Election 2010 - Con/Lib Government

[Daft]

Well the biggest problem facing the world is overpopulation so we should probably really give tax breaks to people who don't have kids at all.

 

Not really sure there's a party that has that policy...

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

"The Daft Party - Preventing pregnancies since '10!"

[Raining_again]

"The Daft Party - Preventing pregnancies since '10!"

 

I'd vote for ya Daft

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Me too, especially since none of the other British parties really appeal to me.

[Daft]

Someone got to do something about over population...

 

 

Mwahahahahaaaa!!!

[MoogleViper]

You say this antisocial behaviour usually applies to families from poorer backgrounds but doesn't the chance of antisocial behaviour as a whole go up in people of poorer backgrounds? What else comes with a poorer background? Like I said, lack of education and prospects, higher chance of alienation, poor nutrition, what else? There's much more at work than the single parent status.

 

Well a single parent would have to work longer hours to support their children. Therefore leaving less time to actually bring them up.

[david.dakota]

Someone got to do something about over population...

 

 

Mwahahahahaaaa!!!

 

Hitler tried.

[Daft]

Well a single parent would have to work longer hours to support their children. Therefore leaving less time to actually bring them up.

 

This is part of why I'd argue they need more support.

 

I'm not going to say any more for reasons I've already explained.

 

Hitler tried.

 

That was ethnic cleansing. A little bit different. One day, not too far away, the world will not be able to avoid the issue of overpopulation.

[danny]

Well, relieving financial burdens can help at least reduce some stress, thus slightly increasing the chance of couples staying together.

 

And it's known that at a glance, having a father figure around can help reduce the chance of children growing up to be antisocial.

 

Now before anyone flames this, such as people from single parent backgrounds, I am not directing this towards you since you obviously have the competency to turn on a computer and type coherent sentences. I'm talking about Britain as a whole, and the average picture.

 

Well said and im from a single parent background. Although my dad was around (once a week) i still think im one of the few who faired better than a lot of people i know fro msingle parent backgrounds.

 

Teenage parents can survive on the benefits given to them, but they can't really live off them.

 

I'm 21 and it's not often that someone in my family gets to that age without having a kid. My sister (18) currently doesn't work (it's hard to go straight into a job that will leave her with the money that would pay for childcare costs), but her boyfriend does. She realises that you can't live a good life off just benefits, and she knows that parents can't just give her loads of money.

 

Bollcks. I work in a fairly well paid job (over 20k a year), pay taxs, pay a mortgage etc. I cant afford to go out twice a week. Yet there seems to be plenty of single mothers that i know do. My sister recently had a kid shes on the lowest kind of maternity pay now which is next to nothing yet with the benefits she manages to go to go out at least once a week, go to manchester for a night every now and again. Th kid i well looked after and wants for nothing. I know she dsent get any money of my dad and her mam and her dad dosent talk to her. You can live well on benefits. There are estates full of people in the north who prove this fact. They have and endless supply of cider and fags. £100 trainers ad all the most expensive clothes you can buy from JD sports etc. I only wish i had such a low moral compass to have realised this when i left school.

Now before anyone flames me some people do need/deserve benefits, but theres a lot more who dont. im the sort of person who would empty the bins/work in mcdonalds before i would go on the dole. Many of the people on benefits are not they see themselves being above these kind of jobs. I would dispute this fact anyone who works is far far above long term dolies.

[Daft]

Anecdotal evident ftw.

 

I saw a flying pink elephant the other day. They're coming. Coming to kill us all.

[Pyxis]

Someone got to do something about over population...

 

 

Mwahahahahaaaa!!!

 

White people aren't the problem, you would have to control the birth rate of ethnic minorities. The BNP is probably the best party for that.

[chairdriver]

White people aren't the problem, you would have to control the birth rate of ethnic minorities. The BNP is probably the best party for that.

 

...

 

 

Don't know where to begin...

 

 

 

 

 

------------------

 

We should just build metal wombs, and raise children extracorporally - one per family (but you can earn the right to more if you're good at life).

[Pyxis]

...

 

 

Don't know where to begin...

 

 

 

 

 

------------------

 

We should just build metal wombs, and raise children extracorporally - one per family (but you can earn the right to more if you're good at life).

 

It's factually correct, so it would be silly to argue against unless you can't handle facts. I am obviously not racist (my girlfriend is Chinese Malaysian) and I don't think population control makes that much sense since its economically unwise, especially when it comes to pensions.

[Ashley]

But race shouldn't have anything to do with it. We want to control the birthing of people, not ethnicities, regardless of whether or not certain ethnicities have more children than others. Adopt China's 1 kid scheme or what not.

 

(you know, in this bizarro hypothetical world we're living in)

[Gizmo]

Isn't Japan currently having trouble with dwindling population?

[Pyxis]

But race shouldn't have anything to do with it. We want to control the birthing of people, not ethnicities, regardless of whether or not certain ethnicities have more children than others. Adopt China's 1 kid scheme or what not.

 

(you know, in this bizarro hypothetical world we're living in)

 

Yeah, but when the problem is over population, certain groups are the ones to blame and not others, why put in place laws that would also target groups that aren't to blame? That is unfair. It is unfair in this case to be PC and to ignore the actual problem by being blinded by PC tinted glasses. Sure, its wrong to discriminate against skin colour, but not culture, since this all comes down to cultural differences. Europeans (white people, they come from europe..this is not racist) really don't need population control, just like the Japanese don't. To target these people is pointless and wrong. Even China only controls the Han population and not the population of other ethnic groups.

 

India's population is set to rocket to 1.4 billion, which is 1 country and the whole of Europe only has a population of something like 500 million and white people are going to be a fraction of that number in the future. India itself tried population control methods and they didn't work simply because India is a democracy, so it is pretty foolish to think that people would vote for their right to have children to be taken away from them.. It's pretty childish to assume that its feasible in the first place and even then, people would be ignoring the economical problems that a country like the UK would face in such a situation.

 

"There is a demographic catastrophe happening in Europe that nobody wants to talk about, that we daren’t bring up because we are so cagey about not offending people racially. And rightly we should be. But there is a cultural thing as well… By 2020, fifty percent of the children in the Netherlands under the age of 18 will be of Muslim descent… And don’t forget, coupled with this there is this collapse of numbers. Western Europeans are not having any babies. The population of Germany at the end of the century is going to be 56% of what it is now. The populations of France, 52% of what it is now. The population of Italy is going to be down 7 million people." - John Rhys-Davies

Edited April 11, 2010 by Pyxis

[Daft]

White people aren't the problem, you would have to control the birth rate of ethnic minorities. The BNP is probably the best party for that.

 

Haha!! Are you a fucking nut?

 

It's not an issue of race, it's an issue of an over burdening species. Last time I checked we were all human.

 

If you really want to talk about the contribution 'white' people have made to the situation then you can start by looking at the overindulgence inherent in the West. (A personification of this being the morbidly obese American driving his gas guzzlers.)

 

Anyone who votes for the BNP is symphonically stupid. "We are a good Christian country." "British people are those who established themselves on this island when it geographically became cut off from Europe." Contradiction much?

 

Isn't Japan currently having trouble with dwindling population?

 

Yes, indeed they are. I think they are increasing migrant workers but there are issues of preserving national identity.

[Pyxis]

 

Haha!! Are you a fucking nut?

 

It's not an issue of race, it's an issue of an over burdening species. Last time I checked we were all human.

 

Laughing is something some people do when they are insecure in order to give others the impression of confidence. Offensive name calling is something people do when they don't have an argument. Yeah, we are all humans, but we don't all go around swearing at others. I will leave it there because I've got better things to do and really don't care.

[Ashley]

Swearing is also something a Londoner does when they open their mouth, its dialectic not profane

 

Yeah, but when the problem is over population, certain groups are the ones to blame and not others, why put in place laws that would also target groups that aren't to blame? That is unfair. It is unfair in this case to be PC and to ignore the actual problem by being blinded by PC tinted glasses. Sure, its wrong to discriminate against skin colour, but not culture, since this all comes down to cultural differences. Europeans (white people, they come from europe..this is not racist) really don't need population control, just like the Japanese don't. To target these people is pointless and wrong. Even China only controls the Han population and not the population of other ethnic groups.

 

India's population is set to rocket to 1.4 billion, which is 1 country and the whole of Europe only has a population of something like 500 million and white people are going to be a fraction of that number in the future. India itself tried population control methods and they didn't work simply because India is a democracy, so it is pretty foolish to think that people would vote for their right to have children to be taken away from them.. It's pretty childish to assume that its feasible in the first place and even then, people would be ignoring the economical problems that a country like the UK would face in such a situation.

 

Well your original post seemed to suggest within this country (or at least that was my interpretation), rather than worldwide.

 

But you say India has an overpopulation problem but its the result of a number of problems; high infant mortality, the need to send children to work etc. You can't just say "India has a population problem, that must be fixed" without looking at the bigger picture. There probably isn't a solution, its all intertwined with other issues. Part of the reason their previous population controlling methods didn't work was because they were implemented undemocratically, e.g. forcefully sterilising people.

 

Plus we're judging this from a Western perspective whereby smaller families are now the normal. Who are we to say that also means its the 'modern' way of living? Perhaps (and this is pure conjecture as I have no way of knowing) some families don't feel it is right to control the amount of children they have (outside of controlling it out of their own choice, or for medical reasons) because its un-Indian. Again, it could be seen as the West simply saying "you're doing it wrong!"

 

I have a lot of problems with this:

 

"There is a demographic catastrophe happening in Europe that nobody wants to talk about, that we daren’t bring up because we are so cagey about not offending people racially...By 2020, fifty percent of the children in the Netherlands under the age of 18 will be of Muslim descent… - John Rhys-Davies

 

This is a problem? That a religion is on the rise? Why is this one a problem? Because we don't like this religion? Because its not 'ours'? What the fuck difference should it make? Religions go up an down in numbers all the time but by splicing in mentions of increasing Muslim populations within discussing other "problems" only furthers the process of labelling them a problem, and causing more troubles.

 

Perhaps its just different ways of looking at things; personally I'm more of a globalised "all one world" (as naff as that saying sounds) kind of person, I'm guessing JRD was more concerned with keeping "national" boundaries as if we should say stuck in the past. We chose to open ourselves up to the world (or, more accurately, we chose to use it to further ourselves). We can't just say "we want these aspects of globalisation, but not these because we don't like them/don't agree with them". Perhaps I'm not the best to be arguing about this anyway (this ramble aside), because I don't really care about national boundaries and believe most notions of national identity/culture are largely fictional anyway (fictional is not quite the best word but I can't think what word is, its escaping me at present).

 

Yes, indeed they are. I think they are increasing migrant workers but there are issues of preserving national identity.

 

They always seem to be struggling with this

 

Urr reading through a bit of clarification because I seem to contradict myself slightly; I have no problems with people seeking to feel part of a national identity. If you can feel part of a nation and that has a positive effect on you that's wonderful (not something I personally feel but hey ho). I have a problem with using the idea of a "national identity" to 'justify' xenophobia.

Edited April 11, 2010 by Ashley

[Daft]

I will leave it there because I've got better things to do and really don't care.

 

Evidently.

 

Since I wasn't laughing in real life (Actually, I was embarrassed for you) you don't have to worry about me being insecure.

 

As for swearing, do yourself a favour and take some of Stephen Fry's words with you,

 

"The sort of twee person who thinks swearing is in any way a sign of a lack of education or of a lack of verbal interest is just fucking lunatic, or they say, 'It's not necessary.' As if that should stop one doing it. Things not being necessary is what makes life interesting."

 

Your reaction to my emphatic response says much more about you since, as illustrated on the previous page and elsewhere, I can quite clearly hold a logical discussion.

[ipaul]

I must remember those words of Fry the next time I swear somewhat inappropriately.

 

South Shields

 

Continuing their election tour, The Guardian goes to South Shields in what I thought was a very interesting video on a Labour stronghold, South Shields.

Edited April 12, 2010 by ipaul

[Ramar]

Just had labour on the phone trying to get my vote, told them I'd not decided. And when they asked if I had any national concerns, I told them I wasn't happy with this Digital Economy Bill. To which I got the reply "Ok, I'll make note of that"... Take note, like balls you did.

 

If anything pestering for my vote like a cold caller has put me off voting for them.

[BlueStar]

"There is a demographic catastrophe happening in Europe that nobody wants to talk about, that we daren’t bring up because we are so cagey about not offending people racially. And rightly we should be. But there is a cultural thing as well… By 2020, fifty percent of the children in the Netherlands under the age of 18 will be of Muslim descent… And don’t forget, coupled with this there is this collapse of numbers. Western Europeans are not having any babies. The population of Germany at the end of the century is going to be 56% of what it is now. The populations of France, 52% of what it is now. The population of Italy is going to be down 7 million people." - John Rhys-Davies

 

Sounds a lot like the unfounded half-truth scaremongering and outright lies I saw in a youtube video not too long ago, which Snopes did a rather good job of debunking

 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/demographics.asp

 

You'll notice there's a similar statistic about the Netherlands - this time claiming that 50% of all new borns are muslim. That would mean that the Muslims who account for 5.8% of the population would each have to be having 14-16 times more babies than anyone else. Does that sound reasonable to you?

 

It's like when you hear statistics saying "x out of every x boy born in x is called Mohammed", something which demonstrates that Muslims aren't particularly imaginitive when it comes to naming their kids more than it does that they're breeding like something out of Alien, with little eggs unleashing millions of scary foreigners scuttling out to clamp onto the face of poor whitey.

Edited April 12, 2010 by BlueStar

[The fish]

UKIP annoy me immensely. Their policies go something like this:

• Good idea
  
• Very good idea
  
• Very good idea
  
• Good idea
  
• Scrap Human Rights Act
  
• Leave EU
  

 

They're a bit like the English Democrats - they have a string of fairly appealing ideas, interrupted by massive stinking nationalist/fascist turds.

[Ashley]

Speaking of policies that annoy you; fuck off Tories with your ideal to repeal the fox hunting ban. If you make it legal again I'll shoot Cameron. I've never met a smarmier and slier fox than him anyway.