Ashcroft

[uncon]

So Ashcroft is a non dom. Prescott, Next Left and Cambell are rather vociferous on this, yet number 10 is not.

The way that I see it, the story isn't Ashcrofts status as Lord Paul (who states that he will leave the Lords if made to pay any on his international earnings) and a myriad of other labour funders are the same.

It is his dodging the question. If you feel it is acceptable to be a non dom, then why dodge the question when you are in politics? It is a moral standing....at least Lord Paul is openly immoral!

[Major Sinic]

So Ashcroft is a non dom. Prescott, Next Left and Cambell are rather vociferous on this, yet number 10 is not.

The way that I see it, the story isn't Ashcrofts status as Lord Paul (who states that he will leave the Lords if made to pay any on his international earnings) and a myriad of other labour funders are the same.

It is his dodging the question. If you feel it is acceptable to be a non dom, then why dodge the question when you are in politics? It is a moral standing....at least Lord Paul is openly immoral!

This is a bit of a conundrum isn't it? On the one hand neither Lord Ashcroft nor Lord Paul have, as as I know, broken the law on this issue. As the law currently stands neither is obliged to renounce their non-domicile status whilst remaining in the Lords. This is to change when a non-domiciled peer, will not be allowed to sit in the Lords. Lord Paul, as a true socialist and believer in equality for all, has indicated that he is not prepared to give up the tax advantages of being a nondom and is leaving the Lords. Lord Ashcroft has indicated that he will stay and abide by the new rules. We shall see. Perhaps I am being pedantic, but Ashcroft hasn't dodged the question at all. He has point blankly refused to answer on the basis he was not obliged to.

Far harder to understand is why a man of Lord Paul's immense wealth, and position as a privy councillor and peer, should claim a fairly mediocre hotel he owns near Bicester, as his main home in order to enable him to falsely claim his main (UK) home was in fact his second home on which he then claimed allowances. He is under investigation for this abuse of expenses.

The BBC today asked the Labour Parliamentary Party about the tax status of a number of Labours largest donors, i.e. domiciled or non-domiciled. Labour have not provided the requested information.

Under the circumstances Labour would have to be unbelievably hypocritical, even for them, to bray too loudly about Lord Ashcroft.

For my part my wealth (or lack of it), my income, my tax obligations and status and any tax mitigation I might be party to are entirely my business and are between me and HMRC. If I was in public life I would expect such matters to be up for public debate if not actual scrutiny, which is a darn good reason why I have no wish to be in public life.

[uncon]

This is a bit of a conundrum isn't it? On the one hand neither Lord Ashcroft nor Lord Paul have, as as I know, broken the law on this issue. As the law currently stands neither is obliged to renounce their non-domicile status whilst remaining in the Lords. This is to change when a non-domiciled peer, will not be allowed to sit in the Lords. Lord Paul, as a true socialist and believer in equality for all, has indicated that he is not prepared to give up the tax advantages of being a nondom and is leaving the Lords. Lord Ashcroft has indicated that he will stay and abide by the new rules. We shall see. Perhaps I am being pedantic, but Ashcroft hasn't dodged the question at all. He has point blankly refused to answer on the basis he was not obliged to.

Far harder to understand is why a man of Lord Paul's immense wealth, and position as a privy councillor and peer, should claim a fairly mediocre hotel he owns near Bicester, as his main home in order to enable him to falsely claim his main (UK) home was in fact his second home on which he then claimed allowances. He is under investigation for this abuse of expenses.

The BBC today asked the Labour Parliamentary Party about the tax status of a number of Labours largest donors, i.e. domiciled or non-domiciled. Labour have not provided the requested information.

Under the circumstances Labour would have to be unbelievably hypocritical, even for them, to bray too loudly about Lord Ashcroft.

For my part my wealth (or lack of it), my income, my tax obligations and status and any tax mitigation I might be party to are entirely my business and are between me and HMRC. If I was in public life I would expect such matters to be up for public debate if not actual scrutiny, which is a darn good reason why I have no wish to be in public life.

The tax is on overseas earnings. Those in the uk are duly paid, but there is the question of expense claims that you bring up and strangely does not appear in the news.

[Expounder]

This is a bit of a conundrum isn't it? On the one hand neither Lord Ashcroft nor Lord Paul have, as as I know, broken the law on this issue. As the law currently stands neither is obliged to renounce their non-domicile status whilst remaining in the Lords. This is to change when a non-domiciled peer, will not be allowed to sit in the Lords. Lord Paul, as a true socialist and believer in equality for all, has indicated that he is not prepared to give up the tax advantages of being a nondom and is leaving the Lords. Lord Ashcroft has indicated that he will stay and abide by the new rules. We shall see. Perhaps I am being pedantic, but Ashcroft hasn't dodged the question at all. He has point blankly refused to answer on the basis he was not obliged to.

Far harder to understand is why a man of Lord Paul's immense wealth, and position as a privy councillor and peer, should claim a fairly mediocre hotel he owns near Bicester, as his main home in order to enable him to falsely claim his main (UK) home was in fact his second home on which he then claimed allowances. He is under investigation for this abuse of expenses.

The BBC today asked the Labour Parliamentary Party about the tax status of a number of Labours largest donors, i.e. domiciled or non-domiciled. Labour have not provided the requested information.

Under the circumstances Labour would have to be unbelievably hypocritical, even for them, to bray too loudly about Lord Ashcroft.

For my part my wealth (or lack of it), my income, my tax obligations and status and any tax mitigation I might be party to are entirely my business and are between me and HMRC. If I was in public life I would expect such matters to be up for public debate if not actual scrutiny, which is a darn good reason why I have no wish to be in public life.

Their are few points here Major that need addressing. 1] how much UK tax has M.A.he paid since 2000 ,? 2] does he pay tax abroad ?3] how many days has he spent in the UK since 2000 ? 4] does any money donated to the Tory party come from abroad 5] Where has M.A. been entered on the electoral roll since 2000?

His peerage was granted based on a clear and unequivocal promise in 2000 that he would be domiciled in the UK and pay taxes on all earnings from his companies. If he had done this why the prevarication? One can only assume his promise was not kept otherwise why all the obscurity and stonewalling? If he was not resident and paying taxes in the UK while making his donations then those donations are illegal. The information of his status had to be dragged from him by the freedom of information act.

What compounds this question is he is not just a donor, but treasurer of the Conservative party who has direct input into Tory party policy and is specifically involved in the campaign to win marginal Labour seats.

Tory truth and openness doesn't figure very much in this fishy episode, and I doubt if it figures in any of Cameron's "policies".

[Greg Lance-Watkins]

Their are few points here Major that need addressing. 1] how much UK tax has M.A.he paid since 2000 ,? 2] does he pay tax abroad ?3] how many days has he spent in the UK since 2000 ? 4] does any money donated to the Tory party come from abroad 5] Where has M.A. been entered on the electoral roll since 2000?

His peerage was granted based on a clear and unequivocal promise in 2000 that he would be domiciled in the UK and pay taxes on all earnings from his companies. If he had done this why the prevarication? One can only assume his promise was not kept otherwise why all the obscurity and stonewalling? If he was not resident and paying taxes in the UK while making his donations then those donations are illegal. The information of his status had to be dragged from him by the freedom of information act.

What compounds this question is he is not just a donor, but treasurer of the Conservative party who has direct input into Tory party policy and is specifically involved in the campaign to win marginal Labour seats.

Tory truth and openness doesn't figure very much in this fishy episode, and I doubt if it figures in any of Cameron's "policies".

Hi,

is your implication that he has broken any laws or is it just your jealousy at his success that drives you obvious and very venal prejudice.

Margaret Thatcher's policy of care in the community has much to answer for as there are now those who misguidedly believe that Gordon Brown is something other than an economic illiterate and bankrupting the country whilst ensuring it was a net food importer was in some way clever.

It also seems they think selling the country's gold, a portable assett, at a mere £20 an once when the world and his wife was aware it was rising rapidly and it now stands at over £1,000 anounce in potential due to the destruction of the monetary system was in some way sensible - to sell a few ounces could be termed a mistake - how would you term selling 400 tons!

Gordon Brown and his cronies are such economic illiterates and intellectual pygmies that they are handing over OUR money as tax payers to buy carbon credits - they are so stupid they even believe the anthopogenic global warming scam and are robbing those who can least afford it to subsidise a well off upper middle class to build subsidised, and utterly useless, windmills.

You are even so deluded as to have the unattributed mantra: "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate" what drivel - were the fortunate and the capitalists not to have created those fortunes imbeciles like Brown and Blair, Healy, Wilson, Milliepied, Straw, Prescott, Barbara Castle and the rest of the largely communist scum would have had us starving far earlier - had the idiotic Jenny Lee not influenced the champagne socialist Aneurin Bevan the Bevarage plan might have been implemented without the tampering of fools and we would have an NHS that wasn't busted but stoll spending £300,000,000 on cosmetic surgery and tattoo removal - merely to buy the chav vote.

Were it not for care in the community Scotland might not be so corrupt and degenerate with 5.1 million people and in excess of 600,000 jobs working as parasites in QUANGOs and for the stupid so called Scottish Government - no more than a rubber stamping office for the EU to provide bribes.

You may see the beast of balsover as some sort of hero - he was a pig ignorant ballsache, do identify Something nay even ANYTHING he did worth considering - a mouthy ill mannered degenerate clow.

13 years of these degenerates as a government and we are now in a position your childrens children will still suffer from.

Which idiot was in charge when they handed control to the Banksters - who authorised the purchase of toxic debts from America largely bought by degenerate Banksters in Labour seats like Northern Rock and RBS because the imbeciles in charge had never had real jobs and had never understood money had to be earned not handouts for turning up and Banksters had to be regulated.

Join the real world and distance yourself from scum like Straw, Brown Millipied, Prescott, Haine, Benn, Ali and their revolting claque of low lifes.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

[Scooby]

Much as i am a Conservative, i would naturally think that this is just a pre-election smokescreen to try to whip a bit of class warfare but i genuinely don't like this non-dom game, we are currently focussing on Ashcroft and to a lesser extent Paul, what concerns me and i'm trying to get their names that there are another 6 non doms across the board, Aschcroft hasn't broken any laws, and i think we are going to see that he is within the "spirit"of his agreement, who made that agreement and the substance of it i still haven't seen yet, and i would like to know the details.
Another thing that bothers me is that i saw Lord Paul on a tv interview last night, and he stated that as far as his lawyer sees it, he will effectively able to keep his non dom status in effect and still keep his place in the lords even after the new law in place.
I think we need a a very simple very straight forward law, if you are not a Full Time UK resident you cannot be an MP or a peer

But while we are at it i think also we need to change the tax law to stop major UK based companies channeling huge profits out to tax havens to enable them to avoid UK tax.

[Midas]

I think we need a a very simple very straight forward law, if you are not a Full Time UK resident you cannot be an MP or a peer

I'll agree with you on this point, our political representatives should be full-time British residents, no question.

But while we are at it i think also we need to change the tax law to stop major UK based companies channeling huge profits out to tax havens to enable them to avoid UK tax.

Here we do have a divergence of views. With respect, to propose even further changes to the tax laws to prevent the free movement of non-UK originated or based capital or profits out of the country shows a lack of understanding of the importance of this freedom of movement in maintaining both employment and other forms of tax revenue. It's been shown time after time around the world that countries which restrict such capital flow and/or start to tax overseas owned profits inevitably start to suffer from reduced overseas investment and capital flight, leading to a reduction in employment and eventually an overall reduction in tax receipts. For any country to retain its competitiveness in today's globalised world and to be able to attract investment money from other countries, they have to offer something which other countries don't, and a significant part of this are tax allowances and concessions, both for the companies themselves and for those wealthy individuals who own significant parts of them.

It basically boils down to a balance of would you rather have foreign-owned companies and their owners coming to the UK, spending large amounts of money and offering employment and all it's consequential benefits, and only paying a relatively small amount of tax, or would you rather those same companies pull the plug and go to another country with less onerous tax laws than the UK has, resulting in people being out of work and no tax at all coming in?

To talk about this, and the related subjects of non-domiciled British residents etc., might make great news from an emotive point of view, but in practical terms to significantly upset the current status quo is to commit slow economic suicide.

[Greg Lance-Watkins]

Much as i am a Conservative, i would naturally think that this is just a pre-election smokescreen to try to whip a bit of class warfare but i genuinely don't like this non-dom game, we are currently focussing on Ashcroft and to a lesser extent Paul, what concerns me and i'm trying to get their names that there are another 6 non doms across the board, Aschcroft hasn't broken any laws, and i think we are going to see that he is within the "spirit"of his agreement, who made that agreement and the substance of it i still haven't seen yet, and i would like to know the details.
Another thing that bothers me is that i saw Lord Paul on a tv interview last night, and he stated that as far as his lawyer sees it, he will effectively able to keep his non dom status in effect and still keep his place in the lords even after the new law in place.
I think we need a a very simple very straight forward law, if you are not a Full Time UK resident you cannot be an MP or a peer

But while we are at it i think also we need to change the tax law to stop major UK based companies channeling huge profits out to tax havens to enable them to avoid UK tax.

Hi,

Since Westminster is utterly irrelevant why would anyone care?

Westminster makes no laws without permission since 01-Dec-2010 our seat of Government is overseas who cares if our peers are?

As for where they pay tax - that is a matter of compliance with the law - end of!

As for payment overseas - just press a button & transfer your £Millions all this EU local taxation is a joke - it is 100% true and can NOT be altered 'tax is only for little people' - if you have enough you pay none and bleating about it in a single action click world is specious!

Regards,
Greg L-W.

[Expounder]

I'll agree with you on this point, our political representatives should be full-time British residents, no question.



Here we do have a divergence of views. With respect, to propose even further changes to the tax laws to prevent the free movement of non-UK originated or based capital or profits out of the country shows a lack of understanding of the importance of this freedom of movement in maintaining both employment and other forms of tax revenue. It's been shown time after time around the world that countries which restrict such capital flow and/or start to tax overseas owned profits inevitably start to suffer from reduced overseas investment and capital flight, leading to a reduction in employment and eventually an overall reduction in tax receipts. For any country to retain its competitiveness in today's globalised world and to be able to attract investment money from other countries, they have to offer something which other countries don't, and a significant part of this are tax allowances and concessions, both for the companies themselves and for those wealthy individuals who own significant parts of them.

It basically boils down to a balance of would you rather have foreign-owned companies and their owners coming to the UK, spending large amounts of money and offering employment and all it's consequential benefits, and only paying a relatively small amount of tax, or would you rather those same companies pull the plug and go to another country with less onerous tax laws than the UK has, resulting in people being out of work and no tax at all coming in?

To talk about this, and the related subjects of non-domiciled British residents etc., might make great news from an emotive point of view, but in practical terms to significantly upset the current status quo is to commit slow economic suicide.

All those words to avoid paying full UK taxes on your income. What with poor old Lance losing his cool going off into a tangent about all this talk of paying real tax due, your Tory fiscal instincts are working overtime at the thought of not having protective shield ie of Cameron and the tribe to safe guard your right to use questionable tax avoidance, or the of making new laws making questionable tax avoidance more taxing [pardon the pun].

[Midas]

All those words to avoid paying full UK taxes on your income. What with poor old Lance losing his cool going off into a tangent about all this talk of paying real tax due, your Tory fiscal instincts are working overtime at the thought of not having protective shield ie of Cameron and the tribe to safe guard your right to use questionable tax avoidance, or the of making new laws making questionable tax avoidance more taxing [pardon the pun].

My own tax status and the careful use of avoidance legislation has nothing to do with my views on what I've just said, which is simply economic fact. Yes, the vast majority of my own money is held offshore and is completely free of UK taxes (other than what is brought in for my own personal use or benefit), but that's not likely to change whether we have either the Tories or labour in power after May; I think even the Labour party has enough sense to be able to discriminate between the major benefits of encouraging investment income into the UK versus the dubious ideological 'advantages' of cutting their own throats with too onerous tax changes - although I am hedging my bets on that just in case!

[Expounder]

Hi,

is your implication that he has broken any laws or is it just your jealousy at his success that drives you obvious and very venal prejudice.

Margaret Thatcher's policy of care in the community has much to answer for as there are now those who misguidedly believe that Gordon Brown is something other than an economic illiterate and bankrupting the country whilst ensuring it was a net food importer was in some way clever.

It also seems they think selling the country's gold, a portable assett, at a mere £20 an once when the world and his wife was aware it was rising rapidly and it now stands at over £1,000 anounce in potential due to the destruction of the monetary system was in some way sensible - to sell a few ounces could be termed a mistake - how would you term selling 400 tons!

Gordon Brown and his cronies are such economic illiterates and intellectual pygmies that they are handing over OUR money as tax payers to buy carbon credits - they are so stupid they even believe the anthopogenic global warming scam and are robbing those who can least afford it to subsidise a well off upper middle class to build subsidised, and utterly useless, windmills.

You are even so deluded as to have the unattributed mantra: "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate" what drivel - were the fortunate and the capitalists not to have created those fortunes imbeciles like Brown and Blair, Healy, Wilson, Milliepied, Straw, Prescott, Barbara Castle and the rest of the largely communist scum would have had us starving far earlier - had the idiotic Jenny Lee not influenced the champagne socialist Aneurin Bevan the Bevarage plan might have been implemented without the tampering of fools and we would have an NHS that wasn't busted but stoll spending £300,000,000 on cosmetic surgery and tattoo removal - merely to buy the chav vote.

Were it not for care in the community Scotland might not be so corrupt and degenerate with 5.1 million people and in excess of 600,000 jobs working as parasites in QUANGOs and for the stupid so called Scottish Government - no more than a rubber stamping office for the EU to provide bribes.

You may see the beast of balsover as some sort of hero - he was a pig ignorant ballsache, do identify Something nay even ANYTHING he did worth considering - a mouthy ill mannered degenerate clow.

13 years of these degenerates as a government and we are now in a position your childrens children will still suffer from.

Which idiot was in charge when they handed control to the Banksters - who authorised the purchase of toxic debts from America largely bought by degenerate Banksters in Labour seats like Northern Rock and RBS because the imbeciles in charge had never had real jobs and had never understood money had to be earned not handouts for turning up and Banksters had to be regulated.

Join the real world and distance yourself from scum like Straw, Brown Millipied, Prescott, Haine, Benn, Ali and their revolting claque of low lifes.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

Bloody hell Lance you lost your usual cool in this post. " Venal prejudice" "Communist scum", The anti Labour verbal scum is coming to the surface now that's there is a question mark about a possible hung parliament. Political forums on the net are dominated by right wing weirdos and they are all pulling their hair out about the narrowing of the polls between the two parties. The great unwashed are examining Cameron's "policy for change" and what they are finding that he his for change, because he's changing his mind every week about what he intends to do.

Lance your cause is lost we're past the point of no return on the EU. Stop flogging a dead horse.

[Expounder]

My own tax status and the careful use of avoidance legislation has nothing to do with my views on what I've just said, which is simply economic fact. Yes, the vast majority of my own money is held offshore and is completely free of UK taxes (other than what is brought in for my own personal use or benefit), but that's not likely to change whether we have either the Tories or labour in power after May; I think even the Labour party has enough sense to be able to discriminate between the major benefits of encouraging investment income into the UK versus the dubious ideological 'advantages' of cutting their own throats with too onerous tax changes - although I am hedging my bets on that just in case!

The Inland revenue are turning the screws on questionable tax avoidance as I have already pointed out in one of my posts quoting a link. They will continue to do so unless pressure is put on them to ease up by Cameron if he wins a majority.

All any one is expecting is that people like you are subject to the same scrutiny as PAYEarners. A level playing field is that too much?

[Midas]

The Inland revenue are turning the screws on questionable tax avoidance as I have already pointed out in one of my posts quoting a link. They will continue to do so unless pressure is put on them to ease up by Cameron if he wins a majority.

All any one is expecting is that people like you are subject to the same scrutiny as PAYEarners. A level playing field is that too much?

Believe me, I get far more scrutiny from HMRC than the average PAYEarner does! But since you talk about level playing fields, why is it you think that the British government should have any claim on money which is held outside of the UK, which is administered by a non-UK based company and which is invested in non-UK based entities? If any, the governments of the countries where my holdings are based should have first claim on any taxation, however they fully realise the major benefits to themselves not to do that. It's fine for you to talk about fairness and level playing fields, but when did the government itself ever subscribe to those things? They'll use every trick in the book to try to extract as much money from people as they possibly can, then fritter vast amounts of it away in a manner which verges on gross incompetence. You don't think it's 'fair' that the taxpayer should be able to utilise the same legislative framework to protect himself from those ravages?

[Greg Lance-Watkins]

Bloody hell Lance you lost your usual cool in this post. " Venal prejudice" "Communist scum", The anti Labour verbal scum is coming to the surface now that's there is a question mark about a possible hung parliament. Political forums on the net are dominated by right wing weirdos and they are all pulling their hair out about the narrowing of the polls between the two parties. The great unwashed are examining Cameron's "policy for change" and what they are finding that he his for change, because he's changing his mind every week about what he intends to do.

Lance your cause is lost we're past the point of no return on the EU. Stop flogging a dead horse.

Hi,

my word didn't you get that wrong!

You can't answer a single one of the points I made.

In what way do you contend they are NOT " Venal prejudices" "Communist scum", in the context I used them?

As for hair tearing I am advocating appart from those with an INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance candidate and those refusing to spoil their ballot paper by voting for a party politicians and writing Leave-the-EU on their ballot paper they should vote Labour.

I dread the possibility of Tory or hung parliament as Labour with a clear lead are likely to expose the fault lines in the EU more conclusively and more rapidly than a Tory cover-up.

Yes you are right the EU is a dead horse and as such best removed as a rotten hulk than kept alive through dishonesty and faux support from the idiotic who even now are duped into believing the propaganda!

I must say I am not surprised that you seemingly woke up just in time not to risibly try to defend the indefensible!

Regards,
Greg L-W

[Greg Lance-Watkins]

The Inland revenue are turning the screws on questionable tax avoidance as I have already pointed out in one of my posts quoting a link. They will continue to do so unless pressure is put on them to ease up by Cameron if he wins a majority.

All any one is expecting is that people like you are subject to the same scrutiny as PAYEarners. A level playing field is that too much?

Hi,

that would be nice - a level playing field and all incomes treated the same - with or without consideration of ability to pay?

Regards,
Greg L-W.

[Expounder]

Hi,

that would be nice - a level playing field and all incomes treated the same - with or without consideration of ability to pay?

Regards,
Greg L-W.

If you've nothing you pay nothing, if you're making plenty you pay a lot more. This must be just, because those with plenty have made it out of someone else's "coal face" labour. Many of the unwashed work eight hours a day and take home the minimum wage. Those with plenty who have never got their hands dirty just watch the figures on their accounts increase and don't want to pay their fair share.

[Expounder]

Hi,

my word didn't you get that wrong!

You can't answer a single one of the points I made.

In what way do you contend they are NOT " Venal prejudices" "Communist scum", in the context I used them?

As for hair tearing I am advocating appart from those with an INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance candidate and those refusing to spoil their ballot paper by voting for a party politicians and writing Leave-the-EU on their ballot paper they should vote Labour.

I dread the possibility of Tory or hung parliament as Labour with a clear lead are likely to expose the fault lines in the EU more conclusively and more rapidly than a Tory cover-up.

Yes you are right the EU is a dead horse and as such best removed as a rotten hulk than kept alive through dishonesty and faux support from the idiotic who even now are duped into believing the propaganda!

I must say I am not surprised that you seemingly woke up just in time not to risibly try to defend the indefensible!

Regards,
Greg L-W

The EU is here to stay whether you like it or not , that's why you are fighting a lost cause. It's not perfect nothing ever is, patriotism as Samuel Johnson said " is the last refuge of the scoundrel". I believe that the Unity of nations is for the sensible.

[Greg Lance-Watkins]

The EU is here to stay whether you like it or not , that's why you are fighting a lost cause. It's not perfect nothing ever is, patriotism as Samuel Johnson said " is the last refuge of the scoundrel". I believe that the Unity of nations is for the sensible.

Hi,

I'm sure Samuel Johnson knew what HE wsa talking about and it is like many a mantra utterly meaningless in the hands of scoundrels using it out of context.

Perhaps in your race to destroy Britain and British values you might care to ask how beneficial the EU has been for other vassal states - other than France & Germany - even the French voted against the New Constitution.

As for Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece & Spain as they totter on the edge of destruction provide an object lesson in the communist style catastrophy of centralised committee dictatorship bereft of any meaningful democracy which has no valid management structure and functions largely on bribes without viable industry as a net food importer despite the huge agrarian land mass of temperate zone land.

I have more hope for mankind than you clearly and value liberty, freedom, self determination and sovereign independence within a democracy. To you of course such patriotism is appropriate for a missplaced mantra.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

[Greg Lance-Watkins]

If you've nothing you pay nothing, if you're making plenty you pay a lot more. This must be just, because those with plenty have made it out of someone else's "coal face" labour. Many of the unwashed work eight hours a day and take home the minimum wage. Those with plenty who have never got their hands dirty just watch the figures on their accounts increase and don't want to pay their fair share.

Hi,

dirty hands do not denote value, productivity, wealth creation or meaningful effort.

In the main lower animals tend to earn their food and rewards by virtue of their brawn - most of mankind does indeed survive by brawn yet still it fails many and they starve however as reasoning higher mammals the wealth creation is not by brawn but by brain. Without management and brain no coal face could be opened and mined with the collective management required to ship the coal - with my roots in mining it was not long before my family made every effort to rise from grubby hands and using their brawn to making the most of education and working with their brains and clean hands where possible aware they could achieve much more for others by organising them in such a way that they could expend a reduced time and effort and capitalising on the increased productivity which resulted in better pay and conditions, better hours and safety for those who were reliant on their brawn.

One must without doubt congratulate and seek to emmulate those who have not squandered their money but have accrued it and used it wisely to fund the efforts of others to earn a living and have in helping them made a fortune. Without capital industry and income collapses as shown time and again in communism and similar failed systems.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

[uncon]

Having brought the subject up, perhaps I should be the one to lay it to bed.

Nobody cares. Once they found out that Ashcroft is paying tax on his English business people cared about as much as they do that people are unwillingly funding the labour party via union memberships. Shall we move on rather go into the whole Lord Paul thing?

[Expounder]

Hi,

I'm sure Samuel Johnson knew what HE wsa talking about and it is like many a mantra utterly meaningless in the hands of scoundrels using it out of context.

Perhaps in your race to destroy Britain and British values you might care to ask how beneficial the EU has been for other vassal states - other than France & Germany - even the French voted against the New Constitution.

As for Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece & Spain as they totter on the edge of destruction provide an object lesson in the communist style catastrophy of centralised committee dictatorship bereft of any meaningful democracy which has no valid management structure and functions largely on bribes without viable industry as a net food importer despite the huge agrarian land mass of temperate zone land.

I have more hope for mankind than you clearly and value liberty, freedom, self determination and sovereign independence within a democracy. To you of course such patriotism is appropriate for a missplaced mantra.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

EU expanded too quickly and was not diligent or firm enough to exclude countries like Greece which had an questionable unstable run economy. Remember anyway Your argument would lead us back to the dark days militant confrontational nationalism between the main European powers, when in this day and age should it should be fighting against global warming and the preservation of natural resources and the manner they are extracted to avoid world land and air pollution.

As painful as this advance towards European federation seems to you and other sceptics, the world is now developing into a mixed global economy.
Look no further than the auto, aircraft, and shipping industries to bear witness to this. The movement of industries from Britain to the third world by maximum profit seeking "patriots" is an example that the clock can never be put back to create the flag waving jingoism of the past. With the development of China as a global giant and the advance South American economies we need to be an integral part of Europe to survive remembering our manufacturing base in relation to the developing giants is virtually non existent we can't survive on dubious finance dealings forever.

Forging economic and political alliances between different countries was never going to be easy, and it is only one of the answers in the fight to slow the planets continued advance towards self destruction. If the world is to survive for any real length of time, only international attempts at control of populations and management of production of dwindling resources which will bring African and third world countries on board can be the worlds salvation. A fairer distribution of world wealth and resources is the only way to bring peace to the African continent.The EU is a step in the right direction for future generations and an example of co-operation which will encourage others.

[Expounder]

Hi,

dirty hands do not denote value, productivity, wealth creation or meaningful effort.

In the main lower animals tend to earn their food and rewards by virtue of their brawn - most of mankind does indeed survive by brawn yet still it fails many and they starve however as reasoning higher mammals the wealth creation is not by brawn but by brain. Without management and brain no coal face could be opened and mined with the collective management required to ship the coal - with my roots in mining it was not long before my family made every effort to rise from grubby hands and using their brawn to making the most of education and working with their brains and clean hands where possible aware they could achieve much more for others by organising them in such a way that they could expend a reduced time and effort and capitalising on the increased productivity which resulted in better pay and conditions, better hours and safety for those who were reliant on their brawn.

One must without doubt congratulate and seek to emulatethose who have not squandered their money but have accrued it and used it wisely to fund the efforts of others to earn a living and have in helping them made a fortune. Without capital industry and income collapses as shown time and again in communism and similar failed systems.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

NO one is arguing against better organisation and management or scientific progress, which has since the industrial revolution, played it's part in bringing about today's technical advances. But to use this as a legitimate reason for individuals to accumulate obscene amounts of wealth for wealth's sake to control and bribe their way into the echelons of power and become fiscal tyrants answerable to no one and able to skew a political scene to their advantage is wrong.

The type of people you defend are the main threat to democratic process by virtue of their financial clout. No doubt you will point out many of these people are sincere and philanthropic, but I will point to Cheney,Rumsfeld, Murdoch, and Ashcroft and thousands like them for whom wealth is for playing monopoly with economies and God with peoples lives.

[Barry]

Michael Foot, good Old Footy? No, a dangerous, deluded hypocrite | Mail Online

Oi, Doris, I didn't know Lord Ashcroft lived in Belize.

Belsize Park, you mean?

Nah, Belize.
Where's that, then?

Dunno, actually. Might be near Marbella.
Who's Lord Ashcroft, when he's at home?

You know, Paddy Ashcroft, used to be leader of the Tories.
I thought he was Labour.

Does it matter? They're all the same, anyway. Bunch of crooks.

What's this Paddy Ashcroft done?

Apparently, he doesn't pay tax or summit. Gives it to the Tories instead.
You don't pay tax either, Sid. Strictly cash in the motor trade, innit? Wish you'd give a bit more to me.
At least he don't give it to Labour.

So what's the problem?
They say he bought his seat in the House of Lords.
Isn't that how they all get them - cash for honours?
Labour says this Ashdown's not a fit and proper person to sit in the Lords.
Who says that, then?

Peter Mandelson.
What, that creep what fiddled his mortgage and sold passports to them rich Indians, when he wasn't avoiding stamp duty?

That's him, he's Lord Mandelson now.
He's havin' a laugh.

[Greg Lance-Watkins]

Hi,

please don't read this if you are not genuinely interested as it is long.

EU expanded too quickly and was not diligent or firm enough to exclude countries like Greece which had an questionable unstable run economy.

It is less that they expanded too quickly – the attempts of 1914 & 1939 were thwarted so they changed direction and by implementation of Funk’s plan of Feb. 1942 & Heidricht’s ‘How will Germany Dominate The Peace When It Loses The War’ of November 1942.

That it is founded largely on the lies of former generations and the Monnet Shoeman Plot helps little.

One starts to realise just how corrupt the entire concept is if one reads the very brief Treaty of Elysee, which can be found on my blogs.

As for Greece, it is debatable whether ANY Country actually complied with the conditions of the Euro and that the PIIGS are in such dire straights is exampled by Greece who to comply transferred massive debts to Goldman Sacks – the loans are now subject to repayment and Greece is largely unable to meet the interest let alone the capital repayments – hence a Bonds issue so that behind the scenes Germany can transfer a quick fix of some £4.5Billion without declaration as were it a loan or from an EU country it would be ultra vires but the purchase of bonds can obfuscate the transaction!

Remember anyway Your argument would lead us back to the dark days militant confrontational nationalism between the main European powers,

The last 2 Europe wide wars were attempts by bellicose means to impose a Militaristic, centralised, EUropean Union on the peoples of EUrope.

The massacres since have been as a result of the EU, which has spectacularly failed to keep the peace and having so clearly and deliberately damaged NATO which has kept the peace over a larger area and defended the territories of EUrope we are in fact closer to the potential for Military Confrontation and in fact the ever present probability of wars of disassociation with famine that could cause upwards of some 200,000,000 deaths across EUrope.

when in this day and age should it should be fighting against global warming

It is exceedingly difficult fighting against the cyclical output of energy from a nuclear driven star – any suggestions, much beyond a parasol?

and the preservation of natural resources

Which natural resources concern you? Clearly we have coal to last until infinity as with oil, much of it as far untapped. Increasingly Nuclear fuel becomes not just expedient but inevitable – IF we can stay in the game long enough to bring it on stream – biomass, wind power and wave generation are without exception damaging to our environment, fuel hungry to produce and maintain and grossly inefficient to the point of retrograde.

Clearly since the EU has failed to even manage its own budget it is clearly not wise to give it further authority – prior to its existence EUrope was a net food exporter now we are a net food importer unable to feed ourselves and the EU has all but destroyed our fish stocks and fisheries.

and the manner they are extracted to avoid world land and air pollution.

Important but not imperative – few extraction methods have much past local impact environmentally.

As painful as this advance towards European federation seems to you and other sceptics,

& of course to those informed on the subject who choose not to bury their snouts in the trough, blinkered to the truth.

the world is now developing into a mixed global economy.

No actually – more than ever in its history it is dividing into the starved, the starving and the immensely wealthy. The mixture of economies has collapsed due to the polarisation of supra national states and un-natural control as with the malign EU.

Look no further than the auto, aircraft, and shipping industries to bear witness to this. The movement of industries

All of which these United Kingdoms have lost due to the EU which has centralised them and over regulated to the point where they are latgely failing – when a car can be imported and retailed from China or India NEW for under £1,500 a central overly technological industrial base can not compete any more than can the centralised airo industry which has moved deeply in debt due to its failure to produce within budget a viable product.

from Britain to the third world by maximum profit seeking "patriots" is an example that the clock can never be put back to create the flag waving jingoism of the past.

Very much a byproduct of membership of the EU – first our national self respect was destroyed and as our industry was removed to the EU much then moved on to Asia and the Sino Asian tiger economies.

What is the EU if it is not a flag waving jingoist concept with its tedious banner with the enslaving barbed wire ring of stars,its self important pretend parliament its burgeoning army, its armed and indemnified EUroPol and its Odious To Joy EU National song.

Something of a recipe for war I feel.

With the development of China as a global giant

Now in increasing confrontation with a rival Super Power or in terms of the EU should we say Supine Power in reflection of its serial failures not least of which is its currency and democracy!

and the advance South American economies

Pray clarify ‘advance’ – there is no serious self sufficient vigerous economy in all of South America.

we need to be an integral part of Europe to survive

Switzerland, Norway, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, and many more seem to do OK in liberty and independence – membership of the EU is akin to shackling oneself to a corpse!

remembering our manufacturing base in relation to the developing giants is virtually non existent

Destroyed largely by membership of the EU – take the car industry where EU tender was forced upon the sale of Rover and it went – against my caveat at the time – to BMW which did EXACTLY as I warned , it asset stripped the company retained the £400,000,000 that was in the current account, shipped the R&D from Coventry and the new assembly line from Swindon and returned the evicerated carcass less the Mini, Land Rover and the viable bits of Rover.

we can't survive on dubious finance dealings forever.

It may surprise you WE CAN, but with a better regulated and better incentivised financial sector and then we can use much of the money generated to rebuild and revitalise our industrial base.

Forging economic and political alliances between different countries was never going to be easy,

It was so easy we were the world’s greatest master of the art. Acting through the wall of over paid parasitic apparatchiks of the EU and imbecilic nebbishes with no experience like the present Government and Baroness Ashcan it is an impossibility that places these United Kingdoms on the schedule of the EU as NOT commercial but merely ‘Tourism’!!

but it is only one of the answers in the fight to slow the planets continued advance towards self destruction.

The planet has absolutely no problem and will survive – it is mankind who has a problem and creating the lunacy of the EU actually exacerbates the problem as attention is introspective permitting in its self obsessed stupidity China to have literally bought Africa whilst France & Germany, under the Elysee treaty set out to fleece those stupid enough to be duped by the EU com.

If the world is to survive for any real length of time,

The world will survive without problem – it will change but it is likely that 2/3s of mankind will be wiped out relatively soon as the balance population is somewhere between 1.5 & 2.5 Billion people.

Should the climate warm and all the ice melt, which is hugely unlikely as the planet is in fact COOLING despite the Warmists and their new religion which is as dependent on fear and mumbo jumbo as any religion before it yet rather less valid as it can and has been disproven whereas the other superstitions are hard to disprove as they have absolutely no substance.

only international attempts at control of populations

That will be self regulating by pandemic as it always has been in the past – if the EU continues the wars of disassociation as it collapses and every constituent part tries to grab a bit for themselves may well solve Europe territorial problem.

IF the ice did all melt we have some tolerance as it liberates considerably more inhabitable territory than we loose to low lying inundation! Also there are believed to be vaste reserves of both coal and oil in Antarctica and we know Alaska is all but floating on oil from the work done at Gull Island, as with the oil fields of the Falklands ALL untouched as with the Caspian field.

and management of production

As long as it is properly incemtivised with the people who provide the wherewithal for extraction in investment and manage it with brain input balancing their rewards versus those who use their brawn to maintain an incentivised status quo that should be no problem.

of dwindling resources

Again you comment on ‘dwindle’ but yet you lead no example – what is dwindling in terms of resource – other than that which is managed by the EU where they have all but destroyed certin areas of agriculture and almost all of the fisheries.

which will bring African and third world countries on board can be the worlds salvation.

There is not much of Africa of which I am not experienced and I have been to much of the third world – the damage done by countries like France, Belgium, Portugal and Germany in Africa has been massive – The EU has absolutely no idea how to assist Africa and is causing infinitely more damage than it is help.

The problem of Africa is largely down to failure to create a Middle Class and poor control of war lords. This gives rise to the poor management of grazing both by animals and by man (trees for fuel etc.) – the poor education across much of Africa and the imposition of idiotic and inappropriate religions/superstitions has underpinned the huge growth in population leading to the failure of Africa as a continent together with the belief that there is salvation from one’s own mess if one can but get to somewhere else to make one!

A fairer distribution of world wealth and resources is the only way to bring peace to the African continent.

I disagree – incentive is the fairest system to ensure growth and peace. Peace in Africa would be utterly destroyed with any concept of distribution of wealth – the very concept is a failed Victorian ideal picked up and propounded via the Cathars in the writings of Marx and Engel which when you read them with some understanding and experience are the most idiotic clap trap – no wonder the USSR collapsed in pennuary having killed some 20 to 40,000,000 of its own people in persuit of the idiocy you now seek to impose on Africa.

The EU is a step in the right direction for future generations

I regret NO ONE has managed to show in any way that there is any veracity in that overly simplistic jingo.

and an example of co-operation which will encourage others.

As an example of co-operation it has been catastrophic – it has been top down imposition by some of the most venal self serving crooks politics has ever known.

Sorry that got a bit long but since you asked so many questions I felt it incumbent on me to respond.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

[Expounder]

[QUOTE=Greg Lance-Watkins;100843]Hi,

please don't read this if you are not genuinely interested as it is long

Long winded............................................ .............

It is less that they expanded too quickly – the attempts of 1914 & 1939 were thwarted so they changed direction and by implementation of ‘How will Germany Dominate The Peace When It Loses The War’ of November 1942.

That it is founded largely on the lies of former generations and the Mone Shoeman Plot helps little.

One starts to realise just how corrupt the entire concept is if one reads the very brief Treaty of Elysee, which can be found on my blogs

Well Major I didn't know you were into conspiracy theories which explains a lot about your attitude to the EU and your general attitude towards politics. All of these conspiracies are only basically inside your head. You are a member of the head bangers conspiracy society.

As for Greece, it is debatable whether ANY Country actually complied with the conditions of the Euro and that the PIIGS are in such dire straights is exampled by Greece who to comply transferred massive debts to Goldman Sacks – the loans are now subject to repayment and Greece is largely unable to meet the interest let alone the capital repayments – hence a Bonds issue so that behind the scenes Germany can transfer a quick fix of some £4.5Billion without declaration as were it a loan or from an EU country it would be ultra vires
but the purchase of bonds can obfuscate the transaction!

The problems of the EU are no more or no less than than every other country in the world experienced after the inevitable breakdown of the capitalist free market financial system. Made worse by the scandal of unlimited credit availability by greedy money hording financiers and crooked bankers whom you so vociferously defend.

The last 2 Europe wide wars were attempts by bellicose means to impose a Militaristic, centralised, European Union on the peoples of Europe
.

The massacres since have been as a result of the EU, which has spectacularly failed to keep the peace and having so clearly and deliberately damaged NATO which has kept the peace over a larger area and defended the territories of Europe
we are in fact closer to the potential for Military Confrontation and in fact the ever present probability of wars of disassociation with famine that could cause upwards of some 200,000,000 deaths across Europe.

It is exceedingly difficult fighting against the cyclical output of energy from a nuclear driven star – any suggestions, much beyond a parasol?

What kept the peace in Europe up until the end of the cold war was the stand off between the NATO [American led] and Soviet forces, in two distinct and tidy separate zones. The end of the cold war brought a disintegration of small nations which were kept in line by the Soviets, this was a lid lifted off a pressure cooker. The EU and NATO were presented with intractable ethnic and nationalistic problems which festered under the Soviets and were a fall out from the cold war and not set in motion by or because the EU.

The NATO and an EU military force was not designed or trained to deal with internecine strife, but an all out war with the Soviets, so it's not surprising NATO and the EU had problems dealing waring ethnic and nationalistic groups. You obviously don't regard this as a factor, you just Dam them with unjustified criticism

Which natural resources concern you? Clearly we have coal to last until infinity as with oil, much of it as far untapped. Increasingly Nuclear fuel becomes not just expedient but inevitable – IF we can stay in the game long enough to bring it on stream – biomass, wind power and wave generation are without exception damaging to our environment, fuel hungry to produce and maintain and grossly inefficient to the point of retrograde.

Clearly since the EU has failed to even manage its own budget it is clearly not wise to give it further authority – prior to its existence Europewas a net food exporter now we are a net food importer unable to feed ourselves and the EU has all but destroyed our fish stocks and fisheries.

You seem to living in a fish bowl Union Jack flag waving mind set. I am thinking of generations to come who will suffer the consequences mismanagement of finite resources whether it be in the form of global warming or the desicration of the planet by extracting them.

No actually – more than ever in its history it is dividing into the starved, the starving and the immensely wealthy. The mixture of economies has collapsed due to the polarisation of supra national states and un-natural control as with the malign EU

This is purely a matter of opinion, it's what policy of the supra national states follow.

All of which these United Kingdoms have lost due to the EU which has centralised them and over regulated to the point where they arelargley failing – when a car can be imported and retailed from China or India NEW for under £1,500 a central overly technological industrial airo base can not compete any more than can the centralised industry which has moved deeply in debt due to its failure to produce within budget a viable product.

Very much a byproduct of membership of the EU – first our national self respect was destroyed and as our industry was removed to the EU much then moved on to Asia and the Sino Asian tiger economies.

It's people like yourself who's main purpose in life is to accrue as much personal wealth as possible, hoard it a use, it to obtain more wealth who are the danger. You may be a small fish in this game but the large monopolists of this world have wealth that can invoke the overthrow of elected governments.

The loss out industrial base over the last three decades has been caused by our inability to compete with cheap labour in third world countries mainly in the in the far east which you have acknowledged. I suppose You would have been looking to reduce production costs in Britain [wages and salaries] to meet this problem as it wouldn't affect your standard of living only that of the great unwashed. Instead our patriotic businessmen and entrepreneurs closed factories in Britain and indulged in low wage and child labour in the third world to increase profits.

[What is the EU if it is not a flag waving jingoist concept with its tedious banner with the enslaving barbed wire ring of stars,its self important pretend parliament its burgeoning army, its armed and indemnified Euro pol and its Odious To Joy EU National song.
Something of a recipe for war I feel.

Now in increasing confrontation with a rival Super Power or in terms of the EU should we say Supine Power in reflection of its serial failures not least of which is its currency and democracy!

It is made up of enlightened ex colonial powers the EU flag is a symbol EU unity and is not in anyway similar to the jingoist Union Flag. This is still regarded as a symbol of Britain's "great colonial past" in which the great unwashed of Britain were forced to ride roughshod over undefended nations, enslave the populations and use them as slaves to ship out resources from their own countries to the British elite to build their mansions and palaces while the great British unwashed were left to soak them selves in gin and die early in poverty.

Pray clarify ‘advance’ – there is no serious self sufficient vigorous and economies of these countries are growing.

Switzerland, Norway, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, and many more seem to do OK in liberty and independence – membership of the EU is akin to shackling oneself to a corpse!

Switzerland [boring, cuckoo clocks and dodgy banks] Norway....................? snow?. Singapore ex pat British business's? Saudi Arabia................sit on your hands and let the oil revenue pour in till it runs out. Not very good examples to follow. We don't make cuckoo clocks, even after this year we can't say we get a lot of snow. Our manufacturing base has moved to the far east. Lastly our oil has almost run out. I don't think we will ever become members of the above mentioned club

Destroyed largely by membership of the EU – take the car industry where EU tender was forced upon the sale of Rover and it went – against my caveat at the time – to BMW which did EXACTLY as I warned , it asset stripped the company retained the £400,000,000 that was in the current account, shipped the R&D from Coventry and the new assembly line from Swindon and returned the ercierated carcass less the Mini, Land Rover and the viable bits of Rover.

The car industry was finally destroyed by poor and short sighted British management, you can't blame wages for it's downfall as car workers in the EU were and are on comparable or higher wages and salaries.

It may surprise you WE CAN, but with a better regulated and Better incentivised financial sector and then we can use much of the money generated to rebuild and revitalise our industrial base.

The financial sector will be with us for a while but to depend almost entirely on it would be madness. Finance is fluid and can drain away overnight given the right circumstances and could reduce Britain to the status of your favourite ,Switzerland, a tax haven,and a bye gone tourist attraction.

The planet has absolutely no problem and will survive – it is mankind who has a problem and creating the lunacy of the EU actually exacerbates the problem as attention is introspective permitting in its self obsessed stupidity China to have literally bought Africa whilst France & Germany, under the Elysee treaty set out to fleece those stupid enough to be duped by the EU com.

Survive, for how long? and in what shape? Britain has had it's Empire and it's gone. We are now an island off of main land Europe. No manufacturing base to mention no, oil, clinging on to the hope that we remain world banking and financial top dog.

I'll end now as I'm getting ready for footie and will continue to reply to your other points soon.

Regards............................Expounder.

The world will survive without problem – it will change but it is likely that 2/3s of mankind will be wiped out relatively soon as the balance population is somewhere between 1.5 & 2.5 Billion people.

Should the climate warm and all the ice melt, which is hugely unlikely as the planet is in fact COOLING despite the warmists mumbo jumbo as any disproven religion before it yet rather less valid as it can and has been disproven whereas the other superstitions are hard to disprove as they have absolutely no substance.

A climate warming denier to boot, that's not surprising.

That will be self regulating by pandemic as it always has been in the past – if the EU continues the wars of disassociation as it collapses and every constituent part tries to grab a bit for themselves may well solve Europe territorial problem.

IF the ice did all melt we have some tolerance as it liberates considerably more inhabitable territory than we loose to low lying inundation! Also reserves of both coal and oil in Antarctica and we know Alaska is all but floating on oil from the work done at Gull Island, as with the oil fields of the Falklands ALL untouched as with the Caspian field.

Britain is it is said is geographically placed to take advantage of global warming while populations of three quarters of world would die of famine. I wonder where they would make a bee line for? Maybe countries on our section of the meridian?

As long as it is properlyi ncemtivised with the people who provide the wherewithal for extraction in investment and manage it with brain input balancing their rewards versus those who use their brawn to maintain an icintivised status quo that should be no problem.

Again you comment on ‘dwindle’ but yet you lead no example – what is dwindling in terms of resource – other than that which is managed by the EU where they have all but destroyed certain areas of agriculture and almost all of the fisheries.

Remember, the investments you talk about came from brawn, labouring muscles, hired to increase the wealth of those who were already wealthy as a result of exploiting hired labour. It's like the chicken and the egg question, what and who created the wealth in the first place.? It wasn't some feather plucker sitting on his/her backside in an office. Wealth is a commodity created by labour and cornered by a minority to be used to control those without it, to increase the wealth of those with it.

There is not much of Africa of which I am not experienced and I have been to much of the third world – the damage done by countries like France, Belgium, Portugal and Germany in Africa has been massive – The EU has absolutely no idea how to assist Africa and is causing infinitely more damage than it is help.

The problem of Africa is largely down to failure to create a Middle Class and poor control of war lords. This gives rise to the poor management of grazing both by animals and by man (trees for fuel etc.) – the poor education across much of Africa and the imposition of idiotic and inappropriate religions/superstitions has underpinned the huge growth in population leading to the failure of Africa as a continent together with the belief that there is salvation from one’s own mess if one can but get to somewhere else to make one!

I was not referring only to the EU when helping Africa. This is an international problem that needs a concerted global response from the wealthy nations. This where our mind set differs I'm thinking global you are thinking small minded nationalism.

I disagree – incentive is the fairest system to ensure growth and peace. Peace in Africa would be utterly destroyed with any concept of distribution of wealth – the very concept is a failed Victorian ideal picked up and propounded via the Cathars in the writings of Marx and Engels which when you read them with some understanding and experience are the most idiotic clap trap – no wonder the USSR collapsed in pennuary having killed some 20 to 40,000,000 of its own people in persuit of the idiocy you now seek to impose on Africa.

I agree with incentives but in this day and age this concept is confined to large financiers and monopolists it's incentives for the wealthy that matter and if they feel that the incentives are not enough for then they will pull the rug and leave the unwashed floundering.

Finance not democracy rules.




I regret NO ONE has managed to show in any way that there is any veracity in that overly simplistic jingo.



As an example of co-operation it has been catastrophic – it has been top down imposition by some of the most venal self serving crooks politics has ever known.

Sorry that got a bit long but since you asked so many questions I felt it incumbent on me to respond.

Regards,
Greg L-W.

[Major Sinic]

Expounder Old Boy, don't take my name in vain!. I am neither an expounder (sic) nor advocate of conspiracy theories, and you are I think confusing me with another.

[Expounder]

Expounder Old Boy, don't take my name in vain!. I am neither an expounder (sic) nor advocate of conspiracy theories, and you are I think confusing me with another.

Aplogies Major, that reference was not intended to include you althougth I did mention you and G.L.W in the same post on one occasion.

[Expounder]

I feel I must say this. Through experience, and a life long contact with the general public, I found where possible, to avoid contact with with people who have hyphenated surnames whom for some reason I found pretentious, conceited overly demanding and overbearing.
.

[Greg Lance-Watkins]

I feel I must say this. Through experience, and a life long contact with the general public, I found where possible, to avoid contact with with people who have hyphenated surnames whom for some reason I found pretentious, conceited overly demanding and overbearing.
.

Hi,

I would expect you to bring with you prejudices habitualised elsewhere that had little bearing on reality - as with your assumptive judgements. I on my part have learned through bitter experience that people who use anonimity and unwilling to put their name to their views are usually either frauds or cowards and it is the differentiation which is a challenge often dependent on how gratuitously ill mannered they are

It is of course the exception which makes the rule!

Regards,
Greg L-W.

[Major Sinic]

I feel I must say this. Through experience, and a life long contact with the general public, I found where possible, to avoid contact with with people who have hyphenated surnames whom for some reason I found pretentious, conceited overly demanding and overbearing.
.

What an insufferable old inverted snob you are!

Yours

Algernon ffoulkes-Fortescue-Smyth

[Midas]

I would expect you to bring with you prejudices habitualised elsewhere that had little bearing on reality - as with your assumptive judgements. I on my part have learned through bitter experience that people who use anonimity and unwilling to put their name to their views are usually either frauds or cowards and it is the differentiation which is a challenge often dependent on how gratuitously ill mannered they are

Of-topic I'm aware, however there are many very good reasons why, in today's society where companies, governments, pressure groups and some private individuals regularly trawl the internet for comments that they feel are adverse to their own beliefs, then file away for future reference both the remarks themselves and the names, IP addresses and whatever other personally identifiable information about the poster they can, you are very ill-advised to reveal such information. I've already mentioned this matter elsewhere, particularly with reference to commercial organisations vetting certain job applicants, however whether you know it or not, or chose to ignore it or not, government agencies including the police and various branches of the more covert services are some of the biggest 'users' of the technology which allows them to do this.

I for one would not want my real name and certainly not any of my other personal details, being linked to my views, however moderate they might seem right now; who knows what use a future government might have for them. After all, it's hardly a rare occurrence in some totalitarian states where people who've expressed opposition to the powers that be have been arrested or simply vanished without trace, and the way we're headed here with increasing government control, massive invasions of privacy and more and more freedom of speech restrictions, who knows what might we expect 10/20 years down the line!

I'd far rather play it safe than sorry; you not knowing my name in no way invalidates any of my views or opinions does it?

[Expounder]

What an insufferable old inverted snob you are!

Yours

Algernon ffoulkes-Fortescue-Smyth

Lol, I've been called worse, lighten up Major or I begin to believe that you have an hyphernated real name.

[Midas]

Dear Mrs. Mills,

I've just heard a rumour that Expounder's real name is George "Tub-Thumper" Smith-Jones; do you think that there's any truth to this?

Yours sincerely,

Cynthia Plunkett-Longbottom-Smythe (Mrs)

[Expounder]

Hi,

I would expect you to bring with you prejudices habitualised elsewhere that had little bearing on reality - as with your assumptive judgements. I on my part have learned through bitter experience that people who use anonimity and unwilling to put their name to their views are usually either frauds or cowards and it is the differentiation which is a challenge often dependent on how gratuitously ill mannered they are

It is of course the exception which makes the rule!

Regards,
Greg L-W.

Well Greg, you've stuck your head above the parapet by aspiring to the status of a wannabe UKIP blogger, so I don't think you had much choice other than to declare who you are.

I use the forum for political debate which is for me good mental exercise and in many ways fun. I try not to be too personal except sometimes tongue in cheek which is sometimes misunderstood . Ok you don't like my style but more likely my politics, but every one has their own way of expressing their views. some more forthright and rough edged than others.

I can assure you that whatever I'm called by right wing members of the forum is water off a ducks back, it's sticks and stones adage, it's all in the game after what poor old Gordon's been called I couldn't be called much worse.

As I said to Albion when I first joined the forum, we are all big fish in a small pond and our pretentious utterings will have little effect on the outcome of the election.

Regards...........................Exp

[Expounder]

Dear Mrs. Mills,

I've just heard a rumour that Expounder's real name is George "Tub-Thumper" Smith-Jones; do you think that there's any truth to this?

Yours sincerely,

Cynthia Plunkett-Longbottom-Smythe (Mrs)

Lol, great stuff Midas that's what I call lightening up. I do use a double barreled name on the web as I have a common surname name [I'm a common person] But jokes aside, over some years of dealing with the public I been given proportionately a lot more grief by clients with double barreled names. I wonder, could it be coincidence or are they more pretentious? It's a mystery, but I can only recall memories from my own experience.

Yours.....................Gascoigne-Fogerty-Lancealot-Braithwaite-Smythe. MAC DLC and OUT

[Major Sinic]

Lol, great stuff Midas that's what I call lightening up. I do use a double barreled name on the web as I have a common surname name [I'm a common person] But jokes aside, over some years of dealing with the public I been given proportionately a lot more grief by clients with double barreled names. I wonder, could it be coincidence or are they more pretentious? It's a mystery, but I can only recall memories from my own experience.

Yours.....................Gascoigne-Fogerty-Lancealot-Braithwaite-Smythe. MAC DLC and OUT

Perhaps you weren't suitably deferential considering their social position and yours! Equality can only go so far, don't you know! I yearn for the days when the lower orders knew their place, and tipped their caps to their betters.

[Expounder]

Perhaps you weren't suitably deferential considering their social position and yours! Equality can only go so far, don't you know! I yearn for the days when the lower orders knew their place, and tipped their caps to their betters.

Funny enough Major, it wasn't the monied and well off with the double barreled surnames names I had some problems with, it was the supercilious lower orders that must adopted the hyphen presumably to improve their status who were the most pretentious. Maybe aspiring Tories?.

[Major Sinic]

Funny enough Major, it wasn't the monied and well off with the double barreled surnames names I had some problems with, it was the supercilious lower orders that must adopted the hyphen presumably to improve their status who were the most pretentious. Maybe aspiring Tories?.

Joking apart, it has been my experience that 'old money' whether hyphenated or titled or not , and irrespective of political persuasion, generally display courtesy and consideration in their dealings with others.

Many recent hyphenated surnames have come about through lack of or delayed marriages, where the offspring has been given the mother's maiden name as well as the father's surname. This may be a pretentious act although not necessarily.

Generally though I think that 'first generation wealthy' often don't have an understanding of how to behave and to compensate, often become over-demanding, condescending and pretentious. Coupled with either a conscious or unconscious belief that being relatively wealthy somehow makes them 'better' people, can result in a most unattractive individual.