Quizzes & Puzzles31 mins ago
Why Should We Spend £600M On Third World Flood Defences, When We Have A Flood Problem Of Our Own?
64 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Chilldoubt
I'm on the right flank of Labour, looking at through the Conservative's patio doors.
My hope is that the right wing of the Tory party split off and head off to UKIP. That might be the tipping point for me.
That and Theresa May replacing David Cameron.
Or perhaps I just find the Conservatives more appealing now compared to UKIP?
I'm on the right flank of Labour, looking at through the Conservative's patio doors.
My hope is that the right wing of the Tory party split off and head off to UKIP. That might be the tipping point for me.
That and Theresa May replacing David Cameron.
Or perhaps I just find the Conservatives more appealing now compared to UKIP?
I suppose it all comes down to what you would like the nation's wealth spent on. Personally, so long as the government feels the need to take around 45% of the nation's income to fund its programmes I would prefer those programmes to concentrate exclusively on benefits to the UK. What is certainly absurd is for the government to borrow money (when the loans are serviced by the UK taxpayer) only to give that money to people overseas.
It's certainly true that floods in Bangladesh (which occur near enough annually and which leads me to conclude that the area is not fit for humans to live in) cause far more problems than those on the Somerset levels. But people living in Somerset pay UK taxes whilst those in Bangladesh do not. So whilst a conflict exists for the funds to address the problem it is my view that Somerset should get first shout and there should not be the sort of prevarication among politicians arguing if it should be provided and from where the money should come.
If the government really feels the need to legislate to determine how much of other people's money should be given to foreigners I'd far rather they define the amount given as a percentage of tax surplus rather than GDP. At least then they would not have to borrow cash to show their munificence abroad and when we have no surplus there would be no overseas aid.
It's certainly true that floods in Bangladesh (which occur near enough annually and which leads me to conclude that the area is not fit for humans to live in) cause far more problems than those on the Somerset levels. But people living in Somerset pay UK taxes whilst those in Bangladesh do not. So whilst a conflict exists for the funds to address the problem it is my view that Somerset should get first shout and there should not be the sort of prevarication among politicians arguing if it should be provided and from where the money should come.
If the government really feels the need to legislate to determine how much of other people's money should be given to foreigners I'd far rather they define the amount given as a percentage of tax surplus rather than GDP. At least then they would not have to borrow cash to show their munificence abroad and when we have no surplus there would be no overseas aid.
So either way sp, you'll be supposrting a party that wants to stay in the EU. I don't.
Furthermore, I've never voted in my life in any general election but will do so next May. Why would that be?
Why have a bunch of 'swivel eyed loons' gone from whipping boys to serious contenders in the space of 18 months? What is it about them that is so appealing?
http://
So many like me who were apathetic about politics until recently have suddenly found a party that is addressing serious and pressing concerns, those of the ordinary guy in the street. I know it's getting repetitive but next May will in all probability be the most historic in British political history. Too many have had enough of the status quo and will be making their feelings known.
Furthermore, I've never voted in my life in any general election but will do so next May. Why would that be?
Why have a bunch of 'swivel eyed loons' gone from whipping boys to serious contenders in the space of 18 months? What is it about them that is so appealing?
http://
So many like me who were apathetic about politics until recently have suddenly found a party that is addressing serious and pressing concerns, those of the ordinary guy in the street. I know it's getting repetitive but next May will in all probability be the most historic in British political history. Too many have had enough of the status quo and will be making their feelings known.
-- answer removed --
Svejk
Thanks for your list Svejk, most interesting, I could have a guess at the reason, but it would not be quite PC.
Like you I can't understand why sp could not get my point, since it was him who used the old chestnut "it's all about oil" but then he is not alone in this many other ABers think that this is the reason for most things.
Thanks for your list Svejk, most interesting, I could have a guess at the reason, but it would not be quite PC.
Like you I can't understand why sp could not get my point, since it was him who used the old chestnut "it's all about oil" but then he is not alone in this many other ABers think that this is the reason for most things.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.