Soldier put behind the unemployed, criminals and asylum seekers on housing register

[-:Undertaker:-]

Undertaker, put thieves in prison permanently? No wonder you support UKIP. You and UKIP just think up of crap. Utter crap. Crap which will never be implemented. Half of your ideas are just dreams which will never happen as its not possible. I think majority of the country probably disagrees with UKIP or they would be in power. Fact is, majority of the country realises they are a pile of crap with false promises, hence they are no where near to getting in power. You love how people do quizzes and get UKIP as their top choice, but that's because UKIP is a dream party. Its not realistic. Do you not wonder why they are never going to be in power?

If I was to create a party now, I can come up with policies which every one in this country would love and when they do those quizzes, my party will be on top every time. Fact is, people realise its false promises. UKIP say what the hell they want as they never have to worry about implementing it.

I never said put them in prison permanently, the simple fact is that I want them in prison while they are a threat. I dont see putting criminals in prison as utter crap, I see that as a good policy and as do most people I suspect (you could do a poll if you dispute it). As for UKIP, UKIP is the only party talking seriously about budget cutbacks;- I know you dont follow it much hence why you have no idea what you are talking about most of the time, but this government and the Tories are arguing over a £6 billion cut - you are being conned.

The debt stands at over £1 TRILLION yet all the main parties are talking about is the sum of £6 billion, we pay more right now on debt interest than we spend on the education system/the armed forces. UKIP has followed the advice of the taxpayers alliance and found over £50 billion worth of cutbacks just in government waste along with identifying that most government departments need a cut of 1/3 to avert financial catatrophe in this country. So Saurav, i'd like a reponse to who the real joke is.

- Putting criminals behind bars (UKIP policy) - is that a joke?
- Cutting government waste and budgets to avert debt crisis (UKIP policy) - is that a joke?

As for UKIP, its trapped in the FPTP system and will struggle to get anywhere under this system however they do have broad support as they beat both Labour and the Liberal Democrats in the last PR election this country has, coming second nationally and I am sure they beat Labour in half the English regions as well. I'd like to ask you Saurav, what policies of UKIPs are unrealistic and cannot be implemented?

As usual we are on the UKIP topic but if you are going to say something then you are going to have to back it up, so answer my questions in bold please. (and no, dont ignore them as you usually atttempt to do). I am getting bored of you constantly slamming UKIP but with no substance behind what you are saying - so maybe its time you tell me UKIP policies which are unrealistic and Labour policies which are realistic - now can you at least give that a go?

[Catzsy]

I never said put them in prison permanently, the simple fact is that I want them in prison while they are a threat. I dont see putting criminals in prison as utter crap, I see that as a good policy and as do most people I suspect (you could do a poll if you dispute it). As for UKIP, UKIP is the only party talking seriously about budget cutbacks;- I know you dont follow it much hence why you have no idea what you are talking about most of the time, but this government and the Tories are arguing over a £6 billion cut - you are being conned.

The debt stands at over £1 TRILLION yet all the main parties are talking about is the sum of £6 billion, we pay more right now on debt interest than we spend on the education system/the armed forces. UKIP has followed the advice of the taxpayers alliance and found over £50 billion worth of cutbacks just in government waste along with identifying that most government departments need a cut of 1/3 to avert financial catatrophe in this country. So Saurav, i'd like a reponse to who the real joke is.

- Putting criminals behind bars (UKIP policy) - is that a joke?
- Cutting government waste and budgets to avert debt crisis (UKIP policy) - is that a joke?

As for UKIP, its trapped in the FPTP system and will struggle to get anywhere under this system however they do have broad support as they beat both Labour and the Liberal Democrats in the last PR election this country has, coming second nationally and I am sure they beat Labour in half the English regions as well. I'd like to ask you Saurav, what policies of UKIPs are unrealistic and cannot be implemented?

As usual we are on the UKIP topic but if you are going to say something then you are going to have to back it up, so answer my questions in bold please. (and no, dont ignore them as you usually atttempt to do). I am getting bored of you constantly slamming UKIP but with no substance behind what you are saying - so maybe its time you tell me UKIP policies which are unrealistic and Labour policies which are realistic - now can you at least give that a go?

Well I think if their manifesto was costed then they would be taken a lot more seriously e.g. how much would it cost to build more prisons to keep all the criminals in?

[Tintinnabulate]

I never said put them in prison permanently, the simple fact is that I want them in prison while they are a threat. I dont see putting criminals in prison as utter crap, I see that as a good policy and as do most people I suspect (you could do a poll if you dispute it). As for UKIP, UKIP is the only party talking seriously about budget cutbacks;- I know you dont follow it much hence why you have no idea what you are talking about most of the time, but this government and the Tories are arguing over a £6 billion cut - you are being conned.

The debt stands at over £1 TRILLION yet all the main parties are talking about is the sum of £6 billion, we pay more right now on debt interest than we spend on the education system/the armed forces. UKIP has followed the advice of the taxpayers alliance and found over £50 billion worth of cutbacks just in government waste along with identifying that most government departments need a cut of 1/3 to avert financial catatrophe in this country. So Saurav, i'd like a reponse to who the real joke is.

- Putting criminals behind bars (UKIP policy) - is that a joke?
- Cutting government waste and budgets to avert debt crisis (UKIP policy) - is that a joke?

As for UKIP, its trapped in the FPTP system and will struggle to get anywhere under this system however they do have broad support as they beat both Labour and the Liberal Democrats in the last PR election this country has, coming second nationally and I am sure they beat Labour in half the English regions as well. I'd like to ask you Saurav, what policies of UKIPs are unrealistic and cannot be implemented?

As usual we are on the UKIP topic but if you are going to say something then you are going to have to back it up, so answer my questions in bold please. (and no, dont ignore them as you usually atttempt to do). I am getting bored of you constantly slamming UKIP but with no substance behind what you are saying - so maybe its time you tell me UKIP policies which are unrealistic and Labour policies which are realistic - now can you at least give that a go?

If they cutting costs plan was so great and realistic, all the parties would have stolen half of their ideas.

[Hitman]

Thinking that's what she meant is silly. A banned user Mint said there is an area in Manchester full off Indians and Pakistanis. It doesn't mean no white person lives there.

Um, no, your reply is silly. What she posted and what you posted are very different. I will now point out why and how I thought she meant that with good reason. Before I go into I'd just like to ask why you drag that up when it's not directly related to the topic at hand? Not got much to say so you're picking at small things?

OK, the quote again:

there are certain areas where English people have taken over the and the spanish people won't live there

She is saying there are areas in Spain where the English have taken over - and the Spanish will not live there because of this. If there are no Spanish living there (because they won't - refusing to) then what I said is correct - I said just that. So what's the problem buddy?

What you said (the quote by "Mint") is totally different. That is saying Manchester is FULL of Pakistanis and Indians and it doesn't even mention white people at all. All that is saying is that there are many Pakistanis and Indians - there could be many white people too.

The person I quoted had subjects A and B - A being the English, B being the Spanish. It's saying subject B will not live in certain areas where subject A have 'taken over'. Your quote from Mint is saying that Manchester is full of subject A.

Your quote is NOT saying "Manchester is full of Pakistanis and Indians and white people won't live there" - the key word is WON'T - if they won't live there then it means they're not bloody there. My head is hurting at how ******ed this is for you not to understand. :S Seriously.

I really don't know why I bother posting here when people fail to see even the simple things like that and then back it up with a stupid quote that doesn't even mean the same thing.

If you are going to reply with a load of drivel that does not make sense then don't waste your time, however I will read and reply to one that realises you're the silly one.

[Jordy]

Undertaker, put thieves in prison permanently? No wonder you support UKIP. You and UKIP just think up of crap. Utter crap. Crap which will never be implemented. Half of your ideas are just dreams which will never happen as its not possible.

Of course it couldn't be implemented till lots more prisons are built but many countries throughout the world permanently lock up persistent offenders, you should give people a chance first to change, but if they don't, lock them up.[/quote]

I think majority of the country probably disagrees with UKIP or they would be in power. Fact is, majority of the country realises they are a pile of crap with false promises, hence they are no where near to getting in power.
You love how people do quizzes and get UKIP as their top choice, but that's because UKIP is a dream party. Its not realistic. Do you not wonder why they are never going to be in power?

If I was to create a party now, I can come up with policies which every one in this country would love and when they do those quizzes, my party will be on top every time. Fact is, people realise its false promises. UKIP say what the hell they want as they never have to worry about implementing it.

UKIP is a pressure group, while it would like to get into power it's much more interested on making an impact on mainstream politics and hoping the parties will adopt their policies, or form an agreement with the Conservatives. As you probably know, I am a Conservatives supporter but believe it or not, I agree with UKIP on the vast majority of things. I personally think it's a bit of a wasted vote atm too and I also see it as helping Labour by voting UKIP so that's why I continue to support the Conservatives for now (I also have confidence in David Cameron turning this country around), but you can agree with a party without voting for it.

His wife was pregnant at the age of 15/16 :S and she already has 3 kids. Maybe it would have been better to wait before having kids.

Perhaps our Labour government should of done something about this considering we have the highest teen birth-rates in Europe. They've had 13 years.

But police and firefighters also put their lives at risk.

Police & Firefighters get a better wage than most, I doubt any live in council houses. There is not the same element of risk, the number of police & firefighters dying each year is less than 10 if you add them together I imagine, there is far more deaths in the military unfortunately. I also consider representing your country during a war an incredibly honourable think to do and should be rewarded by the state accordingly, especially as they will have nothing to go back to usually.

If they cutting costs plan was so great and realistic, all the parties would have stolen half of their ideas.

Their ideas rely on things such as leaving the EU. If Labour is so great why does anyone vote Conservatives? Politics is all about trying to convince people your ideas are great, it is anything but black and white.

[-:Undertaker:-]

If they cutting costs plan was so great and realistic, all the parties would have stolen half of their ideas.

Let me put it this way, the national debt stands at over £1 trillion and the Labour Party, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats are arguing over a £6 billion increase in NI - that is unrealistic my friend, and to spend more on debt interest as we do now than we do on our armed forces or education system is not only unrealistic, but damn right stupid and not one of the main parties is proposing the drastic cuts that we need. It will be hard, it will be very very tough but it needs to be done.

We have not got a choice, look at Greece or Britain back in the 1970s.

[Tintinnabulate]

Um, no, your reply is silly. What she posted and what you posted are very different. I will now point out why and how I thought she meant that with good reason. Before I go into I'd just like to ask why you drag that up when it's not directly related to the topic at hand? Not got much to say so you're picking at small things?

OK, the quote again:

She is saying there are areas in Spain where the English have taken over - and the Spanish will not live there because of this. If there are no Spanish living there (because they won't - refusing to) then what I said is correct - I said just that. So what's the problem buddy?

What you said (the quote by "Mint") is totally different. That is saying Manchester is FULL of Pakistanis and Indians and it doesn't even mention white people at all. All that is saying is that there are many Pakistanis and Indians - there could be many white people too.

The person I quoted had subjects A and B - A being the English, B being the Spanish. It's saying subject B will not live in certain areas where subject A have 'taken over'. Your quote from Mint is saying that Manchester is full of subject A.

Your quote is NOT saying "Manchester is full of Pakistanis and Indians and white people won't live there" - the key word is WON'T - if they won't live there then it means they're not bloody there. My head is hurting at how ******ed this is for you not to understand. :S Seriously.

I really don't know why I bother posting here when people fail to see even the simple things like that and then back it up with a stupid quote that doesn't even mean the same thing.

If you are going to reply with a load of drivel that does not make sense then don't waste your time, however I will read and reply to one that realises you're the silly one.

Firstly, wow, you get so worked up its hilarious.

I guess you lack the ability to read sentences properly.

What you said (the quote by "Mint") is totally different. That is saying Manchester is FULL of Pakistanis and Indians and it doesn't even mention white people at all. All that is saying is that there are many Pakistanis and Indians - there could be many white people too.

However I said,

Thinking that's what she meant is silly. A banned user Mint said there is an area in Manchester full off Indians and Pakistanis. It doesn't mean no white person lives there.

I thought it's common sense what I meant. I guess some people lack them here.

*REMOVED*

Edited by iAdam (Forum Super Moderator); Please do not be rude to other forum members.

[Hitman]

Firstly, wow, you get so worked up its hilarious.

I guess you lack the ability to read sentences properly.



However I said,



I thought it's common sense what I meant. I guess some people lack them here.

*REMOVED*

Edited by iAdam (Forum Super Moderator); Please do not be rude to other forum members.

OK, whether you said area or not does not matter.

Your quote is saying there are lots of Pakistanis and Indians in an area of Manchester and because of this it doesn't mean that there are no white people.

Tash's quote is saying that there are loads of British in an area of Spain and no Spanish people are there. If she had simply said "there are loads of British in an area of Spain" then sure, maybe there would be Spanish there too, but she said the Spanish won't live there which is saying there are only British and no Spanish there, which is wrong because it's not like that at all.

I understand what you are saying, but Tash clearly said that it's an area where there are loads of British and no Spanish, because they won't live there.

Unfortunately I didn't get to see the rude remark you posted, but I won't stoop down and return it.

[Tintinnabulate]

OK, whether you said area or not does not matter.

Your quote is saying there are lots of Pakistanis and Indians in an area of Manchester and because of this it doesn't mean that there are no white people.

Tash's quote is saying that there are loads of British in an area of Spain and no Spanish people are there. If she had simply said "there are loads of British in an area of Spain" then sure, maybe there would be Spanish there too, but she said the Spanish won't live there which is saying there are only British and no Spanish there, which is wrong because it's not like that at all.

I understand what you are saying, but Tash clearly said that it's an area where there are loads of British and no Spanish, because they won't live there.

Unfortunately I didn't get to see the rude remark you posted, but I won't stoop down and return it.

It wasn't a rude comment. It was merely stating you look foolish.
And I thought its common sense my post pretty much meant "Asians live in that area so white people dont" as I was defending Tash's posts, otherwise my post would have no meaning. I apologise for not quoting the whole post, but I honestly didnt think I would need to as most people have enough common sense to guess.

[Hitman]

It wasn't a rude comment. It was merely stating you look foolish.
And I thought its common sense my post pretty much meant "Asians live in that area so white people dont" as I was defending Tash's posts, otherwise my post would have no meaning. I apologise for not quoting the whole post, but I honestly didnt think I would need to as most people have enough common sense to guess.

The moderator seemed to think it was rude. Anyway, it does not bother me... these are just messages on a forum. I give up explaining, I could spend hours writing replies and getting nowhere. At the end of the day there are not areas that are full of British and no Spanish.

Are you Saurav? You seemed alright in the PM's we exchanged...