maybe welfare sounded like the sort of thing that should be included under health care to the researcher.Saint wrote:Not got the time to investigate that report tonight, but there's something wrong or distorted with the numbers. NHS is at 23% for 2020, a bit less than that today. That is provable fact. That report claims that it was at 23% years ago, and is already miles over that number. I suspect that it's something to do with what they're describing as public spending, as opposed to the government expenditure.bimboman wrote:Saint wrote:Source? Forecast for 2020 us that the NHS will consume slightly less than 23% of government spending, so you're forecasting a near 50% increase over the next 3 years (in reality far more than that unless the economy shrinks dramatically)bimboman wrote:iarmhiman wrote:So long term is the NHS sustainable?
Should the UK government stop pouring money into it and the focus by on private healthcare?
By 2023 the NHS will take 38% of all state spending. We will be a state health system with a country attached.
Forecasts are that NHS expenditure as a % of GDP will stay relatively constant over the near to.mid term, at around 9.8% of GDP
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-ot ... s-11542202
IFS.
That doesn't sound right (whether one wants to use the term income or wealth) but I suppose you might have some very specific interpretations of distribution and wealth. And we should also note the NHS is also cost to taxpayersbimboman wrote:Trostan wrote:Like a lot of major organisations, the NHS is a great engine for the national distribution of wealth.
Sewa is right to a significant extent; the local spin offs, not just in tax revenue but the purchase of local services and equipment, the creation of skills, the housing distribution; take into account not just money, but add in the wellbeing across your nation.
Of course, overall benefits are limited by the waste due to inefficiencies within the system
, The NHS doesn’t distribute wealth.
It's the opposite. D'ohManInTheBar wrote:That's not federalismMick Mannock wrote:Are you not someone who wants to see central power resting with the EU at the expense of national govts?sewa wrote:What an accusation Mick, I am shocked hereMick Mannock wrote:That is because you are a federalist.
But it's not done on a per borough basis. It's a vote across the whole of London. So it doesn't matter what your very local vote is likely to be, its the whole region that counts.backrow wrote:My London borough voted leave so whatever I do will not matter, brexit protest vote will win easily here ,
You thick moron! Jesus wept that shows terrible understanding of basic concepts.Mick Mannock wrote:Are you not someone who wants to see central power resting with the EU at the expense of national govts?sewa wrote:What an accusation Mick, I am shocked hereMick Mannock wrote:That is because you are a federalist.
Federalism means subsidiarity.shereblue wrote:It's the opposite. D'ohManInTheBar wrote:That's not federalismMick Mannock wrote:Are you not someone who wants to see central power resting with the EU at the expense of national govts?sewa wrote:What an accusation Mick, I am shocked hereMick Mannock wrote:That is because you are a federalist.
Westminster residts sunsidiarity. The EU promotes it.
Is anyone still pretending that Labour are anything other than a Brexit party?c69 wrote:Why not Labour?Sefton wrote:Lib Dem, spit, or Green for me this week.