There's a Lot Wrong with Britain

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
961

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

the main reason people are leaving is high taxes and high cost of living relative to pay. That is the reason that I left. On a global scale this is a good thing and is exactly what more people in the US should be prepared to do. Instead of sitting back and complaining that there are no jobs, move somewhere that requires your skills.

I agree with you on this.
The smart English person who is smart enough to know that there is no quality of life here.
So they look to go to sunny places where they can earn more ( their skills are more valued since in their own country it is not because the money for that is being stolen by the .gov ) and have a real life.

You may be difficult, Cockney, but you are smart.

: )

I earn a hell of a lot less here it is just that the cost of living (with a family) is so much lower that my quality of life is higher. [/quote]

One of the Biggest problems with Britain and many of the other countries of Europe is the governments take away so much in taxes. People there will tell about all the wonderful government giveaways but they never realize that all the taxes make it unattractive for motivated people who want to get ahead in life to stick around.

That is why European societies are not as upwardly mobile as America. People are pigeon holed in their place and that is it unless they get their “lucky Break”. Then if someone does get ahead in the next generation the tax man comes along to knock them back down into their proper place with death taxes which in Britain are 40 percent.

[quote]
Thank you for the compliment. I think one of the issues that Sifu has is that he wants to pigeon hole me into some group so that he can argue against that group. This is why he keeps coming up with names, Blairite, Guardianista etc. [/quote]

The reason why I do that is because ideologically there really isn’t all that much daylight in between those groups and the Tory’s, so I’m trying to get you to take a stand on the issues.

[quote]
To my mind, the ideologies of all of the main groups are flawed. If you take any of them to their extremes you end up with chaos. The kind of world that PRCal, Pushharder etc dream of would be just as fucked as the socialist nightmare that the Labour party is dragging in. [/quote]

Some of the flaws of the parties are the same flaws. Them some of their different flaws end up with the same result. ie the Tories have their wealthy backers who benefit from Tory policy, Labour also has it’s wealthy backers who benefit handsomely from Labour policy.

Tories can be expected to do more to help people who are economically at the top. Labour on the other hand pays much lip service to helping the economically disadvantaged while engaging in polcies against the middle class that make it impossible for people to escape their class. Under labour the poor still stay at the bottom while the super rich stay at the top.

[quote]
The problem is, trying to tread the line and get a balance in any country is difficult. Also, whenever there is change in the party in power the first work is to reverse some obvious policies of the previous guys. Next comes the apologising that promises cannot be fulfilled due to the mess left by the previous guys by which point the next round of elections coming up and you get a dive for the centre to ensure re-election. [/quote]

The problem is cynical, jaded people like you who accept dishonesty and deciet as a normal part of the political process. The biggest threat to democracy is populaces being tolerant of politicians making promises that they either cannot or have no intention of keeping.

ie The EU constitution that the british people were promised a refferrendum on in the 2005 Labour election manifesto. Labour has refused to give the people the vote it promised. David Cameron has bullshitted people into believing that the Tory party will hold a refferrendum despite top tory party officials saying that if the treaty is in effect by the time they get elected in 2010 then there will be no such refferrendum.

The British people who will take to the streets over some stupid bullshit like fox hunting are just rolling over for the EU constitution. In the next month their sovereignty as an independant people is being taken away from them by a foreign government without their permission. What do the British do about it? Nothing. Because the British have become spineless pansies who will not stand up for their freedom.

[quote]
I really hate party politics because it means that the brightest guys are set working against each other instead of collaborating. Unfortunately in a democratic system parties manifest out of necessity and the alternative to democracies is hardly ideal. [/quote]

I hate party politics because people don’t look past them to see that there are people who are playing both sides so no matter who wins they benefit. Tory/Labour Republican/Democrat they are just two differents sides of the same coin.

That is why leadership has become almost nonexistant, we don’t get leaders anymore what we get is politicians. Politicians who say and do whatever is needed to get power so they can then advance their rich sponsors agenda while not acting in the best interests of society.

You don’t need the brightest people (though it is good to have smart leadership) so much as you need people who have the integrity to not bullshit people to get power and then not deliver because what they promised was bullshit.

962

[quote]Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

I earn a hell of a lot less here it is just that the cost of living (with a family) is so much lower that my quality of life is higher. Yes, that was what I meant: Your spending power is stronger. Besides, sunshine and warmth are free. You have no idea how much I am paying to keep my bones warm in London and we are told gas prices are going to sky rocket again. [/quote]

Despite the fact that Britain is the EU’s biggest producer/exporter of natural gas. The two biggest energy suppliers in Britain are part owned by the French and German governments. Because of this the prices they charge their French and German customers is set by their government at a price that is below their market value. So what they do to make up for their losses in France and Germany is they sock it to the British. So the high prices you are paying for gas and electricity is actually subsidising energy consumers in France and Germany.

Another way the British get screwed by Europe is during the summer they buy the British North Sea natural gas production at a low price because the demand is low and store it in France. Then when the winter comes they sell it back to the British at a substantial profit. This is how Britain gets used and screwed by it’s so called EU partners.

[quote]
To my mind, the ideologies of all of the main groups are flawed. That is the problem with politics right there; You can’t work with ideals because reality is far from it. So why not a more realistic, down to earth approach? There hasn’t been anything different really. That is why I lost interest many years ago. We are going around in circles, nothing elemental has changed. [/quote]

It is because the mass media has had a lock on the flow of information. That is why there is a movement underway to seize conrol of the internet because it has created a new paradigm where the mass media can be rendered irrelevant. That is why the BNP website has been the target of several dos attacks which under British law are classified as acts of terrorism.

Cooperation over competition sounds nice, but in practice some of us have unrecncilable differences.

963

[quote]Chushin wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

I’m sure if we met in real life we would actually have more views in common than differences, the internet tends to increase polarisation of thought and we are both highly contrary.

I’m sure Sifu would disagree with you on that![/quote]

Actually Chushin I probably would get along with Cockney. I am fairly laid back and can get along with most people. I do have some close friends who are way left of Cockney. I wouldn’t want to live with them again because that was too close but we are still friends. Cockney does have a point about postings on a forum exaggerating differences. It is easier to be antagonistic and rude from a distance.

964

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sloth wrote:
So, I’m starting to understand there’s disagreement between Sifu and Cockney.

Actually we are the same person trolling for everyone’s entertainment :wink:

[/quote]

Diabolical!

965

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

the main reason people are leaving is high taxes and high cost of living relative to pay. That is the reason that I left. On a global scale this is a good thing and is exactly what more people in the US should be prepared to do. Instead of sitting back and complaining that there are no jobs, move somewhere that requires your skills.

I agree with you on this.
The smart English person who is smart enough to know that there is no quality of life here.
So they look to go to sunny places where they can earn more ( their skills are more valued since in their own country it is not because the money for that is being stolen by the .gov ) and have a real life.

You may be difficult, Cockney, but you are smart.

: )

I earn a hell of a lot less here it is just that the cost of living (with a family) is so much lower that my quality of life is higher.

One of the Biggest problems with Britain and many of the other countries of Europe is the governments take away so much in taxes. People there will tell about all the wonderful government giveaways but they never realize that all the taxes make it unattractive for motivated people who want to get ahead in life to stick around.

That is why European societies are not as upwardly mobile as America. People are pigeon holed in their place and that is it unless they get their “lucky Break”. Then if someone does get ahead in the next generation the tax man comes along to knock them back down into their proper place with death taxes which in Britain are 40 percent.

Thank you for the compliment. I think one of the issues that Sifu has is that he wants to pigeon hole me into some group so that he can argue against that group. This is why he keeps coming up with names, Blairite, Guardianista etc.

The reason why I do that is because ideologically there really isn’t all that much daylight in between those groups and the Tory’s, so I’m trying to get you to take a stand on the issues.

To my mind, the ideologies of all of the main groups are flawed. If you take any of them to their extremes you end up with chaos. The kind of world that PRCal, Pushharder etc dream of would be just as fucked as the socialist nightmare that the Labour party is dragging in.

Some of the flaws of the parties are the same flaws. Them some of their different flaws end up with the same result. ie the Tories have their wealthy backers who benefit from Tory policy, Labour also has it’s wealthy backers who benefit handsomely from Labour policy.

Tories can be expected to do more to help people who are economically at the top. Labour on the other hand pays much lip service to helping the economically disadvantaged while engaging in polcies against the middle class that make it impossible for people to escape their class. Under labour the poor still stay at the bottom while the super rich stay at the top.

The problem is, trying to tread the line and get a balance in any country is difficult. Also, whenever there is change in the party in power the first work is to reverse some obvious policies of the previous guys. Next comes the apologising that promises cannot be fulfilled due to the mess left by the previous guys by which point the next round of elections coming up and you get a dive for the centre to ensure re-election.

The problem is cynical, jaded people like you who accept dishonesty and deciet as a normal part of the political process. The biggest threat to democracy is populaces being tolerant of politicians making promises that they either cannot or have no intention of keeping.

ie The EU constitution that the british people were promised a refferrendum on in the 2005 Labour election manifesto. Labour has refused to give the people the vote it promised. David Cameron has bullshitted people into believing that the Tory party will hold a refferrendum despite top tory party officials saying that if the treaty is in effect by the time they get elected in 2010 then there will be no such refferrendum.

The British people who will take to the streets over some stupid bullshit like fox hunting are just rolling over for the EU constitution. In the next month their sovereignty as an independant people is being taken away from them by a foreign government without their permission. What do the British do about it? Nothing. Because the British have become spineless pansies who will not stand up for their freedom.

I really hate party politics because it means that the brightest guys are set working against each other instead of collaborating. Unfortunately in a democratic system parties manifest out of necessity and the alternative to democracies is hardly ideal.

I hate party politics because people don’t look past them to see that there are people who are playing both sides so no matter who wins they benefit. Tory/Labour Republican/Democrat they are just two differents sides of the same coin.

That is why leadership has become almost nonexistant, we don’t get leaders anymore what we get is politicians. Politicians who say and do whatever is needed to get power so they can then advance their rich sponsors agenda while not acting in the best interests of society.

You don’t need the brightest people (though it is good to have smart leadership) so much as you need people who have the integrity to not bullshit people to get power and then not deliver because what they promised was bullshit. [/quote]

I agree with most of what you have written here. British people want a European social system with US tax levels.

I am not as dead set against the EU as you. Most of the claims of ridiculous EU regulation are pretty much a fabrication of shitty newspapers. This is one of the reasons that lazy sensationalist journalism winds me up so much. People end up focussed on totally the wrong issues.

For the most part the people playing off both sides in the political race are big businesses. The lobbying power of various groups is pretty scary (especially in the US.)

966

Why did it take so long to let Wilders in? I am curious about that.

967

[quote]Sifu wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

I earn a hell of a lot less here it is just that the cost of living (with a family) is so much lower that my quality of life is higher. Yes, that was what I meant: Your spending power is stronger. Besides, sunshine and warmth are free. You have no idea how much I am paying to keep my bones warm in London and we are told gas prices are going to sky rocket again.

Despite the fact that Britain is the EU’s biggest producer/exporter of natural gas. The two biggest energy suppliers in Britain are part owned by the French and German governments. Because of this the prices they charge their French and German customers is set by their government at a price that is below their market value. So what they do to make up for their losses in France and Germany is they sock it to the British. So the high prices you are paying for gas and electricity is actually subsidising energy consumers in France and Germany.

Another way the British get screwed by Europe is during the summer they buy the British North Sea natural gas production at a low price because the demand is low and store it in France. Then when the winter comes they sell it back to the British at a substantial profit. This is how Britain gets used and screwed by it’s so called EU partners.
[/quote]

You want to see where Britain really gets screwed, just look at subsidies to French Farmers!

On one level I am hopeful that the internet will increase peoples knowledge and help to break this. On the other I see that it actually makes it easier for people to spread bullshit like the whole anti flu jab rubbish that is going round at the moment.

[quote]
The problem is, trying to tread the line and get a balance in any country is difficult. Also, whenever there is change in the party in power the first work is to reverse some obvious policies of the previous guys. Next comes the apologising that promises cannot be fulfilled due to the mess left by the previous guys by which point the next round of elections coming up and you get a dive for the centre to ensure re-election. And around we go, so much so it becomes predictable as you have just shown.

I really hate party politics because it means that the brightest guys are set working against each other instead of collaborating.
I agree with this. Cooperation not competition.

Cooperation over competition sounds nice, but in practice some of us have unrecncilable differences. [/quote]

And then people group together for strength and you end up with parties again. Alternatively People co-operate so well that you end up with a ‘President for Life’ running a ‘benevolent dictatorship’

968

Incidentally, two bi-elections held in areas that BNP was hoping to win over the last 2 weeks. Their share of the vote dropped in both.

Nick Griffin was on Question Time last night (BBC program where a cross spectrum panel of political figures field questions from a studio audience.) Just trying to get hold of a video, reports I have read are that he was stuttering shaking and had difficulty putting together coherent arguments.

I’m sure the BNP will play off that he was a victim and the audience and panel was stacked against him however if he is some great leader, surely he should be able to turn around that kind of situation.

969

BNP on Question Time:

Part One: BNP Nick Griffin on BBC Question Time Part 1 - YouTube and go from there…

970

[quote]ephrem wrote:
BNP on Question Time:

Part One: BNP Nick Griffin on BBC Question Time Part 1 - YouTube and go from there…[/quote]

Appreciated. Will watch that when I get home. Just got sent the clip of him talking about an almost totally non violent branch of the KKK.

971

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

I’m sure the BNP will play off that he was a victim and the audience and panel was stacked against him [/quote]

He did. He said the BBC was biased and he was set up.
His face was on he cover of many newspapers today and this has been big on the TV news and late night political discussions.

972

[quote]Sifu wrote:

Despite the fact that Britain is the EU’s biggest producer/exporter of natural gas. The two biggest energy suppliers in Britain are part owned by the French and German governments. Because of this the prices they charge their French and German customers is set by their government at a price that is below their market value. So what they do to make up for their losses in France and Germany is they sock it to the British. So the high prices you are paying for gas and electricity is actually subsidising energy consumers in France and Germany. [/quote]
This is revolting.[quote]

Another way the British get screwed by Europe is during the summer they buy the British North Sea natural gas production at a low price because the demand is low and store it in France. Then when the winter comes they sell it back to the British at a substantial profit. This is how Britain gets used and screwed by it’s so called EU partners.[/quote]

Time to get a divorce? [quote]

Cooperation over competition sounds nice, but in practice some of us have unrecncilable differences. [/quote]

I am aware that political cooperation leads to corporation - that is what I am beginning to see from this thread:
Elite Corporations is what Government and EU nations really are.

The model I had in mind is idealistic and requires unity not uniformity.
Realism lending unreconcilable differences leads to civilized divorce.

973

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

the main reason people are leaving is high taxes and high cost of living relative to pay. That is the reason that I left. On a global scale this is a good thing and is exactly what more people in the US should be prepared to do. Instead of sitting back and complaining that there are no jobs, move somewhere that requires your skills.

I agree with you on this.
The smart English person who is smart enough to know that there is no quality of life here.
So they look to go to sunny places where they can earn more ( their skills are more valued since in their own country it is not because the money for that is being stolen by the .gov ) and have a real life.

You may be difficult, Cockney, but you are smart.

: )

I earn a hell of a lot less here it is just that the cost of living (with a family) is so much lower that my quality of life is higher.

One of the Biggest problems with Britain and many of the other countries of Europe is the governments take away so much in taxes. People there will tell about all the wonderful government giveaways but they never realize that all the taxes make it unattractive for motivated people who want to get ahead in life to stick around.

That is why European societies are not as upwardly mobile as America. People are pigeon holed in their place and that is it unless they get their “lucky Break”. Then if someone does get ahead in the next generation the tax man comes along to knock them back down into their proper place with death taxes which in Britain are 40 percent.

Thank you for the compliment. I think one of the issues that Sifu has is that he wants to pigeon hole me into some group so that he can argue against that group. This is why he keeps coming up with names, Blairite, Guardianista etc.

The reason why I do that is because ideologically there really isn’t all that much daylight in between those groups and the Tory’s, so I’m trying to get you to take a stand on the issues.

To my mind, the ideologies of all of the main groups are flawed. If you take any of them to their extremes you end up with chaos. The kind of world that PRCal, Pushharder etc dream of would be just as fucked as the socialist nightmare that the Labour party is dragging in.

Some of the flaws of the parties are the same flaws. Them some of their different flaws end up with the same result. ie the Tories have their wealthy backers who benefit from Tory policy, Labour also has it’s wealthy backers who benefit handsomely from Labour policy.

Tories can be expected to do more to help people who are economically at the top. Labour on the other hand pays much lip service to helping the economically disadvantaged while engaging in polcies against the middle class that make it impossible for people to escape their class. Under labour the poor still stay at the bottom while the super rich stay at the top.

The problem is, trying to tread the line and get a balance in any country is difficult. Also, whenever there is change in the party in power the first work is to reverse some obvious policies of the previous guys. Next comes the apologising that promises cannot be fulfilled due to the mess left by the previous guys by which point the next round of elections coming up and you get a dive for the centre to ensure re-election.

The problem is cynical, jaded people like you who accept dishonesty and deciet as a normal part of the political process. The biggest threat to democracy is populaces being tolerant of politicians making promises that they either cannot or have no intention of keeping.

ie The EU constitution that the british people were promised a refferrendum on in the 2005 Labour election manifesto. Labour has refused to give the people the vote it promised.

David Cameron has bullshitted people into believing that the Tory party will hold a refferrendum despite top tory party officials saying that if the treaty is in effect by the time they get elected in 2010 then there will be no such refferrendum.

The British people who will take to the streets over some stupid bullshit like fox hunting are just rolling over for the EU constitution. In the next month their sovereignty as an independant people is being taken away from them by a foreign government without their permission. What do the British do about it? Nothing. Because the British have become spineless pansies who will not stand up for their freedom.

I really hate party politics because it means that the brightest guys are set working against each other instead of collaborating. Unfortunately in a democratic system parties manifest out of necessity and the alternative to democracies is hardly ideal.

I hate party politics because people don’t look past them to see that there are people who are playing both sides so no matter who wins they benefit. Tory/Labour Republican/Democrat they are just two differents sides of the same coin.

That is why leadership has become almost nonexistant, we don’t get leaders anymore what we get is politicians. Politicians who say and do whatever is needed to get power so they can then advance their rich sponsors agenda while not acting in the best interests of society.

You don’t need the brightest people (though it is good to have smart leadership) so much as you need people who have the integrity to not bullshit people to get power and then not deliver because what they promised was bullshit.

I agree with most of what you have written here. British people want a European social system with US tax levels. [/quote]

In general people in Europe want lavish social services along with employment and work rules that go way beyond what most countries do for people. They are clinging to an old paradigm where Europe and the US represented the developed who could produce manufactured goods and that was it.

Times have changed. We are in a global market place competing against countries like India where you work or you starve and die. They don’t have the deadweight of a liesure class on benefits to drag along when they compete with Europe. Nor do they have employment laws with extended vacations, environmental protection laws.

That European social system is a house of cards that is starting to collapse.

[quote]
I am not as dead set against the EU as you. Most of the claims of ridiculous EU regulation are pretty much a fabrication of shitty newspapers. This is one of the reasons that lazy sensationalist journalism winds me up so much. People end up focussed on totally the wrong issues. [/quote]

There is a lot more than silly regulations wrong with the EU. The EU has a serious democratic deficit. One of it’s main goals is the concentration of power in as few hands as possible buried inside a complex beaurocratic mess that few people understand and can follow. The entire structure of the EU has been designed by people who had severe flaws in their thinking and hidden agendas.

[quote]
For the most part the people playing off both sides in the political race are big businesses. The lobbying power of various groups is pretty scary (especially in the US.) [/quote]

Don’t delude yourself, the EU has worse problems with big business and big money controlling government than the US. Europe has corporations that are so massive that if the were US companies they would be in violation of US antitrust laws and get broken up by the government.

974

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Why did it take so long to let Wilders in? I am curious about that.[/quote]

Because Lord Nazi Ahmed threatened violence if Wilders was allowed to speak. He threatened to bring 10,000 muslims to attack parliament so they caved in.

975

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
ephrem wrote:
BNP on Question Time:

Part One: BNP Nick Griffin on BBC Question Time Part 1 - YouTube and go from there…

Appreciated. Will watch that when I get home. Just got sent the clip of him talking about an almost totally non violent branch of the KKK.[/quote]

Again you are misrepresenting what was said. Griffin’s remark was about David Duke and to some extent he was correct. Duke did try to repackage the Klan and make it more mainstream.

Part of that repackaging was moving away from violence because it was bad for their image. The panelists jumped all over Griffin so quickly that they didn’t stop to consider that he baited them and they took the bait.

Here is an interesting history of the Klan. If you watch this video and the 8 others that go with it towards the end of the series the head of the NAACP discusses how Duke tries to play himself off as the boy next door by having a clean cut image.

976

[quote]Alpha F wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

I’m sure the BNP will play off that he was a victim and the audience and panel was stacked against him

He did. He said the BBC was biased and he was set up.
His face was on he cover of many newspapers today and this has been big on the TV news and late night political discussions.

[/quote]

That was quite obviously a stage managed affair, where they were going to go after the BNP. I don’t think that was a good strategy for them. Certainly not when they had someone as slimey as Jack Straw on the panel. Unlike Griffin, Straw has actually been making policy and therefore has a lot to answer for.

What was funny was how Jack Straw got put on the spot. When Straw was asked if Labour immigration policy was to blame for the rise of the BNP he talked all round the question without answering it and they had to re-ask him the same question three or four times. He would not give a straight answer to that question.

977

Here is the latest bit of information that has now come out. For quite some time now I have been telling you that Labour been using race in a cynical fashion to advance it’s own political ends.

Now one of Tony Blairs government advisors has written in the Evening Standard that the Labour government policy of mass immigration was not solely for the purpose of filling job vacancies but to deliberately make the country more multicultural so they could use that for political ends.

I hate to say I told you so but, I told you so.

The results in London, and especially for middle-class Londoners, have been highly positive. It’s not simply a question of foreign nannies, cleaners and gardeners - although frankly it’s hard to see how the capital could function without them.

Their place certainly wouldn’t be taken by unemployed BNP voters from Barking or Burnley - fascist au pair, anyone? Immigrants are everywhere and in all sorts of jobs, many of them skilled.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

Labour wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural, says former adviser
Labour threw open Britain’s borders to mass immigration to help socially engineer a “truly multicultural” country, a former Government adviser has revealed.

The huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and “rub the Right’s nose in diversity”, according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.

He said Labour’s relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to “open up the UK to mass migration” but that ministers were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its “core working class vote”.

As a result, the public argument for immigration concentrated instead on the economic benefits and need for more migrants.

Critics said the revelations showed a “conspiracy” within Government to impose mass immigration for “cynical” political reasons.

Mr Neather was a speech writer who worked in Downing Street for Tony Blair and in the Home Office for Jack Straw and David Blunkett, in the early 2000s.

Writing in the Evening Standard, he revealed the “major shift” in immigration policy came after the publication of a policy paper from the Performance and Innovation Unit, a Downing Street think tank based in the Cabinet Office, in 2001.

He wrote a major speech for Barbara Roche, the then immigration minister, in 2000, which was largely based on drafts of the report.

He said the final published version of the report promoted the labour market case for immigration but unpublished versions contained additional reasons, he said.

He wrote: "Earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural.

“I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended â?? even if this wasn’t its main purpose â?? to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.”

The “deliberate policy”, from late 2000 until “at least February last year”, when the new points based system was introduced, was to open up the UK to mass migration, he said.

Some 2.3 million migrants have been added to the population since then, according to Whitehall estimates quietly slipped out last month.

On Question Time on Thursday, Mr Straw was repeatedly quizzed about whether Labour’s immigration policies had left the door open for the BNP.

In his column, Mr Neather said that as well as bringing in hundreds of thousands more migrants to plug labour market gaps, there was also a “driving political purpose” behind immigration policy.

He defended the policy, saying mass immigration has “enriched” Britain, and made London a more attractive and cosmopolitan place.

But he acknowledged that “nervous” ministers made no mention of the policy at the time for fear of alienating Labour voters.

"Part by accident, part by design, the Government had created its longed-for immigration boom.

“But ministers wouldn’t talk about it. In part they probably realised the conservatism of their core voters: while ministers might have been passionately in favour of a more diverse society, it wasn’t necessarily a debate they wanted to have in working men’s clubs in Sheffield or Sunderland.”

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the Migrationwatch think tank, said: "Now at least the truth is out, and it’s dynamite.

"Many have long suspected that mass immigration under Labour was not just a cock up but also a conspiracy. They were right.

“This Government has admitted three million immigrants for cynical political reasons concealed by dodgy economic camouflage.”

The chairmen of the cross-party Group for Balanced Migration, MPs Frank Field and Nicholas Soames, said: "We welcome this statement by an ex-adviser, which the whole country knows to be true.

“It is the first beam of truth that has officially been shone on the immigration issue in Britain.”

A Home Office spokesman said: â??Our new flexible points based system gives us greater control on those coming to work or study from outside Europe, ensuring that only those that Britain need can come.

â??Britain’s borders are stronger than ever before and we are rolling out ID cards to foreign nationals, we have introduced civil penalties for those employing illegal workers and from the end of next year our electronic border system will monitor 95 per cent of journeys in and out of the UK.

â??The British people can be confident that immigration is under control.â??

978

Wow

Sinister Prime Minister.

979

[quote]Sifu wrote:

In general people in Europe want lavish social services along with employment and work rules that go way beyond what most countries do for people. They are clinging to an old paradigm where Europe and the US represented the developed who could produce manufactured goods and that was it.[/quote]

Exactly. I have noticed that.
This model of “First World x Third World” is a political illusion.[quote]

That European social system is a house of cards that is starting to collapse.[/quote]

The house was built on a weak foundation: A false sense of superiority for considering and calling themselves “developed countries.”
This is also what I meant way back by ‘what goes around comes around’.
“Pride is before a fall.”
When we try to elevate ourselves above other people, other nations, arrogantly ( competition implies a sense of superiority and nullification of the intrinsic value of another, whereas cooperation recognizes the equity of another ) there is usually a turn of events to ‘put us back into our place’. The scales of justice dictate it. It is not about equality - no country and no person will ever be totally equal for another intrinsic and important value dictates diversity: the inborn value individuality.
Any model, political or otherwise, based on ‘equality’ will never work as it violates identity. We must move away from thinking equality to thinking equity.[quote]

There is a lot more than silly regulations wrong with the EU. The EU has a serious democratic deficit. One of it’s main goals is the concentration of power in as few hands as possible buried inside a complex beaurocratic mess that few people understand and can follow. The entire structure of the EU has been designed by people who had severe flaws in their thinking and hidden agendas. [/quote]
Exactly.
Fundamental flaw as explained above: Elitist thinking and living.[quote]

Don’t delude yourself, the EU has worse problems with big business and big money controlling government than the US. Europe has corporations that are so massive that if the were US companies they would be in violation of US antitrust laws and get broken up by the government. [/quote]

‘Elite Corporations is what Government and EU nations really are.’