In the news today....

[UFGN]

Ladies and Gentleman.

I present to you .......... a UFGN meltdown.

You see he promotes this "I know what I'm talking about" persona, so obviously when he's been so blatantly caught out talking complete bollocks he doesn't take it very well.

As for your weak attempt to divert, who runs the country doesn't run the local council who makes all the local decisions and uses the funds they get from the local populace and Gov't.

Labour make the decisions in the areas their MP's are head of, the council run the borough's you doughnut.

......... you'd of been better off with a simple "Sorry I made a mistake" and owned up to it like a man.

to blame local councils OF ANY PARTY for the poverty within them is just shocking.

Quote me you pr*ck.

I simply refuted your eroneous and disengenous lie that Grimsby and Burnley are Conservative areas and are thus responsible for their state.

I present to you, DG talking out of his arse and desperately trying to avoid adding any substance to what he hoped would be a bs throwaway comment. All the best areas are conservative and all the worst ones Labour.... jesus christ And he calls me a f***ing radical?

I'm going to try again. Maybe you could pull your head out of your arse and answer

How can local councils make a significant difference to their areas when central government set budgets, taxation etc etc? Why are you blaming Labour for these areas being bad..... (oh yes you are)..... when local councils have such little power to raise funds, bring in jobs, fight crime, house their residents?

By the way, you said

Labour make the decisions in the areas their MP's are head of

I'd love to hear more all about how MPs run their local areas. Maybe you could explain it to me?

[DiamondGooner]

First of all if you need me to explain how a local council is repsonible for all of that and how the budget is spent, managed, planning permission, turning the town into somewhere attractive and business friendly then this convo is at a dead end.
"Councillors play an important role in planning, running, monitoring, and developing council business." statement from the net.

Secondly my simple statement was ......... "all the best areas in England are under Conservative Local Gov't"

It was a simple and true statement, you wanted to argue a fact and you tried it by giving that ridiculous list of 10 of the most deprived areas and trying to fob off some of them onto the Con's when they are Labour run for decades up until last year.

I didn't argue anything else, I said nothing of the amount of budget they recieve or anything, you added all that in because you lost the argument.

[Pat Rice in Short Shorts]

UFGN, clam down dude. Have a conversation. That requires some consideration of the others person's points and thus some self control.

Consider this fact that expands on DGs point. Low income areas (crappy) occur across the globe. In democracies most are indeed run and have been for decades by elected liberal or even socialist representatives that promise the moon and always blame the "right" while corruption is rampant. This is a fact. Yet nothing changes, things get worse in most cases. Crappy to me means high crime, gardens filled with old fridges,bags of old trash and couches, crumbling homes...all the things we see and know to be from Indian reservations to Baltimore to DG's Hackney or my Penge .

Perhaps we should consider that the citizens of those places DO have the intellect and ability to change their own communities? What exactly is holding back people from cleaning things up? To stop being the consumers of the drugs that run those local economies (other than welfare)? It comes down to personal and community responsibility and generations of broken families and lack of ambition of many to change things. The initiatives I applaud and think work FAR better are things like charter schools, community based mentoring, anti gang programs, community based policing policies.

Blindly blaming others before looking inward, and having the race baiters, the provocateurs reinforcing the victimhood does not work. It never will. It leads to the violence and class/race warfare as we have seen in London, Paris, Rio, NY and countless other places.


Do these areas need a hand up to start positive results...yup. But all too often simply pumping money at the problem reinforces the reasons not to.

[LMAO]

UFGN, clam down dude. Have a conversation. That requires some consideration of the others person's points and thus some self control.

Consider this fact that expands on DGs point. Low income areas (crappy) occur across the globe. In democracies most are indeed run and have been for decades by elected liberal or even socialist representatives that promise the moon and always blame the "right" while corruption is rampant. This is a fact. Yet nothing changes, things get worse in most cases. Crappy to me means high crime, gardens filled with old fridges,bags of old trash and couches, crumbling homes...all the things we see and know to be from Indian reservations to Baltimore to DG's Hackney or my Penge .

Perhaps we should consider that the citizens of those places DO have the intellect and ability to change their own communities? What exactly is holding back people from cleaning things up? To stop being the consumers of the drugs that run those local economies (other than welfare)? It comes down to personal and community responsibility and generations of broken families and lack of ambition of many to change things. The initiatives I applaud and think work FAR better are things like charter schools, community based mentoring, anti gang programs, community based policing policies.

Blindly blaming others before looking inward, and having the race baiters, the provocateurs reinforcing the victimhood does not work. It never will. It leads to the violence and class/race warfare as we have seen in London, Paris, Rio, NY and countless other places.


Do these areas need a hand up to start positive results...yup. But all too often simply pumping money at the problem reinforces the reasons not to.

No, it's not a fact. It's easy to cherry pick a handful low income areas and blame liberal policy, but that's lazy thinking.

What about rural Kentucky, Ohio, Oklahoma, Alabama, Mississippi, West Virginia, Oregon, etc.? Those areas are run down, high in welfare recipients, high in poverty, full of corruption from local politicians, and have rampant drug use, yet they're run by conservative policy. But you never bring those areas up because it's easier to bash liberal policy than it is to actually get down to the root causes.

Though, while we're cherry picking to push narratives, liberal policies also result in a high quality of living. In the top 10 richest counties in America by median household income, most (60%) are liberal: Loudoun County, Fairfax County, and Arlington County in Virginia (#1, #3, and #6, respectively), Howard County in Maryland (#2), and Santa Clara County and San Mateo County in California (#5 and #8, respectively). All have county boards that are fully controlled by liberal ideology or have supermajority liberal control. All home to some of the best public school districts in the country, low crime, high QoL.

Capital absolutely has a lot to do with an area's success; it's the allocation of resources that's the problem.

[Pat Rice in Short Shorts]

As you might notice I said most which is true. And I am speaking of local elected leadership. The politics of poverty stricken areas are exploitative and cynical because we have allowed a dependency culture to be created. So we have the generationally poor attracted to promises of free stuff that does nothing to advance their lives. It is a sick trap.

But lets expand what you point out...the same principles apply. Individuals make their choices in life to give into the cards they were dealt or they follow the harder, but better path in life. If you wait around for politicians to fix things good luck.

Yes there are liberal governments in CA, OR, WA and NY...and that is why these folks are moving out. The policies suck.

[LMAO]

As you might notice I said most which is true. And I am speaking of local elected leadership. The politics of poverty stricken areas are exploitative and cynical because we have allowed a dependency culture to be created. So we have the generationally poor attracted to promises of free stuff that does nothing to advance their lives. It is a sick trap.

But lets expand what you point out...the same principles apply. Individuals make their choices in life to give into the cards they were dealt or they follow the harder, but better path in life. If you wait around for politicians to fix things good luck.

Yes there are liberal governments in CA, OR, WA and NY...and that is why these folks are moving out. The policies suck.

I saw the "most", and I said it wasn't fact. I'd wager it's closer to an even 50-50 for which ideology is responsible. And yes, I was also speaking of local leadership. My point is that it's not strictly liberal or conservative ideology or policy that's the root cause of low income and high crime areas, and claiming one or the other is the primary reason is intellectual laziness.

I agree that there is a personal responsibility element to it, but sometimes, the universe doesn't care. You can be the most determined worker in the world, but if you don't have the brains to be a neurosurgeon or a data scientist (or even a CPA ), or the body to handle laying concrete or working on an oil rig, or a rap sheet, then all the hard work in the world isn't going to elevate you out of poverty or the extreme end of lower-middle class. And I think that's where our worldviews differ (correct me if I'm wrong).

Washington is the third fastest growing state, Oregon eighth, and California is in the top half (twenty-second). Only New York from your list has negative growth. So no, seems like other than NY, people are moving in.

[Pat Rice in Short Shorts]

As you might notice I said most which is true. And I am speaking of local elected leadership. The politics of poverty stricken areas are exploitative and cynical because we have allowed a dependency culture to be created. So we have the generationally poor attracted to promises of free stuff that does nothing to advance their lives. It is a sick trap.

But lets expand what you point out...the same principles apply. Individuals make their choices in life to give into the cards they were dealt or they follow the harder, but better path in life. If you wait around for politicians to fix things good luck.

Yes there are liberal governments in CA, OR, WA and NY...and that is why these folks are moving out. The policies suck.

I saw the "most", and I said it wasn't fact. I'd wager it's closer to an even 50-50 for which ideology is responsible. And yes, I was also speaking of local leadership. My point is that it's not strictly liberal or conservative ideology or policy that's the root cause of low income and high crime areas, and claiming one or the other is the primary reason is intellectual laziness.

I agree that there is a personal responsibility element to it, but sometimes, the universe doesn't care. You can be the most determined worker in the world, but if you don't have the brains to be a neurosurgeon or a data scientist (or even a CPA ), or the body to handle laying concrete or working on an oil rig, or a rap sheet, then all the hard work in the world isn't going to elevate you out of poverty or the extreme end of lower-middle class. And I think that's where our worldviews differ (correct me if I'm wrong).

Washington is the third fastest growing state, Oregon eighth, and California is in the top half (twenty-second). Only New York from your list has negative growth. So no, seems like other than NY, people are moving in.

It's about doing the best with the ability one has. It is about choices. People inherently know the difference between right and wrong, just that the latter path is the easier. Having a rap sheet is by choice. That should not preclude second chances.

https://bja.ojp.gov/funding/opportuniti ... 2020-17110

[Pat Rice in Short Shorts]

Anyone else notice that about half the sports coverage on Sky Sports News is dedicated to SJW or victimized athletes?

[Phil71]

Anyone else notice that about half the sports coverage on Sky Sports News is dedicated to SJW or victimized athletes?

Yep.

I don't watch the sports news any more.

[Pat Rice in Short Shorts]

Anyone else notice that about half the sports coverage on Sky Sports News is dedicated to SJW or victimized athletes?

Yep.

I don't watch the sports news any more.

They need to "learn" from ESPN. But then ESPN has not learned from ESPN.

[Pat Rice in Short Shorts]

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL3N ... keZW7kVe4&

Couple questions...who saves them? Prostitutes?

And who needs a job cleaning them?

Telling they are reformed on a #2 pencil! (Made that bit up)

[Pat Rice in Short Shorts]

https://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/lak ... 74498.html

Back to the 70s! But then a few years back my wife was caring for a quadriplegic neighbor on her own time after he hit a moose on the road. The SEIU got wind of it because his agency nurse complained. First they made her join the care agency so she simply gave her meager wages to the guy. Then they demanded she join their union. She told them to f**k off. The next week we had two of them harassing us at out home. Then the next weekend. Got the sheriff to charge them with trespass but their union got the charges dismissed with a warning.

[Phil71]

A police officer has been shot dead by a man who was being detained at Croydon Custody Centre in south London in the early hours of this morning...

A 23-year-old man was detained by officers at the scene. He was also taken to hospital with a gunshot wound and remains in a critical condition. It is believed that he shot himself, as police say none of their weapons were discharged.

The Telegraph's Crime Correspondent Martin Evans understands that the suspect may be of Sri Lankan origin.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... t-updates/

[LMAO]

Wait, what?

How does a person being detained in a facility have a firearm? Did he keister it?

[Rockape]

Just saw Kylie on the ITV news just now.......she looks different, so must have had work done.

Her eyes look too close together!