Stuff about YOUR country that pisses you off

[Hot Mega]

Just look at things in perspective..... An individual just can't think of himself in isolation.

Sir, if I understand your position we're just going to have to disagree on governmental intervention in personal choice.

Laws that punish people who aren't directly or by proximate cause doing anything wrong (primarily to someone else) are wrong and against all principles of freedom and self-determination IMO.

"If" and "but" are the 2 biggest little words in the dictionary. We can "if" and "but" ripple almost any scenario into something that potentially could be some minor problem.

It is unconscionable that we allow a government (of the people) to punish us for our individual choices...whether it be excessive taxation on cigarettes, banning of prostitution, drug use or even fining you for not wearing a seatbelt...that is NO different from the government telling you that you may not consume too many hamburgers in a week or even mandating that you get 8 hrs. of sleep per night at the threat of fine or imprisonment.

 

[Ravenholm]

There are special rules for "darker skin" people in the UK?? I suspect the difference between the UK and some of the places you assert these "darker skin" people originate is that the UK is relatively freer which means people of any stripe have more rights to individual choice, religious freedoms, social and political justice. However, it sounds like you want the UK to be more totalitarian like the countries you decry.

These kinds of things [rulings, ect] need to be thought about and planned ahead of time. So as we can see if theres any flaws which would cause long term damage or short term damage and I am in favour of the sort of plans that would cause short terms damage more than anything. As there's always someone to complain and upset with a multi cultural society.

The government here though just makes things up as they go. And yes they do favour cultures with darker skin tones than of the lighter skin tone. For the reasons I stated in the other post. It isn't really equallity at it's best over here. Fair enough every country has it's ups and downs, but for the love of fuck, this UK government doesn't have a scooby.

It seems as if there really IS special rules for the "darker skin" in the UK. They get all the benefits and chances. I even read somewhere that the government gives them FREE driving lessons as well. So as to help with their chance of getting a job in the UK. This is complete bastard bullshit right here. As people in my family [and a couple of friends] have to pay serious money for lessons. Your talking something like forty quid for two hour lessons. It's about twenty quid or so per hour [give or take a pound or two]. My aunty spent over one thousand pounds on lessons before she took her test. And a pal of mine spent nearly six hundred on lessons. Yet certain types of people get it for free.

They get to protest and create hate speeches and all that and yet your average UK civvie gets fucked in the arse by Thatcher's Bullyboys [the pigs] if they even look the wrong way. Yes I know Thatcher isn't in power anymore. But the Pigs will always be known as that by me as I was born in the Thatcher era.

I think Derek Trotter said it best when he contacted the Council and tried to get moved into a bungalo [as he lived in a flat] in one of the Only Fools and Horses episodes, he wasn't too hopeful you see: to be in with a chance to get that house, you'd have to speak with a foreign accent and have about nine kids. Aint that the truth.

At this moment in time IMO there is nothing to be proud of in the UK.

 

[Hot Mega]

I even read somewhere that the government gives them FREE driving lessons as well. So as to help with their chance of getting a job in the UK.

I have no idea if that's true or not but I would suggest you look into the legitimacy of that claim as there is no limit to the extremist who find currency in perpetuating myth and ginning up hatred by mischaracterizing facts or outright lying.

My least favorite phase in the internet age it "I read something somewhere..".

But that aside, times change, circumstances change and laws should too as long as such laws seek to directly protect victims and punish perpetrators proportionately.

 

[Ravenholm]

I have no idea if that's true or not but I would suggest you look into the legitimacy of that claim as there is no limit to the extremist who find currency in perpetuating myth and ginning up hatred by mischaracterizing facts or outright lying.

My least favorite phase in the internet age it "I read something somewhere..".

But that aside, times change, circumstances change and laws should too as long as such laws seek to directly protect victims and punish perpetrators proportionately.

I have no idea if that has changed or not. But IT WAS the way it was done a couple of years back. So even if it has changed or not, it was done in the first place, when it shouldn't have been done. They should be made pay for things from the start, like every other UK civilian. Pay with their benefits or any other money they have. Like everyone else.

 

[Facetious]

I even read somewhere that the government gives them FREE driving lessons as well. So as to help with their chance of getting a job in the UK. This is complete bastard bullshit right here. As people in my family [and a couple of friends] have to pay serious money for lessons. Your talking something like forty quid for two hour lessons. It's about twenty quid or so per hour [give or take a pound or two]. My aunty spent over one thousand pounds on lessons before she took her test. And a pal of mine spent nearly six hundred on lessons. Yet certain types of people get it for free.

When I went to High School, driver's education was free. I don't know exactly when or why the program was cancelled. I will hypothesize that the reason for the discontinuance is because the politicians want everybody to be reliant on public transpo. It's not politically correct to drive cars is another one of my theories.


As far as a governments' appeasing of non white peoples, it's the taking the path of least resistance, what else would you expect ?
If it keeps up, everybody is in deeper shit with this entitlement class crap.


:Leaving the thread with this: -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IIzNmLDvb8

 

[marquis2]

Or the government can make people live with the consequences of their choices and not give them anything when they do something incredibly stupid, but allow them to do it as long as they aren't directly hurting others. That way everybody can have personal freedom and other people don't have to cover for their stupidity. That might be a little harsh in some situations but it's fair.

But it isn't YOU that lives with the consequence of your actions it's the people round you.What sort of life do you give to your family if you become a paraplegic or a corpse through exercising a pointless and selfish right to suit yourself over wearing a seatbelt?

 

[Hot Mega]

But it isn't YOU that lives with the consequence of your actions it's the people round you.What sort of life do you give to your family if you become a paraplegic or a corpse through exercising a pointless and selfish right to suit yourself over wearing a seatbelt?

If that's the case, then so be it! The government can't nor should it be trying to protect everyone AND their families from the consequences of every poor judgment. If they we're to undertake such a task, they would be able to do nothing else including the ACTUAL jobs we pay them to do.

To the extent they do try it...their efforts are primarily revenue driven. Seatbelt laws are just the most absurd example.

Another good example is laws banning prostitution. One local law enforcement official commented on a sting operation centered around craigslist posting. He said they timed their stings to coincide with the end of the month when they expected activity would be at it's highest because these women would likely need their monthly rents. The argument against prostitution he made was to stop the "exploitation" of women. Now let's stop there for a minute....they are now doing these women a favor??? In the minority of cases they may even be right. But who's really doing the exploiting and victimizing in most of these cases? The adult who is going to freely pay another willing adult to rent something the government shouldn't have any jurisdiction over...his/her body? OR the government who is now going to arrest, fine (a person they acknowledge is likely in need of paying their rent), jail, likely jeopardize their ability to pay their rent and exposing them to possible eviction?

I would say the average person being offered that protection would say thanks but no thanks.

Likewise, the person who jumps in their car to go to a grocery store 2 miles away and gets a ticket for not being belt (for his/her and family's own protection) is now going to have to pay a fine and pay increased insurance premiums for 3 years because the government is trying to protect him/her annnd I guess their families now. Again, thanks but no thanks....I'll let the guy take his chances.

There are people who believe prostitution and other things are exploitative...fair enough...then don't engage in it and leave those who believe it's their best chance to take care of their financial interests alone. There are people who believe it's a good idea to always wear a seatbelt (like I believe) but I'm not willing to impose my beliefs on the judgments on the guy going 2 miles away to a grocery store. And I certainly don't want my government stopping, detaining and taking his money for not doing so.

 

[tiger1977]

The fact that ignorant people are allowed a voice in what happens with the gov't. If you don't know any better, then stay out of the way. Don't get involved if you don't bother trying to learn the facts.

 

[D-rock]

But it isn't YOU that lives with the consequence of your actions it's the people round you.What sort of life do you give to your family if you become a paraplegic or a corpse through exercising a pointless and selfish right to suit yourself over wearing a seatbelt?

Yes, but it isn't the general public that is hurt. Even the people that might be hurt are hurt indirectly. People should be allowed to make their own decisions about themselves, even if it could impact family members that care about them. Granted, some decisions aren't always smart, but it also isn't the governments job to but in and make them for the person. To do otherwise would be about as legitimate as to eliminate every single person from playing sports, going fishing, working a dangerous job, going rock climbing, or doing anything else that could be potentially dangerous in any way because they might get hurt, die, or some other thing might happen to them.

 

[marquis2]

Yes, but it isn't the general public that is hurt. Even the people that might be hurt are hurt indirectly. People should be allowed to make their own decisions about themselves, even if it could impact family members that care about them. Granted, some decisions aren't always smart, but it also isn't the governments job to but in and make them for the person. To do otherwise would be about as legitimate as to eliminate every single person from playing sports, going fishing, working a dangerous job, going rock climbing, or doing anything else that could be potentially dangerous in any way because they might get hurt, die, or some other thing might happen to them.

I live in the UK and we have a taxpayer funded health service.A victim needing extensive treatment as a result of not taking reasonable care is a burden on the taxpayer.The cost of running the emergency services is from taxes.
People hurt indirectly are still hurt.If your spouse ends up having to be pushed everywhere in a wheelchair , what sort of life have you left them?
This is exactly the sort of thing a government should be doing.

 

[GabberMan]

Re: Stuff about YOUR country that pisses you off



Conflict of interest !! :rofl: :jester:

Well, yes. Multiculturalism is policy-based. It doesn't prevent racism - if anything it makes it worse.

 

[ghoul]

My country has this problems against live concerts... especially metal bands... even N.E.R.D had problems when they were here... and now most probably they're going to band Rotting Christ...NOOOO!!!!

 

[Hot Mega]

I live in the UK and we have a taxpayer funded health service....
This is exactly the sort of thing a government should be doing.

I think the question was "Stuff about YOUR country..." As I stated before..the fact that I was talking about the U.S. when I made the original point would seem to make any discussion of what goes on in the UK fairly moot.

But just to humor the point you make and under your supposition...why should your government allow it's citizens to do anything hazardous since they are liable for the medical expense?? Why shouldn't they control what you eat, your alcohol consumption, exercise habits, recreational activity, etc. as a condition of state sponsored health care? Further, IF you're okay with that kind of governmental intervention in your personal life....then you can't be an advocate of a free society.

The U.S. however, was founded on the principles of libertarian liberalism..which should mean at it's core the individual right to self determination....you know, the whole "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" thing.

But frankly, you've just made the best argument against state sponsored health care I've ever heard...

 

[britlover]

Very interesting thread ... *has a look around*

 

[marquis2]

I think the question was "Stuff about YOUR country..." As I stated before..the fact that I was talking about the U.S. when I made the original point would seem to make any discussion of what goes on in the UK fairly moot.

But just to humor the point you make and under your supposition...why should your government allow it's citizens to do anything hazardous since they are liable for the medical expense?? Why shouldn't they control what you eat, your alcohol consumption, exercise habits, recreational activity, etc. as a condition of state sponsored health care? Further, IF you're okay with that kind of governmental intervention in your personal life....then you can't be an advocate of a free society.

The U.S. however, was founded on the principles of libertarian liberalism..which should mean at it's core the individual right to self determination....you know, the whole "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" thing.

But frankly, you've just made the best argument against state sponsored health care I've ever heard...

One thing you won't find ANYWHERE here, even among the most conservative right wing is argument against state sponsored health care.We've had it for over 60 years, imperfect as it is, and all theoretical and dogmatic objections are seen as plain nonsense because it WORKS and is better than any alternatives.It's a wonderful thing and it gives the people of the UK tremendous freedom.The freedom of not having to worry about getting prompt health care for your self and your family.
It's a pity that so many of our American friends view freedom as an American invention.The founding fathers simply transplanted it from Britain which was a free country even then.In fact many Americans were markedly less free than their counterparts over here.

 

[Ravenholm]

And the trouble with immigrants in the UK is if you give them an inch, to be caring to one or two of their needs, they try and take a mile instead. And they more or less end up succeding as well. Otherwise they try and play the race card against the people that say no to them. Well welcome to the real world where people get NO said to them a lot of the time. They wouldn't dare try and play race cards against their own countries government, or anyone else. Yet they do here in the UK as the freedom shown to them is abused in every way possible. I am all for freedom and equallity for all, ect. But if I were in charge when some people cross the line and expect to get treated in a different manner to the rest due to skin colour, then the gloves would be coming off, and the nunchucks would getting swung instead and heads would be cracked. No exceptions.

 

[fatman0529]

the BS no change politics

 

[Hot Mega]

One thing you won't find ANYWHERE here, even among the most conservative right wing is argument against state sponsored health care...In fact many Americans were markedly less free than their counterparts over here.

If it comes at the expense of the government directing my most basic, individual decisions at the threat of fine....then no thanks.

As I said before, if the impetus behind a government deciding such things as you wearing a seatbelt or not because the taxpayer is on the hook for your medical expense...explain how you haven't extended to them the right to decide any other circumstance that involves you and a potential hazard to your health??

Back when I worked for companies, they shouldered most of the expense for my health care but I couldn't imagine them saying to me because we do so we're going stipulate that you not drink in excess, wear a seatbelt at all times and only eat certain foods....because of course, WE'RE on the hook for your health care.

We are not the freest and we don't have a patent on freedom but what we do have is a constitution and BORs that are a direct result of our disagreement with aspects of British rule. Writs of Assignment (for example) which were in effect open ended search warrants handed down by The British as a means of confiscating wealth and taxes were the primary reason for our revolt.

Our laws are based on our constitution and our BORs....which defines the limits of their power and responsibilities. Their powers and responsibilities are limited to the articles contained therein. That's what I go by and that's what my fellow countrymen and women should be doing as well. I don't know what your government's laws, powers and responsibilities are derived from....that kind of stuff COULD actually be written into it and if that's the case that could explain the difference in your perspective and mine.

The closest thing we have in our constitution that suggests anything like you believe is Art. I Sec. 8 where the government is to "promote the general welfare". That is a far cry from ensuring "the general welfare" as your posts seem to suggest.

You say that you enjoy freedoms we may not...and that certainly may be so. However, if you've convinced yourself that government intervention in your personal decision making is the way to go then I'm not sure how long you will enjoy such freedoms. Government by it's nature seeks more and more control...and the more you giveth...the more it takes.

 

[om3ga]

And the trouble with immigrants in the UK is if you give them an inch, to be caring to one or two of their needs, they try and take a mile instead. And they more or less end up succeding as well. Otherwise they try and play the race card against the people that say no to them. Well welcome to the real world where people get NO said to them a lot of the time. They wouldn't dare try and play race cards against their own countries government, or anyone else. Yet they do here in the UK as the freedom shown to them is abused in every way possible. I am all for freedom and equallity for all, ect. But if I were in charge when some people cross the line and expect to get treated in a different manner to the rest due to skin colour, then the gloves would be coming off, and the nunchucks would getting swung instead and heads would be cracked. No exceptions.

As the son of immigrant parents who had to brave the usual (back then) "No dogs, No Irish, No coloureds", forgive me if I politely say...

What a load of bollards...

And that's the problem with the UK (probably around the world too) - we generalise too much.....

 

[D-rock]

I live in the UK and we have a taxpayer funded health service.A victim needing extensive treatment as a result of not taking reasonable care is a burden on the taxpayer.The cost of running the emergency services is from taxes.
People hurt indirectly are still hurt.If your spouse ends up having to be pushed everywhere in a wheelchair , what sort of life have you left them?
This is exactly the sort of thing a government should be doing.

I don't have a problem with state sponsored health care at all, but I also don't think the government should have to step in and cover for incredible stupidity or easily preventable carelessness in every situation either. The fact that it might is more the problem with government policies about your health care, than actually having government sponsored health care. Maybe you should consider adding that to the list of things you shouldn’t like about your country.