Jump to content
Phantis Forums

King_Katsouranis

Rookie Members
  • Posts

    184
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by King_Katsouranis

  1. On 17/02/2017 at 2:41 PM, athinaios said:

    Yeah? But he doesn't admit he's a racist. In the good ol' days, they would admit it as a badge of honor.

    Unfortunately when this is the man leading the political discourse in this country its a huge problem.

    @Athens4, you make some good points.

  2. On 06/02/2017 at 3:46 AM, aek66 said:

    an illegal immigrant can never take my job. never. i don't fear an illegal immigrant taking my job.

    what i argue is that the illegal immigrant will take the job of a 1st/2nd generation mexican-american, a poor uneducated white/black person or another illegal immigrant. not only that, but if that illegal immigrant has an anchor baby, now the govt. purse opens up for them. should i even care about others' economic fates? i do.

     

    this is why the 'occupy wall street' was a flimsy joke that collapsed under it's own weight. too many mixed messages that can't jive. to allow all in, harms the bottom of the pyramid. the poor white, black or latino. instead of facing the truth, we'll blame white privilege or racism? dreamland.

    well, what about the poor white guy? that's who trump said will no longer be forgotten.

    i'm all for protesting income inequality but i'm not for illegal immigrants.

    I don't necessarily think you're wrong about inequality. Just like the brexiters will soon find out when you vote for chaos the people who suffer the most are the have nots. They don't have the means to adjust to the changing circumstances around them.

  3. I'm sorry AEK66 I compete with far more immigrants than you do for work. You don't have 500 million who can legally compete with you for work, I do.  But I know, given I sell into as many markets as I do, I can't have it both ways.  You are naive if you think illegal immigrants have had such an effect on your life. 

    Gyros,  surely you must have the same view of Christianity? 

  4. Obama didn't do Twitter diplomacy like Donald did.  The thing with circumventing constitutions  is it's plain wrong. But when you're doing it to make a point, rather than policy it is reckless. 

    You really must be bitter.  There is a difference between accepting globalisation and the changes in racial make up to circumventing constitutions to persecute minorities.  If you can't see that difference it explains a lot of things about you. 

  5. This is the problem with extreme conservatives. Anyone who doesn't agree with you becomes a liberal. No one has advocated any of that,  but of course thats where you move the debate. The real elephant in the room is you can talk about advocating killing gays being exclusive to Islam, but really it's a fundamental value of the republican party. How else would you keep the bible thumpers on side? 

    So I assume you Gyros are okay with gay marriage rights? 

  6. On 31/01/2017 at 2:54 AM, gyros said:

    This is such a cop-out and typical of the do nothing approach and keep on getting massacred.  Lets keep the same policy and bury our head in the sands and when a massacre occurs, lets change pictures of social media to a flag and light up the eiffel tower at night and stand together.  If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, its a duck.   

     

    I'm not suggesting dong nothing. What I am saying is Drumpf has gone way too far and making political points isn't going to achieve anything either. If you can't see the difference between politics and policy designed to work well that's just laughable. 

  7. A lot of them? Probably closer to 1 in a 100k refugees end up committing atrocities.Additionally a lot of the attacks in Europe have been by people born/raised in Europe. The fact is there are bad eggs everywhere.  What you will find through is this type of attack gets more profile.

    This policy is letting the terrorists win. When you stop going about your everyday life in the same pattern and change policy in such draconian fashion you have lost. The terrorists have succeeded in changing your values and now influence what you do on a daily basis. Trump behaving like a loser... Who would've thought.

  8. 3 hours ago, ELLAS75 said:

    President TRUMP at the Pentagon with VP and Secretary of State signing in 2 more executive orders. One to beef up the military and a to keep terrorists out of US from certain countries. Also he had a very productive meeting with PM May.

    Lots being done under this president unlike the last one...

    America is great again, and Canada will be great again once the gutless PM is out!

    All the scientists Trump hates would love to examine you. For a 40 something you really are truly unique. 

    Why can't you ever respond to a post that destroys your lack of logic? Instead you hide behind one liners of bullshit. 

    By productive I assume you see it as a positive that May practically sold off the NHS to American companies?  Productive she refused to discredit torture.  For a "devout christian" you're very confused...

  9. As we discussed in the Trudeau topic, your interpretations  of  Canada's numbers are inconsistent and erratic. 

    Deficit and debt are different things. You should know the difference, because you're speaking about deficit not debt. In fact a quick google search will show you Harper's deficit numbers are no better as a % of GDP.

    Given how big a portion of Canadian GDP government spending is, if Trudeau didn't spend the economy would shrink.  Then again if Harper was so good Canada's finances would have been better. Look at Norway's sovereign wealth fund and Australia's government figures over the same period, since they are similar resource rich economies...
     

  10. 5 hours ago, js1000 said:

    You misunderstand me, I wasn't calling you a racist just pointing out that the term is banded about and used to discredit people we don't like to hear, the media do it all the time. A meaningless term now.

    That is fair enough, my mistake on the first part. Farage though, he is a racist no two ways about it.  Look at the definition of racist, then see Farage's comments about Romanians and "Chinks". The guy is just an a**hole all round. He is no friend of the working man like he claims.

    I'm prepared to discuss the accounts issue, but lets not use that nut job Richard Milton as a source. As it stands Full Fact gave a pretty comprehensive debunking to that theory.  HMRC's compliance is probably worse to budget.

    Re May, it's not her job to come up with a plan. There are three muttering Brexiters in charge of various departments, who can't come up with a plan between them. The latest is a transitional plan, which will probably be the end agreement  (Brexit in name only and no real change).Just like the Lords was supposed to be abolished 100 years ago.

    Which brings me to this point, if that is likely to be the case should the UK bother? The by-election on December 1 should give us more clarity on the importance of Brexit in the electorate. 

  11. The bigger nations have always had control. That is how a union/partnership will always work. The smaller nations take the bung in terms of subsidies, which generally keeps them happy(unless it goes wrong).

    Singling out Germany isn't IMO accurate. The UK has  also had a significant influence on the EU. The single market, expansion into the east and opt outs evidence that.  Here is an article on the EU controlling UK laws;  https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/. The UK more often than not gets what it wants out of the EU.

    I agree with inflexibility, but that is more a problem with the common currency than the single market.  The UK and Scandi nations all were able to control monetary policy, and were able to recover fairly well. 

  12. 4 minutes ago, Bananas said:

    I agree with what you're saying, but maybe if the government hadn't concentrated so much of the wealth and benefits in "the City" alone those on the fringes wouldn't have felt so disenfranchised.  We can blame who we will, but the government should take a large portion of the blame for Brexit even being a possibility.

    It's absolutely true. But that is Blair and the Tories failing with the city. Ironically, Barnier wanted to regulate the city further but the UK said no, several times. But then people feel disenfranchised with the benefits of the city. So they decide to tell the EU to sod off. The same EU who wanted to regulate the city in a better manner, so the average Brit wouldn't feel so left behind.

    The problem that exists now is that is the UK's only significant export. Revenues are already forecast to get hammered, regulating the city means less government spending = lower growth rates.  Staying in the EU is not palatable politically either. Another massive conflict for the government. 

    The people who voted for Brexit have managed to cut off their noses to spite their faces.

  13. When I come across a topic where Monkeydonian is used I would call it out. The same way I called out some posters for suggesting Greece should only take Orthodox refugees. Some people would rather take an Orthodox Syrian who will contribute nothing to Greece, instead of a Muslim Syrian who  is a doctor as an example. I argued that the Muslim  in that scenario would be better. So yeah, you can call me racist as you please, but I've argued against that several times. 

     

    Quote

    As for Fraud, MR Obama, MR Trump, MRS Clinton and Boris Johnson all spring to mind(and many more too)

    Absolutely. At the same time most people believe Farage isn't a fraud. It's delusional. 


     

    Quote


    And we're still in the EU and it still hasn't been audited and we're still net contributors and voting is still irrelevant. But then deep inside we all know that. 

    The audited point is misinformation. See here:
    https://fullfact.org/europe/did-auditors-sign-eu-budget/
    You'll find HMRC has similar issues.

    Obviously, we can't go anywhere as May is incapable of forming a plan to do so. Look at her record in the Home Office, she ballsed up everything she touched.  

  14. If you look at it from that perspective, then I agree. It still doesn't change the fact that sometimes it would be better for the harmony of the EU for smaller nations to have their voices heard in policy matters. 

    The perception from non-Europeans on the EU is fascinating. The benefits that the average European has gained from the EU are huge. Imagine being stuck in a backwater and as a European you can go to any EU member's embassy for consular assistance. Imagine travelling anywhere in Europe and being able to get free health care. Imagine before EU directives people used to get 10 days annual leave instead of the 20 - 25 as a minimum now.

    Instead in this country we are worried about  immigrants filling jobs that Brits don't want. 

  15. I understand the subsidy point. But Greece has no real leverage in policy making, and probably is not represented as much as it should be.  Some will argue its a good thing, as the EU has brought desperately required reform. The issue is Greece is in no position to shape policy of the EU. The UK on the other hand...

  16. 2 hours ago, ThrylosG7 said:

    @Bananas you make some good points - as your aware I'm far more to the right than you - but at least your not so far left that we cant find some common ground lol 

    The other issue with the EU is its complexity - and the fact its another layer of govt - a layer that is full of people who no one knows - at all let alone knows what they stand for and what their beliefs are on top of that you have a committee possibly full of people from every country except your own making policies that affect your country- immigration for example - some countries are affected far more than others..but the countries affected the most may not be part of the policy discussion  - somehow that just doesn't sit right with me - and many people. The EU elections and the roles of different representatives are so complex the average person unless they are political nut would not understand what is going on.

    Then you have the bigger nations bullying smaller ones...Germany was crying about subsidies to Greece over the years - however those subsidies not only helped modernise Greeces roads and transport to a certain extent - the contracts were given to countries that provided the subsidies - it also created jobs in greece - jobs that paid taxes - in turn Greece was able to purchase high value items from germany - like Military equipment , the citizens could afford german cars...That was the plan for places like greece - and how countries like germany would benefit- the Rio Antirrio bridge was Greek and french companies...for example. 

    You get the picture - all this creates a lot of distrust and questions...people dont trust politicians as it is - and most of them use double speak - which makes us hate them even more . The EU was a good idea to begin with - until they decided that national sovereignty was too much of a burden - and the EU elites developed god complexes...

     

    You make some good points from a Greek perspective.  From a Greek perspective the EU hasn't delivered enough to the country. From a British perspective, its the opposite. The UK has benefited so much, that is why it is so laughable Brexit is going to happen. 

  17. 9 hours ago, Bananas said:

    Ah, yes, I forgot Cameron was forced into the referendum vote.  Still, if the remain had won with 50.1% does it mean that the views of the 49.9% should be ignored ?  And likewise, I don't feel that the leave winning with 52% was a strong enough result.  But it is what it is.

    The important thing to note is that regardless how the future pans out for England, there is a large portion of the population that is not happy with specific elements of EU policy.  The main one being immigrants driving down wages.  Even if this idea can be debunked, it's a fact that this was the main driver for the result.  The EU and England did not do enough to address this issue ... somehow.

    Parliament gambled and lost big time.  They expected to win, and not do anything about the immigration issue.  When it would have been better in my opinion, to address it and the notion of Brexit would have been a marginal issue after that.

    Well interestingly Nigel Farage said if it was 52 - 48 remain it would mean nothing. So using the precedent he set, this vote should mean nothing? It's not that simple. The UK has been driving the UK for years (expansion into Eastern Europe, opt outs and rebates, single market is a Tory idea). The UK has managed to get a really good deal by carefully negotiating when it had leverage. Now we are sat at a table still playing poker, instead our cards are exposed and we have a s%$#! hand. May's approach doesn't help either, nor does it fit with her government's plan on budget repair. The Tories are going to lose somewhere on it politically in a real big way. 

    The immigration and wages point is not really true. But I get it, if I was from some s%$#!-hole area decimated by the post-industrial economy and had no chance of social mobility or having a good life then immigrants are good to blame. The problem for these areas are, the biggest investors in the areas were the EU. The government is forecasting reduced revenues and wants to cut a deficit, and suddenly the biggest investor in the area has been told to sod off. What good is going to come from that? Most of the immigrants are centered around the larger urban cities anyway.

  18. Extreme? Name a sensible Tory politician who was leave before June 23.

    Triggering article 50 isn't a plan. The plan is what happens, whats negotiated for, whats the fallback position and what are the objectives and what compromises are made. None of those exist, there is no plan.

    It wasn't legally binding because of sheer incompetence of the pro-brexit politicians.

    Ah the establishment doom and gloom. You realise, as there hasn't been a Brexit and there is a depreciated currency right now is considered favourable in economic terms. The fact we are doing nothing above ordinary with it is telling.

    The point about Farage is simple. What sort of anti-establishment candidate accepts a peerage, has an offshore tax structure and is an ex city trader? The answer is a racist fraud.

  19. David Cameron thought he wasn't going to win a majority. So at the time of the election it was a ploy to ensure they were bigger than the Labour party, and could govern again in some form of coalition (probably Lib Dems). The Lib Dems would never have allowed a referendum, so in many ways the referendum was never going to happen. However, the Tories won (mostly due to Lynton Crosby's excellent polling and analysis).

    Nobody except for a few extreme politicians in parliament wanted to leave, now loads are overcompensating on their position. It is a tough proposition at the moment. Vote Leave never defined what exactly their position was re single market  and customs union. So it is ambiguous what Brexit means.  Unfortunately, our negotiating position isn't very strong, and can be undermined be any of the other 27 members. 

    The thing is May could Brexit to a Norway model and feasibly have Brexited. Part  of the electorate won't have accepted that. But then again vote leave should have done two things;

    1. Made the referendum binding in law, not in pamphlets. 
    2. Had an official position of what Brexit meant, not have every politician contradict each other. 


    BTW on the anti-establishment theme. Nigel Farage (former currency trader, man with offshore tax structure) is considering accepting a life peerage in The Lords. I'm not sure he is the man of the working class people think he is. 
     

×
×
  • Create New...