Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@terry wrote:
All I want is for you to tell me why east European migrants are beneficial to this country’s economy.
TerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerryTerry
You drew the lines remember, ‘we’ are the emotional clique, all ‘we’ are here for is to smugly pat each other on the back!!
Reason!???? We don’t need no stinkin’ reasons!
And didn’t you indicate earlier that jen-jen was not worth the bother? So why are you bothering her? We’ve got some important emoting to do! The future of the PC Brigade depends on our triumvirate!
You on the other hand, are rational, factual, and all things in heaven and earth appear bound by your imagination. I might be wrong about that, but your authoritative style makes an impression.
Unequal states I know, but as you have indicated that ‘we’ are less capable of reason or logic, perhaps before asking one of ‘us’ to justify our assertions, you could demonstrate more clearly, perhaps with footnotes, what an acceptable justification looks like.
I won’t hold my breath, because I have a medical condition that makes breathing essential to life. And I won’t hold it against you if you fail to do so, you’re only human after all . . . .
@terry wrote:
@wordsworth60 wrote:
@terry wrote:
I have sincere reservations about your ability to grasp most situations . . .
My advice to you is to go away and do a bit of research before you start getting into serious discussions.And please, let me know (in your own time) .Hey Tezzarolio!
I was going to lambast you for mocking my clique-buddy so sarcastically and patronisingly, but then I remember that can’t be right because you don’t like personal attacks, and you’re open-minded to debate so it must just be friendly banter – you misleading scamparoonie!
At least that saves jen_jen the trouble of pointless research, because you don’t intend ‘knowing’ anything other than what you know already, just just wanted to send her off on a wild goose chase – you good-humoured prankster you!!!!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:Deflecting away from the real debate (as you have) is probably a wise decision. You can’t fight a battle without bullets.
Terrotactile! My old Kemosabe!
If I used bullets that wouldn’t be a fair fight. You don’t use real bullets, you never open your sources to scrutiny and you wander aimlessly around the numerical hinterland throwing around big numbers in as if no one here can divide by ten.
I’ve not been able to find any record of numbers as high as two million reflecting the impact of recent total immigration, never mind eastern european immigration – are you including every eastern european ever to enter the country? have you factored for those who leave? If these are trustworthy estimates, what are the assumptions behind them. If you can show how my research is deficient, rather than just make bland assertions then this might look like combat, but really Terry, you’re just joshing aren’t you?
A tenner says you never will, but nntil then Terry, let’s keep it light,
Don’t make me serious, you don’t like me when I’m serious . . . . . . . .
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
@terry wrote:
I have sincere reservations about your ability to grasp most situations . . .
My advice to you is to go away and do a bit of research before you start getting into serious discussions.And please, let me know (in your own time) .Hey Tezzarolio!
I was going to lambast you for mocking my clique-buddy so sarcastically and patronisingly, but then I remember that can’t be right because you don’t like personal attacks, and you’re open-minded to debate so it must just be friendly banter – you misleading scamparoonie!
At least that saves jen_jen the trouble of pointless research, because you don’t intend ‘knowing’ anything other than what you know already, just just wanted to send her off on a wild goose chase – you good-humoured prankster you!!!!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:@pepsi wrote:
@wordsworth60 wrote:
@wordsworth60 wrote:
Pepsi, I fink I luv you . . . . .
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Sorry, I’m emotional and impressed by eruditeness . . . . . . .
You dandy ! …..
:lol:
Why pepsi! you’ve ruffled my ruffles!!
@wordsworth60 wrote:
Pepsi, I fink I luv you . . . . .
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Sorry, I’m emotional and impressed by eruditeness . . . . . . .
@pepsi wrote:
“Now in modern English, the word’ manners’ means outward behavior. Of one who knows and observes the etiquette of good society and behaves politely, we say `he has good manner’s; while one who is rude and rough and clownish in his behavior, is said to have bad manners. In this sense we might say that manners make a gentleman; for gentlemanliness, in the ordinary meaning of the word, consists largely in correct, courteous and considerate behavior towards others. But mere politeness scarcely makes a man; for many a so called `gentleman’ is at heart selfish and mean, cowardly and weak. What, then, did Bishop Wickham mean when he said, `Manners Maketh man’?”
The word `manners’ had a much deeper meaning than it has today.
It did not denote merely polite behavior, but that what we should call good moral conduct, or morality. And the old Bishop means that it is good moral conduct based on sound moral principles that made boys and men, men. This shows that founder of Winchester School and New College, Oxford, did not regard education as merely mental training and the acquisition of knowledge, but especially as moral training. He wanted his school and his collage to produce true men-good, honest, fearless, God fearing men.
In other words he recognized that the only thing that really mattered in life was character. Wealth, rank, fine clothes, polite manners, learning-none of these things alone or together can make a man; it is only character that can do that. A man of character, however poor, low-born or ignorant he may be, is more of a man than millionaires, princes and scholars of no character.
Pepsi, I fink I luv you . . . . .
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
@jen_jen wrote:
Maybe the non-indigenous parents will be a positive influence on the indigenous by example rather than being the disaster waiting to bring this country to its knees.
As an aside I find the notion of ‘indigenous” in the UK quite interesting as I believe the closest we get would be anyone pure Welsh, pushed away from most notable invasion points and trading points to the East. However even that is blurred because records of any invasions of what is now Wales might not have been preserved.
Anyway, if you look within more cosmopolitan cities you will find the schools, churches and other institutions with unrestricted entry maintained by people of relatively recent immigrant stock. Professions which truly promote and recruit on merit tend to be more varied although traditions of class and external social conditions make those rare.
Indeed the settlement in some economically declining areas of immigrants holding Middle Class values has helped stall and even halt that decline to some extent and sustain standards which might well have slumped had the middle class exodus into the developing suburbs been the only major demographic factor.
Unfortunately British culture – especially in media and politics – is still burdened with the association between immigration per se and deprivation, often struggling to recognise the social and economic diversity within minority ethnic communities.
@simplysu wrote:
You should see the one of me in my brownie uniform … yes, yes … my Mum thought it was an amazing idea
Does the uniform still fit . . . . .?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
@simplysu wrote:
Was it up your fundamental orifice?
You’re kinky enough to be posh Su
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Yes Anc, but then the landed gentry didn’t depend on cash for their power, that’s why they held the developing bougoisie in such disdain in Victorian times, while having to marry off their progeny to the nouveau riche in order to avoid penury.
And yes, Manners maketh man, but look who said it . . . .
You don’t want your yeomanry too well mannered if they need to be out in the fields gathering the harvest before the rains come (from which you’ll take your taxes of course). And you certainly don’t want them too well mannered if they’re going to stand in a field ‘sticking it up’ some foreigner who won’t let you take over their territory – you just want them compliant.
Now, where did I put my copy off The Red Flag, I know I was singing it a moment ago . . . . .
