|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On September 23 2013 09:17 Dapper_Cad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 01:43 GhastlyUprising wrote:
But here's a newsflash for you: abolishing waste and inefficiency is a pipe dream. The overthrow of capitalism is not remotely on the cards. The surest way to avoid malnourishment is for developing countries to aspire toward a stable population, like what we would have in Europe without the immigration. That is not a pipe dream and just needs a cultural change for it to become a reality. Or we could stop our elites stealing from them. If developing countries could keep their tax revenues they'd be a lot better off. http://www.christianaid.org.uk/images/deathandtaxes.pdf Yes. There's much that can be done to adjust the polarizing wealth inequality between nations. That doesn't require anything revolutionary either (just a bit of consciousness-raising to exploitive practices).
|
On September 23 2013 09:24 GhastlyUprising wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:39 olias wrote:
GhastlyUprising, smear spreading?? What do you think this is? a forum to get elected to government? Dont take this so seriously. The point of this thread is to have open and frank discussions about UK politics, everyone is mildly combative, but you are particularly shouty. There is no substance to these charges. It's simply a case of posters on the pro-migration side taking revenge because I've successfully refuted their views and embarrassed them a bit by showing just how fringe and radical their proposals really are. (Especially those of Zaros, who has called for not only open borders, but also the privatization of education as well as the welfare state.) What is the point in continuing with these personal attacks? Haven't you derailed the thread enough? I have no intention of continuing to debate immigration, but I'm not going to allow the libertarians to rewrite the history of this thread
The only person you are embarrasing is yourself, you haven't refuted anyones views you are just a socialist joke.
Also i didn't say privatise the welfare state.
|
On September 23 2013 09:41 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 09:24 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 23 2013 07:39 olias wrote:
GhastlyUprising, smear spreading?? What do you think this is? a forum to get elected to government? Dont take this so seriously. The point of this thread is to have open and frank discussions about UK politics, everyone is mildly combative, but you are particularly shouty. There is no substance to these charges. It's simply a case of posters on the pro-migration side taking revenge because I've successfully refuted their views and embarrassed them a bit by showing just how fringe and radical their proposals really are. (Especially those of Zaros, who has called for not only open borders, but also the privatization of education as well as the welfare state.) What is the point in continuing with these personal attacks? Haven't you derailed the thread enough? I have no intention of continuing to debate immigration, but I'm not going to allow the libertarians to rewrite the history of this thread The only person you are embarrasing is yourself, you haven't refuted anyones views you are just a socialist joke. Also i didn't say privatise the welfare state. You insist on playing this game? Here are the quotes:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=29#562
On September 22 2013 07:29 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 07:25 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 07:15 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:10 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 06:54 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 06:36 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 05:43 Zealos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:19 GhastlyUprising wrote:It's hard to know what to do when faced with a poster so addicted to misleading tactics and hypocrisy. In this thread he has continually argued against restraints on immigration. Now wants to style himself as not "pro-immigration" after all. Maybe he's counting on my bailing out of the thread before I address his post, so his question will serve to kick up sand and confuse things. Naturally, pro-immigration posts by this guy abound, and at the very best he has a meaningless semantic point. He's just relying on scoring a few cheap debating points in an attempt to discredit me -- or whatever. He will probably now accuse me of derailing the thread, even though I'm faced with a no-win situation of being called a liar if I don't produce the quotes. Everything I said about the Tea Party libertarians has been reinforced, and I don't regret a single one of those comments. Are you serious? Are you really that dumb? I asked for quotes from ME that show me as pro immigration, and you link a load of posts by Zaros. Are you really having that much difficulty with this thread? No, no difficulty. One of you is called Zaros, the other is called Zealos. You have the exact same hardcore libertarian views, the exact same writing style (randomly flitting between writing words in full and txt msg spk with pervasive use of "u" and "ur"), you're active in the same thread around the same time and for some reason have an axe to grind against one particular commenter. Something is going on. In any case it would seem inexplicable that Zealous suddenly jumped in and started insulting me for being anti-immigration (as shown in the second to last of those links) if he didn't entertain contrary views. I have nothing to do with Zealos lol, and I dont have a grudge against you, I just think your views are incorrect and you are very provocative. You want provocative? I've found the very first series of posts that passed between us. The first provocative comment is this: On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. Implying that being against immigration is "isolationist" and "xenophobic". As if that wasn't provocative enough, you followed it up with a statement that "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway". I think it's clear that these positions are a hell of a lot more provocative than merely calling someone a zealot. Being against immigration by definition is isolationist. And why is stating my opinion on the role of government provocative, you might disagree with my opinion but i was only stating it. That isn't the definition of isolationism, I'm afraid. I'm all in favour of international collaboration as long as it's within our means. But "xenophobic" was the main thing that got my goat. And yes, I maintain that it is highly provocative to say that government "shouldn't be providing most of what it does" when we're faced with great poverty, even DESPITE essential assistance by the government to millions of people. This takes us back to my "Blade Runner" comparisons and so forth. I believe I hit the nail on the head on every single one of those posts. You are making the assumption that privatising etc hurts poor people which i massively disagree with or I wouldn't be in favour of it. Yes maybe the Xenophobic thing was misplaced.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=15#294
On September 04 2013 22:30 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2013 22:23 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. It's pretty clear to most of the population that the UK cannot sustain unlimited immigration. England is already one of the most densely populated countries in the whole world. We have enough trouble providing for our population ALREADY. The government is already making cuts to basic public services, including the NHS. A subsequent wave of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, such as what we experienced in the past, would be absolutely disastrous for the UK. Its not clear at all, and government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway, even if it should immigrants are a net benefit to the government finances. So you quite clearly spoke in favour of privatizing welfare. I have no intention of continuing to play these games with you of "I never said tomayto, I said tomahto!" You're clearly a libertarian extremist with radical and fringe views -- despite whatever minor and insignificant hedges you might throw in, as does every libertarian extremist, including Ron Paul.
|
On September 23 2013 10:02 GhastlyUprising wrote:
You're clearly a libertarian extremist with radical and fringe views -- despite whatever minor and insignificant hedges you might throw in, as does every libertarian extremist, including Ron Paul.
You literally cannot help yourself. You cannot make a post without making yourself looking like an idiot.
You have given up on my earlier question, as I assumed you would, and instead you have continued on with your train of justice, attacking strawmen and using excessive hyperbole to prevent any useful discussion taking part within the thread.
|
On September 23 2013 10:02 GhastlyUprising wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 09:41 Zaros wrote:On September 23 2013 09:24 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 23 2013 07:39 olias wrote:
GhastlyUprising, smear spreading?? What do you think this is? a forum to get elected to government? Dont take this so seriously. The point of this thread is to have open and frank discussions about UK politics, everyone is mildly combative, but you are particularly shouty. There is no substance to these charges. It's simply a case of posters on the pro-migration side taking revenge because I've successfully refuted their views and embarrassed them a bit by showing just how fringe and radical their proposals really are. (Especially those of Zaros, who has called for not only open borders, but also the privatization of education as well as the welfare state.) What is the point in continuing with these personal attacks? Haven't you derailed the thread enough? I have no intention of continuing to debate immigration, but I'm not going to allow the libertarians to rewrite the history of this thread The only person you are embarrasing is yourself, you haven't refuted anyones views you are just a socialist joke. Also i didn't say privatise the welfare state. You insist on playing this game? Here are the quotes: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=29#562Show nested quote +On September 22 2013 07:29 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:25 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 07:15 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:10 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 06:54 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 06:36 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 05:43 Zealos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:19 GhastlyUprising wrote:It's hard to know what to do when faced with a poster so addicted to misleading tactics and hypocrisy. In this thread he has continually argued against restraints on immigration. Now wants to style himself as not "pro-immigration" after all. Maybe he's counting on my bailing out of the thread before I address his post, so his question will serve to kick up sand and confuse things. Naturally, pro-immigration posts by this guy abound, and at the very best he has a meaningless semantic point. He's just relying on scoring a few cheap debating points in an attempt to discredit me -- or whatever. He will probably now accuse me of derailing the thread, even though I'm faced with a no-win situation of being called a liar if I don't produce the quotes. Everything I said about the Tea Party libertarians has been reinforced, and I don't regret a single one of those comments. Are you serious? Are you really that dumb? I asked for quotes from ME that show me as pro immigration, and you link a load of posts by Zaros. Are you really having that much difficulty with this thread? No, no difficulty. One of you is called Zaros, the other is called Zealos. You have the exact same hardcore libertarian views, the exact same writing style (randomly flitting between writing words in full and txt msg spk with pervasive use of "u" and "ur"), you're active in the same thread around the same time and for some reason have an axe to grind against one particular commenter. Something is going on. In any case it would seem inexplicable that Zealous suddenly jumped in and started insulting me for being anti-immigration (as shown in the second to last of those links) if he didn't entertain contrary views. I have nothing to do with Zealos lol, and I dont have a grudge against you, I just think your views are incorrect and you are very provocative. You want provocative? I've found the very first series of posts that passed between us. The first provocative comment is this: On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. Implying that being against immigration is "isolationist" and "xenophobic". As if that wasn't provocative enough, you followed it up with a statement that "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway". I think it's clear that these positions are a hell of a lot more provocative than merely calling someone a zealot. Being against immigration by definition is isolationist. And why is stating my opinion on the role of government provocative, you might disagree with my opinion but i was only stating it. That isn't the definition of isolationism, I'm afraid. I'm all in favour of international collaboration as long as it's within our means. But "xenophobic" was the main thing that got my goat. And yes, I maintain that it is highly provocative to say that government "shouldn't be providing most of what it does" when we're faced with great poverty, even DESPITE essential assistance by the government to millions of people. This takes us back to my "Blade Runner" comparisons and so forth. I believe I hit the nail on the head on every single one of those posts. You are making the assumption that privatising etc hurts poor people which i massively disagree with or I wouldn't be in favour of it. Yes maybe the Xenophobic thing was misplaced. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=15#294Show nested quote +On September 04 2013 22:30 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 22:23 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. It's pretty clear to most of the population that the UK cannot sustain unlimited immigration. England is already one of the most densely populated countries in the whole world. We have enough trouble providing for our population ALREADY. The government is already making cuts to basic public services, including the NHS. A subsequent wave of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, such as what we experienced in the past, would be absolutely disastrous for the UK. Its not clear at all, and government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway, even if it should immigrants are a net benefit to the government finances. So you quite clearly spoke in favour of privatizing welfare. I have no intention of continuing to play these games with you of "I never said tomayto, I said tomahto!" You're clearly a libertarian extremist with radical and fringe views -- despite whatever minor and insignificant hedges you might throw in, as does every libertarian extremist, including Ron Paul.
Where did I say privatise the welfare state...
|
On September 23 2013 19:32 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:02 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 23 2013 09:41 Zaros wrote:On September 23 2013 09:24 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 23 2013 07:39 olias wrote:
GhastlyUprising, smear spreading?? What do you think this is? a forum to get elected to government? Dont take this so seriously. The point of this thread is to have open and frank discussions about UK politics, everyone is mildly combative, but you are particularly shouty. There is no substance to these charges. It's simply a case of posters on the pro-migration side taking revenge because I've successfully refuted their views and embarrassed them a bit by showing just how fringe and radical their proposals really are. (Especially those of Zaros, who has called for not only open borders, but also the privatization of education as well as the welfare state.) What is the point in continuing with these personal attacks? Haven't you derailed the thread enough? I have no intention of continuing to debate immigration, but I'm not going to allow the libertarians to rewrite the history of this thread The only person you are embarrasing is yourself, you haven't refuted anyones views you are just a socialist joke. Also i didn't say privatise the welfare state. You insist on playing this game? Here are the quotes: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=29#562On September 22 2013 07:29 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:25 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 07:15 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:10 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 06:54 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 06:36 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 05:43 Zealos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:19 GhastlyUprising wrote:It's hard to know what to do when faced with a poster so addicted to misleading tactics and hypocrisy. In this thread he has continually argued against restraints on immigration. Now wants to style himself as not "pro-immigration" after all. Maybe he's counting on my bailing out of the thread before I address his post, so his question will serve to kick up sand and confuse things. Naturally, pro-immigration posts by this guy abound, and at the very best he has a meaningless semantic point. He's just relying on scoring a few cheap debating points in an attempt to discredit me -- or whatever. He will probably now accuse me of derailing the thread, even though I'm faced with a no-win situation of being called a liar if I don't produce the quotes. Everything I said about the Tea Party libertarians has been reinforced, and I don't regret a single one of those comments. Are you serious? Are you really that dumb? I asked for quotes from ME that show me as pro immigration, and you link a load of posts by Zaros. Are you really having that much difficulty with this thread? No, no difficulty. One of you is called Zaros, the other is called Zealos. You have the exact same hardcore libertarian views, the exact same writing style (randomly flitting between writing words in full and txt msg spk with pervasive use of "u" and "ur"), you're active in the same thread around the same time and for some reason have an axe to grind against one particular commenter. Something is going on. In any case it would seem inexplicable that Zealous suddenly jumped in and started insulting me for being anti-immigration (as shown in the second to last of those links) if he didn't entertain contrary views. I have nothing to do with Zealos lol, and I dont have a grudge against you, I just think your views are incorrect and you are very provocative. You want provocative? I've found the very first series of posts that passed between us. The first provocative comment is this: On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. Implying that being against immigration is "isolationist" and "xenophobic". As if that wasn't provocative enough, you followed it up with a statement that "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway". I think it's clear that these positions are a hell of a lot more provocative than merely calling someone a zealot. Being against immigration by definition is isolationist. And why is stating my opinion on the role of government provocative, you might disagree with my opinion but i was only stating it. That isn't the definition of isolationism, I'm afraid. I'm all in favour of international collaboration as long as it's within our means. But "xenophobic" was the main thing that got my goat. And yes, I maintain that it is highly provocative to say that government "shouldn't be providing most of what it does" when we're faced with great poverty, even DESPITE essential assistance by the government to millions of people. This takes us back to my "Blade Runner" comparisons and so forth. I believe I hit the nail on the head on every single one of those posts. You are making the assumption that privatising etc hurts poor people which i massively disagree with or I wouldn't be in favour of it. Yes maybe the Xenophobic thing was misplaced. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=15#294On September 04 2013 22:30 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 22:23 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. It's pretty clear to most of the population that the UK cannot sustain unlimited immigration. England is already one of the most densely populated countries in the whole world. We have enough trouble providing for our population ALREADY. The government is already making cuts to basic public services, including the NHS. A subsequent wave of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, such as what we experienced in the past, would be absolutely disastrous for the UK. Its not clear at all, and government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway, even if it should immigrants are a net benefit to the government finances. So you quite clearly spoke in favour of privatizing welfare. I have no intention of continuing to play these games with you of "I never said tomayto, I said tomahto!" You're clearly a libertarian extremist with radical and fringe views -- despite whatever minor and insignificant hedges you might throw in, as does every libertarian extremist, including Ron Paul. Where did I say privatise the welfare state...
If taken entirely literally your statement "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway" is a pretty radical change in government spending.
Did you, in fact, mean that government spending should be reduced to less than half of it's current levels? Or was it just hyperbole. I don't have any particular problem with hyperbole I'd just like you to clarify this statement.
|
On September 23 2013 19:32 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:02 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 23 2013 09:41 Zaros wrote:On September 23 2013 09:24 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 23 2013 07:39 olias wrote:
GhastlyUprising, smear spreading?? What do you think this is? a forum to get elected to government? Dont take this so seriously. The point of this thread is to have open and frank discussions about UK politics, everyone is mildly combative, but you are particularly shouty. There is no substance to these charges. It's simply a case of posters on the pro-migration side taking revenge because I've successfully refuted their views and embarrassed them a bit by showing just how fringe and radical their proposals really are. (Especially those of Zaros, who has called for not only open borders, but also the privatization of education as well as the welfare state.) What is the point in continuing with these personal attacks? Haven't you derailed the thread enough? I have no intention of continuing to debate immigration, but I'm not going to allow the libertarians to rewrite the history of this thread The only person you are embarrasing is yourself, you haven't refuted anyones views you are just a socialist joke. Also i didn't say privatise the welfare state. You insist on playing this game? Here are the quotes: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=29#562On September 22 2013 07:29 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:25 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 07:15 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:10 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 06:54 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 06:36 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 05:43 Zealos wrote:On September 22 2013 03:19 GhastlyUprising wrote:It's hard to know what to do when faced with a poster so addicted to misleading tactics and hypocrisy. In this thread he has continually argued against restraints on immigration. Now wants to style himself as not "pro-immigration" after all. Maybe he's counting on my bailing out of the thread before I address his post, so his question will serve to kick up sand and confuse things. Naturally, pro-immigration posts by this guy abound, and at the very best he has a meaningless semantic point. He's just relying on scoring a few cheap debating points in an attempt to discredit me -- or whatever. He will probably now accuse me of derailing the thread, even though I'm faced with a no-win situation of being called a liar if I don't produce the quotes. Everything I said about the Tea Party libertarians has been reinforced, and I don't regret a single one of those comments. Are you serious? Are you really that dumb? I asked for quotes from ME that show me as pro immigration, and you link a load of posts by Zaros. Are you really having that much difficulty with this thread? No, no difficulty. One of you is called Zaros, the other is called Zealos. You have the exact same hardcore libertarian views, the exact same writing style (randomly flitting between writing words in full and txt msg spk with pervasive use of "u" and "ur"), you're active in the same thread around the same time and for some reason have an axe to grind against one particular commenter. Something is going on. In any case it would seem inexplicable that Zealous suddenly jumped in and started insulting me for being anti-immigration (as shown in the second to last of those links) if he didn't entertain contrary views. I have nothing to do with Zealos lol, and I dont have a grudge against you, I just think your views are incorrect and you are very provocative. You want provocative? I've found the very first series of posts that passed between us. The first provocative comment is this: On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. Implying that being against immigration is "isolationist" and "xenophobic". As if that wasn't provocative enough, you followed it up with a statement that "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway". I think it's clear that these positions are a hell of a lot more provocative than merely calling someone a zealot. Being against immigration by definition is isolationist. And why is stating my opinion on the role of government provocative, you might disagree with my opinion but i was only stating it. That isn't the definition of isolationism, I'm afraid. I'm all in favour of international collaboration as long as it's within our means. But "xenophobic" was the main thing that got my goat. And yes, I maintain that it is highly provocative to say that government "shouldn't be providing most of what it does" when we're faced with great poverty, even DESPITE essential assistance by the government to millions of people. This takes us back to my "Blade Runner" comparisons and so forth. I believe I hit the nail on the head on every single one of those posts. You are making the assumption that privatising etc hurts poor people which i massively disagree with or I wouldn't be in favour of it. Yes maybe the Xenophobic thing was misplaced. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=15#294On September 04 2013 22:30 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 22:23 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. It's pretty clear to most of the population that the UK cannot sustain unlimited immigration. England is already one of the most densely populated countries in the whole world. We have enough trouble providing for our population ALREADY. The government is already making cuts to basic public services, including the NHS. A subsequent wave of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, such as what we experienced in the past, would be absolutely disastrous for the UK. Its not clear at all, and government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway, even if it should immigrants are a net benefit to the government finances. So you quite clearly spoke in favour of privatizing welfare. I have no intention of continuing to play these games with you of "I never said tomayto, I said tomahto!" You're clearly a libertarian extremist with radical and fringe views -- despite whatever minor and insignificant hedges you might throw in, as does every libertarian extremist, including Ron Paul. Where did I say privatise the welfare state... In both of those quotes. Second one speaks for itself, first one is in the context of cuts to public services as the nested quotes make clear.
End of discussion, as far as I'm concerned. You're playing a deceptive and highly dishonest game of tomayto-tomahto and I'm not going to continue to entertain you.
|
On September 23 2013 20:59 Dapper_Cad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 19:32 Zaros wrote:On September 23 2013 10:02 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 23 2013 09:41 Zaros wrote:On September 23 2013 09:24 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 23 2013 07:39 olias wrote:
GhastlyUprising, smear spreading?? What do you think this is? a forum to get elected to government? Dont take this so seriously. The point of this thread is to have open and frank discussions about UK politics, everyone is mildly combative, but you are particularly shouty. There is no substance to these charges. It's simply a case of posters on the pro-migration side taking revenge because I've successfully refuted their views and embarrassed them a bit by showing just how fringe and radical their proposals really are. (Especially those of Zaros, who has called for not only open borders, but also the privatization of education as well as the welfare state.) What is the point in continuing with these personal attacks? Haven't you derailed the thread enough? I have no intention of continuing to debate immigration, but I'm not going to allow the libertarians to rewrite the history of this thread The only person you are embarrasing is yourself, you haven't refuted anyones views you are just a socialist joke. Also i didn't say privatise the welfare state. You insist on playing this game? Here are the quotes: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=29#562On September 22 2013 07:29 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:25 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 07:15 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:10 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 06:54 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 06:36 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 05:43 Zealos wrote:
[quote]
Are you serious? Are you really that dumb? I asked for quotes from ME that show me as pro immigration, and you link a load of posts by Zaros. Are you really having that much difficulty with this thread? No, no difficulty. One of you is called Zaros, the other is called Zealos. You have the exact same hardcore libertarian views, the exact same writing style (randomly flitting between writing words in full and txt msg spk with pervasive use of "u" and "ur"), you're active in the same thread around the same time and for some reason have an axe to grind against one particular commenter. Something is going on. In any case it would seem inexplicable that Zealous suddenly jumped in and started insulting me for being anti-immigration (as shown in the second to last of those links) if he didn't entertain contrary views. I have nothing to do with Zealos lol, and I dont have a grudge against you, I just think your views are incorrect and you are very provocative. You want provocative? I've found the very first series of posts that passed between us. The first provocative comment is this: On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. Implying that being against immigration is "isolationist" and "xenophobic". As if that wasn't provocative enough, you followed it up with a statement that "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway". I think it's clear that these positions are a hell of a lot more provocative than merely calling someone a zealot. Being against immigration by definition is isolationist. And why is stating my opinion on the role of government provocative, you might disagree with my opinion but i was only stating it. That isn't the definition of isolationism, I'm afraid. I'm all in favour of international collaboration as long as it's within our means. But "xenophobic" was the main thing that got my goat. And yes, I maintain that it is highly provocative to say that government "shouldn't be providing most of what it does" when we're faced with great poverty, even DESPITE essential assistance by the government to millions of people. This takes us back to my "Blade Runner" comparisons and so forth. I believe I hit the nail on the head on every single one of those posts. You are making the assumption that privatising etc hurts poor people which i massively disagree with or I wouldn't be in favour of it. Yes maybe the Xenophobic thing was misplaced. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=15#294On September 04 2013 22:30 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 22:23 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. It's pretty clear to most of the population that the UK cannot sustain unlimited immigration. England is already one of the most densely populated countries in the whole world. We have enough trouble providing for our population ALREADY. The government is already making cuts to basic public services, including the NHS. A subsequent wave of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, such as what we experienced in the past, would be absolutely disastrous for the UK. Its not clear at all, and government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway, even if it should immigrants are a net benefit to the government finances. So you quite clearly spoke in favour of privatizing welfare. I have no intention of continuing to play these games with you of "I never said tomayto, I said tomahto!" You're clearly a libertarian extremist with radical and fringe views -- despite whatever minor and insignificant hedges you might throw in, as does every libertarian extremist, including Ron Paul. Where did I say privatise the welfare state... If taken entirely literally your statement "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway" is a pretty radical change in government spending. Did you, in fact, mean that government spending should be reduced to less than half of it's current levels? Or was it just hyperbole. I don't have any particular problem with hyperbole I'd just like you to clarify this statement. If he's just saying that benefits should be reduced, even while tens of thousands of people are reeling from the bedroom tax, and isn't promoting a substitute in the private sector, then he's even worse than a libertarian extremist.
|
On September 23 2013 23:14 GhastlyUprising wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 20:59 Dapper_Cad wrote:On September 23 2013 19:32 Zaros wrote:On September 23 2013 10:02 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 23 2013 09:41 Zaros wrote:On September 23 2013 09:24 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 23 2013 07:39 olias wrote:
GhastlyUprising, smear spreading?? What do you think this is? a forum to get elected to government? Dont take this so seriously. The point of this thread is to have open and frank discussions about UK politics, everyone is mildly combative, but you are particularly shouty. There is no substance to these charges. It's simply a case of posters on the pro-migration side taking revenge because I've successfully refuted their views and embarrassed them a bit by showing just how fringe and radical their proposals really are. (Especially those of Zaros, who has called for not only open borders, but also the privatization of education as well as the welfare state.) What is the point in continuing with these personal attacks? Haven't you derailed the thread enough? I have no intention of continuing to debate immigration, but I'm not going to allow the libertarians to rewrite the history of this thread The only person you are embarrasing is yourself, you haven't refuted anyones views you are just a socialist joke. Also i didn't say privatise the welfare state. You insist on playing this game? Here are the quotes: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=29#562On September 22 2013 07:29 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:25 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 07:15 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 07:10 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 22 2013 06:54 Zaros wrote:On September 22 2013 06:36 GhastlyUprising wrote:
[quote]No, no difficulty. One of you is called Zaros, the other is called Zealos. You have the exact same hardcore libertarian views, the exact same writing style (randomly flitting between writing words in full and txt msg spk with pervasive use of "u" and "ur"), you're active in the same thread around the same time and for some reason have an axe to grind against one particular commenter. Something is going on. In any case it would seem inexplicable that Zealous suddenly jumped in and started insulting me for being anti-immigration (as shown in the second to last of those links) if he didn't entertain contrary views. I have nothing to do with Zealos lol, and I dont have a grudge against you, I just think your views are incorrect and you are very provocative. You want provocative? I've found the very first series of posts that passed between us. The first provocative comment is this: On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:
[quote]Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist".
He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest".
He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there.
doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. Implying that being against immigration is "isolationist" and "xenophobic". As if that wasn't provocative enough, you followed it up with a statement that "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway". I think it's clear that these positions are a hell of a lot more provocative than merely calling someone a zealot. Being against immigration by definition is isolationist. And why is stating my opinion on the role of government provocative, you might disagree with my opinion but i was only stating it. That isn't the definition of isolationism, I'm afraid. I'm all in favour of international collaboration as long as it's within our means. But "xenophobic" was the main thing that got my goat. And yes, I maintain that it is highly provocative to say that government "shouldn't be providing most of what it does" when we're faced with great poverty, even DESPITE essential assistance by the government to millions of people. This takes us back to my "Blade Runner" comparisons and so forth. I believe I hit the nail on the head on every single one of those posts. You are making the assumption that privatising etc hurts poor people which i massively disagree with or I wouldn't be in favour of it. Yes maybe the Xenophobic thing was misplaced. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=419575¤tpage=15#294On September 04 2013 22:30 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 22:23 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 04 2013 21:59 Zaros wrote:On September 04 2013 21:28 GhastlyUprising wrote:On September 02 2013 19:53 Eufouria wrote:
Nigel Farage is a closet racist who would have no idea how to actually run anything if he had any power, if he somehow became leader he'd blame Europe and immigrants for all of our problems and then nothing would be better since they're really not the main problems in Britain.
Yes, he doesn't have a clue how to run anything, but it's ridiculous to accuse him of being a "closet racist". He wouldn't blame immigrants for all our problems, which is why he took a stand against the Tory advert that told illegal immigrants to "Go home or face arrest". He would be correct in saying that we had, and continue to have, too much immigration. Most of the country agrees with him there. doesn't mean he is correct. He is an isolationist maybe xenophobic. It's pretty clear to most of the population that the UK cannot sustain unlimited immigration. England is already one of the most densely populated countries in the whole world. We have enough trouble providing for our population ALREADY. The government is already making cuts to basic public services, including the NHS. A subsequent wave of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, such as what we experienced in the past, would be absolutely disastrous for the UK. Its not clear at all, and government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway, even if it should immigrants are a net benefit to the government finances. So you quite clearly spoke in favour of privatizing welfare. I have no intention of continuing to play these games with you of "I never said tomayto, I said tomahto!" You're clearly a libertarian extremist with radical and fringe views -- despite whatever minor and insignificant hedges you might throw in, as does every libertarian extremist, including Ron Paul. Where did I say privatise the welfare state... If taken entirely literally your statement "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway" is a pretty radical change in government spending. Did you, in fact, mean that government spending should be reduced to less than half of it's current levels? Or was it just hyperbole. I don't have any particular problem with hyperbole I'd just like you to clarify this statement. If he's just saying that benefits should be reduced, even while tens of thousands of people are reeling from the bedroom tax, and isn't promoting a substitute in the private sector, then he's even worse than a libertarian extremist.
I think only you could make that connection.
He said he thinks the government funds too much.
Ghastly's version: Reducing all benefits and making sure poor people starve. Just because he's even worse than "Libertarian Extremists"
Oh, and, I know you're avoiding this but:
On September 22 2013 02:15 Zealos wrote:
I know it's hard for you, but just try to answer my question please.
Either that, or admit you were wrong.
You can do it. I believe in you.
|
He actually said "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway".
And yes, that is essentially what happens when you significantly reduce benefits EVEN AFTER radical and widely criticized cuts have already been made. People will be in danger of going without meals and getting evicted from their homes.
|
On September 23 2013 23:36 GhastlyUprising wrote:
He actually said "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway".
And yes, that is essentially what happens when you significantly reduce benefits EVEN AFTER radical and widely criticized cuts have already been made. People will be in danger of going without meals and getting evicted from their homes.
You have not even looked into or asked him what he believes the government is funding that they shouldn't be. Instead you've made up your own vision of what /he/ thinks, and then argued against it. Classical strawman.
Also, I still want you to justify telling me that I am "More hardcore than the libertarian Tea Party" Though I somewhat imagine you are going to struggle with that one, even with your imagination.
|
On September 23 2013 23:44 Zealos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 23:36 GhastlyUprising wrote:
He actually said "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway".
And yes, that is essentially what happens when you significantly reduce benefits EVEN AFTER radical and widely criticized cuts have already been made. People will be in danger of going without meals and getting evicted from their homes. You have not even looked into or asked him what he believes the government is funding that they shouldn't be. Instead you've made up your own vision of what /he/ thinks, and then argued against it. Classical strawman. If he's going to come out with statements like "government shouldn't be providing most of what it does anyway" and call for the privatizing of education, the abolition of "green belts and restrictive planning laws", unlimited open borders immigration, etc., then yes, people will draw conclusions.
On September 23 2013 23:44 Zealos wrote:Also, I still want you to justify telling me that I am "More hardcore than the libertarian Tea Party" Though I somewhat imagine you are going to struggle with that one, even with your imagination. I thought I already explained that? I implicitly identified you with Zaros. You have similar names, views and writing style, and I couldn't understand why else you came out of the blue and had an axe to grind. If I was wrong, then I apologize.
Now can someone move the thread on to another topic? Surely this is getting tedious. The thread is about UK politics, not about how unfair I was on the libertarians for calling them zealots and accusing them of saying X when they really said Y, where Y is almost indistinguishable from X.
|
I was stating that it was unfair for to spend half your posts stating my views to the thread as a "Hardcore Liberation" when it is neither true, not based in any fact.
I appreciate the apology.
|
Flat. From MPs to delegates to lobbyists, not to mention news-hungry political journalists, that seems to be the most common word used to describe this Labour Party conference at the seaside.
Forget Manchester and Liverpool - Labour is back in Brighton, which is hosting the Opposition's penultimate jamboree before the May 2015 general election.
The party is ahead in the polls but you would not know it from the mood in Brighton.
The fringe isn't fizzing; delegates aren't delighted. MPs mutter about a lack of leadership and vision and are far from proactive in heaping praise on the two Eds, Messrs Miliband and Balls.
Over the weekend, former Blair spin chief Alastair Campbell warned against the dangers of "complacency".
Complacency? Au contraire, Alastair. Labour Party activists in Brighton can't seem to see the glass as anything other than half empty.
The mood is downbeat, after a summer of negative headlines, Miliband missteps and a glimmer of an economic recovery. This isn't a party whose members seem excited about the fact that it is the bookies' favourite to win power in less than 20 months time. There is no buzz in Brighton.
In the hotel foyers, and out on the seafront, Labour left- wingers complain about Miliband and Balls' caution and conservatism, especially on fiscal policy and financial regulation, while the party's right- wingers continue to maintain that their leader is, basically, "unelectable".
Source
|
I am coming to a sad revelation that my assumption that Labour would be in power after the next election is probably not going to happen :/
I think it's going to be another Con-Lib coalition. With the economy slowly appearing to turn round, and Labour appearing to have a lot of difficulty maintaining any kind of lead in the polls, it seems more and more likely that the lead they had was just a mid term slump from the Tories.
Sigh.
|
On September 24 2013 18:18 Zealos wrote:
I am coming to a sad revelation that my assumption that Labour would be in power after the next election is probably not going to happen :/
I think it's going to be another Con-Lib coalition. With the economy slowly appearing to turn round, and Labour appearing to have a lot of difficulty maintaining any kind of lead in the polls, it seems more and more likely that the lead they had was just a mid term slump from the Tories.
Sigh.
I think the German Elections show how the results will end up pretty well, Conservatives will get a majority, Labour will go backwards and the lib dems will lose a lot of seats.
|
On September 24 2013 18:30 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 18:18 Zealos wrote:
I am coming to a sad revelation that my assumption that Labour would be in power after the next election is probably not going to happen :/
I think it's going to be another Con-Lib coalition. With the economy slowly appearing to turn round, and Labour appearing to have a lot of difficulty maintaining any kind of lead in the polls, it seems more and more likely that the lead they had was just a mid term slump from the Tories.
Sigh. I think the German Elections show how the results will end up pretty well, Conservatives will get a majority, Labour will go backwards and the lib dems will lose a lot of seats.
I'm beginning to think that the Lib Dems won't do as badly as it looked like they were going to ~A year ago.
They will benefit from the upward economy too imo. I also really doubt the Cons will get a full majority.
It would also suck hard for David Cameron to have a slight ~5-15 majority in the House of Commons. Worse in a lot of ways than a coalition with the Lib Dems.
|
On September 24 2013 18:58 Zealos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 18:30 Zaros wrote:On September 24 2013 18:18 Zealos wrote:
I am coming to a sad revelation that my assumption that Labour would be in power after the next election is probably not going to happen :/
I think it's going to be another Con-Lib coalition. With the economy slowly appearing to turn round, and Labour appearing to have a lot of difficulty maintaining any kind of lead in the polls, it seems more and more likely that the lead they had was just a mid term slump from the Tories.
Sigh. I think the German Elections show how the results will end up pretty well, Conservatives will get a majority, Labour will go backwards and the lib dems will lose a lot of seats. I'm beginning to think that the Lib Dems won't do as badly as it looked like they were going to ~A year ago. They will benefit from the upward economy too imo. I also really doubt the Cons will get a full majority. It would also suck hard for David Cameron to have a slight ~5-15 majority in the House of Commons. Worse in a lot of ways than a coalition with the Lib Dems.
I would much rather that than Clegg or Miliband in government.
|
I think Miliband might be alright. He's just a shocking public speaker with no mass appeal.
It'll be interesting in the run up to the election as more and more of Labours policies get revealed.
|
On September 24 2013 19:11 Zealos wrote:
I think Miliband might be alright. He's just a shocking public speaker with no mass appeal.
It'll be interesting in the run up to the election as more and more of Labours policies get revealed.
I can't really think of anything worse tbh, at least David Cameron somewhat believes in the market and people, Miliband is openly hostile and would be an embarrassment on the world stage lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
