Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fragony
They changed the calculations, decided our economy is bigger then it really is. They even don't shy away of adding revenues from prostitution and drugs. It's a robbery, simple as that.
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-601_en.htm
Quote:
2. Does this year's technical adjustment take into account the new method to calculate member states' GDP (ESA 2010)?
No. This new method to calculate member states' GDP will have no impact on their GNI contribution to the EU budget until the new own resources decision comes into effect, which is probably 2016.
What kind of fringe blogs have you been reading again?
Quote:
3. Why does this year's technical adjustment see such big increases of contributions to the EU budget for some member states?
This year's adjustment includes GNI re-calculation dating back to 2002 for most member states and to 1995 for one, as there were a number of unresolved issues that had accumulated over the last years. The decision to resolve these historic issues now results from a joint effort of member states in cooperation with Eurostat. With all these issues now cleared, future such corrections will again be rather minor, as they were in recent years.
Some member states have consistently reported too low values for their GNI over the last years, this obviously explain the size of some adjustments upwards.
In other words, some countries tried to get around payments by reporting false numbers/stole money.
Stop getting your information from the conspiracy fringe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rory_20_uk
If not Greece, then a massive handout to Iceland. The point is that the money went to East Germany for decades and not to any other country that requires support which is not corrupt.
Is that net contribution or gross? The CAP is practically a system to support France's archaic farming practices and France liked the EU to give it more of a voice on the world stage (and generally anti the USA/UK axis); the Eastern Europeans have certainly messed this up. Germany was in there to promise to play nice with the others / cheaper to rule Europe this way.
~:smoking:
Yes, just keep blaming France, which is only the second biggest net contributor, and let's not speak about Britain singlehandedly blocking banking legislation to suit it's archaic, bubble-creating, corrupt financial sector, that is almost the only sector it has left in almost the only worthwhile city it has left. Stop whining about other countries and start looking at the problems your own country creates. The whole accusation that Germany just wants more power is based on nothing than silly historical grievances that you otherwise claim to have gotten over long ago.
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
If you honestly think that a single election that brings about a handful of elected UKIP members will bring down 60+ years of social programs, institutions etc... then your system really was fragile and useless to begin with.
Bring down? No. Damage enough to push the scots over the edge? Depressingly likely.
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Husar
Only 94 questions in the parlement. More reliable than europa.eu
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
First this...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ckade-him.html
Is because of this....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-28971058
I find it incomprehensible that these leftist would support violent child rapists but as Louis the Fat used to say, racism trumps sexism every time. There you have it.
I used to think that leftist were just gullible misguided fools, now I'm not so sure. This was done deliberately. Oh and for another flavour from these "progressives" they want schools to teach five year olds about homosexual sex.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-bullying.html
Truly evil people.
Update.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...itics-06022015
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
InsaneApache
I used to think that leftist were just gullible misguided fools, now I'm not so sure. This was done deliberately. Oh and for another flavour from these "progressives" they want schools to teach five year olds about homosexual sex.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-bullying.html
Truly evil people.
So, teaching biology, including reproduction/sex education is considered bad? The moral outrage!
Instead of mysteriously coming into contact into the world of sex through red-tube at the age of ten, warping young impressionable minds, an actual good solution to the issue, by actually educating our children so they grow up with a healthy attitude is a big sin. The actual proposals are actually tailored to be age-appropriate, and they cover a number of issues, should as telling kids that how that dodgy uncle asking you to stroke his snake is very bad and you should tell grow-ups straight away.
Next you will tell the tale of how sex is bad and wrong, how it should only occur for the reproduction of children and even then, you should weep in your pillow in shame at performing such outrageous acts.
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
So, teaching biology, including reproduction/sex education is considered bad? The moral outrage!
So your happy to teach children about buggery at aged five years old? I can only assume that you don't have any. At five years old (and older) I thought my dick was for pissing through. Children should be left to be children. Older kids, approaching or at puberty is ok. This is just repulsive on so many levels.
BTW I was 11 years old when I was taught about the reproductive cycle, which is/was about right.
What is it about children that leftists find so appealing? P.I.E. and Harriot Harman and Jack Dromey springs to mind at the Civil Liberties Union back in the 70s.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...g-9162728.html
Sick bastards.
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
InsaneApache
So your happy to teach children about buggery at aged five years old? I can only assume that you don't have any. At five years old (and older) I thought my dick was for pissing through. Children should be left to be children. Older kids, approaching or at puberty is ok. This is just repulsive on so many levels.
BTW I was 11 years old when I was taught about the reproductive cycle, which is/was about right.
That is a strawman, there is nothing about teaching buggery to five-year olds. i can pretty much tell you from limited knowledge what the lessons would be, and it would be pretty much saying that it is possible for two men or women to be in love with other in age-appropriate manner, which is like "Jimmy has two Dad's who love each other like how Susan has a Mum and Dad. Jane's also have two Mum's too". Very simplistic, but hey, it is for 5 year olds like you said.
I think it would actually be an issue if it was loading up a clip from a porn site and go "This is what Jimmy's dads are up to at night" then queue clip of two men making passionate love, there might actually some objections to the manner it is being taught, which I can safely say, is definitely not what is being broached.
I don't think Moddycuddling children is the best way, it has always failed. I was taught at a small age about the world, for example, when I saw someone in a wheelchair at a young age, my mother told me about disabilities and how they can impact someone's life and introduced me to the person to say "hello", the person was warm and appreciative that I was being taught the right way. I have grown up never mocking people for being disabled. On the other hand, I saw others who basically 'shielded' children away from disabled people and sneered at the person in the wheelchair, and then they grow up mocking and making fun of disabled people for being abnormal monstrous creatures.
Ignorance isn't bliss. Only way of overcoming bigotry and discrimination is knowledge and experience.
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beskar
That is a strawman, there is nothing about teaching buggery to five-year olds. i can pretty much tell you from limited knowledge what the lessons would be, and it would be pretty much saying that it is possible for two men or women to be in love with other in age-appropriate manner, which is like "Jimmy has two Dad's who love each other like how Susan has a Mum and Dad. Jane's also have two Mum's too". Very simplistic, but hey, it is for 5 year olds like you said.
I think it would actually be an issue if it was loading up a clip from a porn site and go "This is what Jimmy's dads are up to at night" then queue clip of two men making passionate love, there might actually some objections to the manner it is being taught, which I can safely say, is definitely not what is being broached.
I don't think Moddycuddling children is the best way, it has always failed. I was taught at a small age about the world, for example, when I saw someone in a wheelchair at a young age, my mother told me about disabilities and how they can impact someone's life and introduced me to the person to say "hello", the person was warm and appreciative that I was being taught the right way. I have grown up never mocking people for being disabled. On the other hand, I saw others who basically 'shielded' children away from disabled people and sneered at the person in the wheelchair, and then they grow up mocking and making fun of disabled people for being abnormal monstrous creatures.
Ignorance isn't bliss. Only way of overcoming bigotry and discrimination is knowledge and experience.
Except that telling the kids Jimmy has two Dads is also mollycoddling. because it implies there isn't a woman out there who gave birth to Jimmy. Actually, Jimmy has a mum and a dad but Jimmy's dad has a boyfriend/male partner.
Also, your example about disabled people is flawed because real ignorance is not encountering disabled, but your example has the parents setting a bad example and the children following it.
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
How long till we are hearing stories like below in primary school?
Girl raped at school after sex education class
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
How long till we hear stories like below from mosques?
Boy raped at church after sunday school service
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Husar
We won't
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Husar
Um... rapes happen in a lot of places but you're missing the point because in the example I gave there was a direct link between the sex education and the rape.
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rhyfelwyr
Um... rapes happen in a lot of places but you're missing the point because in the example I gave there was a direct link between the sex education and the rape.
I'm not missing the point, or can you prove that I am? The only point I could possibly miss is my own assumption of what your point may be since you hardly explained it. As such I didn't explain my counter-point either and based on my assumption of what your point was and my assumption of what you assume my counter to be, you completely missed my point!
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Honestly the only solution is to repeal the Factory Act and get children back into the workforce. Work the little blighters into an exhausted stupor and they'll never rape again. They'll be too tired for anything else too, but that's inconsequential.
Re: 20 miles south from me.......Rothrham.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
naut
Honestly the only solution is to repeal the Factory Act and get children back into the workforce. Work the little blighters into an exhausted stupor and they'll never rape again. They'll be too tired for anything else too, but that's inconsequential.
Spot on! And the mining firms can cut way down on the diameter and height of the transfer drifts as well -- smaller workers won't need all that wasted space.
