 |
| |
|
|
C0ckney
|
|
Big Up The Macedonian Massive
Apr 2000
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
I dont advocate culture wars, but integration and not assimilation into a hegemony is the way to go imo. That way, not only do you get the best of both worlds but you avoid alienating the people you should be embracing. The latter certainly isn't an option with people in any greater numbers than isolated cases. |
i'm not entirely sure what you are saying here but like i said, i think if people come to england they should be english. if you think that they do things better in your home country then bloody well stay there, we're doing alright without you 
quote:
Ah, no hence net benefit. You have X amount of land. 100% of that is currently used for farming. That has a worse effect than 30% of that used for housing, with 70% left to develop naturally. That is what I am saying. |
i think PA was right when he said you can't think of it like that. it is (and this is a candidate for understatement of the year  ) a bit more complicated than that.
quote:
British farming, except the speciality stuff that can't be produced anywhere else (like wendsleydale cheese :love, is superfluous because of the amount we could be importing from the third world, leading to cheaper food for us and a better deal for them. Instead we are subsidising ours (and Frances) farmers while those in the third world starve. I don't think that makes sense to me. Speaking in a utilitarian sense, the needs of people who are starving outweigh those of a relatively small number of people who can be found new jobs, while the economy benefits  . And ignorant.. it's probably the only economic issue I spent a serious amount of time considering . Hence I used the word superfluous, instead of malevolent. |
well i agree about the common agricultural policy (which is what you are on about wrt french farmers) but that's another thread don't you think
i'm not a utilitarian so i'm not that bothered about what would be best for 3rd world farmers, i'd rather worry about our own. our farmers produce good quality food and as long as there is a market for it then farming will not be 'superfulous'. british farmers also do the job of looking after the countryside, one wonders who would do that if the 'relatively small number of people' who farm the land no longer did so.
i think this talk about the teaching of our history is a bit much. if i'd just taken in what i was taught in school i wouldn't have known we'd ever had an empire, never mind the good and bad things about it :/
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
 |
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
You're a libertarian. Isn't that basing political theory on a pipe dream pretty much by definition?
|
Libertarianism is essentially alien to this, since I'm not using libertarian arguments. Note that my libertarianism is based upon a set of different premises to familial libertarianism. My arguments are utilitarian and could be held by pretty much any political view to the left of the BNP (not that there's a great deal to their right ).
quote:
Whaleboy, you exude the usual arrogance from a big fish in a small pond (ie, probably cleverest in your school/college). I've seen your ilk before. Don't think you know it all.
|
Making presumptions about my background (and very inaccurate ones at that) are not going to help you in this argument. Now if you have a problem with the manner in which I express myself and put forth my views, then please feel free to say so, best via PM or email so as not to spam. However you well know that if I'm faced with a superior argument, I'll quite happily drop my own and adopt it, Thus far you have been unable to provide me with one. If you're willing to continue this debate without resorting to psychoanalysis or attemting to classify my into one of your "ilks" based upon nothing more than a few threads, then I am willing to continue discussing. If you continue you're really just showing yourself to be a *****.
quote:
You haven't reasonably explained to me why the advantages/disadvantages of immigration to this country is of any concern to you. You don't care about the well-being of this one country in particular (so you say), so please explain why you support it.
|
Net benefits. It is my view that immigration (within limits of course) benefits the economy and culture of the host nation, and of course benefits the immigrants by moving from a poor nation to one where there is more opportunities. It thus benefits all that are directly concerned. Now you may respond by pointing out that immigration is reducing the workforce of the source nation. That is of course true, though because there are multiple sources, the impact upon one, relative to the numbers received here is far smaller. Needless to say, the more we do to improve the economy of the third world (including measures like the cessation of farmer subsidies) the less economic difference will be created between populations, so like current between a positive and negative charge, if you reduce the potential difference, the current decreases.
As a result, immigration can be controlled (long term) so current trends are not generalisable.
Let us of course also consider that it is the individuals choice whether or not they emmigrate from their home nation and economic grounds are not sufficient in my opinion to keep them prisoner in their own nation.
And let me clarify, I do care about the well being of this nation, but no more so than any other merely because I was born and live here. I see human life of equal worth, I don't place more value upon a British life than a Pakistani life.
quote:
i'm not a utilitarian so i'm not that bothered about what would be best for 3rd world farmers, i'd rather worry about our own. our farmers produce good quality food and as long as there is a market for it then farming will not be 'superfulous'. british farmers also do the job of looking after the countryside, one wonders who would do that if the 'relatively small number of people' who farm the land no longer did so.
|
British farmers ply the ground with artificial chemicals, destroy hedgerows and drain the ground of naturally occuring nitrates. The imbalances created eutrophicate small rivers, ponds and lakes that are essential for many forms of life, bird life is at an all time low, native wild flowers are a rarity and the ground exudes more CO2 than it absorbs. That is not good for the environment.
If much of the farm land was converted back to its original state: forest and woodland, with some being developed of course, that would be a blessing to the environment.
With regards to your piece about food, there is a market for food, regardless of the source. However, there is a greater market for cheap food. I'd rather pay 40p for a loaf of bread than 70p or whatever. That is good for the economy and gets much of the third world out of its straitjacket, especially if other nations adopt this approach too.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Park Avenue
|
 |
Liberal and defender of freedoms for the people
Oct 1999
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
Net benefits. It is my view that immigration (within limits of course) benefits the economy and culture of the host nation |
But you don't care about this since you're not a "nationalist".
quote:
and of course benefits the immigrants by moving from a poor nation to one where there is more opportunities. |
I don't think there's many doubting this right now.
quote:
It thus benefits all that are directly concerned. Now you may respond by pointing out that immigration is reducing the workforce of the source nation. That is of course true, though because there are multiple sources, the impact upon one, relative to the numbers received here is far smaller. |
Wtf? They don't just come here, they go to many nations - your point here is fallacious.
quote:
Needless to say, the more we do to improve the economy of the third world (including measures like the cessation of farmer subsidies) the less economic difference will be created between populations |
A good way of also doing this would be to ban immigration and create an incentive for third world countries to invest more heavily in education.
quote:
As a result, immigration can be controlled (long term) so current trends are not generalisable. |
Meaningless waffle.
quote:
Let us of course also consider that it is the individuals choice whether or not they emmigrate from their home nation and economic grounds are not sufficient in my opinion to keep them prisoner in their own nation. |
What would you say if all of Africa wanted to move here? Would you welcome them? Why/why not? 
quote:
And let me clarify, I do care about the well being of this nation, but no more so than any other merely because I was born and live here. I see human life of equal worth, I don't place more value upon a British life than a Pakistani life. |
Fine, I do.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Knevil
Like the Irish in Scotland? Or even worse, the Maori in New Zealand? Sometimes these things work out. |
Are you suggesting that everything is now hunky-dory between maoris and the rest of NZ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Knevil
No, but it's not on the path to race war. |
At the moment every other race in NZ is treated as second-class. The National party has had a huge boost in the polls recently after it's leader came out in support of treating everyone equally.
It's not a race war, but there's certainly a lot of fighting going on.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
|
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
But you don't care about this since you're not a "nationalist".
|
You really must understand that not being a nationalist doesn't mean that I don't want what is best economically for this nation, except that I don't want others to suffer because of it, and that suffering being greater than the benefits achieved by said measure. Like I said, I take a utilitarian view.
quote:
Wtf? They don't just come here, they go to many nations - your point here is fallacious.
|
Not at all, there are more host nations than there are source nations currently, at least with a considerable flow of refugees. I'm not accounting for a half-dozen native Australians .
quote:
A good way of also doing this would be to ban immigration and create an incentive for third world countries to invest more heavily in education.
|
What are they going to use to pay for that? Blood? A major increase in public spending there is called for, which has to come from somewhere, so a general economic boost is called for. The best way to do that is by importing our food from them.
quote:
Meaningless waffle.
|
It's not that difficult to understand . By reducing the main urge for people to immigrate, we can control the remaining flow by adjusting small attractors that are under our control, such as benefits (and communicating that change).
quote:
What would you say if all of Africa wanted to move here? Would you welcome them? Why/why not?
|
That is like my will to magically materialise on the moon. There comes a point where it is impossible. Believe it or not, the potential of British society is not infinite.
Why?
quote:
Well I might do, only because I know they wouldn't get in and every vote might make the mainstream political elite take note of their more realistic policies.
|
I like to think that I have shown them to be unrealistic. What is your problem with the "political elite" whatever that is?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
|
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
What should be the biggest educational story? The gulf in quality in pre-GCSE education. That's where the true inequality lies. yet the media and the government seem only concerned about altering the university admissions process.
|
But it is a very big issue. These are hundreds of thousands of people in dire straits because of education, alternatively viewed as the question of funding for some of the most important institutions in any developed society. I can't think of many issues that are more important than that!!  . And if you are saying that politicians pay no attention to the GCSE gap, well that's clearly wrong, remember the coverage last year?
Nonetheless, the measures used to solve are going to attract varying degrees of attention. Something that requires a slow change in approach is different to something that requires a sudden change in legistlation!
quote:
Just an example. The increase in tuition fees is not relevant at all
|
Sorry but no
quote:
What about crime. Someone got their head stamped on and killed 100m from where my dad works a couple of weeks ago. I bet the perpertrators get a couple of years tops. Rather than LIFE. Everyone knows who did it.
|
If there isn't sufficient evidence for their conviction in court then they are innocent as far as the state is concerned. Nonetheless, since everyone "knows", then that should be submitted in court. It's quite simple really. And for what its worth, two years is insufficient imo, unless they are rehabbed most effectively. To solve the problem would take longer. Life should, imo, be used only where rehab isn't an option and the prisoner is still a risk. Revenge will get no-one anywhere.
quote:
= politicians removed from reality.
|
You do know what the = symbol means?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Park Avenue
|
|
Liberal and defender of freedoms for the people
Oct 1999
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
These are hundreds of thousands of people in dire straits because of education, alternatively viewed as the question of funding for some of the most important institutions in any developed society. |
Dire straits? Debts on £10k?
Geez, maybe the government will have to buy everyone a home next, can't have people in dire straits owing £80k!
Universities - most important institutions? No, that would be the prisons.
quote:
If there isn't sufficient evidence for their conviction in court then they are innocent as far as the state is concerned. Nonetheless, since everyone "knows", then that should be submitted in court |
Yes IMO it should. But they are afraid to step forward because victims get too much protection and end up becoming vigilantes against witnesses. A lot of people are in estates that are like prisons due to this. Estates where the police are afraid to go. We need a Giuliani "zero tolerance" approach to sort out our cities and get rid of the scum.
quote:
And for what its worth, two years is insufficient imo, unless they are rehabbed most effectively. To solve the problem would take longer. Life should, imo, be used only where rehab isn't an option and the prisoner is still a risk. Revenge will get no-one anywhere. |
It's not revenge it's punishment. And a deterrent. Bring back the rope.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-04-2004 05:07
. Where do much of the scientific, social, intellecual, technological, and political advances come from 
|