Michael Howard standing down as an MP

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

Was he the one who changed the rules so that councils don't have to allocate as much land to travellers? I can't remember.

http://www.urban75.org/legal/cja.html

Former Member

Meh, the squatting laws of old or new have never been adequate or suitable. A completely new system has ot be created for it in my opinion, though i do not know how to impliment such a new system so i will not began randomly making suggestions on it.

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote:

There wasn’t a hint of biological racism in their tone –

You don't remember the 80's so well do you?

Disillusioned wrote:

Oh and the theory that the far-left and far-right share some common ground – Communism and Nazism for instance having more in common with each other than either with the centre-left or centre-right is while generalising to an extent quite a popular approach.

You don't know too much political theory or history either.

Former Member

subject13 wrote:

Meh, the squatting laws of old or new have never been adequate or suitable. A completely new system has ot be created for it in my opinion, though i do not know how to impliment such a new system so i will not began randomly making suggestions on it.

Rough translation - I don't know anything about it, but I'm gonna comment anyway.

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote:

You don’t have to be particularly bright to realise that we live in a small densely populated island, immigrants have deeply enriched Britain yet as desirable as it may be Britain can’t take an unlimited number of immigrants. With constraints already on housing in the South East and developers already eagerly wishing to make inroads to the Green Belt it’s simply being practical to state that we cannot take everyone who wants to come here.

Well, you've only got to look at the water shortages in South East England. Thames Water, which covers London, is bringing in hosepipe bans next month. Water is running low, the transport system in the South East is practically gridlocked, so what does the Government suggest? Aside from building lots of useless houses that nobody will want to live in, (courtesy of Prezza Bulldozers Corp.) they encourage more and more people to come and live there. Isn't it a bit full as it is?

Oh and the theory that the far-left and far-right share some common ground – Communism and Nazism for instance having more in common with each other...

Dictators like Hitler & Stalin had more in common than history likes to admit.

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

Well, you've only got to look at the water shortages in South East England. Thames Water, which covers London, is bringing in hosepipe bans next month. Water is running low, the transport system in the South East is practically gridlocked, so what does the Government suggest? Aside from building lots of useless houses that nobody will want to live in, (courtesy of Prezza Bulldozers Corp.) they encourage more and more people to come and live there. Isn't it a bit full as it is?

and people are being encouraged to come here...why? To service the needs of capital perchance?

stargalaxy wrote:

Dictators like Hitler & Stalin had more in common than history likes to admit.

You're making a common mistake. Equating Stalinism with communism.

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

You don't know too much political theory or history either.

:rolleyes: If you look at Communist and Fascist regimes you’ll find they generally share an extremely authoritarian government.

Press censorship, suppression of political opponents and an absence of democracy are traits all shared by present day Cuba, the old Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and Mussolini’s Italy. Of course ideologically they’re not equivalent but both stand together in their intolerance of freedom and democracy.

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote:

:rolleyes: If you look at Communist and Fascist regimes you’ll find they generally share an extremely authoritarian government.

Press censorship, suppression of political opponents and an absence of democracy are traits all shared by present day Cuba, the old Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and Mussolini’s Italy. Of course ideologically they’re not equivalent but both stand together in their intolerance of freedom and democracy.

You're making the same mistake as stargalaxy. You certainly won't find me defending authoratarian communist regimes. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make to be honest.

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

You're making a common mistake. Equating Stalinism with communism.

Really? Look at Hitler & Stalin. Both got kicks out of murdering millions under their respective regimes. Both followed suppressive policies. Both ruthlessly cowed the press, democracy was dead under both megalomaniacs. As far as I'm concerned, the two are evil. Are you a communist sympathiser, Blagsta?

Disillusioned wrote:

If you look at Communist and Fascist regimes you’ll find they generally share an extremely authoritarian government. Press censorship, suppression of political opponents and an absence of democracy are traits all shared by present day Cuba, the old Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and Mussolini’s Italy. Of course ideologically they’re not equivalent but both stand together in their intolerance of freedom and democracy.

Of course. Hence why I equate the two together. They have more in common than historians like to admit.

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

You're making a common mistake. Equating Stalinism with communism.

Although following the Bolshevik coup Lenin enacted press censorship, persecuted the Russian Orthodox Church and suppressed political opponents – even fellow Socialists of different parties. Lenin’s communism didn’t exactly embrace democracy did it? He dismissed the democratic Constituent Assembly when it didn’t produce the result he wanted...Communism in whatever shade has been fundamentally a bad thing.

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

Really? Look at Hitler & Stalin. Both got kicks out of murdering millions under their respective regimes. Both followed suppressive policies. Both ruthlessly cowed the press, democracy was dead under both megalomaniacs. As far as I'm concerned, the two are evil. Are you a communist sympathiser, Blagsta? Of course. Hence why I equate the two together. They have more in common than historians like to admit.

I think you missed the point entirely. Never mind eh?

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote:

Although following the Bolshevik coup Lenin enacted press censorship, persecuted the Russian Orthodox Church and suppressed political opponents – even fellow Socialists of different parties. Lenin’s communism didn’t exactly embrace democracy did it? He dismissed the democratic Constituent Assembly when it didn’t produce the result he wanted...Communism in whatever shade has been fundamentally a bad thing.

Communism - everyone sharing things and everyone getting the same. Nice idea. But it doesn't work.

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote:

Although following the Bolshevik coup Lenin enacted press censorship, persecuted the Russian Orthodox Church and suppressed political opponents – even fellow Socialists of different parties. Lenin’s communism didn’t exactly embrace democracy did it? He dismissed the democratic Constituent Assembly when it didn’t produce the result he wanted...Communism in whatever shade has been fundamentally a bad thing.

Sorry, you won't find me defending Leninism either. What is your point?

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

Communism - everyone sharing things and everyone getting the same. Nice idea. But it doesn't work.

LOL! What is this, fucking kindergarten? :rolleyes: If that's the most sophisticated understanding you have of politics its no wonder you're confused.

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

LOL! What is this, fucking kindergarten? :rolleyes: If that's the most sophisticated understanding you have of politics its no wonder you're confused.

Alright smartarse, you define communism then.

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

Does such a system exist? Under communist regimes, you have homeless people. No matter what the regime, these problems still remain.

in soviet union i believe less than 1% of people in moscow lived below the povery line, not saying they were well of but they weren't starving or homeless when the soviet union was at its pinnacle of the 70s and 80s

i believe over 30% of people in moscow live in absolute poverty in moscow now

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

Alright smartarse, you define communism then.

you want me to condense over a hundred years of political thinking and history into a neat soundbite? Grow up ffs.

Former Member

wheresmyplacebo wrote:

in soviet union i believe less than 1% of people in moscow lived below the poverty line, not saying they were well of but they weren't starving or homeless when the soviet union was at its pinnacle of the 70s and 80s... i believe over 30% of people in moscow live in absolute poverty in moscow now

Thanks to Boris Yeltsin, (what a joke) and Vladimir Putin. (who seems to want to turn the clock back to dictatorship) And what is the "poverty line", anyway, what does that term mean? Poverty exists, but at what point can it be said that someone isn't in poverty anymore?

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

Poverty exists, but at what point can it be said that someone isn't in poverty anymore?

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&lr=&cr=countryUK|countryGB&oi=defmore&defl=en&q=define:poverty+line

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&lr=&cr=countryUK|countryGB&oi=defmore&defl=en&q=define overty+line

Didn't quite come out right with the forum code, did it?

Former Member

http://www.oxfamgb.org/ukpp/poverty/thefacts.htm

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

Didn't quite come out right with the forum code, did it?

see my edit

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

see my edit

Thanks for a laugh anyway, Blagsta. (never thought I'd say that)

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

Rough translation - I don't know anything about it, but I'm gonna comment anyway.

Well since you do it all the time with practically every post you make, i thought i would try it just this once!

Former Member

subject13 wrote:

Well since you do it all the time with practically every post you make, i thought i would try it just this once!

Yeah right. :rolleyes:

Former Member

subject13 wrote:

Well since you do it all the time with practically every post you make, i thought i would try it just this once!

Bear in mind Blagsta only ever criticises suggestions - he never actually makes any suggestions of his own. He's that certain of his self-righteousness.

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

Bear in mind Blagsta only ever criticises suggestions - he never actually makes any suggestions of his own. He's that certain of his self-righteousness.

Oh piss off. I'm fed up with arseholes like you who can't be bothered to read my posts properly. I post my opinions all the time, you just can't be arsed to read them.

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

Oh piss off. I'm fed up with arseholes like you who can't be bothered to read my posts properly. I post my opinions all the time, you just can't be arsed to read them.

Do i detect some hypocracy...i think i do.

Former Member

subject13 wrote:

Do i detect some hypocracy...i think i do.

whatever