PDA

View Full Version : How Britian works...



Pages : [1] 2

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
16th January 12, 07:24 AM
Michael Gove has brushed aside Britain's economic problems to propose the public donate a new royal yacht to the Queen as a mark of respect during this year's diamond jubilee celebrations, according to a confidential letter to fellow ministers.

In the letter, which has been sent to Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary and minister overseeing the celebrations, and to the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, Gove at one point comes close to suggesting that Britain's dire economic climate means that a large-scale celebration is required to lift the country's spirits.

The education secretary writes: "In spite, and perhaps because of the austere times, the celebration should go beyond those of previous jubilees and mark the greater achievement that the diamond anniversary represents."

The Liberal Democrats privately expressed surprise at the proposal, which is likely to cost at least £60m, at a time of national austerity.

Meanwhile Tom Watson, the Labour party vice-chairman, said: "When school budgets are being slashed, parents will be wondering how Gove came even to suggest this idea."

Gove, an enthusiastic monarchist, writes in the letter: "I feel strongly that the diamond jubilee gives us a tremendous opportunity to recognise in a very fitting way the Queen's highly significant contribution to the life of the nation and the Commonwealth."

Commenting on draft celebration proposals prepared by Hunt, Gove expresses his reservations at a lack of ambition, saying: "I feel strongly more should be done to achieve a longer lasting legacy. Events such as proms and the party at the palace organised for the diamond jubilee, and street parties, although excellent, are transient. It would be appropriate to do something that will mark the significance of this occasion with fitting ceremony.

"My suggestion would be a gift from the nation to her majesty; thinking about David Willetts's excellent suggestion of a royal yacht, and something tangible to commemorate this momentous occasion." He adds: "The year ahead provides an enormous opportunity to showcase the very best of Britain."

Hinting at cabinet tensions over the way in which the culture department is focusing so heavily on the Olympics in the year of the jubilee, Gove says: "The diamond jubilee must not be overshadowed by the Olympic Games, but form an integral part of this great year for our country."

Some of Gove's extravagant language reveals the difficulties created for politicians by the coincidence of the jubilee and the Olympics, alongside forecasts that the UK economy will slip back into recession this year and see a further severe squeeze on living standards. Labour will be watching for any sign the national celebrations are used by the government to distract from the state of the economy.

Gove ends his letter by suggesting that if insufficient taxpayer funds are available a private donation could be sought, before making a naked departmental bid for every schoolchild or school to be given a gift as a permanent reminder of the event. Gove's office confirmed the authenticity of the letter but refused to comment.

The royal yacht Britannia was decommissioned by the Labour government in December 1997 and became a visitor attraction in Edinburgh. It was last seen listing after a leak during repairs over the New Year holiday.

Various efforts have been made to propose a new royal yacht, but have been rejected on the grounds of cost, estimated in 1997 at £60m. However, during the June celebrations a luxury cruiser boat, the Spirit of Chartwell, which is already being dressed up as a royal barge, will carry the Queen along the Thames as part of a pageant.

Yep that is how mental some of the UK's polliticians are!

We are in deep financial $h!t, so lets by one of the richest people in the country a new boat out of tax payers money!


We're DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED!!!!!!!!!!!

(Unless of course we make a concerted global effort to expoit the near space resources that are available to us NOW!)

Lollius Urbicus
16th January 12, 07:45 AM
£60 million, that's what... One months payment to the EU?

Spade: The Real Snake
16th January 12, 07:51 AM
We should have tried that.....giving Barry Hussy O a boat instead of all the goddam Hawaiian vacations.

Cullion
16th January 12, 08:11 AM
£60 million, that's what... One months payment to the EU?

More like a day's payment. No really. It's actually ~40-50 million a day.

Lollius Urbicus
16th January 12, 08:47 AM
Cameron says no.


More like a day's payment. No really. It's actually ~40-50 million a day.
Should have known.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
16th January 12, 09:04 AM
Oh well were my boat then?

Lollius Urbicus
16th January 12, 09:07 AM
In Brussels.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
16th January 12, 09:46 AM
BASTARDS!

OZZ
16th January 12, 11:03 AM
You Brits need to dump the Monarchy.
Start protesting against them on a regular basis, egg the Prince, throw feces at Kate..then they will get the message.

Spade: The Real Snake
16th January 12, 11:15 AM
Isn't Canucklestan subjects of the crown?

Why doesn't you fuckers start, first before telling the Crookteeths to clean up their shit


Sent by telekinesis via Cerebro

Lollius Urbicus
16th January 12, 11:24 AM
The Queen does indeed own Canada.

Spade: The Real Snake
16th January 12, 11:32 AM
please edit post to read:

Mumz pwnzrz Canucklestan


thank you

lant3rn
16th January 12, 01:46 PM
she is more of figure head here
meaning that if she asked us to buy a boat, we would ask her kindly to go fuck herself

Cullion
16th January 12, 01:50 PM
The Queen would not ask you to buy her a boat. 'The Crown' might. And you would not get a vote on it.

Lollius Urbicus
16th January 12, 01:56 PM
I don't think anyone has actually checked if the Queen actually wants a yacht, maybe the cabinet should actually find out what she would like.

lant3rn
16th January 12, 01:57 PM
no money can be given to you limeys without a parliamentary vote. technically it could but that would be the end of the party that let it happen

Cullion
16th January 12, 02:45 PM
no money can be given to you limeys without a parliamentary vote. technically it could but that would be the end of the party that let it happen

The Crown does not need to extract wealth from Canada by asking your public treasury for it, it simply receives rent and other income on the vast tracts of land that it owns.

It's kind of quaint that you think The Crown is a person, or somehow representative of the people of the British Isles. When you pay crown rent, you aren't paying rent to 'England'.

KO'd N DOA
16th January 12, 02:48 PM
The NWT gave our future Monarchs Will and Kate, a free 700 diamond broach and matching cufflinks. Now the world knows we have diamonds.

Why not get the shipyards moving again, and build her a boat. Keep the trades happy, and give the east coast a cash infusion to get them off the dole. Let the world know we can build boats.
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/463400/PRINCE-WILLIAM-KATE-DIAMOND-BROACH-CUFFLINKS.jpg

lant3rn
16th January 12, 03:14 PM
The Crown does not need to extract wealth from Canada by asking your public treasury for it, it simply receives rent and other income on the vast tracts of land that it owns.

It's kind of quaint that you think The Crown is a person, or somehow representative of the people of the British Isles. When you pay crown rent, you aren't paying rent to 'England'.the only expenses paid to the crown are incurred when its horse faced representatives come for a visit. And how do you know what i think?

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
16th January 12, 03:18 PM
And how do you know what i think?

He's been taking alot of ayahuasca.

OZZ
17th January 12, 01:22 PM
she is more of figure head here
meaning that if she asked us to buy a boat, we would ask her kindly to go fuck herself

+ rep

OZZ
17th January 12, 01:27 PM
The Queen would not ask you to buy her a boat. 'The Crown' might. And you would not get a vote on it.

Cullion, I've had this debate with you before. Your CROWN has NO authority over us whatsoever. What century do you live in?
Explain this to me..what do you think the relationship between our two countries is ?

OZZ
17th January 12, 01:32 PM
The Monarchy in Canada
Feature by Jay Makarenko |

Canada has a long monarchical tradition, beginning with the chief leadership of Aboriginal groups, the rule of French monarchs in New France, and British monarchs in Canada. This article presents Canada's monarchial traditions and institutions: it discusses the concept of monarchy, its history in Canada, its relationship with other governmental institutions, the profile of the current monarchy, as well as the debates and issues facing the monarchy in Canada.

Historical overview of monarchies in Canada

Canada has extensive historical ties to monarchy. Both the British and French monarchs have ruled over parts of what is known as Canada today. Even prior to European colonization of the region, Aboriginal groups formed quasi-monarchical forms of government. The following provides an overview of the history of British monarchy in Canada.

British Monarchy in Canada
Canada in the Making: Representative Government
"Canadianizing" the Monarchy

The British North America Act of 1867 established Canada as both an independent nation and a constitutional monarchy. However, the monarchy itself remained a strictly British institution. Since that time, however, reforms have been instituted which have "Canadianized" the monarchy in Canada.

The first of these reforms was the passing of the Royal and Parliamentary Titles Act by the British Parliament. This Act replaced the concept of a single monarchy throughout the British Empire with multiple monarchies, held by the same person. Previously, the British King or Queen was the monarch of colonies such as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, simply by virtue of being the monarch of the United Kingdom of Great Britain. With the passage of the Royal and Parliamentary Titles Act, however, the King or Queen was designated as the monarch of these countries, as separate monarchies and kingdoms. Canada thus continued to recognize a British King or Queen as its monarch. However, the country had gained its own royal office and title; the monarchy in Canada was no longer known as the King or Queen of the United Kingdom, but simply as the King or Queen of Canada.

A second key reform came in 1931, when the British Parliament passed the Statute of Westminster, 1931. The Statute officially recognized the autonomy of all Commonwealth Nations, as well as gave all Commonwealth Realms, including Canada, legal powers over the monarchy in their own jurisdiction. (A Commonwealth Realm is any nation that recognizes the monarch in Britain as its Head of State.) As such, any changes to the rules of succession (the procedures by which a new monarch in Britain can be chosen) or royal styles and titles (the manner by which a monarch describes him/herself, or is described by others) require the consent of all Parliaments of the Commonwealth Realms. For example, if the Act of Settlement — which provides that only Protestants may become the monarch — were to be changed to allow Catholics to accede to the Throne, this would require Parliamentary approval by Canada and all other Commonwealth Realms.

The convention regarding the altering of royal styles and titles was again amended in 1953 to allow each Commonwealth Realm to adopt its own practices, as suited to its particular monarchy.

Canadian Government & the Monarchy

How the monarchy works in Canadian government.

Canada is a constitutional monarchy. In other words, the monarchy in Canada is recognized as the Head of State and centre of state authority. This role, however, is essentially symbolic; today, most real political power in Canada lies with elected politicians. The following provides an overview of the monarchy in contemporary Canadian government.
The Monarchy & the Canadian Parliament

The Canadian Parliament is one of the fundamental institutions in Canadian government, and is responsible for the development and enactment of federal laws. The Canadian Parliament is composed of three parts: the House of Commons, the Senate, and the Monarchy. In theory, for a law to come into effect, it must be approved by all three parts of Parliament.

The House of Commons is the elected legislative body of Parliament. Members of the House of Commons (called Members of Parliament or MPs) are elected by Canadians to serve five-year terms, although these terms often end up being shorter. These elected representatives deliberate and pass government legislation. It is also important to note that the government of the day is represented by the political party with the greatest number of elected representatives in the House of Commons. The Prime Minister is the leader of the political party with the most elected representatives.

The Senate is the non-elected legislative body of Parliament. Members of the Senate (called Senators) are not elected directly by Canadians, but appointed by the federal government. The Senate was designed to act as a counter-balance to the democratically elected House of Commons (as a body of “sober second thought”) and as an avenue of regional representation in Parliament. Each region of Canada is represented by a given number of Senators in the Red Chamber. In theory, no law can pass without approval by the Senate; however, in practice, the Senate very rarely exercises this power and generally approves all laws passed by the House of Commons.


The third component of Parliament is the monarchy. Again, in theory, no law can be passed without approval by the monarchy (before a bill officially becomes law in Canada, it must be given Royal Assent). The monarchy also has the power to appoint the Prime Minister, and to summon and dissolve Parliament. In practice, however, the monarchy rarely exercises these powers independently. The monarch (or its representative in Canada, in the form of the Governor General) automatically gives Royal Assent to all legislation passed by the House of Commons. The actual decision to summon and dissolve Parliament is made by the Prime Minister. Its execution by the monarchy is almost always a formality.

Ceremonial, nothing more.
Britain does not own ' vast tracts of land ' over here..are you kidding me ?
Or are you going to tell me how our government works ?

OZZ
17th January 12, 02:00 PM
That is only part of the article, but its all I need to prove my point.
In theory mean just that, in theory.

Aboriginal groups have more clout over here now than Britain does. That's just the way it is...

lant3rn
17th January 12, 02:01 PM
thx for the civics lesson

OZZ
17th January 12, 02:04 PM
I get incensed when Brits talk down to us.
Especially limeys that are delusional and think its the 17th century.
Let's see the receipts for the rent on these ' vast tracts of land ', Cullion.

KO'd N DOA
17th January 12, 02:05 PM
Uh Ozz. Under the Indian Act, the indigenous population (for some reason now called aboriginals although not from Australia) are chattle for the Queen.

Vieux Normand
17th January 12, 02:37 PM
I get incensed when Brits talk down to us.

You give a shit about this because........?

Spade: The Real Snake
17th January 12, 02:47 PM
She's the only thing keep you Canucklestanians from becoming States 51-60

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
17th January 12, 04:05 PM
You give a shit about this because........?

Colonial inferiority complex obviously.

Robot Jesus
17th January 12, 04:28 PM
She's the only thing keep you Canucklestanians from becoming States 51-60

I was raised during the Clinton years, at that time I would have agreed with you.

Lollius Urbicus
17th January 12, 04:36 PM
Explain this to me..what do you think the relationship between our two countries is ?
Canada is Lizzie's bitch.

Spade: The Real Snake
17th January 12, 04:46 PM
I was raised during the Clinton years, at that time I would have agreed with you.
W would have taken you fuckers, kicking and screaming like insolent children, put you across his knee and spanked the maple right out of you until you screamed "LOVE ME UNCLE SAM!!! LOVE ME LIKE THE DADDY I NEVER HAD!!!!!'

lant3rn
17th January 12, 05:02 PM
Canada is Lizzie's bitch.
How much does your country you pay the crown again for the honour of ruling over you?

lant3rn
17th January 12, 05:05 PM
W would have taken you fuckers, kicking and screaming like insolent children, put you across his knee and spanked the maple right out of you until you screamed "LOVE ME UNCLE SAM!!! LOVE ME LIKE THE DADDY I NEVER HAD!!!!!'
We don't need another dead beat parent.

Pay your bills first and maybe we'll talk.

Robot Jesus
17th January 12, 05:07 PM
W would have taken you fuckers, kicking and screaming like insolent children, put you across his knee and spanked the maple right out of you until you screamed "LOVE ME UNCLE SAM!!! LOVE ME LIKE THE DADDY I NEVER HAD!!!!!'

forever guaranteeing democrat control of government, it would be like adding a second California.

our right wing parties look like commies next to your left wing parties.

Spade: The Real Snake
17th January 12, 05:08 PM
We don't need another dead beat parent.

Pay your bills first and maybe we'll talk.
that's the only reason we will take you as our Canucklestan Catamite. You get to kick-in for gas.

lant3rn
17th January 12, 05:15 PM
We already supply you with a boatload of gas.

your going to have to come to reality with your financial situation and trade in your hummer for something more economical

. 8212

Something like this could work

OZZ
17th January 12, 05:20 PM
You give a shit about this because........?

Knee-jerk reaction, former colonialist insecurity..who knows ?
Cullion is supposed to be smart..he should know what he's yakking about if he's going to yak.

OZZ
17th January 12, 05:21 PM
that's the only reason we will take you as our Canucklestan Catamite. You get to kick-in for gas.

You Yanks are an afterthought now...your reign is coming to an end, that's why we're increasing our trade with China.
Plus, they actually have money.

OZZ
17th January 12, 05:25 PM
We would have taken you fuckers, kicking and screaming like insolent children, put you across his knee and spanked the maple right out of you until you.

You mean the way we spanked your ass during the War of 1812 ? Before or after we burned the White House to the ground?
Oh wait, we were still officially British then...so the BRITS kicked your ass.

resolve
17th January 12, 05:38 PM
Hey we did end up invading England you know...

But our invasion force went to a local pub and got drunk instead (truth).

Cullion
17th January 12, 07:19 PM
You mean the way we spanked your ass during the War of 1812 ? Before or after we burned the White House to the ground?
Oh wait, we were still officially British then...so the BRITS kicked your ass.

You are still British now. Be proud.

Lollius Urbicus
18th January 12, 05:33 AM
How much does your country you pay the crown again for the honour of ruling over you?
Could you translate this into English?

lant3rn
18th January 12, 09:18 AM
you mean english for dummies?

Robot Jesus
19th January 12, 08:42 AM
All I have to say is

http://blog.sourceboards.com/images/HarryForKingFront_600x840.jpg

http://blog.sourceboards.com/images/HarryForKingBack_600x437.jpg

Cullion
19th January 12, 09:07 AM
Harry would certainly be the 'Drinks are on me!' option, were he ever King.

Vieux Normand
19th January 12, 03:30 PM
Cullion... should know what he's yakking about if he's going to yak.

Now, now.

How is he--or anyone--supposed to play "self-appointed expert" on a topic if he actually is an expert?

You know better than to expect this.

Cullion
19th January 12, 04:03 PM
Cullion, I've had this debate with you before. Your CROWN has NO authority over us whatsoever. What century do you live in?
Explain this to me..what do you think the relationship between our two countries is ?

You paste long walls of text without reading much before you speak.

Re-read my posts about crown ownership of land in Canada and the rest of the commonwealth. Read what I've posted about the distinction between 'Elizabeth Windsor' and 'The Crown'.

I understand your constitutional arrangements far better than you do, so I expect you to pay attention.

Robot Jesus
19th January 12, 05:53 PM
if the full rights of the crown were ever exercised we would have a bloodless coupe within the hour.

Cullion
19th January 12, 05:54 PM
They already are and you don't even notice it. That's the whole point.

OZZ
19th January 12, 06:12 PM
I understand your constitutional arrangements far better than you do, so I expect you to pay attention.
No you don't.

Tell me more about these 'vast tracts of land' and the rental agreement..provide some proof this time.
Which you cannot do, because there is none.
As a former Ward of the Crown , I understand the 'Crown' designation quite well.

Cullion
19th January 12, 06:22 PM
No you don't.

Tell me more about these 'vast tracts of land' and the rental agreement..provide some proof this time.
Which you cannot do, because there is none.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_ownership_in_Canada#Crown_Lands

http://web2.gov.mb.ca/laws/statutes/ccsm/c340e.php

lant3rn
19th January 12, 06:25 PM
They already are and you don't even notice it. That's the whole point.

elaborate plz, for us frozen proles.

OZZ
19th January 12, 06:26 PM
if the full rights of the crown were ever exercised we would have a bloodless coupe within the hour.

That's why its all immaterial now.
The Governor General is the Queen's Representative in Canada..she is a figurehead for the Royal presence in our country. The Queen has no say in who gets appointed as her representative, Parliament appoints him or her.
Most people want to do away with the Governor General altogether, because it s a waste of taxpayers money. All she does is travel around the world and live a life of luxury.
She is supposed to represent the Royal interest in Canada, yet they hardly see one another.
.

Adouglasmhor
19th January 12, 06:28 PM
http://www.whoownstheworld.com/canada/

lant3rn
19th January 12, 06:30 PM
Our GG attended the royal wedding, ozz....

Think of the scandal if we didn't have representation at such an important event.

Spade: The Real Snake
19th January 12, 06:34 PM
fucking -A-, goddamn Dudley Do-Right is kickin' it in Buckingham with the Beefeater Boyz

Cullion
19th January 12, 06:36 PM
elaborate plz, for us frozen proles.



The Crown does not need to extract wealth from Canada by asking your public treasury for it, it simply receives rent and other income on the vast tracts of land that it owns.

It's kind of quaint that you think The Crown is a person, or somehow representative of the people of the British Isles. When you pay crown rent, you aren't paying rent to 'England'.

Ozz does not stop and check things before he tears off on a diatribe. No he doesn't.

OZZ
19th January 12, 06:39 PM
The majority of all lands in Canada are held by governments on behalf of the monarchy and are called Crown Lands.

Cullion, this is no different than the Governor General representing the Queen..its all formality and ceremonial in nature.


About 89% of Canada's land area (8,886,356 km²) is Crown Land, which may either be federal (41%) or provincial (48%); the remaining 11% is privately-owned.

See the words Federal and Provincial..that's the Canadian Government. Does it say British Government ? Commonwealth ? No..
The language used in much of our legal, political and civic statutes are written in such a way as to pay respect to out British heritage. But the actual authority of Britain over her is NIL.
The Manitoba legislation you just posted up is just the laws for Government land - Crown Land.

lant3rn
19th January 12, 06:45 PM
None of that money goes to the monarchy, If the Queen Lizz or our GG decides they want to evict the entire city of Toronto you would see for yourself just how loyal of subjects we are. Power is exercised and taxes are collected in the name of the crown but administered by our government.

The power of the crown exists in name only (like the force). It's been kept around as kind of a keepsake of our history.

.

Cullion
19th January 12, 06:51 PM
I think I need to quote my first-page posts back in a larger size.



The Queen would not ask you to buy her a boat. 'The Crown' might. And you would not get a vote on it.

It's kind of quaint that you think The Crown is a person, or somehow representative of the people of the British Isles. When you pay crown rent, you aren't paying rent to 'England'.

If you need any help parsing that, just ask.

Replying to it with 'But the queen doesn't get any rent from me!' is more than a little retarded.

lant3rn
19th January 12, 06:52 PM
"Crown" means Her Majesty the Queen in right of the province

From your own source

Cullion
19th January 12, 06:53 PM
What, are you now claiming that the Queen does own Canada?

That's ridiculous, it's a modern democracy.

OZZ
19th January 12, 06:54 PM
As a result, in the leading petroleum producing province of Alberta, 81% of the subsurface mineral rights are owned by the provincial Crown. The remaining 19% are owned by the federal Crown, individuals, or corporations.[7]

The Crown is the Canadian government at either the Provincial or federal level, Cullion.
Stop trying to use The Crown both ways...

lant3rn
19th January 12, 06:54 PM
She owns it in name only, that's what im trying to say.

You toothless, fog sucker

Cullion
19th January 12, 06:56 PM
The Crown is the Canadian government at either the Provincial or federal level, Cullion.
Stop trying to use The Crown both ways...

You are not the fastest guy on the draw sometimes, Ozz.

Cullion
19th January 12, 06:56 PM
She owns it in name only, that's what im trying to say.


What do you mean 'name only' ?

lant3rn
19th January 12, 06:58 PM
It's a riddle see if you can figure it out.

OZZ
19th January 12, 07:53 PM
Ok..I'm done playing your trolling game.

We both know that you were using the term ' The Crown ' earlier in the thread in a different sense.
We don't pay for the Queen's boat , you do. She does not have the power to make us do so either, as you implied earlier. NO Canadian political party would ever invoke the powers of the Crown. It would be political suicide and they would get beaten down by the opposition as well as the larger public.
The Queen owns no land here , and Canadians pay no 'rent' to the British Crown.
You are being a dork.
I know damn well how our government works and what the relationship is between our two countries.

Just for the record..as a Canadian I AM proud of our British heritage.

OZZ
19th January 12, 07:57 PM
She owns it in name only, that's what im trying to say.

You toothless, fog sucker

He's been trolling us, lantern. And doing a pretty damn good job of it.

Cullion
20th January 12, 03:23 AM
We both know that you were using the term ' The Crown ' earlier in the thread in a different sense.

Where ?

Robot Jesus
20th January 12, 08:55 AM
in Canadian legal jargon crown = public land. when, say, an oil company pays royalties on a crown mineral lease the money goes to the provincial government and stays there. That's why the Albertan government tends to be awash in cash and PEI not so much. The money does not go to the Crown in the sense your describing.

Cullion
20th January 12, 12:09 PM
You guys have really vivid imaginations, or a reading comprehension problem.

Nowhere did I describe the crown as being a person, or the UK govt, or the Queen.

In fact I explicitly said it was not those things.

Don't make me think Canadians are stupid.

lant3rn
20th January 12, 12:29 PM
The Queen would not ask you to buy her a boat. 'The Crown' might. And you would not get a vote on it. your a smug britfag.

this was your first post that led us here. If you weren't refering to the ''crown'' as our government or the technical meaning which would be the queen(as defined in our law). Then this sentence makes little sense.

Vieux Normand
20th January 12, 01:12 PM
Just out of curiosity, can cnux still be referred to as "subjects of the Crown"?

I've asked a few cnux and get little enlightenment as a result.

One would think they'd know whether or not they are subjects...

...and to what exactly they are subject(ed).

Lollius Urbicus
20th January 12, 02:02 PM
I don't think anyone is a subject anymore, I think we're all citizens now.

KO'd N DOA
20th January 12, 03:49 PM
When I was at elementary school Peel School Board, Ontario, we started every morning with.

The Lords Prayer
God Save the Queen
and Wrapped it up with O'Canada.

I felt every part a loyal subject.

Cullion
20th January 12, 05:00 PM
your a smug britfag.

this was your first post that led us here. If you weren't refering to the ''crown'' as our government or the technical meaning which would be the queen(as defined in our law). Then this sentence makes little sense.

What, are you still claiming that the Queen personally owns most of Canada?

I thought we'd dealt with this myth.

Robot Jesus
20th January 12, 05:50 PM
At some point I was under the impression you where arguing in favour of that myth, after reading your posts again I don't know how I got that idea.

Cullion
20th January 12, 05:53 PM
It's because Ozz and Lantern got confused and just started insisting that I said something that I never did.

It's an agenda

OZZ
21st January 12, 12:03 PM
It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong..
I am nothing if not a big man.

lant3rn
21st January 12, 12:43 PM
Then i'm still confused as what you were referring to by using the word "crown" in your first two posts

Robot Jesus
21st January 12, 01:07 PM
He meant that if the government wanted to they would buy her a boat and would not need the parliament to vote on it, just take the money out of petty cash or something.

lant3rn
21st January 12, 01:13 PM
He meant that if the government wanted to they would buy her a boat and would not need the parliament to vote on it, just take the money out of petty cash or something.
Technically ythey could i guess, but if the expense wasn't put into their budget there would be a shit storm over the purchase

Robot Jesus
21st January 12, 01:15 PM
I honestly doubt it, not when we are buying jet fighters with no engines on a no bid contract.

lant3rn
21st January 12, 01:16 PM
I honestly doubt it, not when we are buying jet fighters with no engines on a no bid contract.

that was in the budget

AAAAAA
23rd January 12, 03:07 PM
lulzy

Sounds good, picking the best things of the world for yourself.

Adouglasmhor
23rd January 12, 05:36 PM
http://i1143.photobucket.com/albums/n624/Egg_NoB/3Ja1l.png

Another cunt who doesn't know the difference between British and English.

Plus I drive a Swedish Car.

Lollius Urbicus
23rd January 12, 06:06 PM
http://i1143.photobucket.com/albums/n624/Egg_NoB/3Ja1l.png
Lol good one. Where is your car, TV, wife, food and furniture from?

Cullion
23rd January 12, 06:07 PM
Americans often still drive American cars. It's just that they're shit.

Spade: The Real Snake
23rd January 12, 06:26 PM
Lol good one. Where is your car, TV, wife, food and furniture from?
welldone Cake.
welldone.

Adouglasmhor
23rd January 12, 06:45 PM
I didn't post this as an insult. I think England is cool.

I don't have a TV. I buy most of my food from Whole Foods or Costco. My cars are German and Japanese.

My furniture is mostly Amish.

Oh yeah, my wife is an American citizen.

It's an Audi.
My car isn't a BMW or a Merc but a T5 is a lot more manly car than any Audi.

Adouglasmhor
23rd January 12, 06:51 PM
Not according to house and home, etc. it isn't.

You pansy.

Adouglasmhor
23rd January 12, 06:53 PM
In fact, the V70 T5 is easily the quickest station wagon you can buy short of the very rapid BMW 540i,

Adouglasmhor
23rd January 12, 07:21 PM
It's handy for carrying all my gear when I go into the mountains. Plus means the hound has secure space when I take him out for the day. Plus it's not a woman's car. Plus I can put one of the back seats down and sleep in it.


But best of all it's not an Audi.

Robot Jesus
23rd January 12, 08:34 PM
Lol good one. Where is your car, TV, wife, food and furniture from?

I don't see your point, cultural purity/dilution is something that makes some sense with old cultures like England or France, it does not with North American culture.

Adouglasmhor
24th January 12, 01:46 AM
I don't see your point, cultural purity/dilution is something that makes some sense with old cultures like England or France, it does not with North American culture.

England has been a culture which has brought in elements from all over the world since day 1, Founded by Germanic tribes on lands occupied by Romano British Celts, Invaded by Vikings, Normans, Dutch, occupying the Americas, India, Part of China, Part of the Caribbean and trading with the world, then having waves of immigration from all over the world. If there is a defining trait to English culture it is co opting from other cultures.

Adouglasmhor
24th January 12, 01:51 AM
I have no taste and think driving a tarted up Volkswagen hides the fact I am a prematurely middle aged man pretending I am still young and dynamic.

NoBowie
17th December 15, 01:19 PM
http://i.imgur.com/cNA7rCd.jpg

Feryk
17th December 15, 03:42 PM
Hey, if your tits were that perky, you'd show them off to royalty too.

Üser Friendly
17th December 15, 04:39 PM
And if you were royalty, you have a good old gander

NoBowie
17th December 15, 04:46 PM
And if you were royalty, you have a good old gander

Just a gander? Nay. I demand a solid motorboating as tribute!

Üser Friendly
17th December 15, 04:52 PM
it's good to be the (almost) king

Syntactical Disruptorize
19th December 15, 12:36 AM
And if you were royalty, you have a good old gander

I had no idea I was royalty.

Üser Friendly
19th December 15, 02:34 AM
You'll always be a Princess to me XX

NoBowie
21st December 15, 05:51 PM
Cullion founded a club!

Fauxtor can join!

nm6JnhPbHCQ

Cullion
22nd December 15, 02:24 PM
there's an entrance test

Üser Friendly
22nd December 15, 02:30 PM
bend over and I'll show you

Feryk
22nd December 15, 06:50 PM
A unicorn --- named 'Shaft' --- who runs the whole thing...

Pie of Hate
23rd December 15, 04:42 AM
John Shaft?

Üser Friendly
23rd December 15, 05:00 AM
watch yo mouth

MerkinMuffly
23rd December 15, 01:09 PM
When Doofa hears about a big black Shaft, the first thing he thinks of is mouth.

Üser Friendly
23rd December 15, 02:32 PM
Can you dig it?

MerkinMuffly
23rd December 15, 02:38 PM
V-OYKd8SVrI

NoBowie
2nd January 16, 10:02 AM
Happy new year, former oppressors:

http://i.imgur.com/wgHRhXC.jpg

Üser Friendly
2nd January 16, 11:54 AM
^Modern Hogarth

NoBowie
2nd January 16, 01:25 PM
Another Brit:

http://i.imgur.com/tJVSKU2.jpg

MerkinMuffly
2nd January 16, 01:27 PM
She likes getting pegged too, NoB!

Harpy
2nd January 16, 02:51 PM
I had no idea I was royalty.

I didn't know you were inbred Your Highness.

Cullion
2nd January 16, 06:04 PM
Happy new year, former oppressors:

http://i.imgur.com/wgHRhXC.jpg

this is a pretty normal scene for a friday or saturday night in the centre of a large city in the UK.

NoBowie
2nd January 16, 06:39 PM
this is a pretty normal scene for a friday or saturday night in the centre of a large city in the UK.

Hmm. I guess Seattle is boring as far as large cities go.

Cullion
2nd January 16, 07:19 PM
British people just tend to drink more than Americans

Syntactical Disruptorize
2nd January 16, 07:57 PM
I didn't know you were inbred Your Highness.
My uncle married his first cousin. Even more evidence of my heretofore unsuspected royal nature!

NoBowie
2nd January 16, 08:42 PM
My uncle married his first cousin.

That's hot.

I got to 3rd base with mine. Of course, I was like 13 and she was 12. We were playing hide and go seek.

NoBowie
5th January 16, 05:09 PM
A man whose penis was ripped off in a road accident, and who has subsequently received surgery to fit an 8-inch bionic penis, is to lose his virginity to an “award winning” dominatrix who unsuccessfully ran for parliament.

http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/the-man-with-a-bionic-penis-will-lose-his-virginity-to-a-dominatrix-who-ran-for-parliament--WJY00cYJhg

Pie of Hate
6th January 16, 08:02 AM
http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i156/mokojak/Transformers20Penis.gif

Üser Friendly
7th January 16, 07:49 AM
Fuck you Dr, you're not the boss of me! (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3387943/Passenger-fined-50-putting-feet-train-seat-given-written-caution-guard-using-127-year-old-bylaw.html)

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
7th January 16, 09:10 AM
See, doesnt that look better...

Pie of Hate
7th January 16, 09:21 AM
http://www.pbfcomics.com/archive_b/PBF271-Spelling.png

MerkinMuffly
7th January 16, 11:58 AM
Shouldn't the gods be taking out the respective children instead?

Pie of Hate
7th January 16, 12:12 PM
Depends.

Pie of Hate
12th January 16, 11:54 AM
https://ak-hdl.buzzfed.com/static/2014-04/enhanced/webdr02/17/12/original-8872-1397753386-12.jpg

NoBowie
15th January 16, 11:12 AM
http://i.imgur.com/Vddmotu.jpg

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
15th January 16, 02:14 PM
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/12509704_897266830380144_1201418261152066152_n.jpg ?oh=42221593bc0fe5f6013340f64ddf31a2&oe=5737E43A

NoBowie
16th January 16, 11:38 AM
http://i.imgur.com/7OuHFe1.jpg

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
26th January 16, 12:54 PM
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtp1/v/t1.0-9/12573871_1108695429170369_1438302620601695286_n.pn g?oh=9e89de0c0a4345367e4168a8996e83d7&oe=573684CA

Feryk
26th January 16, 05:00 PM
That is a really stupid poster you have there, Doc.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
26th January 16, 05:15 PM
That's no way to talk about Doofa.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
26th January 16, 05:17 PM
I'm going through a particularly cynical phase at the moment. In such moods I tend to get very annoyed with rich privileged right wing politicians.

It'll pass.

NoBowie
26th January 16, 07:15 PM
You understand many of the lefty politicos are just as rich and entitled? They just hide it better.

Üser Friendly
27th January 16, 04:03 AM
That is a really stupid poster you have there, Doc.

Yeah!

That's no way to talk about me

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
27th January 16, 05:30 AM
You understand many of the lefty politicos are just as rich and entitled? They just hide it better.

Yeah I get that, my cynical moods though aint so rational though.

Feryk
27th January 16, 12:22 PM
http://www.politicalruminations.com/images/cartoons/entitlement101.jpg

NoBowie
27th January 16, 12:26 PM
I actually agree with the baby part of the comic.

If you can't afford to take care of your baby, the government should give it to someone who can.

That would increase low income folks use of birth control and reduce crime as low income babies are more likely to be criminals in the future.

No more popping out kids to get govmint' cheddar

MerkinMuffly
27th January 16, 12:35 PM
Let me show you where you went wrong.


...the government should...

Cullion
27th January 16, 12:45 PM
we should put contraceptive hormones in popular soft drinks and quietly inform the upper and upper-middle discretely class via social media ads that require real concentration and reference checking to interpret. that might redress the IQ/reproduction balance

MerkinMuffly
27th January 16, 12:47 PM
we should put contraceptive hormones in popular soft drinks and not tell anyone.

Feryk
27th January 16, 04:00 PM
..and start saving for our eventual move to Elysium.

NoBowie
29th January 16, 11:10 AM
Goddamn. Get it together.

Young people in England have 'lowest literacy levels' in developed world says OECD:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/young-people-england-have-lowest-literacy-levels-developed-world-says-oecd-1540711

Young people in England are the most illiterate in the developed world with many students graduating with only a basic grasp of English and maths, an in-depth analysis by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has found.

The OECD report rated English teenagers aged 16 to 19 the worst of 23 developed nations in literacy and 22nd of 23 in numeracy. In contrast, pensioners or those close to retirement were among the highest-ranked of their age group.


The fucks this gaji gannin on aboot? Propa raj insult that like. Me English is fuckin' immaculate mate. A nah me fuckin' alphabet 'n everythin'.

Pie of Hate
29th January 16, 11:20 AM
Could we have kippers for breakfast
Mummy dear, Mummy dear
They got to have 'em in Texas
Cos everyone's a millionaire

Feryk
29th January 16, 01:05 PM
Not a great example of literacy, but sure.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
29th January 16, 01:07 PM
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/940940_439522852924148_639911788704522754_n.jpg?oh =47e45c0540e430d5736a1bb7db96d208&oe=5739B33D

Üser Friendly
29th January 16, 02:17 PM
79 quid is pretty reasonable for four silk cushion covers

Feryk
29th January 16, 07:03 PM
Yeah, and what's the problem you have with unemployed people going back to work, Max?

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
31st January 16, 02:30 PM
You assume that most unemployed people do it voluntarily.

https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/12592192_440056056204161_5195939367818663522_n.jpg ?oh=464a594b80352e48d7f2afb71820e1af&oe=57292969

Feryk
1st February 16, 06:56 PM
You assume that most unemployed people do it voluntarily.

Do what? Look for work? I damn well hope so!

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
2nd February 16, 06:01 AM
No silly, do you think that the majority of unemployed people are unemployed voluntarily?

Üser Friendly
2nd February 16, 08:25 AM
I'm going to go out on a limb and say yes

Partly it's because of the poverty trap of low wages, but a lot of people are just plain selfish and lazy

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
2nd February 16, 08:46 AM
I'm going to go out on a limb and say yes

... but a lot of people are just plain selfish and lazy

https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xat1/v/t1.0-9/943911_1068643226521913_2139733168241372600_n.jpg? oh=227539c38a326b76c35bd73f6c263339&oe=573A9596

Now go & stand in the naughty corner with NoB.

NoBowie
2nd February 16, 10:53 AM
Uh-oh Fauxtor. Yoy have to make a choice here. Either folks are generally 'good' and hardworking and can be trusted with firearms and government cheese or they are evil and selfish and shouldn't have either.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
2nd February 16, 11:03 AM
Soz NoBster but that would be a false dichotomy.

Feryk
2nd February 16, 12:09 PM
As with everything, there is nuance and shades of gray in all of this. Of course there are people who are unemployed through no fault of their own, and who will generally get re-employed fairly quickly because they are willing to be mobile and retrain if necessary.

There are also multi-generational welfare cases who don't work because of a culture of not working - for decades pervades their culture/family identity.

And many, many other things in between.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
2nd February 16, 01:00 PM
So which "nuance" do you think is the majority of unemployed?

Feryk
2nd February 16, 01:21 PM
Splitting hairs, Max. I haven't polled the unemployed to be able to tell.

I can tell you in my area, the oil price has led to thousands of layoffs. Those people are willing to work. Some are re-integrating into the workforce (albeit at much lower wages) in service positions. Some aren't, preferring to hold out and wait until the oil price improves.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
2nd February 16, 01:32 PM
Splitting hairs, Max. I haven't polled the unemployed to be able to tell.

No, just pressing for your opinion.

Syntactical Disruptorize
2nd February 16, 02:05 PM
No, just pressing for your opinion.
Do you have another shtick? Because that one's getting terribly old.

NoBowie
2nd February 16, 02:30 PM
So which "nuance" do you think is the majority of unemployed?

Under 15 weeks.

http://www.deptofnumbers.com/unemployment/duration/

Look though, the trend seems to suggest folks are getting lazier even with a better economy.

And my prior was not a false dichotomy. You would really trust someone with government cheese but not a gun? I don't want the government to give money to anyone I can't trust with possession of a gun. (excluding minors and the insane, of course)

I am talking average folks. If there is an average 20 or 30 year old you would give welfare to but not trust with a gun, I want some details on that person. I don't think they should be given money either.

Feryk
2nd February 16, 03:02 PM
There is no doubt that every country has holes in it's social safety net. Some people on Unemployment don't deserve it. Some deserve more understanding than those programs provide (they seem to dehumanize their clients from what I can tell). A lot of people who struggle with mental illness fall through the health care system and end up homeless.

There are lots of flaws as far as I can see. In our country there are municipal programs, provincial programs, federal programs and all of them have different terms and definitions and benefit periods, etc., etc., etc. It's a little ridiculous how much bureaucracy is built up around these programs. The end result is that it is very difficult for an able minded person to be able to navigate 'the system'. Someone mentally ill has no chance at all.

Feryk
2nd February 16, 03:07 PM
FYI, I'd love to see someone give this a try:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
2nd February 16, 03:43 PM
Under 15 weeks.

http://www.deptofnumbers.com/unemployment/duration/

Look though, the trend seems to suggest folks are getting lazier even with a better economy.

Or your metric for a better economy is not as reliant on employment figures as maybe it should be?


And my prior was not a false dichotomy. You would really trust someone with government cheese but not a gun? I don't want the government to give money to anyone I can't trust with possession of a gun. (excluding minors and the insane, of course).

Compounding your false dichotomy isnt going to help you.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
2nd February 16, 05:41 PM
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/12631507_10153220410211090_4406230483038945959_n.j pg?oh=3f8b1172bf7da7c39f3cb4ce1ba8f413&oe=572A7AA1

NoBowie
2nd February 16, 06:48 PM
I can't answer the question because my bleeding heart has backed me into a corner where logic has no meaning.

Noted.

Üser Friendly
3rd February 16, 01:51 AM
unemployment can be addictive, and to a certain extent you'd have to be an idiot to take a low paid job, that pays less than the dole, especially if free housing and health care are included

Why go out and work all day if you can get the same cash, or more sitting watching daytime TV all day?

I'd like to see some form of work for welfare system

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
3rd February 16, 05:30 AM
An interesting idea, care to elaborate?

Pie of Hate
3rd February 16, 07:19 AM
some form of work for welfare system

Last I heard, that was on the cards. "Job Seekers" having to do tasks around the community such as litter picking, or they would have their benefits cut or removed. Not sure how the Community Service perps would feel about having their jobs taken away though.

I think the liberals were / are trying to bugger it off with labels like "unfair" and "slave labour". Would have to double check where it's at now. I haven't heard anything for ages about it.

Üser Friendly
3rd February 16, 08:21 AM
An interesting idea, care to elaborate?

Make benefits dependent on performing x hours (work out minimum wage by dole payments including housing benefit etc divided by hours etc) of work. Turn it into an Enployment benefit rather that Unemployment benefit

This gives dolite experience in a working environment, and allows for references for gaining work else where

A porter at an airport or train station would be a possible role for beneficiaries

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
3rd February 16, 08:23 AM
Not sure how the Community Service perps would feel about having their jobs taken away though.

There would be a lot of low paid jobs that would be threatened by such a scheme, particularly public sector jobs like street cleaning, hospital domestics, etc, It would effectively make these jobs even worse paid than they currently are.

Üser Friendly
3rd February 16, 12:01 PM
The unions would have something to say about that

NoBowie
3rd February 16, 01:56 PM
The socialists would have something to say about that

Yes, they certainly would.

Üser Friendly
3rd February 16, 03:10 PM
If you hide under the blankets the socialists can't get you NoB

Üser Friendly
3rd February 16, 03:12 PM
For Work for Welfare to work the kinds of jobs that get done would have to be roles that currently do not get done

That's why i suggested porters at airports etc

Or roles that are under staffed at present

NoBowie
5th February 16, 09:13 AM
http://imgur.com/MSnj3we.gif

Üser Friendly
5th February 16, 12:06 PM
that's a good family dog

Cullion
7th February 16, 06:59 AM
For Work for Welfare to work the kinds of jobs that get done would have to be roles that currently do not get done

That's why i suggested porters at airports etc

Or roles that are under staffed at present

The danger there is that roles get filled with welfare claimants for free instead of the employer attracting more candidates by offering better wages.

Üser Friendly
7th February 16, 07:13 AM
That is a potential risk, what way could that be reduced?

FDR put many unemployed people to work in the 30's

Cullion
10th February 16, 03:36 PM
I'm sick of having to sort recycling into different bins, and most people use the wrong bins anyway. The 'environmentalist' unemployed youth should be particularly enthusiastic about suiting up to sort trash into different piles. Like those poverty stricken people in the Phillipines and Mexico city do, but with protective clothing. If you're in sound physical health and you want welfare, that's what you can do, with time off for job interviews with tax-registered employers.

It would be useful for everybody else, it's honest work, it's good for the environment and it's probably not quite valuable enough for people to be willing to pay minimum wage to real employees to do, so you wouldn't be displacing anybody. Don't like it? get a real job.

Feryk
10th February 16, 08:17 PM
We pay developmentally disabled people to do that. It gives them financial independence, and is a ton more efficient than depending on the general public to separate stuff.

Üser Friendly
11th February 16, 02:03 AM
Both good solutions

Well done Canada and Cullionstahn

Adouglasmhor
13th February 16, 02:03 AM
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/12631507_10153220410211090_4406230483038945959_n.j pg?oh=3f8b1172bf7da7c39f3cb4ce1ba8f413&oe=572A7AA1

Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal and the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal, awarded to all military personnel serving at the time of the jubilees, depending on length of service.

MerkinMuffly
13th February 16, 04:29 AM
He's just razzing her because she has no soul and smells of foxpiss and digestives.

NoBowie
13th February 16, 09:38 AM
I thought he flies a helicopter in some form of service and has actually rescued some people?

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
13th February 16, 09:40 AM
Yes Air Sea Rescue

NoBowie
13th February 16, 10:49 AM
That's pretty admirable to me. Plus, his wife is hot.

Üser Friendly
13th February 16, 02:03 PM
It's good to be the Crown Prince

Nearly

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
15th February 16, 08:49 AM
Local councils, public bodies and even some university student unions are to be banned by law from boycotting “unethical” companies, as part of a controversial crackdown being announced by the Government.

Under the plan all publicly funded institutions will lose the freedom to refuse to buy goods and services from companies involved in the arms trade, fossil fuels, tobacco products or Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

Any public bodies that continue to pursue boycotts will face “severe penalties”, ministers said.

Full Indy article. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/israel-boycott-local-councils-public-bodies-and-student-unions-to-be-banned-from-shunning-israeli-a6874006.html)

More of NoB's free meerkat enforcement in practice no doubt.

NoBowie
15th February 16, 10:40 AM
Full Indy article. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/israel-boycott-local-councils-public-bodies-and-student-unions-to-be-banned-from-shunning-israeli-a6874006.html)

More of NoB's free meerkat enforcement in practice no doubt.

Here's the thing, if you work for a government / non-private entity, your purchasing choices should be based on price / quality / etc. and whom your government says you should / shouldn't purchase from.

For example, if you have a trade embargo with Cuba you probably shouldn't purchase Cuban goods.

This is very similar to U.S. public officials refusing to marry gay couples. Not as bad a thing really, but on the same spectrum.

The problem with you activists is that you have to crow about everything you do when it is often in your best interests to shut the fuck up. How about, if you are in one of these groups and have purchasing control, you just avoid buying things from groups you don't agree with WITHOUT FUCKING MOUTHING OFF about it.

That way, folks who disagree with you, won't report your behavior and influence folks to create bills like this. Leave politics and religion out of work.

I like Israel and if someone at my work did this you can bet I would report their behavior, provided the Israeli goods made more sense than their choice from a quality / price standpoint.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
15th February 16, 10:54 AM
Here's the thing, if you work for a government / non-private entity, your purchasing choices should be based on price / quality / etc. and whom your government says you should / shouldn't purchase from.

The is issue is that, locally elected officials who may of stood on a platform of not spending tax payers money on certain things, are now being told by central government that they are not allowed to do that any more.



The problem with you activists is that you have to crow about everything you do when it is often in your best interests to shut the fuck up. How about, if you are in one of these groups and have purchasing control, you just avoid buying things from groups you don't agree with WITHOUT FUCKING MOUTHING OFF about it.

That way, folks who disagree with you, won't report your behavior and influence folks to create bills like this. Leave politics and religion out of work.

Have you started smoking crack?

This is a direct assault on local democracy & free market principles.

NoBowie
15th February 16, 10:58 AM
The is issue is that, locally elected officials who may of stood on a platform of not spending tax payers money on certain things, are now being told by central government that they are not allowed to do that any more.

Are my ears deceiving me? Does the Fauxtor finally have a complaint about big, centralized government?

That's what central government does, makes sure things are consistent.

If you want smaller government and more local control, you will have to reduce taxes. Sorry bro!


Have you started smoking crack?

Nope. You seriously think the workplace is a good venue for religious and political discussion and activities? You must be on LSD.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
15th February 16, 11:03 AM
Are my ears deceiving me? Does the Fauxtor finally have a complaint about big, centralized government?

As explained on many occasions, I dont support the idea of centralized government.



If you want smaller government and more local control, you will have to reduce taxes. Sorry bro!

LOL says the guy who supports HUGE government funding.


Nope. You seriously think the workplace is a good venue for religious and political discussion and activities? You must be on LSD.

Errrr if your workplace is in the government then yeah.

That must have been a hard pegging you got last night. I'd go see a doctor about delayed concussion if I were you.

NoBowie
15th February 16, 11:10 AM
So, if I am, for example, a postal worker, I should spout off all day about the merits of the Republican or Democrat party?

False. Quick way to get fired.

Unless you are working in a position that is directly related to a particular party, religion and politics should be off the table.

Any party agnostic government entity, public services, law enforcement, social services, etc. should function this way. I shouldn't even know which way you lean if I am your coworker.

Talk with any HR person, they will agree with me. If you spout off about one party or another, and I am in the opposing side, I can use that against you or the employer if I get fired or something HR related happens at work. "They just fired me because I am in the green party and they support labor"

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
15th February 16, 11:20 AM
So, if I am, for example, a postal worker, I should spout off all day about the merits of the Republican or Democrat party?

False. Quick way to get fired.

Unless you are working in a position that is directly related to a particular party, religion and politics should be off the table.

Any party agnostic government entity, public services, law enforcement, social services, etc. should function this way. I shouldn't even know which way you lean if I am your coworker.

Talk with any HR person, they will agree with me. If you spout off about one party or another, and I am in the opposing side, I can use that against you or the employer if I get fired or something HR related happens at work. "They just fired me because I am in the green party and they support labor"

No you fuckwit.

If you were an elected official & you stood on a platform that you wouldnt spend local tax money on certain things & you had the majority within the local council. Then, the proposal by central government is saying that they would not be allowed to act upon this if those things include boycotting tobacco, fossil fuels, Israeli produce, etc.

Do you understand now?

NoBowie
15th February 16, 11:26 AM
It's completely understandable.

"Under the new rules all contracting authorities including local councils, quangos and universities which receive the majority of their funding from the Government will lose the freedom to take ethical decisions about whom they purchase goods and services from."

You want central government cheese? Then follow their guidelines and decisions. This is like the welfare folks who whine that they can't use their government supplied food funds on twinkies. Fund yourself then.

I want big military and a big surveillance machine. Everything else should be tiny.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
15th February 16, 11:29 AM
Just like your cock.

NoBowie
15th February 16, 01:29 PM
Just like your cock.

I hate to inform you, but it is exactly average.

And... I have bigger balls than you will ever have in your life. Stop sucking off the government teat (and wishing others would / could do the same) and grow a pair.

Üser Friendly
15th February 16, 01:46 PM
I does mean that Boycotting 'unethical' states or countries seems to be working

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
15th February 16, 02:27 PM
My Gods™ that crack is hitting me hard.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
15th February 16, 02:30 PM
I does mean that Boycotting 'unethical' states or countries seems to be working


Was working but now NoB's Nanny State has intervened & he's trying to make out that that is OK whilst on the other hand decrying the same institution for being a Nanny State.

All very Orwellian of him.

Üser Friendly
16th February 16, 01:13 AM
I blame Cameron and his Eaton chums

Poor NoB is just a prawn

Feryk
16th February 16, 12:14 PM
I don't understand what all the fuss is about. The elected official in the Dochter's example can simply blame the unethical dipshits in the federal government. He stays elected, the people love him - and the federal government still saves millions.

If he ACTUALLY cares, then he can lobby the federal government to make changes. If enough people agree with him, it becomes an election issue, and governments will be forced to respond or topple. DEMOCRACY!!

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
16th February 16, 12:15 PM
^Big government apologoist

Feryk
16th February 16, 12:24 PM
I'm neither an apologist or a critic. It just seems like someone took the power away from the local politicians in this regard, and they are upset about it. That's a pretty simple issue, and not one that condemns either level of government.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
16th February 16, 03:57 PM
YOu ever considered being a politician Ferky?

Feryk
17th February 16, 11:12 AM
Nah. I inhaled when I was younger. I can't Clinton my way out of some things I've done.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
17th February 16, 11:21 AM
That doesnt matter in this day & age. Unless you did something really naughty?

You can tell me, I'm a Doctor.

NoBowie
17th February 16, 11:42 AM
Nah. I inhaled when I was younger.

Penis?

Feryk
17th February 16, 12:13 PM
I smoked weed, did mushrooms, drank far too much. I hated my high school experience and am pretty sure that most of the people there who knew me didn't like me much (it was mutual). I slept with a number of girls in high school, but wasn't smooth enough to be able to do it without hurting people's feelings (I was a cad).

There are LOTS of stories about me still floating around that I would be embarrassed about if they were made public. Plus, I make more than most politicians.

NoBowie
17th February 16, 06:22 PM
There are LOTS of stories about me still floating around that I would be embarrassed about if they were made public.

http://i.imgur.com/iaf9eUB.gif

Feryk
18th February 16, 11:35 AM
Something like that wouldn't embarrass me, if it were true.

NoBowie
18th February 16, 11:45 AM
I uh... I drop the soap all the time.

Feryk
18th February 16, 11:54 AM
No matter how much you hint, it's never gonna happen, NoB. I'm just not that into you.

NoBowie
18th February 16, 12:09 PM
I haven't met you in person, NoB, so I am able to contain my lust. Just barely.

Feryk
18th February 16, 07:59 PM
Bloodlust, maybe.

NoBowie
18th February 16, 10:31 PM
I'm on my period.

NoBowie
28th February 16, 10:41 PM
http://i.imgur.com/ujd8gIk.jpg

Feryk
29th February 16, 12:55 PM
Irony that you of all people post pictures of condoms.

NoBowie
29th February 16, 01:12 PM
Irony that you of all people post pictures of condoms.

Sometimes you try to pullout but they have really strong legs and wrap them around you and hold you inside.

http://i.imgur.com/ZQJfSGH.png

Feryk
29th February 16, 01:21 PM
...?

You don't need to make excuses, NoB. You are the one who has to live with the consequences staying in your home, eating your food, shitting on your floor...for at least two more decades.

Congratulations!

Feryk
29th February 16, 01:22 PM
Oh, right, I forgot. You just built the house - but it's really just part of the future divorce proceedings, so you won't have to worry about actually living with your own children.

NoBowie
29th February 16, 01:36 PM
You are the one who has to live with the consequences staying in your home, eating your food, shitting on your floor...for at least two more decades.

Congratulations!

http://i.imgur.com/Dxd2WIm.jpg

Feryk
29th February 16, 01:41 PM
Some call it disgusting....but it's art.

Pie of Hate
1st March 16, 04:36 AM
Checkmate in three.

Üser Friendly
1st March 16, 06:36 AM
Surely that should be check mate in No. 2s

Pie of Hate
1st March 16, 07:39 AM
I'm counting the involuntary piss dribble that always accompanies No. 2s as well.

Üser Friendly
1st March 16, 09:04 AM
nice imagery

Pie of Hate
1st March 16, 09:30 AM
Just think of the echo she could achieve with your bucket.

Üser Friendly
1st March 16, 09:35 AM
yeah!

NoBowie
22nd March 16, 03:57 PM
oi me n alfie took a cam wit us n ur nans gaper n we woznt serprized at all m8

http://i.imgur.com/x11HxHi.gif

NoBowie
25th March 16, 12:15 PM
http://i.imgur.com/PQ4pH4m.jpg

NoBowie
6th April 16, 01:02 PM
Cosplay in Britain:

http://i.imgur.com/LKEC2w7.jpg

Feryk
6th April 16, 01:18 PM
They take their Kennedy impersonators seriously. I wonder if they have a Lee Harvey Oswald cosplayer out there somewhere?

Üser Friendly
6th April 16, 01:41 PM
I'd go as a grassy knoll

Feryk
6th April 16, 01:45 PM
Figures you'd like a 'lone gunman' crawling around on top of you...

Üser Friendly
7th April 16, 01:05 AM
Lone gunman?

You're so naive

Feryk
7th April 16, 12:28 PM
Well played...:)

Pie of Hate
8th April 16, 04:32 AM
He wants entire platoons crawling around on top of him.

Üser Friendly
8th April 16, 06:25 AM
I'm a knoll

It's what i do

Feryk
8th April 16, 09:52 AM
Hmm....maybe more of a Gnoll....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnoll

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZLbEX7_GC_c/UClsWSqx1sI/AAAAAAAAANg/vu8K4jBv1Uo/s1600/Gnoll_Necromancer_by_velinov.jpg

A human, hyena hybrid? Yep, I can see it.

Pie of Hate
8th April 16, 10:40 AM
Weren't they a Thundercat villain?

Feryk
8th April 16, 10:56 AM
Couldn't tell you. The only thing I remember from that show is Cheetara.

http://t00.deviantart.net/RAQ0C8wbmlWzEoSBwmriDa4x54I=/300x200/filters:fixed_height(100,100):origin()/pre04/3482/th/pre/f/2013/309/c/1/cheetara_colors_by_e_blake-d6t4xco.jpg