 | Forum
Reply | Remain With or Leave the EU
at 12:58 16 Jun 2016
Nothing of the sort. I was just pointing out that Nice_to_Michu was correct in that 5% unemployment is considered to be the natural rate of unemployment/full employment level which is ideal. |
| Forum
Reply | Remain With or Leave the EU
at 12:42 16 Jun 2016
I find it rather odd how people who are distrustful of politicians, and voting leave, are willing to ignore expert advice in favour of politicians who they happen to agree with in this referendum. |
| Forum
Reply | Farage
at 21:35 4 Apr 2015
Having studied health economics briefly in one of my modules last year, immigration never came up in the lectures or the readings as an issue with regards to the NHS.
In fact, if anything an ageing population is the biggest concern in terms of demographics. Immigration doesn't even register as a major issue. Rising cost of treatments and people living longer are the main issues that NHS costs keep rising. To use quote from a textbook about health economics, "There is an irony here. When we consider both curative and preventative medicine, ultimately the more successful you are the more it costs you".
The majority of immigration into the UK are of working age and are not in much need of the NHS. British migration to other EU countries, notably Spain, is much more harmful than the migration we get here in relation to healthcare. ( http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21635041-britain-imports-young-sprightly-m
Oh and health tourism, what is Nigel Farage referring to? There are people who do travel to get better healthcare but they would pay for it privately. Is he suggesting that people deliberately migrate to the UK just for healthcare? I guess that argument falls through, as it does about migrants just coming to here to claim benefits when in fact most come to work, who are also net contributors to the economy. |
| Forum
Reply | Charles Hebdo Latest Edition
at 17:43 23 Jan 2015
Firstly, may I apologise in how late my response has been. I've been very busy with exams and project work in uni.
I may have used the wrong term, I'll concede to that but I think you know what I meant. Just in case you didn't, I meant that Europe in recent times does not hold religion as a tool for enforcement of our laws or to base our policies on. We now act here in Europe, not in the name of a God or a religion but as individuals.
Yes, I know that Europe's culture was shaped by religion and God, I'm not an idiot. However, Europe is past the stranglehold of the state and religion being one, unlike certain Muslim countries where without religion the stability of the state diminishes, like it would have in Europe before.
Well you're assumption about me is wrong. I was in fact brought up in a Catholic family. I've also lived in the Middle East and in the UK and have witnessed first hand the influence and value that people have of religion. And you'll notice that people in the Middle East, regardless of their faith take religion a lot more seriously than we do in general in the UK. |
| Forum
Reply | Charles Hebdo Latest Edition
at 01:45 15 Jan 2015
So if you're not religious yourself, how does 'godless society' offend you? You're the first person I know who claims to be irreligious but the mention of their society (which I'm glad to be a part of) as godless and secular offends them. I completely fail to see your logic. In fact, your logic mirrors that which you try to describe.
I think you'll find the majority of Muslims in Europe recognise the right of Charlie Hebdo's cartoons, they just find it offensive and so are well within their right to say so.
And your fourth paragraph, I'm in agreement with, it's what I was alluding to which stems from the religious rule of the state. |
| Forum
Reply | Charles Hebdo Latest Edition
at 21:44 14 Jan 2015
As I said before, I don't think it's about who loves their god more but more to do with upbringing and culture.
You have to remember that people in Europe were brought up in a secular surrounding, a godless society. Whereas the majority of Muslim countries are highly religious with the only thing that remains constant and brings stability is their faith/god.
As an example, think of the most powerful/stable Arab nations at the moment, one thing they have in common is their strict religious code of governance. The people have not been exposed to the mocking of faith as we have. |
| Forum
Reply | Charles Hebdo Latest Edition
at 21:30 14 Jan 2015
Of course they don't, I wasn't talking about the Charlie Hebdo attackers but instead of the Muslim community in general. As you said so yourself, the religion is seen as a 'justification' to the terrorists' actions. |
| Forum
Reply | Charles Hebdo Latest Edition
at 02:53 14 Jan 2015
It's all about how they perceive the cartoons. It wasn't a personal attack but I can see why Muslims with the rise of anti-Islam sentiment may be fearful and misunderstand Charlie Hebdo.
Personally, my Atheism has lead me to enjoy a quite a lot of religious satire. I've routinely mocked both Christianity and Islam. It's not that I believe that Muslims have been targeted or that Charlie Hebdo was an anti-Islamic publication. It's just that I understand that when in a foreign country you may become a little more sensitive to what defines you as a person. |
| Forum
Reply | Charles Hebdo Latest Edition
at 02:39 14 Jan 2015
Someone mocking from the outside may not be against the rules ( I've not studied the Quran) but that doesn't mean it doesn't offend those of the Muslim faith. It can be seen to be more hurtful when an outsider does it, as with anything else.
To me, it's more of a cultural issue in that Muslim majority countries don't tend to have the same freedoms or are not yet accustomed to the European culture of political/religious satire. Religion is so deep rooted in Muslim countries that it would be akin to going to China and mocking Mao Zedong. The state is unstable and one thing that will always remain the same and unites many is their religion.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with Wednesday's cover either. In fact, I find it quite a poignant message and I would have hoped it would resonate with Muslims in Europe. But you'll notice it's the older leaders of the Islamic community who are particularly offended, with time that will hopefully change. |
| Forum
Reply | Charles Hebdo Latest Edition
at 22:51 13 Jan 2015
If this cover had been printed with the engagement of Muslim leaders/community, there would be nothing controversial about it.
Therein lies the problem, the cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammed have been done not by Muslims themselves but by people of other faith or no faith.
For example, there is a big difference when a good friend of mine cracks a joke regarding my ethnicity than when some random person I don't know does. I personally don't get offended whoever tells the joke but it does make a difference to a lot of people. So you can see why some muslims (not the Islamist) may feel offended when people mock their faith.
Let us not forget that all different groups of people get offended. Heck, some Swans fans get offended by inflatable sheep. |
| Forum
Reply | E.U. Punishes the U.K. for your economic success! Not a joke!
at 20:13 24 Oct 2014
Nothing controversial about the increased contributions even though the media has created a big fuss over it.
Member states agreed to the new method of calculations and the leaked numbers are not final. The final contributions to be announced officially on November the 14th , I believe.
Either way, Cameron's public response is counter productive. |
| Forum
Reply | Cameron's War
at 18:55 28 Sep 2014
Two options, either we go full out and try and sort out this problem once and for all. Boots on the ground, a proper post invasion plan and support. Or we simply do nothing.
Going in half asked by just airstrikes will give us a half asked result. Air strikes are a short term solution for a long term problem. |
| Forum
Reply | Cameron's War
at 14:03 27 Sep 2014
If we really want to sort this out then there really is only one option. A long haul campaign with boots on the ground and proper planning for afterlife of the campaign. However, no one has any appetite for that, can't blame them especially after the debacle of the 2003 Iraq War.
It's all about our intentions. What are our intentions? Peace? Stability? What do we really want from the Middle East? Our constant meddling keeps the region in its backward state. We've been meddling in Iraq since the break up of the Ottoman Empire, bombed them in 1920s as they opposed British rule too. |
| Forum
Reply | David Haines
at 17:01 15 Sep 2014
They know that the larger Muslim populations in Iraq and Syria have no support for them as they are actively fighting them. Even the Sunni tribesmen who initially supported them against Al-Maliki are starting to turn against them.
People always point towards Muslim groups protesting against Israel and expect a similar reaction when they are two completely different situations. A protest against a democratic nation, which we have diplomatic relations, may actually have an affect on the situation. Against a rogue terrorist organisation? Futile. |
| Forum
Reply | David Haines
at 22:45 14 Sep 2014
What affect will Muslims protesting against ISIS have? Nothing at all.
Seriously, what do you think it would achieve? As if ISIS really gives a shit what people think anyway. |
| Forum
Reply | Religious footballers
at 17:32 13 Sep 2014
Footballers aren't the brightest, religious people... I'll let you finish off that sentence. |
| Forum
Reply | Fracking hell!
at 00:44 20 Aug 2014
Why is everyone ignoring this post?! The most blatantly obvious solution is Nuclear Power. |
| Forum
Reply | You can't handle it
at 02:31 2 Feb 2014
Didn't see your post, I basically said the exact same thing. Sorry about that, don't do me for plagiarism! Haha |
| | safe_jack
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 4 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 4 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.