Also In The News - part 3

[Trav Le Bleu]

2 hours ago, Sampson said:

Hate the term "migrant crisis" and the way "migrant" and "migration" is used in the media these days with an absolute passion, especially when 99% of the time it refers to a handful of people crossing the channel, yet deliberately uses the generic term "migrate" and "migration" to muddy the waters. There's a clear deliberate attempt by the media to lump anyone who moves to the UK (and even 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants who were born in the UK in some cases) all in as one and to create a profoundly negative image around the term "migrant" and to lump absolutely anyone who dares to move to another country, regardless of reasons and status, into the same group of people. If you listen to certain people on the hard right of the debate they almost talk about "migrants" as a whole being on the same level as rapist and murderers, it's absurd.

Puts me in mind of Alex Batty, the kid who went missing for years and was recently found in France.

 

The news (Radio 6 I think I heard it on - possibly Radio 5) was saying that they were waiting for his passport to be sorted so he can go home.

 

Why? Just let the kid go home! I suppose you could argue that after all these years what difference does a few days make, but seriously, what's the point? When he gets home he'll want to leave the country almost immediately?

 

Personally I find the whole thing about passports, nationality, borders and the movement of humans far too complex. Just let people be where they want to be.

 

What's that Suella? Billions of them want to be in the UK? Rishi was right - everyone should learn maths to a competent level.

Edited 16 December 2023 by Trav Le Bleu

[Dr The Singh]

56 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Puts me in mind of Alex Batty, the kid who went missing for years and was recently found in France.

 

The news (Radio 6 I think I heard it on - possibly Radio 5) was saying that they were waiting for his passport to be sorted so he can go home.

 

Why? Just let the kid go home! I suppose you could argue that after all these years what difference does a few days make, but seriously, what's the point? When he gets home he'll want to leave the country almost immediately?

 

Personally I find the whole thing about passports, nationality, borders and the movement of humans far too complex. Just let people be where they want to be.

 

What's that Suella? Billions of them want to be in the UK? Rishi was right - everyone should learn maths to a competent level.

i cant believe anyone would even comprehend this.

[FoyleFox]

On 15/12/2023 at 16:37, Mike Oxlong said:

I hadn’t realised that Morgan did not give evidence at all during this trial until I read his statement. 

 

I’m not denying that he’s an odious toad but interesting nonetheless ! 

Talking of odious toads, quite amusing that Prince Hazbeen was awarded £146k as only a 10 or so of his 33 story references were upheld. He was offered £400k to settle before the trial. Presumably because Prince William received £1m he thought he'd get the same. Or Smegs did. Shame 😂

[dsr-burnley]

6 hours ago, Sampson said:

Hate the term "migrant crisis" and the way "migrant" and "migration" is used in the media these days with an absolute passion, especially when 99% of the time it refers to a handful of people crossing the channel, yet deliberately uses the generic term "migrate" and "migration" to muddy the waters. There's a clear deliberate attempt by the media to lump anyone who moves to the UK (and even 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants who were born in the UK in some cases) all in as one and to create a profoundly negative image around the term "migrant" and to lump absolutely anyone who dares to move to another country, regardless of reasons and status, into the same group of people. If you listen to certain people on the hard right of the debate they almost talk about "migrants" as a whole being on the same level as rapist and murderers, it's absurd.

More often in the Daily Telegraph it is a reference to the million+ people arriving each year.  There are suggestions that introducing a million new people with their associated housing needs and education and healthcare and the rest, that the country's infrastructure can't cope and the current state of the country's finances also makes it difficult.  I haven't seen any clear attempt to lump the other 10 million or so first generation immigrants in with the current year's million, though I don't necessarily read the same media as you.

 

 

[SecretPro]

6 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

More often in the Daily Telegraph it is a reference to the million+ people arriving each year.  There are suggestions that introducing a million new people with their associated housing needs and education and healthcare and the rest, that the country's infrastructure can't cope and the current state of the country's finances also makes it difficult.  I haven't seen any clear attempt to lump the other 10 million or so first generation immigrants in with the current year's million, though I don't necessarily read the same media as you.

 

 

Fiscally migration costs us little, if anything at all. There's a fairly good argument immigration is good fiscally. 

 

Which is probably why the Tories don't REALLY want to tackle migration (if they did it wouldn't have risen 10-fold in the 13 years they've been in power). That's what's often so maddening...they gaslight the public with it (or the right ring part of it) into constantly thinking immigration is the route of all evil, knowing it will give them a solid voter base, no matter what else they do (whether it be the billions of pounds stolen from the public purse by them and their friends during Covid or any of a number of horrific, deplorable, disgusting policies they have) they can simply say 'we will get tough on immigration' and morons will vote for them, despite the evidence quite clearly indicating that immigration has become 'out of control' under their watch and their watch only. 

[dsr-burnley]

28 minutes ago, SecretPro said:

Fiscally migration costs us little, if anything at all. There's a fairly good argument immigration is good fiscally. 

 

Which is probably why the Tories don't REALLY want to tackle migration (if they did it wouldn't have risen 10-fold in the 13 years they've been in power). That's what's often so maddening...they gaslight the public with it (or the right ring part of it) into constantly thinking immigration is the route of all evil, knowing it will give them a solid voter base, no matter what else they do (whether it be the billions of pounds stolen from the public purse by them and their friends during Covid or any of a number of horrific, deplorable, disgusting policies they have) they can simply say 'we will get tough on immigration' and morons will vote for them, despite the evidence quite clearly indicating that immigration has become 'out of control' under their watch and their watch only. 

Fiscally for the country as a whole, possibly - though I have my doubts.  But it surely drives down wages and drives up house prices, neither of them a good thing for the lower paid.

 

I don't think the Tories are capable of tackling anything, especially anything that involves Home Office co-operation.  The Home Office isn't capable even of deporting ex-convicts on their release from jail, or of signing a document that would allow a Ukrainian refugee into this country (at least, it took them 2 months), so they aren't going to tackle a million per year immigrants. 

 

And like you say, the Tories haven't the strength of purpose.  It will be interesting to see if Labour ever come up with any policies on this issue.

[Sampson]

33 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

Fiscally for the country as a whole, possibly - though I have my doubts.  But it surely drives down wages and drives up house prices, neither of them a good thing for the lower paid.

 

I don't think the Tories are capable of tackling anything, especially anything that involves Home Office co-operation.  The Home Office isn't capable even of deporting ex-convicts on their release from jail, or of signing a document that would allow a Ukrainian refugee into this country (at least, it took them 2 months), so they aren't going to tackle a million per year immigrants. 

 

And like you say, the Tories haven't the strength of purpose.  It will be interesting to see if Labour ever come up with any policies on this issue.

If increasing the number of people in the labour force decreases wages and increasing housing costs that is because of how weak/how little power the unions and collective bargaining have in the UK after Thatcher tore them apart. There is absolutely no inherent reason that immigration should drive down wages and increase housing costs at all unless you are a staunch Truss/Rees-Mogg style intransigent to the ideals of the Libertarian Utopia and believe that the only genuine option is an unregulated wage market, which is what allows the undercutting of wages and cause a race to the bottom in terms of wages.

 

It is a failiure of having a strong system of robust labour laws and systems which allow collective bargaining if our labour force cannot handle increasing labour numbers while our workforce is so desperately in need of it due to the society shifting demographic changes of population ageing and the rapidly changing warped ratio of the proportion of the burden of the tax paying population compared to those of pension/high useage of public healthcare age.

Edited 17 December 2023 by Sampson

[dsr-burnley]

40 minutes ago, Sampson said:

If increasing the number of people in the labour force decreases wages and increasing housing costs that is because of how weak/how little power the unions and collective bargaining have in the UK after Thatcher tore them apart. There is absolutely no inherent reason that immigration should drive down wages and increase housing costs at all unless you are a staunch Truss/Rees-Mogg style intransigent to the ideals of the Libertarian Utopia and believe that the only genuine option is an unregulated wage market, which is what allows the undercutting of wages and cause a race to the bottom in terms of wages.

 

It is a failiure of having a strong system of robust labour laws and systems which allow collective bargaining if our labour force cannot handle increasing labour numbers while our workforce is so desperately in need of it due to the society shifting demographic changes of population ageing and the rapidly changing warped ratio of the proportion of the burden of the tax paying population compared to those of pension/high useage of public healthcare age.

Surely the whole point of government-supported immigration, right back to Windrush, was to bring in cheap labour to do the jobs that the current UK workforce was not willing to do at that price?  Rather than pay enough to get the UK workforce to do it, they imported workers who would accept less pay.  And just because it isn't government policy any more (though it is government practice), doesn't mean it won't have the same effect today.

 

As for housing, it seems intuitive that if you increase the population at a greater rate than you increase the housing supply, prices will rise.  Supply and demand.  No?

[Jon the Hat]

On 16/12/2023 at 00:37, Mike Oxlong said:

I hadn’t realised that Morgan did not give evidence at all during this trial until I read his statement. 

 

I’m not denying that he’s an odious toad but interesting nonetheless ! 

Suggests the Harry side didn't want him to, and the defence didn't think it would help having him go off on one.

[Legend_in_blue]

£60 million profit is classed as a "good return" apparently.  Wow. 

 

Anyone else watching BB1 this morning?

[weller54]

31 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

£60 million profit is classed as a "good return" apparently.  Wow. 

 

Anyone else watching BB1 this morning?

Yep, watching it and God I'd love to punch Doug Barrowman and that stupid looking tart in their smug faces!!!!  What cretins, absolute vermin.. the lowest of the low!!!!!

[Dunge]

It’s interesting to me to see the mental gymnastics in this. She hasn’t seen a penny of it, she says. Which is technically true, but hardly a great moral argument because it’s all in trust. The risks were absolutely extraordinary, they say. From a business perspective, I get that, but it’s not exactly philanthropic behaviour from a peer of the realm. They’ve been investigated for years and it’s taken a toll, she says. Well maybe you should’ve declared an interest in the company like others told you to do.

 

There probably isn’t anything criminal here, but that isn’t the only standard by which people are going to judge you.

[Lionator]

22 minutes ago, Dunge said:

It’s interesting to me to see the mental gymnastics in this. She hasn’t seen a penny of it, she says. Which is technically true, but hardly a great moral argument because it’s all in trust. The risks were absolutely extraordinary, they say. From a business perspective, I get that, but it’s not exactly philanthropic behaviour from a peer of the realm. They’ve been investigated for years and it’s taken a toll, she says. Well maybe you should’ve declared an interest in the company like others told you to do.

 

There probably isn’t anything criminal here, but that isn’t the only standard by which people are going to judge you.

I don’t know the in’s and out of the law but I think profiting £60m from tax payers money is highly unethical and I’d be stunned if there wasn’t some form of fraud involved. 
 

I never want to see a newspaper complain about benefit scroungers ever again while the true scroungers stole £60m of our money. 

Edited 17 December 2023 by Lionator

[weller54]

They made Prince Andrew's interview look quite sincere 😂

[MPH]

Starving people desperate for food shocker. I mean… why is this a problem? If it isn’t intended for starving people then who is it intended for?

 

 

saves on distribution time!

[bmt]

1 hour ago, MPH said:

Starving people desperate for food shocker. I mean… why is this a problem? If it isn’t intended for starving people then who is it intended for?

 

 

saves on distribution time!

Not sure if this is a serious post but if every food truck gets stripped right next to the crossing than people further in Gaza will have nothing, and will be the most in need.

[MPH]

22 minutes ago, bmt said:

Not sure if this is a serious post but if every food truck gets stripped right next to the crossing than people further in Gaza will have nothing, and will be the most in need.

Do you think people are hoarding the food?

 

 

besides this is one truck out of hundreds coming in daily from different crossings..

[l444ry]

 

[st albans fox]

10 hours ago, Dunge said:

It’s interesting to me to see the mental gymnastics in this. She hasn’t seen a penny of it, she says. Which is technically true, but hardly a great moral argument because it’s all in trust. The risks were absolutely extraordinary, they say. From a business perspective, I get that, but it’s not exactly philanthropic behaviour from a peer of the realm. They’ve been investigated for years and it’s taken a toll, she says. Well maybe you should’ve declared an interest in the company like others told you to do.

 

There probably isn’t anything criminal here, but that isn’t the only standard by which people are going to judge you.

Firstly I bet the trust that the money is in will be offshore and therefore the state is being denied either the CT due on the profits or tax due on what’s been taken out of the company 

 

secondly, it was quite usual in that period for govt to make payments in advance (sometimes full payment)  to secure the PPE being supplied to them from companies. It could be that there was very little risk from a business perspective in terms of cash lay out.  In addition, there was no risk of not being paid. If they’re going to argue that the risk was that the PPE they purchased wouldn’t be to standard then what’s the point of them ?  These contracts should have gone to proven suppliers of PPE. If they didn’t have a reliable supply chain then they shouldn’t be pitching in the first place.  It was a gravy train. 

[bmt]

5 hours ago, MPH said:

Do you think people are hoarding the food?

 

 

besides this is one truck out of hundreds coming in daily from different crossings..

No I don't. I'm not sure why that's relevant though; it's unlikely people would only take the minimum calories needed to survive if they didn't know when they'd next get food. 

 

Yes the picture is but the UN are saying it is a major problem so I assume it's more than one in hundreds. And I thought the aid could only come across the Rafah crossing 

[MPH]

9 minutes ago, bmt said:

No I don't. I'm not sure why that's relevant though; it's unlikely people would only take the minimum calories needed to survive if they didn't know when they'd next get food. 

 

Yes the picture is but the UN are saying it is a major problem so I assume it's more than one in hundreds. And I thought the aid could only come across the Rafah crossing 

 

coming in from Egypt and 2 different crossings in Israel. Which is good. Should hopefully speed up the delivery from aid.

 

my point is fairly simple - it didn’t look like anyone was taking more than one bag of rice or one box.  I know your point is that those that live centrally need food and I agree with you, but to flip that coin over those that live near the crossing need food too and maybe that don’t have the gas or means of travel to go several miles  to get food. It might not be safe to either. It’s not like anyone is taking the food to sell on a market. Only to feed their family..plus food IS arriving at central distribution locations. 

Edited 17 December 2023 by MPH

[bmt]

1 minute ago, MPH said:

 

coming in from Egypt and 2 different crossings in Israel. Which is good. Should hopefully speed up the delivery from aid.

 

my point is fairly simple - it didn’t look like anyone was taking more than one bag of rice or one box.  I know your point is that those that live centrally need food and I agree with you, but to flip that coin over those that live near the crossing need food too and maybe that don’t have the gas or means of travel to go several miles  to get food. It might not be safe to either. It’s not like anyone is taking the food to sell on a market. Only to feed their family..

Ah didn't know that, that is good.

 

I agree on the rest of what you're saying too. To be honest I think the main issue is just there should be more food/water, but think everyone agrees with that

[MPH]

Just now, bmt said:

Ah didn't know that, that is good.

 

I agree on the rest of what you're saying too. To be honest I think the main issue is just there should be more food/water, but think everyone agrees with that

 

I feel so helpless. And I don’t mean to keep mentioning this lol. But I stayed with a Palestinian family in the West Bank several years ago now. I wanted to see their plight. hear their story, They have a special place in my heart. Hamas do not. The little girl I stayed with, her only toy was a collection of bottle tops. And that’s supposed to be the wealthier Palestinian area. 

[Jon the Hat]

6 hours ago, MPH said:

Do you think people are hoarding the food?

 

 

besides this is one truck out of hundreds coming in daily from different crossings..

I think the strong will take the food, leaving the weakest with none.  

[Jon the Hat]

15 hours ago, Legend_in_blue said:

£60 million profit is classed as a "good return" apparently.  Wow. 

 

Anyone else watching BB1 this morning?

Looks like a very good return to me, what they call price gouging over here.  The way that companies who frankly had zero interest or knowledge of PPE a week before suddenly popped up to take advantage of the situation on the basis that they knew a guy in China who could send them some crap is pretty depressing.  Still I suspect this has happened in every crisis in history in some way or other.