|
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 |
George Osborne's "Help to Buy" plan offering state-backed mortgage guarantees for aspiring homeowners has come under fire after it emerged that hundreds of those who will be helped by the scheme already own their first home.
Prime Minister David Cameron praised the fact that over 2,000 people had been approved for Help to Buy support in the first month the scheme has been operating, saying: "This is all about helping hardworking people get on the first rung of the property ladder - and helping them get on in life."
However a quarter of the approvals for the scheme were for people to "trade up" to a better home, rather than for first-time buyers.
Critics warned that such a level of support for people who already own a home risked undermining George Osborne's credibility.
Graeme Leach, head economist at the Institute for Directors, told the Huffington Post UK: “The worry is that if a quarter of applicants are using the scheme to move up the ladder as opposed to getting on it, there is a significant risk that even more people will do the same in the future and that will further undermine the credibility of the policy.
Source
|
Godfrey Bloom has called for unemployed people to be banned from voting, in a call derided as "social apartheid".
In a controversial blog for the Huffington Post UK, the Independent MEP, who was stripped of the Ukip whip for jokingly calling a room full of women "sluts", said the electoral system needed to give "more electoral power" to the wealthy who "create the revenue".
The former Ukip business spokesman attacked the fact that some will still get a vote even if they have "contributed nothing to the national exchequer at all and maybe never will".
He added: "I do not expect to vote in a Unite ballot because I am not a member and pay no dues. I do not expect a vote at Marks and Spencer's AGM because I am not a shareholder. We need to get to a system where the interest of the individual and the state are more compatible."
Source
|
On November 14 2013 03:54 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +Godfrey Bloom has called for unemployed people to be banned from voting, in a call derided as "social apartheid".
In a controversial blog for the Huffington Post UK, the Independent MEP, who was stripped of the Ukip whip for jokingly calling a room full of women "sluts", said the electoral system needed to give "more electoral power" to the wealthy who "create the revenue".
The former Ukip business spokesman attacked the fact that some will still get a vote even if they have "contributed nothing to the national exchequer at all and maybe never will".
He added: "I do not expect to vote in a Unite ballot because I am not a member and pay no dues. I do not expect a vote at Marks and Spencer's AGM because I am not a shareholder. We need to get to a system where the interest of the individual and the state are more compatible." Source
I think it's about time we sent this guy to live in bongo bongo land.
|
He's already made waves with his call for a revolution and confession that he doesn't bother voting.
But Russell Brand has really pushed the boat out this time.
David Cameron and George Osborne should probably avoid watching Friday's Chatty Man show on Channel 4, because this is what Brand told Alan Carr.
"I think if you’re a bit mean and tight, and always cutting benefits and being horrible, it’s because you don’t know how to f*** properly".
He went on: "They’re like snickering little posh people, sort of like w***ing into their sock. I think if your job is to look after the country and you don’t care about the people who need it most, you’re out of order. And you’re a filthy, dirty, posh w***er."
Source
|
Cameron should put some Whigs in his cabinet in the next reshuffle; feels like we're being Governed by a smug, neo-aristocratic, intransigent Etonian clique at the moment.
|
Anyone caught possessing pornography which depicts rape could be jailed for three years under new government plans.
It is against the law to publish images of rape but a legal loophole means possession of the material is currently unpunishable.
The changes to the law, which will be introduced in January, will bring England and Wales in line with Scotland, where the offence carries a maximum sentence of three years in jail.
Mr Cameron is targeting websites which show videos and images of rape – whether they claim they are ‘simulated’ or not.
The prime minister has previously attacked websites which show the material, saying: ‘These images normalise sexual violence against women – and they are quite simply poisonous to the young people who see them.’
In a further crackdown on what Mr Cameron referred to as ‘the darkest corners of the internet’, Downing Street will tomorrow announce that a national database will be created to give every illegal image a label.
The move is designed to make it easier to have the material removed from the internet.
Source
|
So, out of curiosity, when will be the next elections and what are current predictions?
|
United States42773 Posts
On November 19 2013 16:12 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +Anyone caught possessing pornography which depicts rape could be jailed for three years under new government plans.
It is against the law to publish images of rape but a legal loophole means possession of the material is currently unpunishable.
The changes to the law, which will be introduced in January, will bring England and Wales in line with Scotland, where the offence carries a maximum sentence of three years in jail.
Mr Cameron is targeting websites which show videos and images of rape – whether they claim they are ‘simulated’ or not.
The prime minister has previously attacked websites which show the material, saying: ‘These images normalise sexual violence against women – and they are quite simply poisonous to the young people who see them.’
In a further crackdown on what Mr Cameron referred to as ‘the darkest corners of the internet’, Downing Street will tomorrow announce that a national database will be created to give every illegal image a label.
The move is designed to make it easier to have the material removed from the internet. Source
A lot of men and women enjoy simulated non consent porn without raping anyone. Is Mr Cameron aware that there are movies depicting everything from simulated murder to simulated hobbits walking a lot without any evidence that it causes people to cast rings into volcanos? Why go after this one thing with the attack on thought crime?
|
On November 19 2013 18:15 JustPassingBy wrote:
So, out of curiosity, when will be the next elections and what are current predictions?
The next elections are in 2015 and I expect Labour to win but the economy is finally improving so perhaps the Conservatives can convince people their policies actually work and I don't think the Lib Dems will do very well at all. It's going to be a close one, we'll just have to see how the next 18 months go.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On November 19 2013 18:20 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2013 16:12 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Anyone caught possessing pornography which depicts rape could be jailed for three years under new government plans.
It is against the law to publish images of rape but a legal loophole means possession of the material is currently unpunishable.
The changes to the law, which will be introduced in January, will bring England and Wales in line with Scotland, where the offence carries a maximum sentence of three years in jail.
Mr Cameron is targeting websites which show videos and images of rape – whether they claim they are ‘simulated’ or not.
The prime minister has previously attacked websites which show the material, saying: ‘These images normalise sexual violence against women – and they are quite simply poisonous to the young people who see them.’
In a further crackdown on what Mr Cameron referred to as ‘the darkest corners of the internet’, Downing Street will tomorrow announce that a national database will be created to give every illegal image a label.
The move is designed to make it easier to have the material removed from the internet. Source A lot of men and women enjoy simulated non consent porn without raping anyone. Is Mr Cameron aware that there are movies depicting everything from simulated murder to simulated hobbits walking a lot without any evidence that it causes people to cast rings into volcanos? Why go after this one thing with the attack on thought crime?
Yes, it's completely abhorrent to me. I find it hard to express just how strongly I'm against banning these things.
|
On November 19 2013 19:37 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2013 18:20 KwarK wrote:On November 19 2013 16:12 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Anyone caught possessing pornography which depicts rape could be jailed for three years under new government plans.
It is against the law to publish images of rape but a legal loophole means possession of the material is currently unpunishable.
The changes to the law, which will be introduced in January, will bring England and Wales in line with Scotland, where the offence carries a maximum sentence of three years in jail.
Mr Cameron is targeting websites which show videos and images of rape – whether they claim they are ‘simulated’ or not.
The prime minister has previously attacked websites which show the material, saying: ‘These images normalise sexual violence against women – and they are quite simply poisonous to the young people who see them.’
In a further crackdown on what Mr Cameron referred to as ‘the darkest corners of the internet’, Downing Street will tomorrow announce that a national database will be created to give every illegal image a label.
The move is designed to make it easier to have the material removed from the internet. Source A lot of men and women enjoy simulated non consent porn without raping anyone. Is Mr Cameron aware that there are movies depicting everything from simulated murder to simulated hobbits walking a lot without any evidence that it causes people to cast rings into volcanos? Why go after this one thing with the attack on thought crime? Yes, it's completely abhorrent to me. I find it hard to express just how strongly I'm against banning these things.
Cameron doesn't seem to understand internet things... He thought 'lol' stood for 'lots of love'; that you could press a big button and turn off the internet (his plan to solve the 2011 england riots) and now he is embarking on a crusade against porn
Thing is even if this becomes law it won't even be enforceable. I mean are they gonna have a team of detectives constantly checking all the porn everyone in the UK is watching?
|
On November 19 2013 19:37 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2013 18:20 KwarK wrote:On November 19 2013 16:12 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Anyone caught possessing pornography which depicts rape could be jailed for three years under new government plans.
It is against the law to publish images of rape but a legal loophole means possession of the material is currently unpunishable.
The changes to the law, which will be introduced in January, will bring England and Wales in line with Scotland, where the offence carries a maximum sentence of three years in jail.
Mr Cameron is targeting websites which show videos and images of rape – whether they claim they are ‘simulated’ or not.
The prime minister has previously attacked websites which show the material, saying: ‘These images normalise sexual violence against women – and they are quite simply poisonous to the young people who see them.’
In a further crackdown on what Mr Cameron referred to as ‘the darkest corners of the internet’, Downing Street will tomorrow announce that a national database will be created to give every illegal image a label.
The move is designed to make it easier to have the material removed from the internet. Source A lot of men and women enjoy simulated non consent porn without raping anyone. Is Mr Cameron aware that there are movies depicting everything from simulated murder to simulated hobbits walking a lot without any evidence that it causes people to cast rings into volcanos? Why go after this one thing with the attack on thought crime? Yes, it's completely abhorrent to me. I find it hard to express just how strongly I'm against banning these things.
It drives me nuts.
Kids = Ban : Reasonable, because the very act of filming it was non-consensual in the first place.
Actual Rape = Ban : Again, non consensual.
Anything that is legal to take part in should be legal to watch. I don't understand 
|
Actual rape videos sure if you can enforce it but why go after simulated?
I really don't get what the fuck Cameron is doing when it comes to the Internet and I think neither does he
I think the logic of blocking porn is to stop these young children rapes which are being blamed on seeing porn as opposed to absolute shit parenting
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On November 20 2013 01:25 Zealos wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2013 19:37 marvellosity wrote:On November 19 2013 18:20 KwarK wrote:On November 19 2013 16:12 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Anyone caught possessing pornography which depicts rape could be jailed for three years under new government plans.
It is against the law to publish images of rape but a legal loophole means possession of the material is currently unpunishable.
The changes to the law, which will be introduced in January, will bring England and Wales in line with Scotland, where the offence carries a maximum sentence of three years in jail.
Mr Cameron is targeting websites which show videos and images of rape – whether they claim they are ‘simulated’ or not.
The prime minister has previously attacked websites which show the material, saying: ‘These images normalise sexual violence against women – and they are quite simply poisonous to the young people who see them.’
In a further crackdown on what Mr Cameron referred to as ‘the darkest corners of the internet’, Downing Street will tomorrow announce that a national database will be created to give every illegal image a label.
The move is designed to make it easier to have the material removed from the internet. Source A lot of men and women enjoy simulated non consent porn without raping anyone. Is Mr Cameron aware that there are movies depicting everything from simulated murder to simulated hobbits walking a lot without any evidence that it causes people to cast rings into volcanos? Why go after this one thing with the attack on thought crime? Yes, it's completely abhorrent to me. I find it hard to express just how strongly I'm against banning these things. It drives me nuts. Kids = Ban : Reasonable, because the very act of filming it was non-consensual in the first place. Actual Rape = Ban : Again, non consensual. Anything that is legal to take part in should be legal to watch. I don't understand
Exactly this. It's a fundamentally basic logic breakdown. I hate governance in this fashion because it erodes any faith and trust to do things correctly.
|
Northern Ireland25451 Posts
I fucking hate the Tories.
I never liked much of their policies, but at least respected them for their ideas regarding personal autonomy, their rhetoric against the nanny state.
All out the window to pander to Daily Mail editorials, ridiculous.
|
So exactly what does simulated rape porn encompass? I'm thinking you could interpret it in such a way that about half of the kink scene is now illegal.
|
United States42773 Posts
Meanwhile countdowns to people turning 18 and appearing topless appeared in major tabloids. Simulated child porn anyone?
|
Northern Ireland25451 Posts
Not dodgy at all... Not like Charlotte Church won 'Rear of the Year' when she was 16.
|
What the fuck kind of title is this in the daily mails crusade against online porn
'Boy, 10 addicted to extreme online porn raped girl of 7 for 2 years.'
Now 1. How the fuck are either parents not getting a hint of this and the blame immediately goes to porn
2. This seems to be done in a very similar fashion to when school shootings occur and they say the guy is a fan of dark music or whatever
Difference is people are dying in one scenario.
Doesn't Cameron understand there's already tools to stop children seeing online porn as it is? The reason they can still reach it is either because the parents don't care or the ones that do are too fucking ignorant about the Internet to use them
|
Northern Ireland25451 Posts
'The nanny state gone mad, respect parental autonomy!' - Daily Mail on everything else.
I think it's quite smart politicking from Cameron, he seems to be chipping in on all these pretty much irrelevant moral issues (in terms of the country's priorities), because there will never be sustained opposition to them. Meanwhile he appeals to a section of his party's base support.
Porn and adult material opt-ins with ISPs- 'You're only annoyed because you're a porn fiend/think of the children.'
The askFM and general cyberharassment- 'OMG a girl died you know?!'
Now this latest- 'You're defending rape porn!'
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
