brexit, Coronavirus and the eu

[jetro 5,349]

15 minutes ago, ChrisJones said:

For me it would be a massive do over. A strong foundational constitution and repealing of tens of thousands of bullsh*t laws. That would the start point. The short answer is individual liberty. Everything up from there is open to discussion with the people.

Very good.

I have had this discussion many times with a good friend of mine. I would completely change the running of the country. This is pure fantasy of course lol.

First off, get rid of the government we have, and just have a few trustworthy members  on staff, for a normal weeks wage, which will be reviewed every four months, to see are they pulling their weight.

Next get rid of the churchs out of running the country, and take back the property they have. All they own is the church. 

Bring back the death penalty for pedos, rapists murders and drug dealers.

3 strike system for all other crimes, plus chain  gangs.

I would legalise cannabis and prostitution, strictly regulated,

Create work for the people with the best standard of living we can give.

Close all borders, stop forgin aid.

Rebuild old derlitic buildings for the homeless.

There's so much more and better thought out, that I can't write it all now.

There just the head lines

Atb j 

[ChrisJones 7,975]

9 minutes ago, jetro said:

Very good.

I have had this discussion many times with a good friend of mine. I would completely change the running of the country. This is pure fantasy of course lol.

Of course! Same boat this end. I've had the discussion on numerous occasions with lads from America, Canada, and Mexico. It's been really interesting to hear the Mexican perspective from where some of them have grown up. One of the Bosnian lads from our northern branch had some insight too! It's amazing how working class lads from all backgrounds agree on many issues.

13 minutes ago, jetro said:

First off, get rid of the government we have, and just have a few trustworthy members  on staff, for a normal weeks wage, which will be reviewed every four months, to see are they pulling their weight.

I'd devolve it into regions dealing with regional issues. National level's primary concern should be with the miltary (national security and emergencies) and foreign policy.

16 minutes ago, jetro said:

Create work for the people with the best standard of living we can give.

This where I'm an advocate for removing obstacles to business. People need to create the best standard of living. They can do that with through business and employment. Government can't create prosperity but it can remove it.

19 minutes ago, jetro said:

Close all borders, stop forgin aid.

This where I get unpopular because I'd go further and limit domestic aid to those that actually need the safety net. We can all decide on legitimate examples without the need to list them. Removing the desire/dependency to live off the state would help fill vacant jobs and remove the need to close borders, IMHO. Paying people to do nothing creates resentment as a starter. Only those that need it should have the access to it.

23 minutes ago, jetro said:

There's so much more and better thought out, that I can't write it all now.

Same. It's hard to start nailing it down because this is actually one area of diversity that can't be simply stated!

[jetro 5,349]

1 minute ago, ChrisJones said:

Of course! Same boat this end. I've had the discussion on numerous occasions with lads from America, Canada, and Mexico. It's been really interesting to hear the Mexican perspective from where some of them have grown up. One of the Bosnian lads from our northern branch had some insight too! It's amazing how working class lads from all backgrounds agree on many issues.

I'd devolve it into regions dealing with regional issues. National level's primary concern should be with the miltary (national security and emergencies) and foreign policy.

This where I'm an advocate for removing obstacles to business. People need to create the best standard of living. They can do that with through business and employment. Government can't create prosperity but it can remove it.

This where I get unpopular because I'd go further and limit domestic aid to those that actually need the safety net. We can all decide on legitimate examples without the need to list them. Removing the desire/dependency to live off the state would help fill vacant jobs and remove the need to close borders, IMHO. Paying people to do nothing creates resentment as a starter. Only those that need it should have the access to it.

Same. It's hard to start nailing it down because this is actually one area of diversity that can't be simply stated!

On the issiue of work, if and when work is provided, the people in the aera must take it, or no benefits, what ever. 

Just one police force the army.

Yes most definitely trade with other countries, but on our terms.

The finer points make it sound so much better, well at least in my head it does lol.

Kids under 18 breaking the law, militarily school, thought, pride in their country, respect also in themselves as well, and thaught a trade as well.

Take back our fishing and gas grounds. 

Create work with off shore wind farms.

Tell Brussels to forget about the money.

The banks and the politicians at the time caused the upset, let them pay it back, not the people.

Cut taxes, but use them properly. 

These so much that could be done, but never will be.

As I said just a bit of fun, idle chat. 

Atb j 

[ChrisJones 7,975]

5 minutes ago, jetro said:

These so much that could be done, but never will be.

As I said just a bit of fun, idle chat. 

True! We could spend days listing it and it's more to while away the time than anything else.

There can't be a man here that hasn't got an opinion on it and I'd love to read them!

[jetro 5,349]

1 minute ago, ChrisJones said:

True! We could spend days listing it and it's more to while away the time than anything else.

There can't be a man here that hasn't got an opinion on it and I'd love to read them!

Atb j 

[ChrisJones 7,975]

@WILF what do you think of Hungary's new education curriculum that Orban has just released? Personally I have no issue with some of the nationalist rhetoric but pushing propaganda, revising past mistakes and removing them all together?

Isn't that exactly what we're saying was Britain's problem in the last few decades?

[WILF 47,060]

2 hours ago, ChrisJones said:

@WILF what do you think of Hungary's new education curriculum that Orban has just released? Personally I have no issue with some of the nationalist rhetoric but pushing propaganda, revising past mistakes and removing them all together?

Isn't that exactly what we're saying was Britain's problem in the last few decades?

It’s exactly that mate.......however all I will say is, it’s fighting fire with fire in many respects.

Terrible afflictions bring with them terrible remedies......it’s the most dangerous thing about what we loosely call “the lefts” assault on free speech, quelling of any debate, weaponising ideologies and language 

When you can ruin a persons life for making a joke or comment you don’t approve of then what’s the remedy for that?.......it has to be something equally over the top and terrible.

They have been re-writing history and bending the truth for years in the UK and latterly Europe and now “the other side” is using that weapon against them there’s an outcry !

Theres a simple solution, you allow full and free speech wether you like it or not, wether it offends or not........or you get the same hammer used against you that you yourself have been using for years.

I dont particularly approve of editing history but the intellectual gloves have got to come off with this zealots.......

Edited April 2, 2020 by WILF

[ChrisJones 7,975]

25 minutes ago, WILF said:

It’s exactly that mate.......however all I will say is, it’s fighting fire with fire in many respects.

Terrible afflictions bring with them terrible remedies......it’s the most dangerous thing about what we loosely call “the lefts” assault on free speech, quelling of any debate, weaponising ideologies and language 

But this is fighting bullsh*t with bullsh*t.

Replacing an arguably corrupt system with another isn't a remedy, IMHO. Especially when you sprinkle on what at the current view appears to be a unhealthy seasoning of authoritarianism. It remains to be seen but this isn't an improvement. They're already sub-dividing their system with anti-antisemitism if indeed that is what they're doing.

28 minutes ago, WILF said:

When you can ruin a persons life for making a joke or comment you don’t approve of then what’s the remedy for that?.......it has to be something equally over the top and terrible.

Not at all. You reset the system and uphold that right to free-speech. You break a system by removing individual rights. You can't fix it by simply turning it on it's head. If this was to be a successful venture into a nationalist government it's already taken a dark turn, no?

31 minutes ago, WILF said:

They have been re-writing history and bending the truth for years in the UK and latterly Europe and now “the other side” is using that weapon against them there’s an outcry !

Agreed but the danger is making free speech a weapon. I can't argue that the UK and the EU are utterly wrong in their political correctness venture but to replace it with a stronger, more authoritarian version, is f*ck*ng bonkers! I said earlier in the thread about subdividing within itself. If just a few days it wanted a strong Hungarian identity (Ethnic values) and now, if that article is correct pushing for a religious division. It's already pushing against the issues we agreed would lead it fail and all of this is done under the rule of a prime minister who now has absolute power.

38 minutes ago, WILF said:

Theres a simple solution, you allow full and free speech wether you like it or not, wether it offends or not........or you get the same hammer used against you that you yourself have been using for years.

I dont particularly approve of editing history but the intellectual gloves have got to come off with this zealots.......

Can't disagree with any of that but immediately instituting the very things that have caused the problems in the first place, to insulate the them from the fundamentals of free speech, is exactly the same as what we're all concerned about.

The problem with hammers is that if it's the only tool you have every problem starts to look like a nail. This isn't removing the intellectual gloves it's dissolving the hands in a vat of acid!

[WILF 47,060]

8 hours ago, ChrisJones said:

But this is fighting bullsh*t with bullsh*t.

Replacing an arguably corrupt system with another isn't a remedy, IMHO. Especially when you sprinkle on what at the current view appears to be a unhealthy seasoning of authoritarianism. It remains to be seen but this isn't an improvement. They're already sub-dividing their system with anti-antisemitism if indeed that is what they're doing.

Not at all. You reset the system and uphold that right to free-speech. You break a system by removing individual rights. You can't fix it by simply turning it on it's head. If this was to be a successful venture into a nationalist government it's already taken a dark turn, no?

Agreed but the danger is making free speech a weapon. I can't argue that the UK and the EU are utterly wrong in their political correctness venture but to replace it with a stronger, more authoritarian version, is f*ck*ng bonkers! I said earlier in the thread about subdividing within itself. If just a few days it wanted a strong Hungarian identity (Ethnic values) and now, if that article is correct pushing for a religious division. It's already pushing against the issues we agreed would lead it fail and all of this is done under the rule of a prime minister who now has absolute power.

Can't disagree with any of that but immediately instituting the very things that have caused the problems in the first place, to insulate the them from the fundamentals of free speech, is exactly the same as what we're all concerned about.

The problem with hammers is that if it's the only tool you have every problem starts to look like a nail. This isn't removing the intellectual gloves it's dissolving the hands in a vat of acid!

Mate, I totally agree with all that.....what I really meant was (in a long winded and round about way) that what does anyone expect ?..........when crazy is the new normal then you will get equally as crazy pushing in the opposite direction.

Its not right and it certainly isn’t ideal but what do we expect.

[kanny 20,618]

12 hours ago, WILF said:

Theres a simple solution, you allow full and free speech wether you like it or not, wether it offends or not........or you get the same hammer used against you that you yourself have been using for years

I'm seeing this a lot  around certain places I visit and the problem is once you scratch at it a little its bollocks mate, according to some right wing free speech absolutists it's there given right to walk upto your kids and say what ever they like,they are just exercising there rights. 

Free speech was never about this  it was to give us the right to  criticize  government's religion and any other oppressive force it wasn't about being able to  offend people and hide behind the law so you don't get a smack in the face for your actions. 

[WILF 47,060]

3 minutes ago, kanny said:

I'm seeing this a lot  around certain places I visit and the problem is once you scratch at it a little its bollocks mate, according to some right wing free speech absolutists it's there given right to walk upto your kids and say what ever they like,they are just exercising there rights. 

Free speech was never about this  it was to give us the right to  criticize  government's religion and any other oppressive force it wasn't about being able to  offend people and hide behind the law so you don't get a smack in the face for your actions. 

I don’t agree mate, you Can’t put conditions to free speech and still call it free speech.....because it isn’t 

[kanny 20,618]

1 minute ago, WILF said:

I don’t agree mate, you Can’t put conditions to free speech and still call it free speech.....because it isn’t 

Then you have to accept that it's ok for someone to say the worst of things to your kids and not have a the right to act on it  your stance is decreasing your rights not increasing them . 

[WILF 47,060]

2 minutes ago, kanny said:

Then you have to accept that it's ok for someone to say the worst of things to your kids and not have a the right to act on it  your stance is decreasing your rights not increasing them . 

Society regulates itself mate if you allow it, someone who is a complete horror as a person pretty soon finds themselves unable to function in an area.....that’s the way it used to be and that the way it should be.

Plus, you have a choice as an individual, you can put said individual into intensive care if you want and have your day in court .......or not?.....because it also requires a change in mindset from government and law enforcement.

Coppers ain’t stupid, they know who almost every complete arsehole in their area is......and if that arsehole winds up with granny bashed out of him every now and then so be it.

Thats not what they do now, they look for the conviction or the “hate” crime because everything is based on a number now days rather than a set of moral values.

[kanny 20,618]

2 minutes ago, WILF said:

Society regulates itself mate if you allow it, someone who is a complete horror as a person pretty soon finds themselves unable to function in an area.....that’s the way it used to be and that the way it should be.

Plus, you have a choice as an individual, you can put said individual into intensive care if you want and have your day in court .......or not?.....because it also requires a change in mindset from government and law enforcement.

Coppers ain’t stupid, they know who almost every complete arsehole in their area is......and if that arsehole winds up with granny bashed out of him every now and then so be it.

Thats not what they do now, they look for the conviction or the “hate” crime because everything is based on a number now days rather than a set of moral values.

So you don't support free speech then.

Dont get it twisted I am playing devil's advocate a little here.  I agree we have crossed a line at present with curbing our free speech rights but I can also see that absolute free speech also has its problems .

I've spent hours listening to debates on this subject and what it usually boils down to is  some white guy wants the the right to call a black guy  nigger , and not get a smack up the lips for it .

I'm all for free speech as a right to criticise but not to abuse is where I personally stand on the subject. 

[Born Hunter 17,775]

4 minutes ago, kanny said:

Then you have to accept that it's ok for someone to say the worst of things to your kids and not have a the right to act on it  your stance is decreasing your rights not increasing them . 

Freedom comes at the expense of rights. A freedom is a protection from government, a right is the promise of a provision from government.

I don't completely agree with Wilf regarding freedoms. I think freedoms have to be limited, I don't think a society that values justice and equality can cope with such responsibility. For the examples you gave.

I value freedom, more than most would consider reasonable. But ideology and reality clash here. The limits on any freedom have to be judged based on the foundations and intentions of that freedom. Discourse is essential to democracy, it's there to allow a democracy to adapt and evolve without those in power impeding it with corrupt intents. The freer the speech, the more perfectly a democracy can operate. But if it ultimately leads to the destruction of society and potentially the democratic system itself, is that in keeping with our fundamental values still? The limits on free speech have to be decided based on that, based on the question "is this in the interest of democracy or that of government".

I don't think we have it completely right in this country, but neither do I think absolute freedom is right either. I tend to respect the wisdom of the Supreme Court on such constitutional matters, though perhaps not enough of their time has been spent on this in recent history.