BS: Theresa May's new year message

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Iains
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 10:08 AM

That should be export production from the lowest cost base. I hit send too soon

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 10:30 AM

That's OK Iains. I got the gist anyway and, yes, that type of globalisation is a worry. Globalisation is probably the wrong description in that case but it is difficult to coin a new phrase isn't it! I understand what you mean now and, yes, it is something that needs to be addressed. Not sure how to go about it apart from, as we have been saying, regulation of business by government, regulation of government by people. To eliminate global 'buy cheap, sell dear' tactic though yet another globalistion must occur. That of global resource management by the governments of all countries. It is no good us telling companies to stop making vast profits, They will simply not comply. They must be made to be fairer and that means hitting the profits if they do not. Globally!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 11:15 AM

"
This is why the divisiveness of Farage etc is so damaging"


The acquiescence of the "liberal" left to the status quo is much more damaging to the promotion of systemic change than Mr Farage ever was.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 11:16 AM

BTW - Is there any significance in that, at the moment at least, Theresa May's new year message is followed by the thread "Pantomime"?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Iains
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 11:28 AM

I recommend a read of the link. Perhaps within encapsulates both the origin of where we are today and the wrong avenues taken.

https://newint.org/features/2002/07/05/history/

Also the first factories. Arkwright had a phenomenal social conscience for his time, rather different to the East India Company and the modern corporation.
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/britain-1700-to-1900/industrial-revolution/factories-in-the-industrial-revolution/

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 11:45 AM

I'll flag those for a read when I have more time - At a glance they look interesting but I doubt if such a short article as the first will tell the full story. Still, certainly a good place to start so thank you.

The point being made about Arkwright is also quite significant. People like Elon Musk and a few others do seem to be realising that responsible capitalism is better than just grabbing the resources, including labour, in the cheapest way possible. Arkwright did it, as did Salt and Lever afterwards. Treating your workers properly pays dividends, to coin a capitalist phrase :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Stu
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 11:51 AM

"The acquiescence of the "liberal" left to the status quo"

This sentence means nothing, it's too fuzzy and vague. Who are the "liberal" left? Why is "liberal" in quotes? Define "liberal" left in terms an idiot like me can understand.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 12:07 PM

Good heavens the evils of profit - any of you wondered where pension funds get the money to pay out? Or do you all actually believe that profits all go into the pockets of "evil" capitalists.

Capitalism is NOT a political system. It has far from been disproven nor has it failed as an economic system, it is still going strong, while communism has collapsed as both an economic and a political system.

Also there has been the idiotic belief that only capitalists that exploit the world's resources - in the 1990s I had the opportunity to witness the rape of mother earth "Soviet" style - horrendous was no understatement of the environmental damage done.

Those putting this line of complete and utter BS out should take a look at what "globalisation" has done since 1990. The "World's" economy has doubled, the number of people living in poverty has halved and this is supposed to be bad? If anybody tries to tell me that people in general are worse off today than they were fifty years ago or 100 years ago then you are delusional.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 12:20 PM

It should be "acquiescence in" anyway, Stu. The man can do no right.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 12:29 PM

"Capitalism is NOT a political system."
It is an economic system that is based on political support centered on the privileged
"Also there has been the idiotic belief that only capitalists that exploit the world's resources"
Every system exploits the world's resources and always has
Capitalism does so for profit rather than for the good of humanity and inbui;ty into that exploitation is waste
- we live in an age where we throw things away rather than repair them - because it is more profitable to do so.
Capitalism is incapable of exploiting responsibly if it is not profitable.
" any of you wondered where pension funds get the money to pay out?"
"Good heavens" didn't you know.
Pension funds are paid for out of profits earned by the workers - no profits, no pesnsions.
Do you really believe they are paid for as a free handout from benevolent employers?   
Similarly with state pensions, which are paid from our txes - do you think the Government reaches into its own pocket to hand them out.
You would think so to hear some Tories talk.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 12:30 PM

Tell us how Donald Trump came by his billions, Teribus, then tell us how capitalism is so efficient at making everyone better off and bringing about a fairer world. By the way, stop prattling on about the evils of communism. You know damn well that no political system that comes anything like close to communism has ever been tried on a significant scale. It's just a buzzword used by people who want to diss China and the USSR for ideological reasons rather than real reasons (of which there are plenty). Modern-day China is as capitalist as capitalism can be.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 12:35 PM

Dave,
BTW Keith - The first mention of what the picture was was by me on 06 Jan 17 - 12:08 PM.

Wrong.
I described it before you at 11.52 AM, in response to Jim, Steve and
Alan Conn who had all described it even earlier.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Iains
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 12:41 PM

Teribus
Capitalism can only exist within certain political frameworks so to distinguish it from a political system can create difficulties.
I do not think anyone would argue that governments cannot exploit resources-the vast bulk of the world's oil resources are under government control-although in the Middle East it can be argued as to which particular government controls the oil. The oil majors have had a declining share for decades.
The world economy may have doubled since 1990 but it has done nothing to protect the rust belt or many industrial workers in the UK. The trade partnerships that are being negotiated in complete secrecy would appear, from the little publicised details to, benefit the corporations solely.
The capitalist system may provide pension funds with cash for reinvestment but how many are signed up to private pensions today?
Social investment is an alien concept for the capitalist system and the continual flight to low cost production, taxation and regulation reduces the ability of government to fund pensions and welfare.
It is a flawed system and benefits a minority only. To me it appears that as the system grows more agile in preserving profit it will surely cause it's own downfall.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 01:04 PM

Did you really, Keith? You mean the 11.52AM post that said

The poster showed a genuine picture of migrants waiting to enter Europe so they were non-Europeans, but not black actually.

Which is somewhat different to my post some 16 minutes later that said

The photograph used was of migrants crossing the Croatia-Slovenia border in 2015, with the only prominent white person in the photograph obscured by a box of text.

But, yes, both are factually accurate so I suppose you win in the game of nitpicking. But you still have not let us know why you think it was some sort of mental illness that made me add more detail about it and I doubt you ever will.

Teribus - We are in some agreement! Coon ground at last :-) Globalisation is not a bad thing as the resources of the world are being used as intended - for the benefit of the world! If only all others could see it as such. I have also argued long and hard that communism as we have seen it is not the answer but you must concede that capitalism is not perfect either. As I keep saying, surely there must be a compromise that takes the best of both worlds? I like to see it as capitalism regulated by the government but the government regulated by people and consumerism may work just as well. We are of course just conceptualising anyway.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 01:04 PM

A typical example of the inbuilt wasteful nature of capitalism is to be found in agriculture.
We used to be regular visitors to North Norfolk and numerous local people described how the coastal area, which used to be full of small farms, were bought up by multi-nationals who immediately tore down the hedgerows to facilitate their large machines.
Within a few years the East wind had lifted off the topsoil, leaving the land unfarmable.
MacColl and Seeger found a similar situation in the Scottish Borders over thirty years ago, where small farmers were being driven out by rent and food stock-increases and the land sold of to multi-nationals and The Forestry commission - are left unfathomable by overuse and the planting of trees which poisoned the lands for any other use.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 01:05 PM

Coon ground? The area in which racoons breed? Should of course be common ground :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 03:07 PM

As far as I am aware East Anglia and Lincolnshire are still the richest farming areas in England.

As far as the Scottish Borders go I'd like to know the Multi-Nationals that came in to buy up the land from all those small farmers. Most farms in the Scottish Borders are tenanted with land being owned principally by the Duke of Buccleugh and Lord Lothian.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 03:40 PM

"As far as I am aware East Anglia and Lincolnshire are still the richest farming areas in England."
Not around the coast, they're not
"I'd like to know the Multi-Nationals that came in to buy up the land from all those small farmers. "
Why?
MacColl's song The Tenant Farmer was taken directly from interviews of ex-farmers in the Eskdalemuir area (Sandyford, to be exact) who had all lost their land as the song describes - they are archived at Ruskin.
There is a chance of course that you might know more than they do - stranger things happened at sea, as the saying goes!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 04:10 PM

What a better world it would be all round if there were no such things as tenant farmers. No duke of this, that or the other ever made a square inch of land. All he's interested in is his tenant farmers making a profit for him while he attends "important meetings" to discuss how he can maximise profits even more (which he won't necessarily share with his farmers, of course) or simply sits on his backside. Farmers who own the land they farm on have to work very hard to make their farms pay. They have to tend it in such a way that it's in even better condition for passing on. That's how it should be. You only have to look at the parlous nature of arable land in this country to see why tenanted farms are a very poor substitute for farmers who own the land they work. Most farms in this country can't grow wheat or barley that's good enough for bread or beer. They grow feed fit only for animals on other farms and we import our wheat from Canada and barley from God knows where. Arable farms in this country are run as factory floors, just sufficiently to avoid them becoming dust bowls in summer.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 07:54 PM

"What a better world it would be all round if there were no such things as tenant farmers."
One of the great contradictions of 'progress' has been that, as the small farms have disappeared the whole system of agriculture has become short term and therefore less efficient in the long run.
Even under feudalism, farmers would tend the farms carefully to produce a livelihood for his family and so that they could pass them on to their children.
They were knowledgeable of the elements and of the characteristics of the land and crops and worked on that knowledge.
We were told by North Norfolk farmers that the average life of the massive agricultural holdings was five years max, by which time the multis had covered their investment and would then move on to something more profitable, leaving the old farms overworked and without topsoil - short-termism and waste.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jan 17 - 08:26 PM

Absolutely, Jim. The state of our soil is the starkest condemnation of naked capitalism you'll see. And round here, on perfectly good land, they grow linseed that no-one needs and which yields three-quarters of a ton per acre. They have to spray the whole crop with herbicide in September in order to kill the haulm and dessicate the crop for harvesting. The fields look like deserts for ten months of the year, but why should anyone worry about that! The same land could grow three tons per acre of wheat or barley, or much more tonnage of spuds, nearly as much if grown organically, amazing stuff for bread or beer or chips. The latest money-spinner is maize, which is the worst possible crop for soil erosion if grown on slopes. It's all slopes in north Cornwall, but who cares! Then there's elephant grass, once planted yielding an annual crop with no effort at all. The ultimate monoculture. It's all over Cornwall like a rash. So what's elephant grass, human food, animal feed? Why no - it's grown, on land perfect for growing food, for biofuel!   

And before Teribus chimes in, yes, it's EU subsidies and the CAP. Can't deny that. One of the biggest inanities of the EU. Strange, though, how the people who take most advantage of it are the most anti-EU of the lot. As the yanks say, go figure.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Teribus
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 02:49 AM

Onto your stereotypes again Shaw?

I'd dearly love you to explain this bit of nonsense:

"Farmers who own the land they farm on have to work very hard to make their farms pay. They have to tend it in such a way that it's in even better condition for passing on. That's how it should be."

It is exactly the same view taken by ANY landowner, they have been looking after and passing on land in some cases for centuries.

As far as what crops are grown - that is entirely up to the farmer, tenant or freeholder, - the owner of the land does not dictate what crop is grown, neither does the owner of the land take any of a tenant farmers profit, the tenant farmer pays a fixed amount agreed at the time the tenancy is signed, what profit he makes are his own to use as he sees fit. On the farms in the Scottish borders some tenant farmers have held their tenancy for generations. In case of death the tenant farmer does not pay death duties on the land he farms, the land owner, or more correctly his estate, on the other hand does when he dies.

We don't grow wheat or barley good enough for brewing or baking? As far as Scotland is concerned all I can say is that you have got to be kidding. Example: "Born in the Borders" Brewery, part of the Chesters Estate, they brew real ales from ingredients grown entirely on the estate, their award winning visitors centre promotes local produce, a tremendous success story and all the vision of the very personable, energetic and hard working land owner. Ever wonder what they use in the distillation process to make all that Whisky Shaw?

At no time at all have I ever heard of Cornwall being described as the "bread basket" of England. Could the reason for that have something to do with the quality of the soil, size of farms/fields and topography of the place? To fit it into the scheme of things as contributions to the economy of Cornwall goes, agriculture contributes something like £336 million, tourism on the other hand contributes £1.85 billion.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Teribus
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 03:22 AM

Jim Carroll - 09 Jan 17 - 07:54 PM

"What a better world it would be all round if there were no such things as tenant farmers." - Steve Shaw

One of the great contradictions of 'progress' has been that, as the small farms have disappeared the whole system of agriculture has become short term and therefore less efficient in the long run.
Even under feudalism, farmers would tend the farms carefully to produce a livelihood for his family and so that they could pass them on to their children."

Absolutely priceless Jim - I suggest you go and look up and study what the Feudal System meant and how it was run - a Feudal farmer had no right to pass anything onto anyone, the land belonged to the Lord of the Manor and he could do with it what he liked when he liked. The Yeoman farmer did not appear until the late 14th Century, and they were normally attendants of a noble family who were rewarded for their services and given land {Normally no less than 100 acres} under freehold, leasehold or copyhold.

As to the efficiency of farming I think that you will find that farming in the UK has become increasingly efficient over the years from the feudal times you seem to have a hankering for up until we joined the EU, or common market, when others started messing about with what became profitable to grow, or not grow on our land. Thankfully those days are about to end.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 03:53 AM

"I suggest you go and look up and study what the Feudal System meant and how it was run"
I know how the feudal system was run thanks all the same
anf I'nm not advocating a return to a primitive system.
What I was pointing out that the condition of the land was in safer hands then than it is now - nothing more.
I did not suggest that the land was "passed on" in ownership - it was retained and tended for by the same families who worked on it and depended on it and it was respected, even then, by the landowners who owned it.
That is no longer the case with the present owners, as demonstrated in North Norfolk and the Borders.
In the short term, farming may be more efficient for making a quick buck, but that was never what farming was about - what has disappeared is working for the future..
You've never quite got over your strutting habit of talking down to people - please don't lapse back into your old ways.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Iains
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 04:46 AM

Recent figures suggest 80% of wheat for breadmaking is home grown. This is a much higher percentage than back in the 70's.
According to the European Environmental Agency:
    105 million ha., or 16 % of Europe's total land area (excluding Russia) were estimated to be affected by water erosion in the 1990s.
    Some 42 million ha. of land were estimated to be affected by wind erosion, of which around 1 million ha. were categorised as being severely affected.
    A recent new model of soil erosion by water has estimated the surface area affected in the EU‐27 at 130 million ha. Almost 20 % is subjected to soil loss in excess of 10 tonnes/ha./year.
    Increased variations in rainfall pattern and intensity will make soils more susceptible to water erosion, with off-site effects of soil erosion increasing.
    Increased aridity will make finer-textured soils more vulnerable to wind erosion, especially if accompanied by a decrease in soil organic matter levels.
According to Defra: degradation processes that threaten soil resources include: i) soil erosion, ii) organic matter decline, iii) compaction, iv) salinisation, v) landslides, vi) contamination vii) soil sealing, and viii) loss of biodiversity. Whilst not all these are necessarily significant in England and Wales, estimates for the UK put the total marginal cost of soil degradation at between £206-315 million per year. Evidence suggests that these costs are incurred in many different ways, affecting diverse ecosystems and stakeholders, over a range of spatial and temporal scales.
If it is assumed that climate change generates more extreme weather events, these will adversely impact soil erosion and degradation.
Both erosion and degradation are being taken far more seriously than previously with remote sensing being utilised.Previously the concepts were recognised but now there is a real attempt to quantify the processes/problems/costs.

http://www.ukauthority.com/data4good/entry/6796/defra-raises-sights-for-satellite-data

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 06:21 AM

The Somerset Levels flood disaster was hugely exacerbated by the fact that the main drains were heavily silted. That is the result of poor farming practices leading to soil erosion. The taxpayer then has to subsidise farming (again!) by paying for the dredging. You don't have to drive far from here to see fields left bare all winter, ready for the next sowing of maize. Disastrous. Soils lacking organic matter need greater and greater inputs of polluting artificial fertilisers. Monoculture means herbicides. What the farmers round here call blackgrass is a menace that can only be controlled by the most vicious herbicides. It also means a constant war against pests, the latest nuclear option being neonicotinoid insecticides which are systemic, killing bees and working up the food chain. Enjoy your breakfast. Songbird populations are being devastated by bad farming practices. I know one farmer a mile or two from here who has farmed all his life who doesn't know one bird from another nor one wild flower from another. The big farm down the road has built a large cafe with a lake in front of it and calls itself a "wildlife centre" (well, I suppose he has some very nice pictures of wildlife on his walls, most of which wildlife you'll have to get off his farm if you want to see any of it). You can walk across his huge fields in summer if you don't mind labouring through tedious groves of maize, linseed or oilseed rape. At least you can still see the sea in the distance. You won't see a butterfly or hear a bird singing in any of those fields. You might get lucky and see the odd wildflower poking out of one of the few stone walls that are left.

The house I live in is my house. I bought it and I love it. It now has a new roof and better windows than when we moved in and I've transformed my garden from an open field into a tree, shrub and flower-filled paradise for wildlife and a nice place to sit out in summer. I grow tomatoes and cucumbers in my greenhouse and I grow a lot of my own veg. I have occasion to visit people who live in privately-rented houses. The fixtures and fittings are selected for utility and cheapness, aesthetic considerations coming a very poor third. The "gardens" are patches of grass which are seldom cut often enough to keep them looking healthy, and the houses and gardens in the street are all the same. They are houses, not homes. No-one loves them and they are really just there to provide profits for landlords in order to give them "returns on their investment." They charge whatever rent they like and can kick out their tenant at a month's notice. If repairs are need the landlord is generally reluctant to cough up and the tenant, despite paying a thousand a month or more, will generally have a lot of hassle before anything gets done. At the end of the tenancy the landlord will do his level best to find excuses not to return the tensnt's deposit.

If you own your house, or your farm, you will have to love it if you want to make it even better than when you first took it on. The hard work you do will all be on your own behalf. If you're a tenant, and someone you hardly ever see owns the house or land, you won't love it because it will never actually be yours. If you look after it well it will be out of a sense of duty or misplaced loyalty to the squire, or because you're scared that he'll throw you out. This isn't just modern life, it's always been like this and look at the state of the place. If you ever drive on the road that goes past Stonehenge as I sometimes do, force yourself to look at the soulless countryside, run by the barley barons who get enough in subsidies to buy my house once a year. Those ancient Britons, who actually understood the land, if they could see what we've done would certainly have some suggestions, probably stated in very fruity language, as to what we could do with our "progress."

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Teribus
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 07:02 AM

"That is no longer the case with the present owners, as demonstrated in North Norfolk and the Borders." - Jim Carroll

Eskdalemoor Jim? 75,000 acres have been owned by the Dukes of Buccleuch for roughly 500 years. Same owner owns 61,000 acres in the Ettrick and Yarrow valleys for roughly the same period of time. Both areas have been extensively and successfully farmed for years, leases may have been sold, tenants changed but little land actually sold. The current owners have looked after their land and have done so for rather a long time.

So multi-nationals only use massive tracts of arable land for five years then move on as the land is no longer of any use do they? At that rate Jim East Anglia would have become a desert by the end of the 20th century. Typical example of your over emotive twaddle, the area still remains to be one of the most productive arable farming areas in the United Kingdom.

The population of the UK has risen from roughly 45 million in 1945 to roughly 65 million today and we grow 80% of the grain required to bake Britain's bread. As far as our fishing and our agriculture goes rule by the diktat of the EU Commission has been a complete and utter disaster.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 07:45 AM

Well it hasn't been good, I'll grant you that. I haven't met a single farmer round here that wanted to remain in the EU. Of course, they were promised before the referendum that they wouldn't be out of pocket once the EU subsidies stopped. I think we can confidently add that one to the roster of false promises, such as all that money for the NHS and a curb on immigration, that suckered people into voting leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Stu
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 08:00 AM

You can't really own land, it's one of the greatest human misconceptions tied in with all that crap about having dominion over all living things. I reject it utterly.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Iains
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 08:26 AM

Stu does this mean you are quite happy to share your housing with any strays and waifs that may care to take up abode with you?

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 08:39 AM

"Eskdalemuir"
I did not say the evicted farmers lived on Eskdalrmuir"
I gave the exact location - Sandyford - most of the land there is now the property of The Forestry Commission
When MacColl suddenly received royalties for First Time Ever, they bought a holiday home in the area - his song, Tenant Farmer, was composed after meeting a bunch of farmers at a Hogmanay Party they gave who had been evicted, as I said, anwd were working on assembly lines in local factories - that is what the song is about.
It seems you are back to your old tricks of denying (without evidence), whatever doesn't suit - it's ceased being amusing, now it's predictable enough to be boring
That is what happened to the land there, that was what Ewan and Peggy were told, and all your bullshit changes nothing.
"Somerset Levels"
My sister lives not far away and the local press announced that farmers who had farmed the Levels for generations had been forced out by the flooding and told nor to return
Decades of allowing the drains to silt up have made it impossible to control flooding

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 08:45 AM

I agree, Stu, but if we want people to love the ground on which their house and garden stands or which they farm they must be allowed unconditional stewardship of it, and that includes being allowed to pass it on. To make sure that no-one has more than their fair share, which would depend on many factors such as the quality of the land and its potential for providing a decent living, there could be a steeply-graduated land tax, starting at nil. And landlords should be taxed so heavily that they would want to offload their land or property quickly and cheaply. That would soon fix our insane housing market.

The Earl of Wilton's lackeys used to come round to our house for the ground rent when I was little. My dad used to save up pennies and ha'pennies and he'd throw the lot at the collector in the street. The idea that the house is yours but not the ground it stands on is an outrage of the highest order.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: The Sandman
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 09:17 AM

"Well it hasn't been good, I'll grant you that. I haven't met a single farmer round here that wanted to remain in the EU. Of course, they were promised before the referendum that they wouldn't be out of pocket once the EU subsidies stopped. I think we can confidently add that one to the roster of false promises, such as all that money for the NHS and a curb on immigration, that suckered people into voting leave"
   partly true, Ithink the vote in Wales which was crucial, was also to do with steel factories being closed because cameron allowed cheap chinese steel to be dumped, samoe on teeside, then there was the anti eu fishing vote, towns like lowestoft have been decimated

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Stu
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 09:28 AM

"Stu does this mean you are quite happy to share your housing with any strays and waifs that may care to take up abode with you?"

Huh? Why would I do that? What's opening up my house with everyone else got to do with owning land?

I live on this bit of land, have a a bit of paper to say I own it but in reality I'm just here for a while before I move on or keff it. What is it I own? Is it the bit of the earth's crust the grass grows on and my house is built on? That only goes down a few tens of kilometres, then we're into an environment where there is some movement of the rock that my bit of crust floats on. Or is my ownership based on geostationary co-ordinates, and I temporarily own the mantle flowing far down beneath my feet? But that can't be right.

But... the crust is moving around 10mm a year and at some point it will subduct beneath another plate and be destroyed... so can I have my money back if that happens?

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Iains
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 10:29 AM

Stu I think you will find in the UK that you own precious little below the ground. In virtually all areas anything of worth is owned by the Crown Estates, the Church, or the government.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Stu
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 11:06 AM

Ha! I refuse to recognise their claim to any land.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Iains
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 11:40 AM

Well Good Luck with that if they want to come fracking or mining.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 11:52 AM

You can't own the land because you didn't make the land, but you do own the added value that you've given that land, as long as you have dominion over your fair share and no more. You may have done that by building a house on it, or at least buying the house that someone else built on it, by draining it, improving the soil and cultivating it. When you do things like that you're entitled to give it reasonable protection from ingress or damage, the key word being reasonable. Keeping people off vast tracts of moors and mountains so that ignorant men can shoot at stags or birds for "sport," or trying to keep me off beaches, doesn't come under "reasonable."

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: The Sandman
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 05:00 PM

"Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 04:48 AM

Don't respond Steve - that way lies madness

Because you can not challenge a word I have said, so better hide."
Keith I have met you in person and I have no desire to fall out with you, but I cannot accept your response when i challenged you about Farages xenophobia, I produced a copy and paste of a report of a speech Farage made in Grimsby.
your response was laughable, you resorted to trying to undermine the contents by asking if the student   was out of their teens.
Throughout this thread I have stated that not everyone who voted to leave was a racist but it is clear that Farage has used the race issue to win votes,
your comment "was the student out of his teens" insults those people who are 18 or 19 who are considered by the government old enough and responsible enough to vote legally.
when someone does respond to you politely, and you are clearly caught out you still will not admit you are wrong, so what is the point of anyone responding to you.
THE STUDENT IN QUESTION WAS IN HIS FINAL YEAR OF A BA HONS DEGREE, that means he is considered old enough and responsible enough top vote.14 March 2016       · by European Student Think Tank       · in ambassadors, articles and blogs, EU Foreign Policy, EU Policy Process, Eurocrisis, European Integration, Geen categorie, ISIS, Migration, Religion.       ·
By Matt Evans, British EST Ambassador. Matt is a final year BA (hons) History and Politics student at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, UK.

16486626570_7f070e3bc4_o

The upcoming June referendum on whether Britain should remain a member of the European Union has once again increased the media's interest in the UK Independence Party, commonly known as UKIP. UKIP, formed in 1993 as a response to increasing European integration, are generally viewed as to the right on the political spectrum of the governing Conservative Party, advocating British withdrawal from the European Union and an end to what they view as "uncontrolled immigration".[1] Under the leadership of the charismatic but divisive Nigel Farage, the party has enjoyed recent electoral success, gaining the most seats and votes in the 2014 European Parliament election, marking the first time since 1910 that a party other than Labour and the Conservatives won the largest number of seats in a national election.[2] This article looks at a speech delivered by leader Farage when campaigning for UKIP in the 2015 UK General Election.

            As a part of the general election campaign the infamous Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party, went to Grimsby Town Hall and urged the residents of Grimsby to vote for Victoria Ayling, a local councillor, as their next Member of Parliament[3]. This speech exemplifies a large part of Great Britain's scepticism towards the European Union. Given the situation as it was the general election and Farage was holding a speech in a town known for its fishing, it can be argued that he attempted to ignite a nostalgic and nationalist fire in Grimsby. He begins his speech by stating: "Grimsby used to be a great place"[4]. Already here, Farage is presenting a problem in the United Kingdom namely its lack of sovereignty. It can be argued that this problem is the overarching theme on Farage's agenda since, in his view, it is the root for the sinking fishing industry in Grimsby because of the Common Fisheries Policy, Great Britain's declining living conditions due to the Open Door Policy and the British debt due to the European Union membership.

            Farage gives a historical background of why Great Britain's sovereignty has declined according to his own view, which gives his audience an overview and general knowledge of the problem that Great Britain is currently in. Moreover, it is revealing that Farage had an understanding for his audience. This can be seen, for example, by his focus on the famous fishing industry in Grimsby which illustrates that the speech had a particular audience but also his aggressive quote that "Tony Blair can go to hell"[5] which was received by applause of the audience. He even says sarcastically that he misread the audience when he first mentions Tony Blair, indicating that he knows the audience.

First of all, by igniting the nostalgic and nationalistic fire in the audience, he manages to use the argumentative appeal of pathos. This can be tied into Aristotle's notion of emotions since Farage sparks dissatisfaction or even anger in the audience where Aristotle argues that if an item has importance, people will eventually get angry[6]. In this case, Farage is able to present a broken Great Britain and acknowledge it, which the residents of Grimsby are attached to. This indicates that the residents of Grimsby find an importance in Great Britain. Farage is able to direct that frustration and anger, and pinpoint the lack of sovereignty as the fundamental problem. This use of pathos can be considered rather successful since Farage's aim is convince the residents of Grimsby to vote for Ayling because belief and action are intertwined, according to Aristotle[7], and thus by making that certain belief a constituent part of emotion, Farage is able to gain more votes for UKIP.

            Another argumentative appeal is ethos, which he is able to portray through his view of Europe. By claiming that he is not against Europe as countries and people and that he, in fact, likes Europe, Farage is able to illustrate to the public that he is a concerned man of Great Britain rather than a fearful or discriminating man of Europe. In addition, he also presents himself as a moral character by telling the audience that the other politicians have been abusing him due to UKIP's "sensible" policies as he puts it[8].

            The last argumentative appeal is logos where Farage appeals to the rationality of the voters in Grimsby. This is illustrated when he makes the case that Great Britain should become like Norway and Iceland who have a booming fishing industry and are not a part of the European Union. Also, by giving a historical background of Great Britain's ties with the European Union, he also appeals to the rationality of the audience since they see a chronological timeline of the developing problem in Great Britain.

Farage uses contradictions in order to portray his policies as appealing. This can be exemplified by his view that controlling the borders of the United Kingdom "immigration once again becomes a positive in our country and not a negative"[9]. By using juxtapositions, Farage is able to make the audience differentiate between UKIP and the other parties, making UKIP more appealing to voters. It is also seen that Farage uses examples as inductions such as his argument for an increase in the defence budget that he compares to house insurance and the comparison that British debt is like maxing out a credit card. At the end of the speech, Farage states that he doesn't want to sell out nor have a ministerial car but rather wants to "drive the agenda of British politics the next five years"[10]. Here, an odd metaphor is applied in order to contrast what politicians want compared to what Farage want to do if elected but since it is the first metaphor that Farage uses in the speech, it also emphasises his goal of influencing British politics.

The hostility towards the European Union that Farage represents sums up the split in Great Britain. The latest opinion poll by Comres suggests that 49% of Britons want to remain in the EU whereas 41% wants to leave[11]. By analysing a speech by one of the leading figures of the British euroscepticism, we can clearly see that the charismatic Farage is able to adapt his rhetoric to different situations and the issues he touches upon are strong entities of British nationalism. Whether you agree with him or not, "[R]hetoric proves crucial when it comes to invoking discourses in the audience conducive to the claim made by the representative, and downplaying competing discourses"[12] and this is fundamental to the democratic ideals that Great Britain but also the European Union represent. Thus, it is important to acknowledge euroscepticism as a part of British political discourse since it illustrates the antagonism of views in British society.

All in all, Farage focuses on the particular audience by his examples and comparisons that are specific to the people in Grimsby, which helps igniting the nostalgic and nationalistic fire in Grimsby. Hence, the speech can be considered to be successful since it convinces the audience that the sole problem of British politics is its lack of sovereignty and UKIP can provide the solution to make Grimsby a thriving fishing town again.

[1] UKIP Manifesto 2015 "Immigration" p.10

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Jan 17 - 07:07 PM

Good Soldier:
An interesting copy/paste, but the original author give no valid quotes to back up what he is saying. He just gives his opinion of the way Nigel Farage was campaigning against Europe.
To quote one of our better authors: it is a tale. Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Teribus
Date: 11 Jan 17 - 03:26 AM

"The Earl of Wilton's lackeys used to come round to our house for the ground rent when I was little. My dad used to save up pennies and ha'pennies and he'd throw the lot at the collector in the street."

Now if that was the truculent, boorish, ungracious and ill-mannered example you were set as a child it explains a great deal about you. That on reflection you boast about it and admire it even more. Having said that, the ground rent you refer to could not have been very much, or those you sneeringly refer to as "Lackeys" {What a good little "socialist" you are at heart} must have been of a much kinder and forgiving a disposition as there are limits defined in law as to how much you can legally pay for in coin. Had they adopted a harder line, your family could have been evicted for failure to pay ground rent and you might have been able to witness your father scrabbling about in the gutter picking up his loose change.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Jan 17 - 03:47 AM

"Now if that was the truculent, boorish, ungracious and ill-mannered example you were set as a child it explains a great deal about you."
And your cap-doffing approach to any criticism of the State,the monarchy and 'the great and the good' explains a great deal about you - what a good little extremist you are at heart.
Being evicted for being disrespectful to the representatives of the local landowners pretty well sums up the system you appear to look back on with fondness.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Teribus
Date: 11 Jan 17 - 04:29 AM

Jim Carroll - 11 Jan 17 - 03:47 AM

A couple of points Jim:

1: "your cap-doffing approach to any criticism of the State, the monarchy and 'the great and the good' explains a great deal about you - what a good little extremist you are at heart."

Surely Jim if as you claim I am a defender of all of those things (Which oddly enough I am not, although I do react to incorrect, ill-informed and outrageous criticism of anything - which is the main reason you and I come into conflict) then how would that make me "an extremist"? I would have thought that it would more accurately have made me more open to accusations of me being a conformist. No matter though as anyone who disagrees with you on anything is immediately accused of every "....ism" in the book, or being every type of "....ist" you could imagine.

2: "Being evicted for being disrespectful to the representatives of the local landowners pretty well sums up the system you appear to look back on with fondness."

Demonstrating your lack of comprehension and inability to read again Jim? Missed the point entirely, yet again - have another read:

"there are limits defined in law as to how much you can legally pay for {something} in coin. Had they adopted a harder line, your family could have been evicted for failure to pay ground rent"

So nothing to do with being disrespectful at all. Currently, going strictly by the rules, the maximum you can pay for something using 1p or 2p coins is 20p{According to the Coinage Act of 1971}. The rest goes something like this:

5p - for any amount not exceeding £5
10p - for any amount not exceeding £5
20p - for any amount not exceeding £10
50p - for any amount not exceeding £10
£1 - for any amount
£2 - for any amount

As far as notes go:

Bank of England notes are not legal tender in Scotland or Northern Ireland.

Scottish and Northern Irish banknotes are not legal tender in England and Wales.

Prior to 1971 there were similar limits on the maximum number of coins of various denominations that could be used in any transaction and that Mr. Carroll would have been Shaw Snr's transgression NOT disrespect.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: The Sandman
Date: 11 Jan 17 - 04:30 AM

The Ukip leader has been criticised by members from all the other main UK political parties this weekend after he said in a car-crash interview on LBC Radio that he would feel "uncomfortable" if a Romanian family moved in next door to him. THAT IS RACIST.
The copy paste gives facts, Farage said Grimsby used to be a great place, statements like Grimsby used to be a great place are reactionary, and appeal not to just dissatisfied fishermen but to racists, because of his views on immigration, if he said Grimsby used to be a great place before the fishing industry was destroyed, that would be acceptable.
But he attempts to use nostalgic and nationalistic rhetoric which at the same time appeals to racists as does his views on immigration, and the fact he stated previously about being uncomfortable about Romanians.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jan 17 - 04:33 AM

GSS, the report on the Grimsby speech by the undergraduate student contains no examples of racism or xenophobia.

If I have missed something, please highlight it.

Here is the concluding sentence,

"Hence, the speech can be considered to be successful since it convinces the audience that the sole problem of British politics is its lack of sovereignty and UKIP can provide the solution to make Grimsby a thriving fishing town again."

Perfectly legitimate.

From his opening paragraph,
" It can be argued that this problem is the overarching theme on Farage's agenda since, in his view, it is the root for the sinking fishing industry in Grimsby because of the Common Fisheries Policy, Great Britain's declining living conditions due to the Open Door Policy and the British debt due to the European Union membership."

Reasonable and legitimate non-racist arguments.

Near the end.
" This can be exemplified by his view that controlling the borders of the United Kingdom "immigration once again becomes a positive in our country and not a negative"[9].

So we see he is not anti-immigration, just concerned that the level is too high. That is the view of all the main parties.

Show me where the racism and xenophobia are reported Dick.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jan 17 - 04:39 AM

The Romanian neighbours thing,
Guardian,
"He told BBC News: "I regret the fact that I was completely tired out and I didn't use the form of words in response that I would have liked to have used.
"I should have just hit back immediately and said: 'Look, understand there is a real problem here – you can't deny it – too much criminality from these gangs has come to London.'"
In an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph taking the form of an open letter from Farage, the Ukip leader said: "Let me be clear – Ukip is not a racist party, and our immigration policy, far from being racist, aims to end discrimination against non-Europeans.
"The vast majority of Romanians who have come to the UK wish to better their lives and would make good neighbours.
"But there is a real problem, an unpalatable truth that our political class would rather not discuss. Since the welcome fall of communism and the awful dictator Ceausescu, Romania has struggled to complete a full transition into a western democracy."
There was discrimination against the Roma minority and a "huge problem" with the growth of criminal gangs, he said.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/19/nigel-farage-next-door-romanians-ukip

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Jan 17 - 04:51 AM

the Ukip leader said: "Let me be clear – Ukip is not a racist party

Ah, OK. It must be true then...

Sorry, Keith. The voices must have been saying things to me again.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jan 17 - 05:18 AM

Well isn't it amazing that Teribus can turn a discussion about the lack of principle and fairness involved in the matter of land ownership into a squabble about the maximum you're allowed to pay in 2 pence pieces. I've told you before, old boy, try to not post before you've had your morning coffee. And you've really done it this time. No-one gets away with being rude about my dad. He's only 93 and I've decided to set him on you. If you have boots, prepare to quake in them now.

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Jan 17 - 05:29 AM

"principle and fairness involved in the matter of land ownership into a squabble about the maximum you're allowed to pay in 2 pence pieces."
Old usual smoke and mirrors Steve - not the slightest bit amazing, just par for the course
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Theresa May's new year message
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jan 17 - 05:33 AM

Only to be expected, Jim. Dash it - forgot to ask Teribus for his postcode so that my dad can set his satnav...