If you were elected PM today, what would you do? [Archive]

-:Undertaker:-

12-09-2007, 04:13 PM

I would.

Cut taxes.

Bring back capital punishment.

Bring back corporal punishment.

Scrap all stealth taxes like Green taxes.

Restructure the NHS as it's completley collapsing.

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.

Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.

Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil.

Give the go ahead to a new Trident.

Leave the EU.

Stay close to America but not right behind them unlike this Labour Government.

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.

As you can see, i'm right wing, what would you do if you got into power? :)

Lycan

12-09-2007, 04:20 PM

I think i'd do some of what you have.. But Taxes are there for a reason... and i'm against Capitol Punishment.

The NHS does need reorganising i agree

Invade another Country... AGH! , lets try diplomacy first but i also agree

I think removing scotland would be a bad idea.. putting in place a British parliment that covered all 4 countries rather then the English,Welsh,Scottish and NI Assemberlys.

Nuclear... i would change that to Renewable energy sources personally

Increase Our Armed force... lovely

We founded the EU, stay in the EU but push ideas that could help britain for once

Make the world see UK and US apart but working together

and Pro Gay and Lesbian Rights for the adoption of Children... They are no different for anyone else and bullying shows how perhaps straight couples shoudn't be allowed children if all they do is bully ;)

I'd also work on Uk Pollution and rubbish levels , reduce fishing in the Uk boosting other food sources i'd also attempt to reduce importants from countries like North Korea and China (as i don't agree with sweatshops)

I would.

Cut taxes.

Bring back capital punishment.

Bring back corporal punishment.

Scrap all stealth taxes like Green taxes.

Restructure the NHS as it's completley collapsing.

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.

Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.

Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil.

Give the go ahead to a new Trident.

Leave the EU.

Stay close to America but not right behind them unlike this Labour Government.

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.

As you can see, i'm right wing, what would you do if you got into power? :)

:Liam

12-09-2007, 04:32 PM

Browney

12-09-2007, 04:37 PM

I would.

Cut taxes. Yeah, I agree. But the government needs money from somewhere so where else could they get it?

Bring back capital punishment. I'll be honest, I dunno what that means.

Bring back corporal punishment. Same as above. :P

Scrap all stealth taxes like Green taxes. Same as first comment but I agree on the stealth bit.

Restructure the NHS as it's completley collapsing. Completely agree. Although I couldn't complain while in hospital. I suppose I got lucky.

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason. I'd prefer to sort problems out at home first, then sort them out.

Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament. It seems to be going that way anyway.

Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil. Yet again, completely agree.

Give the go ahead to a new Trident. Great minds...

Leave the EU. I wouldn't leave completely, but I'd stop us from sinking deeper in.

Stay close to America but not right behind them unlike this Labour Government. I'd be as close as possible.

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied. One of the only things I disagree with I'm afraid.

As you can see, i'm right wing, what would you do if you got into power? :) I'm abit central I suppose. probably considered pushover, haha. But the government is push over already I think.My comments in blue. Only thing I'll add is a massive clamp down on yobs and anti-social behaviour. I wont say all this "hug a hoody" stuff as he might pick pocket your wallet. ;)

Oh and longer, more set-in-stone sentences. There should be allowance for petty crimes but depending on the severity of the crime, no being let out early.

jesus

12-09-2007, 04:39 PM

If you were elected PM today, what would you do?i would lol irl

luke-p

12-09-2007, 04:55 PM

I would

Leave the smoking age at 16

Scrap inheritance tax

Lower VAT If I could

Change immigration rules... Make sure they had a job to come over here with

Increase disability allowance

Decrease Job seekers allowance

Fix the NHS >.<

Put more money into schools / health

That's all I can think of at the moment...

Concentric2

12-09-2007, 04:57 PM

I would;

Bring home troops from Iraq and Afghanistan ASAP and avoid involvement in any other US lead "world police" missions.
Maintain decent funding for our armed forces and in military research/development (including a nuclear deterant) to ensure we're a compact but very effective and respected force in the world.

Build more prison space with better security and take crime and punishment more seriously, with more harsh penalties and potentially more "bobbies on the beat".

Build sustainable energy sources that we control, including nuclear.

Reduce the tax burden (especially for the poorest) where feasible.

Get a grip of the NHS (including not "throwing money at the problem").

Work on good relations between the constituent countries of the UK and aim to prevent more moves towards independence.

Be more strict with the EU, especially in getting our money's worth from what we pay in and putting back restrictions on migrants.

errrmm i'm sure there are other things :P

Lycan

12-09-2007, 04:58 PM

So you don't want to prevent terroism then? ...

I would;

Bring home troops from Iraq and Afghanistan ASAP and avoid involvement in any other US lead "world police" missions.
Maintain decent funding for our armed forces and in military research/development (including a nuclear deterant) to ensure we're a compact but very effective and respected force in the world.

Build more prison space with better security and take crime and punishment more seriously, with more harsh penalties and potentially more "bobbies on the beat".

Reduce the tax burden (especially for the poorest) where feasible.

Get a grip of the NHS (including ot "throwing money at the problem").

Work on good relations between the constituent countries of the UK and aim to prevent more moves towards independence.

Be more strict with the EU, especially in getting our money's worth from what we pay in and putting back restrictions on migrants.

errrmm i'm sure there are other things :P

Concentric2

12-09-2007, 04:59 PM

So you don't want to prevent terroism then? ...
What part of what i said suggests that i don't?

Lycan

12-09-2007, 05:01 PM

The World Police.

We are in Afgahn fighting Terroism/ists at the momment.

Dan2nd

12-09-2007, 05:02 PM

I agree with everything you've said undertaker except the Gay adoption thing =] I'd also bring back national service

whoooosh

12-09-2007, 05:02 PM

make the smoking AND drinking legal age 16
=]

Concentric2

12-09-2007, 05:04 PM

The World Police.

We are in Afgahn fighting Terroism/ists at the momment.
I disagree and don't think we need to be involved. If we weren't there we wouldn't be under half the threat we are, and even then the threat isn't that great imo.

My point being, if we just kept ourselves to ourselves and had the strong police/security forces to deal with any issues quietly, i don't think there'd be anything to worry about.

Lycan

12-09-2007, 05:05 PM

So ignore global problems and form a secret police?

I disagree and don't think we need to be involved. If we weren't there we wouldn't be under half the threat we are, and even then the threat isn't that great imo.

My point being, if we just kept ourselves to ourselves and had the strong police/security forces to deal with issues quitely, i don't think there'd be anything to worry about.

Concentric2

12-09-2007, 05:09 PM

So ignore global problems and form a secret police?
I'm not suggesting we form any more "secret police" than we already have - i'm saying that, as they currently do, our homeland security force(s) (which i'm not familiar with so i can't give any specific name) should investigate and deal with any "pockets" of extremist activity quietly, and hopefully on our own soil.

I feel that what we've done in Iraq/Afghanistan is more than go after terrorists - we've basically marched in and said "we don't like the way this country's run so we're going to remove the government and occupy you until you have one that we like".

lScottl

12-09-2007, 05:11 PM

- Pull out of all wars.
- Try my best to create peace between the UK and the rest of the world (Mainly Russia, China)
- Use reknewable evergy sources.

Lycan

12-09-2007, 05:14 PM

I'm not suggesting we form any more "secret police" than we already have - i'm saying that, as they currently do, our homeland security force(s) (which i'm not familiar with so i can't give any specific name) should investigate and deal with any "pockets" of extremist activity quietly, and hopefully on our own soil.

I feel that what we've done in Iraq/Afghanistan is more than go after terrorists - we've basically marched in and said "we don't like the way this country's run so we're going to remove the government and occupy you until you have one that we like".

In Afghanistan we havn't done much other then fight terroists and attempt peace. the americans on the other hand bombed ... the hell out of it.

Concentric2

12-09-2007, 05:17 PM

In Afghanistan we havn't done much other then fight terroists and attempt peace. the americans on the other hand bombed ... the hell out of it.
We're not really in a position to say which out of the coalition forces have killed more civilians or done more to make peace whatever, and i'm sure we've probably done similar amounts - the point is we've helped to occupy another country which didn't do anything to directly threaten our security.

-:Undertaker:-

12-09-2007, 05:19 PM

I would.

Cut taxes.
Ok I agree
Bring back capital punishment.
Agreed
Bring back corporal punishment.
Do not agree what so ever this is just another shovinistic act of masculinity and dominance that should still be against the law.
It stops kids messing around.

Scrap all stealth taxes like Green taxes.
Agree
Restructure the NHS as it's completley collapsing.
Yes I agree we need another Florence Nightingale
Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.
agree
Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.
Why exactly?
Why should we give them money when they hate us and why should their MPs get to vote on our laws.

Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil.
There are better sources of power that nuclear power.
There are not, Nuclear is cheap and realible, unlike renewable and Oil/Gas

Give the go ahead to a new Trident.
agreed
Leave the EU.
agreed
Stay close to America but not right behind them unlike this Labour Government.
agreed
Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.
Do not agree. someones sexual orientation does not affect a child's life.
Normal Lives eh? Whats normal. Normal is a stereotype, Normal is an expectation, expectations and stereotypes is the only thing that holds us back from our true potential.
Imagine the torment a child would get from his classmates if he had two mums or two dads.

I would.

Cut taxes. Yeah, I agree. But the government needs money from somewhere so where else could they get it?
They already get enough money, if we stop fighting the pointless war in Iraq and stop giving Europe billions then we'll have plenty.

Bring back capital punishment. I'll be honest, I dunno what that means.
Death punishment for Murders and rapists.

Bring back corporal punishment. Same as above. :P

Kids who are really bad get cane.
Scrap all stealth taxes like Green taxes. Same as first comment but I agree on the stealth bit.

Restructure the NHS as it's completley collapsing. Completely agree. Although I couldn't complain while in hospital. I suppose I got lucky.

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason. I'd prefer to sort problems out at home first, then sort them out.
Agreed, but once home is sorted then move onto them.

Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament. It seems to be going that way anyway.

Good, let's kick them out of OUR parliament.
Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil. Yet again, completely agree.

Give the go ahead to a new Trident. Great minds...

Leave the EU. I wouldn't leave completely, but I'd stop us from sinking deeper in.

We'd save billions if we left, we don't benefit at all from it.

Stay close to America but not right behind them unlike this Labour Government. I'd be as close as possible.

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied. One of the only things I disagree with I'm afraid.
So you think a child should be subjected to that disgusting bullying?

As you can see, i'm right wing, what would you do if you got into power? :) I'm abit central I suppose. probably considered pushover, haha. But the government is push over already I think.

Also to peoples comments on Renewables, they cost lots of money and you don't get what you have paid for them back, because with Wind Farms they fall down within 10 Years, you also need to pay for maintenace within them 10 years, they also take up lots of room, I read somewere you'd need something like a few thousand wind turbines to replace just one nuclear power plant.

Lycan

12-09-2007, 05:21 PM

Virgin Mary

12-09-2007, 05:21 PM

Put rockets on the side of Ireland and send it to America seeing as they love each other so much. Other than that, I dunno. I'd want to do stuff which requires monarchy power, like reclaim the commonwealth.

-:Undertaker:-

12-09-2007, 05:25 PM

I don't know of any child in the news or otherwise that has been bullied because of there parrents... every child gets bullied at some point in there life.

Perhaps a better education for the children you think of as the Bullys.

The idea of stepping down and not giving the bullys something to bully is stupid, the idea is to remove the bully.

Perhaps it would work if Corporal Punishment was used, if it wasn't then the bullying wouldn't stop, all this Education Programme stuff doesn't stop bullys.

Lycan

12-09-2007, 05:26 PM

Well perhaps rethinking your idea of not allowing Gay/Lesbians the right to adopt would be wiser.

Or are you a touch Homaphobic?

-:Undertaker:-

12-09-2007, 05:28 PM

Well perhaps rethinking your idea of not allowing Gay/Lesbians the right to adopt would be wiser.

Or are you a touch Homaphobic?

Read above, also don't start calling me homophobic, I haven't said anything bad about them, I have just stated why and that is because the children would be bullied.

Lycan

12-09-2007, 05:33 PM

Read above, also don't start calling me homophobic, I haven't said anything bad about them, I have just stated why and that is because the children would be bullied.

Didn't say you were, i said perhaps you were... nothing wrong with being homaphobic normally its a uncontrolable fear which needs to be sorted.

They woudn't be Bullied tho! , i went to a school where one of the girls had lesbian parrents... did she get bullied for that... not at all, considering that a larger majority of people are Bi then ever before i think the understanding in Secondary school over same sex parrents

Where do you draw the line? can someone who became pregant then became lesbian not be allowed a child...

Browney

12-09-2007, 05:34 PM

They already get enough money, if we stop fighting the pointless war in Iraq and stop giving Europe billions then we'll have plenty. Hopefully we'll pull back fully from Iraq soon enough.

Death punishment for Murders and rapists. Peadophiles, mass murderers and rapists yes.

Kids who are really bad get cane. Sorry but I completely disagree. There are better ways to get at misbehaving children than hitting them.

Good, let's kick them out of OUR parliament. It scares me more than anything. That Russia have such a strangle hold on how we work. They could cut out power before we even knew about it.

We'd save billions if we left, we don't benefit at all from it. I'd prefer to be a collective than a loner though. Who knows, someday they might come in useful.

So you think a child should be subjected to that disgusting bullying? I think in a few years it'll become completely acceptable. It's becoming increasingly acceptable by the year. I can see it changing all around me.

:Liam

12-09-2007, 05:36 PM

Also to peoples comments on Renewables, they cost lots of money and you don't get what you have paid for them back, because with Wind Farms they fall down within 10 Years, you also need to pay for maintenace within them 10 years, they also take up lots of room, I read somewere you'd need something like a few thousand wind turbines to replace just one nuclear power plant.

are you saying its worth an unjust act of masculinity that promotes dominance and not equality is justified if it sorts out kids? At my school people dont mess around because there is equality and discipline, its easy to discipline without the means of physical abuse.

Copral punishment is a shovinistic act of masculinity and dominance which should not be aloud! because there are better ways to discipline kids than to result to violence!

hobo

12-09-2007, 05:58 PM

Lycan

12-09-2007, 06:02 PM

make scotland independent, we don't need england :]
then i'd go be head of parliment in scotland rather than england cos i'd rather not be associated with a country that everywhere else in the world hates.
:)

o &, make gay marriage/adoption illegal.
no i'm not homophobic, i just really don't think it's right for gay couples to get married because marriage is for a man and a woman, i don't think the tradition should be changed.
and adoption for same reasons as undertaker said.
also agree with bringing back capital punishment.

& other than that i don't really have any idea what's going on in politics so i dunno :D

Tradition to be changed?

Its people like you that slow down th progress of a peaceful world and stopped advancement in medicine for hundreds of years.

Undertake said..

My GF is on a child walfare course and has researched quite alot

IN Gay/Lesbian adoptions / child related cases there is Little to No child abuse and there is little to No documented bullying! it shows that a child in that situation is more likely to have a happier life

What do you say to that!

Frodo13.

12-09-2007, 06:57 PM

As you can see, i'm right wing, what would you do if you got into power? :)

I think your slightly confussed...Right Wing means your all for peace etc. Your Left Wing as you have more radical views :)

Ella

12-09-2007, 08:25 PM

Scotland does need England. England gives Scotland alot of financial aid, which means Scotland can offer all that it does (free tuition fees, and free access to care homes for the elderly).
Scotland used to be able to support itself economically with shipbuilding on the Clyde ect. But as you already know, they went along time ago. I personally don't think that Scotland could support itself.

And what is Scotlands problem with being part of the UK? S
cotland is over represented (they can vote in Westminster on things that don't affect them), they control 90% or more of their laws (the only real laws that Westminster decides are on things like gun control, drugs, abortion, prison sentances) and without those undeveloved powers we'd have a situation like in the USA where people can cross 'state borders' to get a lighter sentancing ect. Who wants that?

Scotland gets the best deal right now, I dont think they could improve it by becoming independant.

So you want to make gay/lesbian adoption illegal. What about a lesbian who recieves IVF or a gay that finds a surrogate?
Why is it wrong to offer a child (particularly one who has been given up for adoption) love, care, security, and consideration?

Shouldn't your laws be to improve child care and protection services to avoid cases such as leitica willams? Who was beaten to death by her mother? Rather than stopping loving couples who want a child, to have one?

T0M

12-09-2007, 08:56 PM

I would.

Cut taxes.
Agreed to an exentt

Bring back capital punishment.
Disagree, innocent people can be framed

Bring back corporal punishment.
Disagree this isnt needed

Scrap all stealth taxes like Green taxes.
Agreed totally

Restructure the NHS as it's completley collapsing.
Yes, although isnt as simple as that

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.
Disagree

Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.
Agreed

Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil.
Disagree, risks are too high

Give the go ahead to a new Trident.
Totally agreed here

Leave the EU.
Disagree completely, stay but dont give away our rights to them

Stay close to America but not right behind them unlike this Labour Government.
Agreed

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.
Disagree completely, gay/lesbians are normal people too, you wouldnt say no to somebody becaue they have blonde hair, so this is no different

Thats my opinions =)

Roboevil

12-09-2007, 09:08 PM

Well, first I'd have you killed for being wrong.

I would.

Cut taxes.
I'd raise taxes and make tuition fees free.
Bring back capital punishment.
Nope, it won't change anything.
Bring back corporal punishment.
Wrong again.
Scrap all stealth taxes like Green taxes.
No.
Restructure the NHS as it's completley collapsing.
In 1 day?
Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.
And waste all our money.
Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.
You've phrased it horribly, but I'm going to agree and assume that you want Scotland to disconnect from the UK.
Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil.
Again; you'd do that in 1 day?
Give the go ahead to a new Trident.
Well good bye England.
Leave the EU.
Stupid idea, I'd drop everything and sign the UK away to it.
Stay close to America but not right behind them unlike this Labour Government.
Don't really know what to say on that... it's not doing anything.
Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.
No, your opinion is wrong, it should be entirely legal.
As you can see, i'm right wing, what would you do if you got into power? :)

Thilur

12-09-2007, 09:54 PM

I would.

Cut taxes.

Nope, I'd raise them. Would also tax big city bonuses a lot more, then reinvest the money in public services.

Bring back capital punishment.

Ridiculous suggestion. This method of punishment is uncivilised and will get us nowhere. If you think it'll help with 'yobs', it really won't, it will just cause more resentment.

Bring back corporal punishment.

Nope, won't help with anything.

Scrap all stealth taxes like Green taxes.

Being the right-winger that you are, surely you're disappointed with Cameron's plans to introduce this tax? ;) Then again, it will allow him to abolish the oh-so-important inheritence tax. A tax that, might I add, is more likely to affect his Eton pals than normal people.

Restructure the NHS as it's completley collapsing.

Exaggerating there. I agree it needs more funding, which can be solved by higher taxation.

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.

Hmm not sure about an invasion. I'd certainly be in favour of more trade restrictions and the likes though.

Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.

I really don't see the point in breaking up Britain. A united Britain is, culturally, the way forward. Also, can you imagine the uproar that would follow an English attempt to remove the Scottish Parliament?

Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil.

I think we need to look towards other energy resources where possible.

Give the go ahead to a new Trident.

No. I would be very happy with a nuke-free world.

Leave the EU.

NO. Completely ridiculous proposition. This country completely benefits from membership of the Union. It makes travel between the member states much easier and the diverse variety of cultures teaches us a lot.

Stay close to America but not right behind them unlike this Labour Government.

Stay close to America, yes. And by "right behind them" I presume you mean the Iraq War. I've always wondered how many people would've protested our blatant abandonment of one of our strongest allies in the event of us having refused to join them.

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.

I'm really not sure about this one. I appreciate the point of possible bullying... Hmm... will have to think about it a little more.

As you can see, i'm right wing, what would you do if you got into power? :)

A few things I'd do:

Abolish the monarchy and replace it with an elected official. I'd also replace the 92 remaining hereditary peers in the House of Lords with appointed Life Peers asap.

Lycan

12-09-2007, 09:58 PM

A few things I'd do:

Abolish the monarchy and replace it with an elected official. I'd also replace the 92 remaining hereditary peers in the House of Lords with appointed Life Peers asap.

Monoarchy don't really do anything other then bring in tourism... woudn't complain too much. might reduce how much money they recieve but still

Thilur

12-09-2007, 10:00 PM

Monoarchy don't really do anything other then bring in tourism... woudn't complain too much. might reduce how much money they recieve but still

Aye they do, so modernising them might be a viable option - making them live in a little more humble accomodation, us not having to give them as much money and them doing a little more work.

Concentric2

12-09-2007, 10:14 PM

Ezzie.

13-09-2007, 11:49 AM

Hmm.. I'd probably.

Give scotland the option of removing itself from the u.k (they seem to want to go it by themselves, i think they've earned it)

Probably promote health, cut down obescity and promote healthy eating and living.

Cut the taxes which seem abit erm.. unfair? Bring out the tory's idea of a green tax, tax for flying etc.

Make the U.K More green, get more woods and forests back in England!

Abolish this new "house information pack"

Leave the EU

GommeInc

13-09-2007, 02:51 PM

1. Bring back the death penalty for youths who kill other human beings and do not learn from being locked in jail for a few years.

2. Ban gypsies and make rules exempt if you forcefully remove them from properties.

3. Scrap aload of rules and let Britain tun into a hell hole for a matter of years, after that harmony will turn on when people realise rule breaking is pointless.

4. Get rid of most connections with the EU, they're useless.

5. Focus on NHS and put most government money towards it.

Lozzoling

13-09-2007, 03:05 PM

you cant JUST cut tax's

where are you gonna make up for that loss?

Browney

13-09-2007, 03:22 PM

Aye they do, so modernising them might be a viable option - making them live in a little more humble accomodation, us not having to give them as much money and them doing a little more work.

Humble accomodation? Haha yeah. Lets turn Buckingham Palace into a parking lot, lets make Windsor Castle a shopping market and put Queen Liz in a semi-detached house. The sites are probably more famous than the monarchy. Also, the monarchy bring in much more money than they take. It's big business, tourism.

Lycan

13-09-2007, 03:23 PM

Humble accomodation? Haha yeah. Lets turn Buckingham Palace into a parking lot, lets make Windsor Castle a shopping market and put Queen Liz in a semi-detached house. The sites are probably more famous than the monarchy. Also, the monarchy bring in much more money than they take. It's big business, tourism.

Tourism is something i already mentioned.

Who said anything about turning them into anything opening them to the public would bring more tourism rather then butchering them up (as you suggested)

Browney

13-09-2007, 03:27 PM

Tourism is something i already mentioned.

Who said anything about turning them into anything opening them to the public would bring more tourism rather then butchering them up (as you suggested)

They are already opened for tourists at times and it's tradition for monarchy to occupy these houses. A stuffy little tradition but one I'd like to keep. Long ago, we had kings and queens, ruling over us, a figure of importance. Countries feared us because we ruled with iron fists. Now we get weedy men in suits making the big decisions who bow down at Bush's beck and call.

Lycan

13-09-2007, 03:28 PM

They are already opened for tourists at times and it's tradition for monarchy to occupy these houses. A stuffy little tradition but one I'd like to keep. Long ago, we had kings and queens, ruling over us, a figure of importance. Countries feared us because we ruled with iron fists. Now we get weedy men in suits making the big decisions who bow down at Bush's beck and call.

In Fairness to Brown he hasn't yet done anything for the Americans, and you might hope he would bond scotland and the rest of GB again.

Browney

13-09-2007, 03:37 PM

In Fairness to Brown he hasn't yet done anything for the Americans, and you might hope he would bond scotland and the rest of GB again.

I was more refering to Blair. How I could describe Gordo as weedy would be a miracle. :D

Lycan

13-09-2007, 03:40 PM

I was more refering to Blair. How I could describe Gordo as weedy would be a miracle. :D

I new you were and i don't think you can.

I was just pushing the idea that we do have a change now and although i support blairs moves (perhaps not tasting bushes colon) Brown could be the slight change we need

Browney

13-09-2007, 03:45 PM

I new you were and i don't think you can.

I was just pushing the idea that we do have a change now and although i support blairs moves (perhaps not tasting bushes colon) Brown could be the slight change we need

Well, here's hoping. :)

Pawf

13-09-2007, 05:17 PM

Wth? You can't cut taxes and get rid of stealth taxes and then go on to rebuild the NHS. Taxes are there for a reason :| Your ideas are ridiculous

Virgin Mary

13-09-2007, 05:34 PM

Scotland wants to not be part of the UK so it can wallow in the joy of having an independence day thus a day off work/school. The monarchy represents Britain and is effectively in the culture and Britain is probably the only country in the world which is immediately associated with a monarchy. If they get rid of them then Britain will just be the smaller, less patriotic and less glamorous version of America. We may as well just join the EU and become part of the supernation while we're at it.

FlyingJesus

13-09-2007, 06:09 PM

Gonna do what everyone else has done by writing over yours ^_^

I would.

Cut taxes. Nah. People complain about taxes all the time but we do need them for the NHS, police force etc

Bring back capital punishment. Would hold a referendum on this first so that it could go to public vote, but opinion polls say that the majority want it so would go to the same effect, just with more legitimacy.

Bring back corporal punishment. Yes, definitely. Sure it hurts people but it worked. Kids these days take too much for granted and are so over-protected that it's impossible to discipline anyone.

Scrap all stealth taxes like Green taxes. Not all... as above, taxes are unpopulr, but necessary.

Restructure the NHS as it's completley collapsing. If costs allowed it sure, but I don't think it can be a priority until we get enough money to do so.

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason. No. If the Iraq war was a mistake then Zimbabwe would be even worse, because there's not even anything there that we can take and get money from. A waste of time, money, men and munitions.

Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament. Unnecessary, they aren't numerous of popular enough to cause damage anyway. If all Scottish MPs voted the same way they still couldn't make up a majority.

Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil. Yes. People can say all they want about it being unsafe, but if we can afford it I think we should go for it, as it'll make us more independant and better powered, and it's only proved unsafe in places where it hasn't been properly regulated.

Give the go ahead to a new Trident. I can't honestly say I know enough about this to comment.

Leave the EU. Not entirely, but I'd attempt to make our involvement in the EU down to a simple European market like it was originally supposed to be.

Stay close to America but not right behind them unlike this Labour Government. Unsure on this, obviously I'd stay close as they're a powerful ally and very useful, but it would be dangerous to stray too far from favour, especially if we're to break away from the EU.

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied. I agree with this. It's not a homophobic decision, it helps to protect children. No, not "all" children get bullied, and for young kids this would certainly be a magnet for bullying. Yes, homosexuality is more welcomed now than previously, but it's far from being fully accepted, and in any case it's mostly adults who understand it better. Young children will see any difference as a chance to bully.

Also a note on corporal punishment, aimed at Liam. I don't know why you keep repeating the words "chauvinistic [spelt wrong] masculine show of dominance" and such, as it has nothing to do with that. It's a way to discipline children, and for millennia it has worked. Look around you at the vandalism and attacks done by children of the present day and it's painfully obvious that discipline has become something that just doesn't happen.

Oh and I forgot to mention the monarchy; don't get rid of them. It's the one thing that makes us different, they're our history and hopefully our future. If anything, get them more involved.

Frodo13.

13-09-2007, 06:18 PM

I would.

Cut taxes.
Disagree. Taxes are needed for NHS, Education, Public Transport etc. I wouldn't scrap them, just use them to better effect.

Bring back capital punishment.
Disagree. Dont think it will solve a whole lot. There is always the chance that the wrong person could be excecuted.

Bring back corporal punishment.
Agree. Not in schools but as punnishments for crime and whilst in prison I think is needed.

Scrap all stealth taxes like Green taxes.
Again, taxes are essential.

Restructure the NHS as it's completley collapsing.
Agree, but its more difficult then that.

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.
Agree. To be honast, I dont understand why this hasnt already happend. But if your going to invade Zimbabwe, then you would also need to invade places such as South Korea, who are also underule by a 'evil' dictator.

Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.
Im not sure about this one. I think Scotland need the UK, I dont think they would be able to cope with Independence.

Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil.
Disagree. Building Nuclear Power can lead to global disputes and Cold Wars. Britain doesnt need that.

Give the go ahead to a new Trident.
Disagree for the same reasons as the Nuclear Power thingy.

Leave the EU.
Disagree. They are good for trade etc. Dont think we should give up are traditions to them though e.g sterling to euro is a no-no imo.

Stay close to America but not right behind them unlike this Labour Government.
Agree. USA is a very powerful country, it would be unwise not to have their support. I dont think we need to get involved in their problems though. If I was PM Id pull troops straight out of Iraq.

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.
Disagree. Gay people are normal, and their kids can lead normal lives. Just because someones parent is gay, wont make the kid be gay. Your either born gay, or born straight, and nothing can change that. I know a lad whos Dad is gay, and that lad is straighter then straight! In a future society, I think homosexuality will be just as 'normal' as drinking TEA!

-:Undertaker:-

13-09-2007, 06:24 PM

I don't think many of you get it over the gay issue, I don't have anything against gays people, YES ONE DAY THEY WILL BE FULLY ACCEPTED but they are not at the moment, so let's left thousands of children get bullied for having 2 mums and having 2 dads?

Also we can cut taxes, we'd have billions extra if we left the EU and stopped the war in Iraq, so a little tax cut would be nice as we are taxed more than most others in Europe and the world.

To the people against Nuclear, explain to me what are you so scared about with it?

Oh and on EU issue, 'they are good for trade' - err so we can't trade with anyone if they aren't in the EU? is that what your saying? because we trade with America, China and many others fine without paying billions to them to be in a club.

Browney

13-09-2007, 06:31 PM

I don't think many of you get it over the gay issue, I don't have anything against gays people, YES ONE DAY THEY WILL BE FULLY ACCEPTED but they are not at the moment, so let's left thousands of children get bullied for having 2 mums and having 2 dads?

Well to be honest, that seems double standard to me. You don't want mental bullying of children but are happy to let mis-behaving ones be beaten with a cane? Just my opinion.

Concentric2

13-09-2007, 06:37 PM

Also a note on corporal punishment, aimed at Liam. I don't know why you keep repeating the words "chauvinistic [spelt wrong] masculine show of dominance" and such, as it has nothing to do with that. It's a way to discipline children, and for millennia it has worked. Look around you at the vandalism and attacks done by children of the present day and it's painfully obvious that discipline has become something that just doesn't happen.
I agree that children arn't well enough disciplined but i don't think it's down to parents not being allowed to beat them.

I was never more than slapped on the bottom as a child and my parents managed to discipline me fairly well, so i don't see why other parents can't.
I think it's down to a few social things, including parents' attitudes towards discipline and their children in general - parents are younger now than they were in the past and i see a fair number of parents f'ing and blinding at their children which isn't the right way to go about it and makes the children act quite violently back.

Lycan

13-09-2007, 06:38 PM

I agree that children arn't well enough disciplined but i don't think it's down to parents not being allowed to beat them.

I was never more than slapped on the bottom as a child and my parents managed to discipline me fairly well, so i don't see why other parents can't.
I think it's down to a few social things, including parents' attitudes towards discipline and their children in general - parents are younger now than they were in the past and i see a fair number of parents f'ing and blinding at their children which isn't the right way to go about it and makes the children act quite violently back.

Ditto. i agree with what you say

Throne Sofa

13-09-2007, 07:51 PM

I'd step down, as i'd probably eff up the country, i'm 15. I am not knowlodgeable enough to run the darn country!

Browney

13-09-2007, 08:02 PM

I'd step down, as i'd probably eff up the country, i'm 15. I am not knowlodgeable enough to run the darn country!

Haha, probably best comment all thread.

Even if he supports Chelsea.

:Liam

13-09-2007, 08:06 PM

Gonna do what everyone else has done by writing over yours ^_^

Also a note on corporal punishment, aimed at Liam. I don't know why you keep repeating the words "chauvinistic [spelt wrong] masculine show of dominance" and such, as it has nothing to do with that. It's a way to discipline children, and for millennia it has worked. Look around you at the vandalism and attacks done by children of the present day and it's painfully obvious that discipline has become something that just doesn't happen.

Oh and I forgot to mention the monarchy; don't get rid of them. It's the one thing that makes us different, they're our history and hopefully our future. If anything, get them more involved.
It is, though because a humans main anthropological instinct is to show dominance and to assert who is the person at the top of the heirarchy, studies also show that children who get beaten or were subjected to corporal punishment had social problems later on in life. Corporal punishment never helped teenagers anyway because when teenagers are faced by a social barrier such as this they react either positively or negatively however when faced by a negative barrier such as corporal punishment they will usualy be affected adversely by rebelling which meant lots more people left school earlier back then and didnt do aswell in tests because of the pressure and the stress from fear. The way to go is on a system of mutual respect (which has been enforced at my school). This entales a agreement of rules, but the rules such as no smoking, no shouting, no anger, no anti-social behaviour ect. are not just followed by the students but also by the teachers, if either break the rules they get warnings. If a student becomes unwilling to learn they get the option to leave or stay, if they choose to leave they get expelled, if a teacher breaks theese rules we can put complaints in and same can they. in which is a more workplace like environment, with no break times, a lunch time, and 9-2.30 day, this system is proving affective because it is a much more resonable system of mutual respect and not a traditional hierachy in which everyone is set at a certain level.

Corporal punishment is somthing to be kept in history books. I personally do not agree with almost every right wing view. I believe in socialisation and do not believe in resorting to more chovanistic ways.

Crimson

13-09-2007, 08:21 PM

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.

.................................

T0M

13-09-2007, 08:33 PM

To the nuclear question by undertaker further up, the reason im against it is because its extremely dangerous and extremely expensive to set up and to also get rid of once it has done its job, id prefer to have more wind farms to create electricity, although imo global warming is a fad and is a total waste of our money with all these schemes and if petrol prices go up/flights are taxed because of it i will be seriously annoyed

CrazyColaist

13-09-2007, 09:06 PM

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.

I find that HIGHLY offencive

are you saying gay people shouldnt adopt?

T0M

13-09-2007, 09:08 PM

To spongebob, i dont see how it is offensive? It is an opinion that doesnt insult anybody that is gay/lesbian in anyway

I think gay/lesbian/foreigners these days take every single thing as a racist/homophobic comment :l Toughen up please

FlyingJesus

14-09-2007, 12:05 AM

It is, though because a humans main anthropological instinct is to show dominance and to assert who is the person at the top of the heirarchy, studies also show that children who get beaten or were subjected to corporal punishment had social problems later on in life. Corporal punishment never helped teenagers anyway because when teenagers are faced by a social barrier such as this they react either positively or negatively however when faced by a negative barrier such as corporal punishment they will usualy be affected adversely by rebelling which meant lots more people left school earlier back then and didnt do aswell in tests because of the pressure and the stress from fear. The way to go is on a system of mutual respect (which has been enforced at my school). This entales a agreement of rules, but the rules such as no smoking, no shouting, no anger, no anti-social behaviour ect. are not just followed by the students but also by the teachers, if either break the rules they get warnings. If a student becomes unwilling to learn they get the option to leave or stay, if they choose to leave they get expelled, if a teacher breaks theese rules we can put complaints in and same can they. in which is a more workplace like environment, with no break times, a lunch time, and 9-2.30 day, this system is proving affective because it is a much more resonable system of mutual respect and not a traditional hierachy in which everyone is set at a certain level.

Corporal punishment is somthing to be kept in history books. I personally do not agree with almost every right wing view. I believe in socialisation and do not believe in resorting to more chovanistic ways.

I'm well aware that humans want to be the top of everything, but I have no idea what that's got to do with chauvinism, which is something you don't seem to know either.

Getting a proper beating from your parents is different to a slap on the hands or buttocks with a cane. The former can go as far as abuse, whilst the latter serves (or served) well as a deterrent more than a punishment and was fairly successful - also note that the parents of most forum members would have been around whilst corporal punishment was enforced, and many will have received it. I highly doubt that they all have social problems, and to be honest anyone who gets caned a lot was probably a trouble maker and therefore already had problems.
Also just because there would be a system of light corporal punishment doesn't mean there can't also be respect, it's not one of the other.

-:Undertaker:-

14-09-2007, 05:50 PM

Well to be honest, that seems double standard to me. You don't want mental bullying of children but are happy to let mis-behaving ones be beaten with a cane? Just my opinion.

It is different, if you smash a window in school then you are asking for it.

To the nuclear question by undertaker further up, the reason im against it is because its extremely dangerous and extremely expensive to set up and to also get rid of once it has done its job, id prefer to have more wind farms to create electricity, although imo global warming is a fad and is a total waste of our money with all these schemes and if petrol prices go up/flights are taxed because of it i will be seriously annoyed

Nuclear Power is not dagerous, you are thinking of Chernobyl and that was a Soviet Reactor which were very poor and still are today. Western reactors are different and incredibly safe.

Wind farms are a waste of money, generate hardly any electric that's why you would need thousands just to replace 1 nuclear power station.

But yes you are right on Global Warming, it's absolute rubbish.
+Rep

I find that HIGHLY offencive

are you saying gay people shouldnt adopt?

DID I INSULT GAYS OR LESBIAN IN THIS THREAD AT ONE POINT? CAN YOU NOT READ!

I said I am only against adoption because the children will be bullied because of it, so yes I am againt gay/lesbian adoption, and if you have a problem with it after you read this, before shouting 'HOMOPHOBE' read all of my posts and quote these nasty remarks out to me, because I can't seem to find anythign offensive to anyone.

Oh and I have also missed out Immagration, well i'd have border control put in place and zero immagration allowed except for people who are docters or have the skills we need.

Saosin

14-09-2007, 06:02 PM

kick the chavs out of the UK and make more skateparks.

GommeInc

14-09-2007, 08:31 PM

Browney

14-09-2007, 08:31 PM

Oh and I have also missed out Immagration, well i'd have border control put in place and zero immagration allowed except for people who are docters or have the skills we need.

I rather like Australia's system. If they can prove they have useful skills and if they can speak fluent English, they are allowed in.

I worded that wrong. That made it sound easy. But it's not, I know. My family have looked into it.

GommeInc

14-09-2007, 08:34 PM

I rather like Australia's system. If they can prove they have useful skills and if they can speak fluent English, they are allowed in.
And have a minimum of £2,000 in their bank accounts? That may come in some use.

-:Undertaker:-

14-09-2007, 09:21 PM

I disagree with gays/lesbians not adopting. They should be able to. Also, it is kinda contradictory of you to suggest how to make YOUR Britain when you cannot educate the people about adoption and gays/lesbians.

As I have said, it would only work if corporal punishment was brought back, then no one would say anything because the threat of being smacked would be hanging over them.

You cannot educate people about it, it is something that takes time to be accepted, and in todays climate it's not accepted yet.

I rather like Australia's system. If they can prove they have useful skills and if they can speak fluent English, they are allowed in.

I worded that wrong. That made it sound easy. But it's not, I know. My family have looked into it.

I agree, that's what I ment in my post.

This is one of the reasons I wanted Michael Howard to win the last election, he promised border control, but sadly Tony Blair won another term. I also think Lady Thatcher is best Prime Minister we've ever had.

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2004/05/05/mh_mt_0605.jpg

FlyingJesus

15-09-2007, 03:33 PM

kick the chavs out of the UK and make more skateparks.

Never go into politics.

I rather like Australia's system. If they can prove they have useful skills and if they can speak fluent English, they are allowed in.

I worded that wrong. That made it sound easy. But it's not, I know. My family have looked into it.

I agree, Australia have great border control. My sister's moving there in a couple of months and she's finding it difficult even from England.

Virgin Mary

15-09-2007, 06:09 PM

Well rather then just saying "ill gt rid of taxez lolz" I'd compensate by lowering or even removing the less useful ones and increasing the amount of the more useful ones. I also think punishment should be brought back for children. Obviously something is being done wrong if kids run around thinking they can shoot each other. The law isn't partial on the grounds of race, gender or sexuality so it shouldn't be partial on the grounds of age.

-:Undertaker:-

16-09-2007, 02:08 PM

When I say cut taxes, I don't mean get rid of them, I mean reduce them.

Frodo13.

16-09-2007, 02:58 PM

When I say cut taxes, I don't mean get rid of them, I mean reduce them.

But if taxes are reduced then the goverment have less to spend on NHS, Education etc.

mangle

16-09-2007, 03:06 PM

Browney

16-09-2007, 03:23 PM

But if taxes are reduced then the goverment have less to spend on NHS, Education etc.

He's already said he wants to leave the EU and pull out of Iraq, thus apparently saving enough to lower most taxes.

-:Undertaker:-

16-09-2007, 03:31 PM

But if taxes are reduced then the goverment have less to spend on NHS, Education etc.

The NHS's problems will not be solved by throwing money at it, also we'd save billions from leaving Europe and let's stop giving other countrys our money, did you know we're paying for Russia to have it's own USSR rotting subs removed?

FlyingJesus

16-09-2007, 03:44 PM

I'd consider doing an american style hospital system. Everyone complains about the NHS , i feel that if you went to the american style of pay for you're own treatment and you'd get more hospitals with less longer waiting lists.

Complete privatisation of hospitals is disgusting. In America if you're poor and get badly injured, they likely won't take you to the nearest hospital, they'll travel to a cheap/free one that's further away and less likely to save you.

HotelUser

17-09-2007, 10:43 AM

I would.

Cut taxes.
That depends, if you cut taxes then what expenses would be gone?

Bring back capital punishment.
Disagreed. This would be a mess.

Bring back corporal punishment.
No, this is certainly not how to solve problems.

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.
Robert Mugabe. No R. And if you did that you would probably help people, but your reputation would take a hit.

Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.
I'm from Canada so I don't know what Scotland's done?

Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil.
Well lowering taxes wont help you get this done?

Leave the EU.
If they cost you money than ok..

Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.
Agreed.

As you can see, i'm right wing, what would you do if you got into power? :)

HotelUser

17-09-2007, 10:53 AM

I am favoring England being in Afg, I like that Canada is in it too.

It helps people.

make the smoking AND drinking legal age 16
=]

Don't go into politics.

Put rockets on the side of Ireland and send it to America seeing as they love each other so much. Other than that, I dunno. I'd want to do stuff which requires monarchy power, like reclaim the commonwealth.

reclaim the commonwealth?

If you come over to Canada and say join us again. We wont. Not a chance.

I find that HIGHLY offencive

are you saying gay people shouldnt adopt?

Well.. I'm sure they are nice, the ones that want to adopt but do gay people live in a normal lifestyle that's fitting for children? I'm not being offensive but what if two females got a male or two males got a female?

Or what if the females got a female then raised her to love females? that would not be her choice to be gay.

FlyingJesus

17-09-2007, 01:22 PM

reclaim the commonwealth?

If you come over to Canada and say join us again. We wont. Not a chance.

I think you'll find if we went to Canada to bring it back as a colony then you wouldn't be able to say no :P well, if we went about it the same way as before anyway.

-:Undertaker:-

17-09-2007, 03:37 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
I would.

Cut taxes.

That depends, if you cut taxes then what expenses would be gone?
None would be gone, we'd leave EU and we'd save billions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
Bring back capital punishment.

Disagreed. This would be a mess.
Why would it?, Our justice system right now is a mess with murders getting so called 'life' and serving only 2 years of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
Bring back corporal punishment.

No, this is certainly not how to solve problems.
Yes it is, look at behaviour now compared to years ago, it's PROVEN that it's a deterrant against bad behaviour.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.

Robert Mugabe. No R. And if you did that you would probably help people, but your reputation would take a hit.
Actually I think an invasion of Zimbarbwe would be supported by a fair number of people, I would also consider colonising it again, or run a joint coliation with the opposition there so peace and western civilised ways can spread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.

I'm from Canada so I don't know what Scotland's done?
Scotland take billions pounds from Englands taxes every year, they get extra services and their MP's get to vote on our policies but we don't get a vote on theirs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
Build a new Generation of Nuclear Power Plants so we won't rely on Russia in the future for our gas and oil.

Well lowering taxes wont help you get this done?
Leave EU = Extra Billions
Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
Leave the EU.

If they cost you money than ok..
Yeah.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
Make gay and lesbian adoption illegal, I do not think children would live normal lives otherwise and it's not fair on them to be bullied.

Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
As you can see, i'm right wing, what would you do if you got into power? :)

Concentric2

17-09-2007, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.

I'm from Canada so I don't know what Scotland's done?
Scotland take billions pounds from Englands taxes every year, they get extra services and their MP's get to vote on our policies but we don't get a vote on theirs.

That doesn't mean it'd be a good idea to boot them out of the UK...
Why not just change the way those parts work so that it's no longer unfair?

-:Undertaker:-

17-09-2007, 08:29 PM

That doesn't mean it'd be a good idea to boot them out of the UK...
Why not just change the way those parts work so that it's no longer unfair?

They seem to hate us so much, anyway I don't see them complaining so let's boot them out.

Frodo13.

17-09-2007, 09:46 PM

FlyingJesus

17-09-2007, 10:55 PM

I strongly disagree with leaving the EU. OK, so I dont think we should follow suit with the Euro, but I think the EU is good for us.

EU is are main source of trade. With the EU we can trade with many countries in a more efficent way and cheap. OK, so we don't HAVE to trade with EU, but say if we traded with USA, it would cost us more on a whole. We are also totally over looking things such as the European Courts of Justice. Without them, we would get many unfair decisions in the British Courts. As you may or may not know, the ECJ represents many countries and cultures, so people appealing at the ECJ get a much fairer case.

For the trade reason I disagreed with Dan, saying that instead of leaving we should simply attempt to put ourselves back in the position that we entered it as - just as a trading state. ECJ isn't a good thing in my opinion, as it overrules British law and basically means we can't dictate our own legal system.

Frodo13.

18-09-2007, 03:33 PM

For the trade reason I disagreed with Dan, saying that instead of leaving we should simply attempt to put ourselves back in the position that we entered it as - just as a trading state. ECJ isn't a good thing in my opinion, as it overrules British law and basically means we can't dictate our own legal system.

We can have our own legal system. The ECJ is used when there isnt a specific law set. For example, a women wanted to use the stored eggs that had been fertilised by her ex. She wanted to use them, but he didnt. Because there wasn't any specific law, it had to go all the way up to the ECJ so it could be sorted out. I think its a good thing as it represents lots of other cultures, not just Britain.

I think many people in this thread want Britain to cut many of its ties and we should fend for ourselves. This wouldnt work. What you have to remember is Britain is a little remote island. We need the rest of the world, including EU and USA.

lew!

18-09-2007, 05:26 PM

i say we should stay in the eu.

ummm.. what i would change..
lol Im not sure.. But i would revise most the rules and try and make them better, for everyone.

-:Undertaker:-

18-09-2007, 06:09 PM

I strongly disagree with leaving the EU. OK, so I dont think we should follow suit with the Euro, but I think the EU is good for us.

EU is are main source of trade. With the EU we can trade with many countries in a more efficent way and cheap. OK, so we don't HAVE to trade with EU, but say if we traded with USA, it would cost us more on a whole. We are also totally over looking things such as the European Courts of Justice. Without them, we would get many unfair decisions in the British Courts. As you may or may not know, the ECJ represents many countries and cultures, so people appealing at the ECJ get a much fairer case.

I don't think you get this, how can it be cheap when we pay billions into it and hardly get anything back, WE CAN STILL TRADE WITHOUT THE EU, so what are you saying, that america doesn't trade with France because they aren't in this silly club?

The european faceless pen pushers will implement even more stupid regulations and laws when we sign up again.

Who gives a DAMN if it represents muslims, islam, china or whatever other cultures, we're getting ripped off by it and it's NO GOOD for us.

i say we should stay in the eu.

ummm.. what i would change..
lol Im not sure.. But i would revise most the rules and try and make them better, for everyone.

Why.

Frodo13.

18-09-2007, 07:20 PM

I don't think you get this,

And tbh Taker, I dont think you understand politics full stop. We put money into the EU to help much needier countries, and Im guessing the Goverment sleeps much easier at night because of this. The billions we pay go to good causes. Even if we wernt part of EU, we would be paying billions non the less to USA who is probably the worlds biggest loan shark!

Also, Im not saying we cant trade with other countries, but if your part of the EU, the trading between EU countries is cheaper and more efficent. This is common knowlage! Again, I think your political knowlage is lacking in this area.

Oh, and if your suggesting the ECJ CREATES laws, then LOL at you. Judges only make laws when there is no previous legislation, and/or the law needs to be interpritated. It is the British Government who make BRITISH LAWS.

I think most of your views dont have place in modern Britain.

-:Undertaker:-

18-09-2007, 07:28 PM

And tbh Taker, I dont think you understand politics full stop. We put money into the EU to help much needier countries, and Im guessing the Goverment sleeps much easier at night because of this. The billions we pay go to good causes. Even if we wernt part of EU, we would be paying billions non the less to USA who is probably the worlds biggest loan shark!

Also, Im not saying we cant trade with other countries, but if your part of the EU, the trading between EU countries is cheaper and more efficent. This is common knowlage! Again, I think your political knowlage is lacking in this area.

Oh, and if your suggesting the ECJ CREATES laws, then LOL at you. Judges only make laws when there is no previous legislation, and/or the law needs to be interpritated. It is the British Government who make BRITISH LAWS.

I think most of your views dont have place in modern Britain.

So Spain is needy?, and if we put in money to help needy countrys why do we pay much more than other countrys? LETS SORT OUT OUR OWN COUNTRY FIRST, eh?

The EU does create laws, like it will have power over our justice system if Brown signs the new treaty and will not allow us to have Life sentences because they are 'too harsh'

I think your a very confused Liberal who thinks we should throw away Taxpayers money away without them agreeing.

Who gives the government permission to give Billions away without us agreeing even though it's OUR money, you say my views have no place in modern Britain - well no bleeding wonder it's going to the dogs.

Frodo13.

18-09-2007, 07:36 PM

So Spain is needy?, and if we put in money to help needy countrys why do we pay much more than other countrys? LETS SORT OUT OUR OWN COUNTRY FIRST, eh?

The EU does create laws, like it will have power over our justice system if Brown signs the new treaty and will not allow us to have Life sentences because they are 'too harsh'

I think your a very confused Liberal who thinks we should throw away Taxpayers money away without them agreeing.

Who gives the government permission to give Billions away without us agreeing even though it's OUR money, you say my views have no place in modern Britain - well no bleeding wonder it's going to the dogs.

No, Spain isnt needy, but Bulgaria and Poland are. WE DO GET MONEY BACK! All EU countries get money back! Its just in proportion to how wealthy we are as a nation. Do you know we are one of the worlds richest?!?!? We have enough money to sort ourselves out in the first place, the only problem I see is that it is not being used properly. Oh, and I believe we agreed when we voted as a nation to go into the EU mate.

Again, ECJ does not create laws that directly effect us. The only thing they do, for example, in a case a women wants to use frozen sperm from her dead husband, and the ECJ says No, that means the WHOLE OF EU wont be able to use the frozen sperm of dead husbands [This is called ratio decidendi, people who study Law will know this]. ECJ doesnt decide on, things like tax cuts, or how long terrorists should be held for. Infact, ECJ really only deals with Cival Courts rather then Criminal Courts.

You think Im a confussed Liberal. Well I take that with a pinch of salt from the person who don't know the difference between left wing and right wing.

FlyingJesus

18-09-2007, 07:57 PM

We can have our own legal system. The ECJ is used when there isnt a specific law set. For example, a women wanted to use the stored eggs that had been fertilised by her ex. She wanted to use them, but he didnt. Because there wasn't any specific law, it had to go all the way up to the ECJ so it could be sorted out. I think its a good thing as it represents lots of other cultures, not just Britain.

Nope, there are actual ECJ/ECHR laws, and ANY of these can currently override ANY British law.

I think many people in this thread want Britain to cut many of its ties and we should fend for ourselves. This wouldnt work. What you have to remember is Britain is a little remote island. We need the rest of the world, including EU and USA.

Trade is not impossible without EU membership. It would be more expensive in itself, but that would come mostly from private money from businesses not government taxpayer money, and would therefore leave the government more freedom to spend our money as needed for us.

And tbh Taker, I dont think you understand politics full stop. We put money into the EU to help much needier countries, and Im guessing the Goverment sleeps much easier at night because of this. The billions we pay go to good causes. Even if we wernt part of EU, we would be paying billions non the less to USA who is probably the worlds biggest loan shark!

Just because another country has greater needs, doesn't mean we don't have any needs at all. These countries are problematic for their own reasons, and it's not up to us to sort them out when they're not stable - hell, when we're not stable. If we sort out our own country first then what people don't seem to understand is that we'd then be far more qualified and equipped to help others.

Also, Im not saying we cant trade with other countries, but if your part of the EU, the trading between EU countries is cheaper and more efficent. This is common knowlage! Again, I think your political knowlage is lacking in this area.

As you said, it's common knowledge. Anyone with an interest in politics knows this, and Dan comes under that category. See above for my response to this.

Oh, and if your suggesting the ECJ CREATES laws, then LOL at you. Judges only make laws when there is no previous legislation, and/or the law needs to be interpritated. It is the British Government who make BRITISH LAWS.

Ouch, wrong.

I think most of your views dont have place in modern Britain.

I don't agree with everything Dan says, but that's a bit of a bold statement.

No, Spain isnt needy, but Bulgaria and Poland are. WE DO GET MONEY BACK! All EU countries get money back! Its just in proportion to how wealthy we are as a nation. Do you know we are one of the worlds richest?!?!? We have enough money to sort ourselves out in the first place, the only problem I see is that it is not being used properly. Oh, and I believe we agreed when we voted as a nation to go into the EU mate.

We get a tiny amount of money back from what we put in.. and we really don't have enough to sort ourselves, as easily seen by looking at the current state of the country.

Again, ECJ does not create laws that directly effect us. The only thing they do, for example, in a case a women wants to use frozen sperm from her dead husband, and the ECJ says No, that means the WHOLE OF EU wont be able to use the frozen sperm of dead husbands [This is called ratio decidendi, people who study Law will know this]. ECJ doesnt decide on, things like tax cuts, or how long terrorists should be held for. Infact, ECJ really only deals with Cival Courts rather then Criminal Courts.

Oh dear, still wrong. Tax cuts they may not decide upon, but technically they could impose minimum tax rates or something like that to prevent cuts. They have a lot more power than you seem to think.

You think Im a confussed Liberal. Well I take that with a pinch of salt from the person who don't know the difference between left wing and right wing.

Ok then take it from me instead; you're a confused Liberal.

HotelUser

19-09-2007, 10:43 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
I would.

Cut taxes.

That depends, if you cut taxes then what expenses would be gone?
None would be gone, we'd leave EU and we'd save billions.

Well I somewhat doubt that really. Maybe if you left EU you would be by yourself? Nobody would want to trade you for example for things and you would have to look elsewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
Bring back capital punishment.

Disagreed. This would be a mess.
Why would it?, Our justice system right now is a mess with murders getting so called 'life' and serving only 2 years of it.

Well that's too bad. You can't go around killing people. A government killing their own people isn't that good of an idea. Who gives you the right to kill? Nobody has the right to kill in any situation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
Bring back corporal punishment.

No, this is certainly not how to solve problems.
Yes it is, look at behaviour now compared to years ago, it's PROVEN that it's a deterrant against bad behaviour.

Well it's been PROVEN that that system was removed. If it was removed it was removed for a reason. Probably because it was violent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)

Invade Zimbabwe and remove Robert Mugarbe who has killed may thousands of people for no reason.

Robert Mugabe. No R. And if you did that you would probably help people, but your reputation would take a hit.
Actually I think an invasion of Zimbarbwe would be supported by a fair number of people, I would also consider colonising it again, or run a joint coliation with the opposition there so peace and western civilised ways can spread.

Colonizing it is a ridiculous idea. England shouldn't have any colonies. They are not responsible with them from what history says. They treat the citizens in them awful. I'm not sure if they do that now but it is a chance nobody else wants to take really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- http://www.habboxforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?p=3895260#post3895260)
Remove Scotland from the United Kingdom, or remove their parliament or remove their MP's from our parliament.

I'm from Canada so I don't know what Scotland's done?
Scotland take billions pounds from Englands taxes every year, they get extra services and their MP's get to vote on our policies but we don't get a vote on theirs.

Why is that?

I think you'll find if we went to Canada to bring it back as a colony then you wouldn't be able to say no :P well, if we went about it the same way as before anyway.
Commonwealth to us means absolutely nothing.

We don't even know the Queens name most us. And if you did come over we would laugh at you. What would you do? Fight us? You could win but the money lost wont be worth it. So people would think England is fighting just to own land. Again. I don't think last time you did that it worked out :P.

Frodo13.

19-09-2007, 03:07 PM

Nope, there are actual ECJ/ECHR laws, and ANY of these can currently override ANY British law.

Trade is not impossible without EU membership. It would be more expensive in itself, but that would come mostly from private money from businesses not government taxpayer money, and would therefore leave the government more freedom to spend our money as needed for us.

Just because another country has greater needs, doesn't mean we don't have any needs at all. These countries are problematic for their own reasons, and it's not up to us to sort them out when they're not stable - hell, when we're not stable. If we sort out our own country first then what people don't seem to understand is that we'd then be far more qualified and equipped to help others.

As you said, it's common knowledge. Anyone with an interest in politics knows this, and Dan comes under that category. See above for my response to this.

Ouch, wrong.

I don't agree with everything Dan says, but that's a bit of a bold statement.

We get a tiny amount of money back from what we put in.. and we really don't have enough to sort ourselves, as easily seen by looking at the current state of the country.

Oh dear, still wrong. Tax cuts they may not decide upon, but technically they could impose minimum tax rates or something like that to prevent cuts. They have a lot more power than you seem to think.

Ok then take it from me instead; you're a confused Liberal.

So your telling me what they are teaching me at school is wrong? Judges cant just create laws, for example, they cant just say 'Lets kill all right handed people' They only make laws when there is a gap in the legal system.

-:Undertaker:-

19-09-2007, 04:09 PM

No, Spain isnt needy, but Bulgaria and Poland are. WE DO GET MONEY BACK! All EU countries get money back! Its just in proportion to how wealthy we are as a nation. Do you know we are one of the worlds richest?!?!? We have enough money to sort ourselves out in the first place, the only problem I see is that it is not being used properly. Oh, and I believe we agreed when we voted as a nation to go into the EU mate.

Again, ECJ does not create laws that directly effect us. The only thing they do, for example, in a case a women wants to use frozen sperm from her dead husband, and the ECJ says No, that means the WHOLE OF EU wont be able to use the frozen sperm of dead husbands [This is called ratio decidendi, people who study Law will know this]. ECJ doesnt decide on, things like tax cuts, or how long terrorists should be held for. Infact, ECJ really only deals with Cival Courts rather then Criminal Courts.

You think Im a confussed Liberal. Well I take that with a pinch of salt from the person who don't know the difference between left wing and right wing.

Spain is classed as 'poor' by the EU, so you are wrong on that one, We don't get our money back so you are wrong on that one and you are also wrong in believeing that the EU can't override British Laws, so your wrong again.

Well I somewhat doubt that really. Maybe if you left EU you would be by yourself? Nobody would want to trade you for example for things and you would have to look elsewhere.

Well that's too bad. You can't go around killing people. A government killing their own people isn't that good of an idea. Who gives you the right to kill? Nobody has the right to kill in any situation.

Well it's been PROVEN that that system was removed. If it was removed it was removed for a reason. Probably because it was violent.

Colonizing it is a ridiculous idea. England shouldn't have any colonies. They are not responsible with them from what history says. They treat the citizens in them awful. I'm not sure if they do that now but it is a chance nobody else wants to take really.

Why is that?

Commonwealth to us means absolutely nothing.

We don't even know the Queens name most us. And if you did come over we would laugh at you. What would you do? Fight us? You could win but the money lost wont be worth it. So people would think England is fighting just to own land. Again. I don't think last time you did that it worked out :P.

So according to you, no one wants to trade with China, India, South Africa and so on, just because they aren't in the EU?

Murders should die if they kill someone else, who gives the state the right to kill? - The murders do, you murder someone, you know the price you will have to pay.

It was removed because the liberal morons got their way, just look at how soft everything is getting.

Colozing is a good thing, it brought wealth and cilization to them countrys, look at Zimbarbwe, when we owned it, it was called 'The bread basket of Africa' it was the richest African nation, now it is one of the poorest, THEY CANNOT RULE THEMSELVES people need to understand this.

I have explained the Scotland issue, read over again then reply.

So your telling me what they are teaching me at school is wrong? Judges cant just create laws, for example, they cant just say 'Lets kill all right handed people' They only make laws when there is a gap in the legal system.

So you can't think for yourself?

England

19-09-2007, 04:15 PM

Have a nuclear war.

FlyingJesus

19-09-2007, 05:07 PM

Commonwealth to us means absolutely nothing.

We don't even know the Queens name most us. And if you did come over we would laugh at you. What would you do? Fight us? You could win but the money lost wont be worth it. So people would think England is fighting just to own land. Again. I don't think last time you did that it worked out :P.

lol I was satirising myself, sorry it's sort of.. British humour. Bit bleak ^_^

So your telling me what they are teaching me at school is wrong? Judges cant just create laws, for example, they cant just say 'Lets kill all right handed people' They only make laws when there is a gap in the legal system.

Judges don't create laws, you're quite right, but the ECJ and ECHR are controlled by the EU committee/body/representatives or whatever you want to call them - and they do make laws. And yes, I believe my college "government&politics" course is likely to be more detailed and more informed than a school.

Frodo13.

19-09-2007, 05:40 PM

lol I was satirising myself, sorry it's sort of.. British humour. Bit bleak ^_^

Judges don't create laws, you're quite right, but the ECJ and ECHR are controlled by the EU committee/body/representatives or whatever you want to call them - and they do make laws. And yes, I believe my college "government&politics" course is likely to be more detailed and more informed than a school.

And I would think my A Level Law course would be quite informed too. European COURT of Justice. ECJ is basiclly an appeal court, and there decision for one case will effect the decisions of all similar cases in EU. I dont know if you do law, but this is called the ratio decideni.

And the ECHR. Im presumming you mean the European Convention of Human Rights? Yeah, they made the law for European Human Rights. But without that, we wouldnt have things such as freedom of speech etc. And it is because of the ECHR Britain passed a Human Rights Act in the first place.

-:Undertaker:-

19-09-2007, 05:45 PM

Frodo13.

19-09-2007, 05:53 PM

We'd have rights without this stupid charter, America and other countrys have democratic systems without the EU human rights bill, I find it funny how you think the EU is so good for our country.

In [i think] 1950, Britain was the first country to sign the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and since 1966, the British people have been able to pursue complaints in the European Court of Human Rights.

Because of the large amount of breaching of the ECHR in UK, goverment wanted the ECHR to be incoporated into the British Legal System. So, in 1998, the Labour Party drafted a bill incorporating the ECHR and passed it through parliament. Because of this bill, Britain now deals with most breaches of the ECHR.

So in responce to you, Yes, we do have our own rights bill. But we only have this because the ECHR was causing massive problems for our goverment, as cases can only be put againt public authority in the European Courts of Human Rights.

Virgin Mary

19-09-2007, 05:54 PM

What would Canada do? Fight us with the army owned by the Queen which just happens to be situated in their country. Oh no.

Concentric2

19-09-2007, 06:27 PM

What would Canada do? Fight us with the army owned by the Queen which just happens to be situated in their country. Oh no.
The Queen is their head of state, yes, but she doesn't control their armed forces.

Virgin Mary

19-09-2007, 06:40 PM

The Queen is their head of state, yes, but she doesn't control their armed forces.
lolol, my dear, the Queen is the armed forces!

Frodo13.

19-09-2007, 06:44 PM

lolol, my dear, the Queen is the armed forces!

Its more of a symbolic thing if Im being honast.

Virgin Mary

19-09-2007, 06:55 PM

Its more of a symbolic thing if Im being honast.
http://delivery.viewimages.com/xv/57064810.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193CC300C081D9F4700E789B300CA8FDA5E E86BFBDF8B4B1332A55A1E4F32AD3138
POWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FlyingJesus

20-09-2007, 01:22 PM

And I would think my A Level Law course would be quite informed too. European COURT of Justice. ECJ is basiclly an appeal court, and there decision for one case will effect the decisions of all similar cases in EU. I dont know if you do law, but this is called the ratio decideni.

And the ECHR. Im presumming you mean the European Convention of Human Rights? Yeah, they made the law for European Human Rights. But without that, we wouldnt have things such as freedom of speech etc. And it is because of the ECHR Britain passed a Human Rights Act in the first place.

I don't like to resort to calling names or anything, but you sir are an idiot. Yes the ECJ is a court, well done, but the laws it upholds are EU laws, which are created outside of the UK and legally overrule UK law. As for no freedom of speech without the ECHR.. just no. The HRA was passed due to ECHR law yes, because it had to in order to comply with Europe. Common sense my boy, do you use it?

In [i think] 1950, Britain was the first country to sign the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and since 1966, the British people have been able to pursue complaints in the European Court of Human Rights.

Because of the large amount of breaching of the ECHR in UK, goverment wanted the ECHR to be incoporated into the British Legal System. So, in 1998, the Labour Party drafted a bill incorporating the ECHR and passed it through parliament. Because of this bill, Britain now deals with most breaches of the ECHR.

So in responce to you, Yes, we do have our own rights bill. But we only have this because the ECHR was causing massive problems for our goverment, as cases can only be put againt public authority in the European Courts of Human Rights.

What's this got to do with the fact that Europe has the power to overrule any of our laws with their own? And you mention that we only have it because we had problems with ECHR - that surely just suggests that we have been forced to change our laws in compliance.

The Queen is their head of state, yes, but she doesn't control their armed forces.

Technically the head of state can reclaim such bodies as the military, so she could if she wanted.

Edited by Yoshimitsui (Super Moderator): Please don't be rude to other members.

Frodo13.

20-09-2007, 09:06 PM

I don't like to resort to calling names or anything, but you sir are an idiot. Yes the ECJ is a court, well done, but the laws it upholds are EU laws, which are created outside of the UK and legally overrule UK law. As for no freedom of speech without the ECHR.. just no. The HRA was passed due to ECHR law yes, because it had to in order to comply with Europe. Common sense my boy, do you use it?

Yes, I know ECJs precendents bind our and the rest of EU lower courts, but what Im trying to say is that the ECJ wouldn't just create a law, for example, it couldn't just decide to ban alcohol in Europe. I do however know that the decisions it makes in the ECJ binds all lower courts in the UK

What's this got to do with the fact that Europe has the power to overrule any of our laws with their own? And you mention that we only have it because we had problems with ECHR - that surely just suggests that we have been forced to change our laws in compliance.

I made that post in responce to Undertaker, who said we would have a Human Rights Act despite the ECHR. Imo, I dont think we would.

-:Undertaker:-

21-09-2007, 03:32 PM

Yes, I know ECJs precendents bind our and the rest of EU lower courts, but what Im trying to say is that the ECJ wouldn't just create a law, for example, it couldn't just decide to ban alcohol in Europe. I do however know that the decisions it makes in the ECJ binds all lower courts in the UK

I made that post in responce to Undertaker, who said we would have a Human Rights Act despite the ECHR. Imo, I dont think we would.

So without a Human Rights Act, we'd be killing people for no reason? Utter rubbish.

We are civilised.

Rasq

21-09-2007, 05:43 PM

i would kill habbo owners and give myself 99999999999999 creds and mod powersS!!!!!!11

iluv2spam

21-09-2007, 05:48 PM

*text removed*

Edit by mattmeister (Forum Moderator) - Please do not post racist remarks.

FlyingJesus

21-09-2007, 06:34 PM

*text removed*

You try too hard.

Frodo13.

21-09-2007, 07:38 PM

So without a Human Rights Act, we'd be killing people for no reason? Utter rubbish.

We are civilised.

Human Rights mean things such as freedom of speech. There has been laws enforced against murder for 100s of years.

And the Human Rights Act meant that the UK could deal with more breaches of the ECHR.

HotelUser

21-09-2007, 09:20 PM

lolol, my dear, the Queen is the armed forces!

Don't care.

What would Canada do? Fight us with the army owned by the Queen which just happens to be situated in their country. Oh no.

You think we care about the queen? Sure we respect her to be nice but if they wanted to reclaim us we would say no. No. No. No. England can not just go around claiming owned land. I'm glad you have a little cheerful though in your head about a bright pink day when you get Canada back but it is not going to happen, ever.

lol I was satirising myself, sorry it's sort of.. British humour. Bit bleak ^_^

Judges don't create laws, you're quite right, but the ECJ and ECHR are controlled by the EU committee/body/representatives or whatever you want to call them - and they do make laws. And yes, I believe my college "government&politics" course is likely to be more detailed and more informed than a school.

Fact: Britain can not reclaim Canada.

Spain is classed as 'poor' by the EU, so you are wrong on that one, We don't get our money back so you are wrong on that one and you are also wrong in believeing that the EU can't override British Laws, so your wrong again.

So according to you, no one wants to trade with China, India, South Africa and so on, just because they aren't in the EU?

Murders should die if they kill someone else, who gives the state the right to kill? - The murders do, you murder someone, you know the price you will have to pay.

It was removed because the liberal morons got their way, just look at how soft everything is getting.

Colozing is a good thing, it brought wealth and cilization to them countrys, look at Zimbarbwe, when we owned it, it was called 'The bread basket of Africa' it was the richest African nation, now it is one of the poorest, THEY CANNOT RULE THEMSELVES people need to understand this.

I have explained the Scotland issue, read over again then reply.

So you can't think for yourself?

No according to me I doubt people will like you as much if you left the EU and nobody gave the killer the right to kill. Nobody gave the government the right to kill. Colonizing is a bad idea. It makes the kingdom a bigger target for attack.
For example when USA wanted to be independent they raided Ontario, Canada because of England's ownership over Canada at the time.
Country's like England and others like USA should not be having colonies. They are more of a police force than they are a peace keeping force. Was it not your prince himself that wanted to join his military in Asia? I don't think he wanted to 'keep peace'.

Browney

21-09-2007, 09:32 PM

Was it not your prince himself that wanted to join his military in Asia? I don't think he wanted to 'keep peace'.

No, he wanted to keep morale with the troops. I doubt he went there thinking "BLOW THEM UP, BLOW THEM UP!" He wanted to support our troops and represent the fact that the Royal are not all out of touch and obselete.

Spectate

21-09-2007, 10:02 PM

Don't care.

You think we care about the queen? Sure we respect her to be nice but if they wanted to reclaim us we would say no. No. No. No. England can not just go around claiming owned land. I'm glad you have a little cheerful though in your head about a bright pink day when you get Canada back but it is not going to happen, ever.

Fact: Britain can not reclaim Canada.

No according to me I doubt people will like you as much if you left the EU and nobody gave the killer the right to kill. Nobody gave the government the right to kill. Colonizing is a bad idea. It makes the kingdom a bigger target for attack.
For example when USA wanted to be independent they raided Ontario, Canada because of England's ownership over Canada at the time.
Country's like England and others like USA should not be having colonies. They are more of a police force than they are a peace keeping force. Was it not your prince himself that wanted to join his military in Asia? I don't think he wanted to 'keep peace'.

Agreed! The fewer remnants of the British Empire the better in my opinion. Canada shouldn't have to care about our monarchy.

Lycan

21-09-2007, 10:15 PM

Agreed! The fewer remnants of the British Empire the better in my opinion. Canada shouldn't have to care about our monarchy.

Canada doesn't have to worry about it, The Queen is just a formality, something nice to see from a toruist side, like the changing of the guard at buckingham palace, the queen is just for show

FlyingJesus

21-09-2007, 10:47 PM

You think we care about the queen? Sure we respect her to be nice but if they wanted to reclaim us we would say no. No. No. No. England can not just go around claiming owned land. I'm glad you have a little cheerful though in your head about a bright pink day when you get Canada back but it is not going to happen, ever.

No-one said we were ever going to try, I don't see why we'd need/want to really, as no-one actually cares. You can be all proud and whatever saying that Canadians don't care about the Queen, but that wasn't the point being made - the point was that she technically could reclaim power.

Fact: Britain can not reclaim Canada.
Fact: If we actually invaded as a military force, yes we could. However as I explained above, that's not going to happen because there's no need, and no desire to do so.

No according to me I doubt people will like you as much if you left the EU and nobody gave the killer the right to kill. Nobody gave the government the right to kill. Colonizing is a bad idea. It makes the kingdom a bigger target for attack.
For example when USA wanted to be independent they raided Ontario, Canada because of England's ownership over Canada at the time.
Country's like England and others like USA should not be having colonies. They are more of a police force than they are a peace keeping force. Was it not your prince himself that wanted to join his military in Asia? I don't think he wanted to 'keep peace'.

We're unpopular within the EU anyway, and being popular or not has nothing to do with trade. We're not a dangerous nation so we won't be sanctioned, and I doubt that Europe would want to lose out on our money, especially as we would then be paying more.

Nobody gave anyone the right to kill, true, but then again who is anyone to give any rights? The government are humans like us, but we respect the laws that they create anyway. Killers do not respect these laws and rights, and so lose their own right to life, as they are not co-operating.

You're taking this colonising thing far too personally. Trust me, no-one in the UK gives even the tiniest particle of faecal matter about who owns Canada, it was only mentioned because you gave incorrect information which needed rectifying.

Yes Prince Harry wanted to go to Iraq - because he is a member of the army and thought that he should do his duty. He didn't one day wake up thinking "hey I'm gonna go kill some Iraqis today". He very much wanted to keep peace, so again you need to get facts right before you post.

HotelUser

22-09-2007, 12:50 PM

No-one said we were ever going to try, I don't see why we'd need/want to really, as no-one actually cares. You can be all proud and whatever saying that Canadians don't care about the Queen, but that wasn't the point being made - the point was that she technically could reclaim power.
No she can not technically claim us. Just becase England says so doesn't make it true.

Fact: If we actually invaded as a military force, yes we could. However as I explained above, that's not going to happen because there's no need, and no desire to do so.
That would never happen and if it did I'm sure Canada would get more help.

We're unpopular within the EU anyway, and being popular or not has nothing to do with trade. We're not a dangerous nation so we won't be sanctioned, and I doubt that Europe would want to lose out on our money, especially as we would then be paying more.

Nobody gave anyone the right to kill, true, but then again who is anyone to give any rights? The government are humans like us, but we respect the laws that they create anyway. Killers do not respect these laws and rights, and so lose their own right to life, as they are not co-operating.
Having the right to hold a citizen in a jail is a right a government rightfully has. Killing rights are way beyond and are not any body's right.

You're taking this colonising thing far too personally. Trust me, no-one in the UK gives even the tiniest particle of faecal matter about who owns Canada, it was only mentioned because you gave incorrect information which needed rectifying.If this information is that you can claim us. You can't.

Yes Prince Harry wanted to go to Iraq - because he is a member of the army and thought that he should do his duty. He didn't one day wake up thinking "hey I'm gonna go kill some Iraqis today". He very much wanted to keep peace, so again you need to get facts right before you post.

No he didn't. Do you remember his quote? Something like him sitting on his *** when his men are doing all the work. He wanted to fight.

Concentric2

22-09-2007, 02:53 PM

Something like him sitting on his *** when his men are doing all the work. He wanted to fight.
Yes, and? When you're in a violent situation, violence is likely to be needed to "keep the peace".

And i know what you mean when you say "Fact: Britain cannot reclaim Canada" but that's not the way to say it - it's not a fact - it could technically happen, but we all agree that it's incredibly unlikely to, so it's not worth arguing about.

Frodo13.

22-09-2007, 03:50 PM

No he didn't. Do you remember his quote? Something like him sitting on his *** when his men are doing all the work. He wanted to fight.

British troops are in Iraq, trying to prevent all these terrorists attacks etc going on there. There intention isn't to kill innocent Iraqs, just to elliminate possible attack.

FlyingJesus

22-09-2007, 05:24 PM

No she can not technically claim us. Just becase England says so doesn't make it true.That would never happen and if it did I'm sure Canada would get more help.Having the right to hold a citizen in a jail is a right a government rightfully has. Killing rights are way beyond and are not any body's right.If this information is that you can claim us. You can't.

No he didn't. Do you remember his quote? Something like him sitting on his *** when his men are doing all the work. He wanted to fight.

Oh dear, over patriotic much? Seriously I'm all for being patriotic but be realistic too. In your law, as part of the Commonwealth your armed forces fight in the name of the Queen, so yes she technically can, don't be so stupid as to think that laws don't work just because they're old.

Yes Canada probably would get help, hence why I said it would never happen - we have no need to do it, or the desire to do it. Get over yourself and your country, it's not that powerful.

As for holding prisoners, who gave anyone the right to do that? Your argument is circular and wrong.

So now saying that you want to help your regiment is brutal and equal to a wish to kill as many Iraqis as possible? Don't be so silly.

-:Undertaker:-

22-09-2007, 05:58 PM

British troops are in Iraq, trying to prevent all these terrorists attacks etc going on there. There intention isn't to kill innocent Iraqs, just to elliminate possible attack.

They are there because they are told to be there, they don't want to be there, and the cronies behind the invasion only want us there to secure oil fields.

HotelUser

23-09-2007, 11:44 PM

Oh dear, over patriotic much? Seriously I'm all for being patriotic but be realistic too. In your law, as part of the Commonwealth your armed forces fight in the name of the Queen, so yes she technically can, don't be so stupid as to think that laws don't work just because they're old.

Yes Canada probably would get help, hence why I said it would never happen - we have no need to do it, or the desire to do it. Get over yourself and your country, it's not that powerful.

As for holding prisoners, who gave anyone the right to do that? Your argument is circular and wrong.

So now saying that you want to help your regiment is brutal and equal to a wish to kill as many Iraqis as possible? Don't be so silly.

WOW way to asume everything. I'm just saying you can't reclaim Canada.

British troops are in Iraq, trying to prevent all these terrorists attacks etc going on there. There intention isn't to kill innocent Iraqs, just to elliminate possible attack.

I never said that I was trying to get the point across that England should not be trusted governing foreign land.

Yes, and? When you're in a violent situation, violence is likely to be needed to "keep the peace".

And i know what you mean when you say "Fact: Britain cannot reclaim Canada" but that's not the way to say it - it's not a fact - it could technically happen, but we all agree that it's incredibly unlikely to, so it's not worth arguing about.

No he wanted to fight and It can't happen even if England wanted it to happen. Canada's government would laugh at England's attempt to regain power.

FlyingJesus

24-09-2007, 12:14 AM

Errr your sweeping statement about me assuming things may have worked in your mind as a way to get around answering to my points, but it really doesn't. Try again please.

Concentric2

24-09-2007, 10:05 AM

No he wanted to fight and It can't happen even if England wanted it to happen. Canada's government would laugh at England's attempt to regain power.
I think you're now confusing two seperate things. I was commenting on your view on Prince Harry going to Iraq, which is nothing to do with Britain reclaiming Canada.

Xarea

24-09-2007, 11:31 AM

Corpral Punishment is a must.

Death Penalty is a must.

Hold an EU Refurendum.

Wiley

24-09-2007, 01:57 PM

Lower legal drinking and driving age to 16.

Make war with Bush boi

Get rid of the Goverment and pm system.

YoManGo!

24-09-2007, 02:03 PM

throw a huuuge party

Frodo13.

24-09-2007, 03:44 PM

Lower legal drinking and driving age to 16.

There is already arguments 17 is too young to start driving, so I doubt 16 would ever be made legal. As for drinking at 16, this would just cause such a comotion around Britian.

Make war with Bush boi
What, to get our butts kicked and also loose a very loyal allie? Dont think so.

Get rid of the Goverment and pm system.
Are you actually joking? The govement is a democratic system, representing us! If your suggesting some sort of dictatorship, then the only person they care about is thereselves. At least our goverment tries to help us, even if they are not that good at it.

Virgin Mary

24-09-2007, 05:20 PM

lol if you tried to get rid of government the Queen would just dissolve you

-:Undertaker:-

24-09-2007, 06:35 PM

There is already arguments 17 is too young to start driving, so I doubt 16 would ever be made legal. As for drinking at 16, this would just cause such a comotion around Britian.

What, to get our butts kicked and also loose a very loyal allie? Dont think so.

Are you actually joking? The govement is a democratic system, representing us! If your suggesting some sort of dictatorship, then the only person they care about is thereselves. At least our goverment tries to help us, even if they are not that good at it.

Driving at 16 is just as bad as driving at 17, I think making the age limit higher was a stupid move, they said it was because of crashes caused by inexperiance, but if you start driving when 17 for the first time, that's no different from starting at 16.

Corpral Punishment is a must.

Death Penalty is a must.

Hold an EU Refurendum.

Agreed :8

Also I have just read The Sun's campaign for a EU referendum, I have to say I have learned even more about this treaty.

This treaty will..

Make the UK give up it's top seat in the EU
Make the UK have the Euro, if we don't then we face less power
The EU will control our Armed Forces
The EU will be able to dictate our welfare system
The EU will be able to speak on Britains behalf
The EU will have control over our North Sea Gas supplies
The EU superstate will have an army, wonder who'll pay for that one?, Turkey? nah too poor - Oh YES I forgot, WE WILL!
The EU will be able to overturn Westministers decisions
EU police will have the right to arrest you in Britain even if you haven't broke a British law.
Once the Treaty is signed, there's no going back
Once it's signed, the EU will be able to impose even more laws on us, and we won't be able to veto them because our vetos will have been expired.
NATO will have less power
EU will have control over our Justice System
EU will have power over our Taxes
EU will have power over the Bank Of England in some decisionsI don't want to be the 'United States Of Europe', I want to be The United Kingdom, or England. This new EU reminds me of the USSR/Soviet Union, the people had no say and brussels (Russia) controls everything.

I truly believe this is a dictatorship superpower that is forming.

FlyingJesus

24-09-2007, 07:00 PM

The idea has for some time been to create a single Europe, that's not a secret Dan.

-:Undertaker:-

24-09-2007, 07:02 PM

The idea has for some time been to create a single Europe, that's not a secret Dan.

I am just really really like, shocked that it's so many of our powers gone, also the EU will no longer be any good for trading as I have read that they will charge us EXTRA for trading with non EU countrys, so we're losing, losing, losing.

Mandez

24-09-2007, 07:23 PM

Frodo13.

24-09-2007, 09:12 PM

This country is gone to the dogs recently, why cant we stand up for ourselves, if that stupid jock brown signs that treaty thing with the EU
and gives up all our powers, turns over to the EU, well thats just gay :P

But seriously i think if i became PM i would:

- Bring back Corporal and Capital Punishment, people need to know their place, Murderers, Rapists etc should be hung, a Life for a Life basically.
Also these Scals and insolent kids that we have to put up with in school i mean, teachers should be a loud to hit them.
Dont agree with Capital Punishment. I strongly belive all these rapists and murders should have a life time of suffering, not an easy way out, and yeah. Life should be for LIFE! Agree with corporal punishment too, in schools and in prison in my opinion

- National Service for the selected few, Yobs etc.
Agreed.

- Lower Taxes (Obviously)
I think they are at the right level at the moment, but it has been shown lower taxes dont win elections. If they go too low its also less money going into education etc. I think taxes are OK atm, just need to be used better

- This country used to be powerful we should still try and show it of with our impressive army, you cant get better than our British *****, a bigger army is nessicery, try and intimidate these EU *******s so they show us respect.
Disagree. Threatening other countries can cause all sort of wars etc. Britain dont need that right now.

- Pull out of Iraq stop our boys dying.
Agree. Its not our war. I admire what are troops are doing out there, but its time for them to come home

- More trading.
As we are a island, we sort of rely heavily on trading, so yeah, I guess I agree.

- Upgrade our Trident
Disagree. Again can cause all sorts of problems Britain does not need.

- Turn the Isle of Man into a Prison :D
Hmmm, why not? :P Nah, I dont think it would work somehow

- Invade Iceland and build Nuclear Powerplants for us.
Nuclear Power is just an excuse for other countries to invade you imo. I wouldnt want to go down that road.

Tristan

24-09-2007, 09:15 PM

i'd bring back da deff sentence & sentence evri human being 2 it till im da last 1 in da wurld!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HotelUser

25-09-2007, 01:05 AM

i'd bring back da deff sentence & sentence evri human being 2 it till im da last 1 in da wurld!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't think you said da enough in that sentence :P.

Lower legal drinking and driving age to 16.

Make war with Bush boi

Get rid of the Goverment and pm system.

Never go into politics. The USA would obviously dominate over England. Furthermore the drinking age should be going up. If it was lowered to the driving age even more people would drink and drive. As well as other problems.

Corpral Punishment is a must.

Death Penalty is a must.

Hold an EU Refurendum.

More killing and hurting? Just what your country needs! Only this time it's with a twist. The government are doing it!!?!

I think you're now confusing two seperate things. I was commenting on your view on Prince Harry going to Iraq, which is nothing to do with Britain reclaiming Canada.

I said that to show that Britain should not regain commonwealth of Zimbabwe. Or for any place really. As they are more a police force as they are a peace keeping force.

Errr your sweeping statement about me assuming things may have worked in your mind as a way to get around answering to my points, but it really doesn't. Try again please.

I've already answered this question before I believe. I am not being patriotic I am just telling you you can't go up to a commonwealth country such as Canada and reclaim it. Nobody cares about the queen. Nobody knows we fight for her and when we eventually don't nobody will lose any sleep over it.
Lets see.. What other pointless information did you tell me..
"As for holding prisoners, who gave anyone the right to do that? Your .argument is circular and wrong.

So now saying that you want to help your regiment is brutal and equal to a wish to kill as many Iraqis as possible? Don't be so silly."
I can not understand what you're trying to say there. Rephrase it.

Canada wouldn't probably get help they would get help. When the USA wanted to get their independence they beat England. England just gave up. Couldn't be bothered I would suppose.

More on the topic with regards to Canadians fight for the queen, that is a very old law and should be removed. Many old laws are out-dated and are either pointless or not a good idea. For example the one stating that Americans should be allowed to bare arms. For god sakes that was made in something like the 1700s. Back then you needed it really but now it is just so stupid. If they removed it there would probably be less deaths. People couldn't just go around shooting 30 people in a university because they were being bullied. That has happened a few times now. So about the we fight for the queen thing. Do you think any of our soldiers think that when we go off somewhere? Certainly not! They obviously like to fight for their own country. Not for some far off land many of them have never even been to.

-:Undertaker:-

25-09-2007, 04:14 PM

Trident wouldn't cause problems for our countrys, it never has and it keeps us safe.

Frodo13.

25-09-2007, 07:25 PM

Trident wouldn't cause problems for our countrys, it never has and it keeps us safe.

Obvs, but I think that if it was increased/improved, other countries can feel intimidated . The Cold War was basically over the Cuban Missile Crisis, we dont want to go into the same situation with countries in my opinion.

-:Undertaker:-

25-09-2007, 08:28 PM

Obvs, but I think that if it was increased/improved, other countries can feel intimidated . The Cold War was basically over the Cuban Missile Crisis, we dont want to go into the same situation with countries in my opinion.

Trident is about to expire, so if we didn't renew it, then we'd have no syste,. the Cold War was over Nuclear Missles and Capitalism VS Commmunism, there is no other country whom is opposite to us and has a crackpot in power.

Mandez

25-09-2007, 08:49 PM

WHY DOESNT BRITAIN INVADE AFRICA!

we can then turn them all into our soliders and take over the world like...

HotelUser

25-09-2007, 10:12 PM

WHY DOESNT BRITAIN INVADE AFRICA!

we can then turn them all into our soliders and take over the world like...

If you wern't joking you would be the most stupid person on the forums.:D

Frodo13.

26-09-2007, 03:32 PM

Trident is about to expire, so if we didn't renew it, then we'd have no syste,. the Cold War was over Nuclear Missles and Capitalism VS Commmunism, there is no other country whom is opposite to us and has a crackpot in power.

Well if its about to expire then I agree.

Mandez

26-09-2007, 04:25 PM

If you wern't joking you would be the most stupid person on the forums.:D

What do you mean if werent joking.
How the hell would britain take over the world.

HotelUser

26-09-2007, 10:18 PM

If you wern't joking you would be the most stupid person on the forums.:D

What do you mean if werent joking.
How the hell would britain take over the world.

You said it as a joke. I said if you did not as it as a joke than you would be stupid. Can't you read?:rolleyes:

Mandez

01-10-2007, 05:58 PM

it isnt a joke, africa wouldnt stand a chance ******.

Frodo13.

01-10-2007, 06:07 PM

it isnt a joke, africa wouldnt stand a chance ******.

But Africa is a massive continent! We are a tiny island..

FlyingJesus

01-10-2007, 06:15 PM

A tiny island which once controled 3/4 of the world's landmass.. anyway this is well off topic and old, should probably be closed.

Kross619

01-10-2007, 06:22 PM

I'd get Britain and hopefully the world out of the idea that its our fault the earth is warming.

Frodo13.

01-10-2007, 06:36 PM

A tiny island which once controled 3/4 of the world's landmass.. anyway this is well off topic and old, should probably be closed.

And that is any relevence today because...?

FlyingJesus

01-10-2007, 07:20 PM

Just that you made it seem as though you didn't believe a small country could take over Africa, when it's already been done

Mandez

01-10-2007, 07:57 PM

we should take back the falklands

HotelUser

02-10-2007, 12:38 AM

it isnt a joke, africa wouldnt stand a chance ******.

You said,
we can then turn them all into our soliders and take over the world like...

That is not true lol.

laffin

02-10-2007, 07:51 PM

it isnt a joke, africa wouldnt stand a chance ******.

No offence but I think that you would have to be insane to do that. American would turn against us (which I may remind you is the strongest country in the world) and the UN would turn against us, infact a lot of countries would turn against us, it would be like the next world war but we would have no allies and the only reason we won the last war was because the americians steped in. Also the British people would not stand for this and simply rebel.

winner

03-10-2007, 06:06 AM

i think the government should make every1 play habbo or they get the death penalty.

Tom H

03-10-2007, 06:11 AM

I would make sure we didn't give Scotland any independence back as that's where we generate most of our income from (oil & fishing)

-:Undertaker:-

04-10-2007, 04:36 PM

No offence but I think that you would have to be insane to do that. American would turn against us (which I may remind you is the strongest country in the world) and the UN would turn against us, infact a lot of countries would turn against us, it would be like the next world war but we would have no allies and the only reason we won the last war was because the americians steped in. Also the British people would not stand for this and simply rebel.

Insane?

It is actually a clever idea for us. Think about it, ever since we left Africa has got worse and worse, so if we controlled Africa we would benefit from the money it generates and we could also build their countrys up just like we did with South Africa, however you could say they chucked us out so let them stay like that.

Also there would not be a war, because America wouldn't attack us, because if they did they'd have 180 Nuclear Missles pointing at their major cities and the same with any other countrys.

So I don't really know about Africa, I think we could have a vote for the African people asking whether they want to be saved or not.

I would make sure we didn't give Scotland any independence back as that's where we generate most of our income from (oil & fishing)

The North Sea Gas is the thing that generates our wealth, without it the Kingdom would sink into debt, so England would keep that as England holds westminister.

Not that it mattera anyway I guess, because if Brown signs the treaty the Gas fields will belong to the EU not us.