UKIP's Nigel Farage to speak at Donald Trump rally

[Grouse]

19 hours ago, jayboy said:

It does not take a Great Man view of history - though I suspect you don't really understand what that means - to explain Farage's role in Brexit.You deny a reality which actually is well accepted even among those who were Remainers, namely Farage's hugely influential role.

But your smearing of 52% of British voters as racist shows you to be not only pig ignorant but also unpleasantly deranged.

 

Sadly, 52% of the population are uneducated, pig ignorant and unpleasantly racist?

 

However, Farage's intervention will thankfully consign Trump and his supporters to the trash containers of history!

Edited August 27, 2016 by Grouse

[HappyDazed]

“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”

― George Carlin

[MiKT]

17 minutes ago, HappyDazed said:

“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”

― George Carlin

 

Now I am dazed and unhappy.

 

I like George C even when he's dead, but what's the context?

 

Are you pro, or anti, Trump, or Hillary or Farage, or Brexit, all or none, or even several shades of POTUS, or  just referring to the average US/UK voter or TV poster (self excluded from such generalisations naturally).

 

At least we would get a very fin good idea of what George thought if he was still with us and I would just love to hear his opinions on Mr DT, he certainly would not have wasted any of his time on Nige.

 

Speak up man or for............

[HappyDazed]

13 minutes ago, MiKT said:

 

Now I am dazed and unhappy.

 

I like George C even when he's dead, but what's the context?

 

Are you pro, or anti, Trump, or Hillary or Farage, or Brexit, all or none, or even several shades of POTUS, or  just referring to the average US/UK voter or TV poster (self excluded from such generalisations naturally).

 

The context is the post preceding mine which I also liked....

 

59 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Sadly, 52% of the population are uneducated, pig ignorant and unpleasantly racist.

 

 

[MiKT]

12 minutes ago, HappyDazed said:

 

The context is the post preceding mine which I also liked....

 

 

 

 

OK la,

 

I think George might be tempted to say a few words about the new TV format (which I like in general) but seems to cause a lot of posters (inc. me) to lose the thread.

 

So TV, listen to that voice booming down from above "Fix the frigging site ASAP" so we can continue to debate on the joys of Trumped up Faranges.

 

ugh, sounds like some sort of something nasty you would not want to catch.

[PTC]

So let's examine one of Farage's failures in more detail.

 

Farage’s voting record on fishing ‘makes mockery’ of new election poster http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/media/press-releases/farage’s-voting-record-fishing-‘makes-mockery’-new-election-poster-20150408

This article discusses Farage's record as a member of the European Parliament Fisheries Committee.

 

"Over the three years that Nigel Farage was a member of the European Parliament Fisheries Committee, he attended one out of 42 meetings. Greenpeace research released today shows that during the three major votes to fix the flaws of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), Nigel Farage was in the building but failed to vote in favour of improving the legislation."

 

What do we hear from the self promoting wind bag? That he is the defender of the 'little guy'. Clearly that does not include hard working fishermen and coastal communities. Why? Well because they don't attract enough publicity presumably for him to stroke his own ego. Besides attending a meeting and voting on legislation to fix problems is not something that 'disruptors' do. He fed at th public trough while rejecting and belittling others who work to integrate, respect diversity and fix problems. In other words Govern. Instead he chose to barrack and malign and mobilize the most base and vile bigotry. He demonstrates that it is far easier to tear down than to build.

 

He was a failed businessman, blaming his failure on foreigners. He was a failed representative to the European Parliament. He is a failed leader because he helped destroy a political experiment instead of working to make it work.

 

A natural fit for the soon to be LOSER Trump. I await the personal attacks from those besotted by this manifest failure of a human being.

[jayboy]

So let's examine one of Farage's failures in more detail.

 

Farage’s voting record on fishing ‘makes mockery’ of new election poster http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/media/press-releases/farage’s-voting-record-fishing-‘makes-mockery’-new-election-poster-20150408

This article discusses Farage's record as a member of the European Parliament Fisheries Committee.

 

"Over the three years that Nigel Farage was a member of the European Parliament Fisheries Committee, he attended one out of 42 meetings. Greenpeace research released today shows that during the three major votes to fix the flaws of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), Nigel Farage was in the building but failed to vote in favour of improving the legislation."

 

What do we hear from the self promoting wind bag? That he is the defender of the 'little guy'. Clearly that does not include hard working fishermen and coastal communities. Why? Well because they don't attract enough publicity presumably for him to stroke his own ego. Besides attending a meeting and voting on legislation to fix problems is not something that 'disruptors' do. He fed at th public trough while rejecting and belittling others who work to integrate, respect diversity and fix problems. In other words Govern. Instead he chose to barrack and malign and mobilize the most base and vile bigotry. He demonstrates that it is far easier to tear down than to build.

 

He was a failed businessman, blaming his failure on foreigners. He was a failed representative to the European Parliament. He is a failed leader because he helped destroy a political experiment instead of working to make it work.

 

A natural fit for the soon to be LOSER Trump. I await the personal attacks from those besotted by this manifest failure of a human being.

I dont think anyone here is besotted by Farage - though perhaps you are - nor does anyone believe he is without many faults.Nevertheless he has presided over the greatest political achievement in decades - namely the development of a small minority movement to the stunning recent Brexit success.It would not have happened without him and only the most unperceptive could describe him as a loser.

Objectionable and wrongheaded, certainly but one does not have to admire him to recognise his stunning success.I understand the rage and frustration many feel about Brexit but that isnt a license to distort history.

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, Thaidream said:

Nigel Farage and Donald Trump play to the same audience- white, blue collar workers, somewhat bitter and disillusioned who blame both countries ills on non white immigrants who have allegedly stolen jobs and liberal governments who cannot stop the illegals and spend untold millions on welfare.  The disillusionment is real, the cause not, but neither Farage or  Trump have the real answer.  While there are similarities between both the Uk and US- the causes are somewhat different. Many in the Uk believe that it is the EU who are dictating how Britain should be run and not the British people- hence a vote for Brexit and a desire for the British to decide their fate and not bureaucrats sitting in Brussels.I don't thing anyone actually knows the result of what an exit from the EU will bring and that is why the UK has not formally requested the exit start.

America has no such system and no one else to blame except the American people who keep electing  people as President who talk a good game but cannot produce. The problem is that Donald Trump will not change anything except provide a few crumbs to the poor and declining middle class. He has no plan; he hass no real agenda that will advance America and his solution  of building walls along the Mexican border or keeping out Muslims will not put one extra dollar in the hands of the poor or middle class. He just does not have the depth of knowledge or temperament to be President. Hillary Clinton may be the ultimate politician and as one will also attempt to sell the public snake oil but at least she has some experience in government and can hold the country together until a  real election is possible in the US. Right now, we only have a choice between 2 wealthy Americans neither who really appeal to the majority of the public. That is because of money politics and the  control of the American economy by 1% of our population while the other 99% fight for the leftovers.

To be perfectly  blunt- President Obama should have stayed out of the Brexit campaign and never made any statement  of support one way or the other and Mr. Farage needs to return to the UK and stay out of the American election. Next we'll have Putin and Le Penn making speeches for Trump and Merkel and May making them for Hillary.

 

You overlook the fact that the next president will nominate up to 3 SCOTUS judges, and they will determine the future direction of the US for generations to come.

This election is vital for those that care about the direction in which the US should be heading.

 

All those GOP people that do not support their party's nominated candidate will only have themselves to blame if it all goes wrong for them.

 

You did get it right concerning Obama sticking his beak into the Brexit campaign though. He might even have swung a close vote to the leave side because many disliked him doing so.

 

Re Farage, I don't get why so many dislike him so violently. At least he spoke out about EU corruption and didn't just stick his snout in the trough as so many do.

Edited August 28, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[PTC]

Let us consider more of Farage's failures and the reason why history will remember his as a Loser.

 

Those of the besotted set who idolize so-called 'Great Men' as makers of history, an outdated and quite limited view of human affairs as even the most neophyte historiographers will agree, narrowly measure success in the Brexit affair by the one referendum vote that is largely tainted and was a consequence of promoting some of the worst features of British racism and cultural arrogance.

 

The Brexit vote may be claimed as a success by the partisans but the way in which it was achieved has poisoned the environment for political debate for a long time to come.

 

"We are also diminished. Our politics are poisoned, our discourse is fragile, our leaders are discredited. Facts ceased to matter, knowledge ceased to be valued, compassion appeared to evaporate."  https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/24/eu-vote-uk-diminished-politics-poisoned-racism

 

I wonder in what world the bigoted twit who promoted this state of affairs can be called a success? Clearly not only the British political system failed to deal with a marginalized bigot but that bigot failed the British people by leaving them with a tainted, toxic environment that may take generations to heal.

 

A Loser. A Failure. A natural fit for Trump.

[Jingthing]

In any case, I don't think the attempt at connecting the Brexit movement in general with the trumpist movement is going to be any kind of significant factor in the U.S. presidential election. First of all, most Americans are clueless about such things, and secondly, the U.S. has very specific issues, demographics, and personalities running for president that will actually be the determinative factors.

Edited August 28, 2016 by Jingthing

[JHolmesJr]

On 25 August, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Jingthing said:

Both Brexit and trumpism are white racist, xenophobic movements. 

 

And both make a lot of sense given the current situation….dont agree they are white racist or xenophobic….just realist movements in tune with whats happening.

 

Edited August 28, 2016 by JHolmesJr

[jayboy]

Let us consider more of Farage's failures and the reason why history will remember his as a Loser.

 

Those of the besotted set who idolize so-called 'Great Men' as makers of history, an outdated and quite limited view of human affairs as even the most neophyte historiographers will agree, narrowly measure success in the Brexit affair by the one referendum vote that is largely tainted and was a consequence of promoting some of the worst features of British racism and cultural arrogance.

 

The Brexit vote may be claimed as a success by the partisans but the way in which it was achieved has poisoned the environment for political debate for a long time to come.

 

"We are also diminished. Our politics are poisoned, our discourse is fragile, our leaders are discredited. Facts ceased to matter, knowledge ceased to be valued, compassion appeared to evaporate."  https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/24/eu-vote-uk-diminished-politics-poisoned-racism

 

I wonder in what world the bigoted twit who promoted this state of affairs can be called a success? Clearly not only the British political system failed to deal with a marginalized bigot but that bigot failed the British people by leaving them with a tainted, toxic environment that may take generations to heal.

 

A Loser. A Failure. A natural fit for Trump.

You repeat yourself yet again without furthering your argument.If you were to argue that Farage was not main influence in achieving Brexit there would be a basis for discussion.You seem to believe that Brexit has will sour British political life for generations - but that obviously remains to be seen.

Incidentally don't expect anything but mocking if you use terms like "neophyte historiographers".

[PTC]

What lessons can be learned by the neophyte historiographer when they come to approach the interpretation of Farage's failure? Such people will reject the pig ignorance of the 19th century 'Great Man' school as culturally imperialist and entirely driven by ego. Clearly Marxist historiography and Progressivism should impact on any interpretation of the Rejectionist phenomenon peddled by the failed scam artist Farage but it is clear that contemporary approaches to Social History should be used to interpret this failure.

 

Of course, H.E. Carr's 'What is History' https://www.amazon.com/What-History-Edward-Hallet-Carr/dp/039470391X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1472372295&sr=8-1&keywords=what+is+history debunked the Rankean view of history as an 'accretion of facts' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historiography#Macaulay_and_Whig_history such as the result of a single referendum. So where does the leave the neophyte historiographer who wants to present a valid and credible analysis of Farage.

 

I would approach the task primarily through Social History.

 

Social history is quite different. It touches on, and arguably helps to focus, major issues of public debate, as for example on British national character or the nature of family life. It mobilises popular enthusiasm and engages popular passions. http://www.historytoday.com/raphael-samuel/what-social-history

 

And this would start by looking further at Farage's failure at being elected an MP for the British Parliament. Why did Farage consistently fail to be elected as an MP? Multiple times.

 

"In any other party a leader who has been personally rejected by the electorate seven times would be unthinkable, absurd perhaps.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-has-been-rejected-by-voters-seven-times-and-should-step-aside-has-godfrey-bloom-spoken-10261311.html

 

Approaching his failure through the lens of Social Historiographical analysis means that we have to confront the consequences of this playing and preying on the most base feelings of racism and cultural imperialism and how this was rejected by those who believe in tolerance, diversity and inclusiveness.

 

 

More such reactions here http://www.mirror.co.uk/usvsth3m/nigel-farage-loses-twitter-reaction-5658897

 

Yes, the fact that Farage was rejected by the UK electorate seven times more than demonstrates his status as a failure. Using Social History can provide clues into why this happened. The Rankean Empiricists may stay in their 19th Century cocoon wrapped in the false beliefs that Great Men still determine history. Strikes me as pig ignorance really.

Edited August 28, 2016 by PTC

[jayboy]

What lessons can be learned by the neophyte historiographer when they come to approach the interpretation of Farage's failure? Such people will reject the pig ignorance of the 19th century 'Great Man' school as culturally imperialist and entirely driven by ego. Clearly Marxist historiography and Progressivism should impact on any interpretation of the Rejectionist phenomenon peddled by the failed scam artist Farage but it is clear that contemporary approaches to Social History should be used to interpret this failure.

 

Of course, H.E. Carr's 'What is History' https://www.amazon.com/What-History-Edward-Hallet-Carr/dp/039470391X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1472372295&sr=8-1&keywords=what+is+history debunked the Rankean view of history as an 'accretion of facts' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historiography#Macaulay_and_Whig_history such as the result of a single referendum. So where does the leave the neophyte historiographer who wants to present a valid and credible analysis of Farage.

 

I would approach the task primarily through Social History.

 

Social history is quite different. It touches on, and arguably helps to focus, major issues of public debate, as for example on British national character or the nature of family life. It mobilises popular enthusiasm and engages popular passions. http://www.historytoday.com/raphael-samuel/what-social-history

 

And this would start by looking further at Farage's failure at being elected an MP for the British Parliament. Why did Farage consistently fail to be elected as an MP? Multiple times.

 

"In any other party a leader who has been personally rejected by the electorate seven times would be unthinkable, absurd perhaps.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-has-been-rejected-by-voters-seven-times-and-should-step-aside-has-godfrey-bloom-spoken-10261311.html

 

Approaching his failure through the lens of Social Historiographical analysis means that we have to confront the consequences of this playing and preying on the most base feelings of racism and cultural imperialism and how this was rejected by those who believe in tolerance, diversity and inclusiveness.

 

[/url]  

More such reactions here http://www.mirror.co.uk/usvsth3m/nigel-farage-loses-twitter-reaction-5658897

 

Yes, the fact that Farage was rejected by the UK electorate seven times more than demonstrates his status as a failure. Using Social History can provide clues into why this happened. The Rankean Empiricists may stay in their 19th Century cocoon wrapped in the false beliefs that Great Men still determine history. Strikes me as pig ignorance really.

Beyond mockery.As a pastiche of an uneducated person - like Russell Brand - attempting to sound "academic" it would be admirable.However I have a horrible feeling he is attempting to be taken seriously.

[MiKT]

3 hours ago, PTC said:

What lessons can be learned by the neophyte historiographer when they come to approach the interpretation of Farage's failure? Such people will reject the pig ignorance of the 19th century 'Great Man' school as culturally imperialist and entirely driven by ego. Clearly Marxist historiography and Progressivism should impact on any interpretation of the Rejectionist phenomenon peddled by the failed scam artist Farage but it is clear that contemporary approaches to Social History should be used to interpret this failure.

 

Of course, H.E. Carr's 'What is History' https://www.amazon.com/What-History-Edward-Hallet-Carr/dp/039470391X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1472372295&sr=8-1&keywords=what+is+history debunked the Rankean view of history as an 'accretion of facts' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historiography#Macaulay_and_Whig_history such as the result of a single referendum. So where does the leave the neophyte historiographer who wants to present a valid and credible analysis of Farage.

 

I would approach the task primarily through Social History.

 

Social history is quite different. It touches on, and arguably helps to focus, major issues of public debate, as for example on British national character or the nature of family life. It mobilises popular enthusiasm and engages popular passions. http://www.historytoday.com/raphael-samuel/what-social-history

 

And this would start by looking further at Farage's failure at being elected an MP for the British Parliament. Why did Farage consistently fail to be elected as an MP? Multiple times.

 

"In any other party a leader who has been personally rejected by the electorate seven times would be unthinkable, absurd perhaps.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-has-been-rejected-by-voters-seven-times-and-should-step-aside-has-godfrey-bloom-spoken-10261311.html

 

Approaching his failure through the lens of Social Historiographical analysis means that we have to confront the consequences of this playing and preying on the most base feelings of racism and cultural imperialism and how this was rejected by those who believe in tolerance, diversity and inclusiveness.

 

 

More such reactions here http://www.mirror.co.uk/usvsth3m/nigel-farage-loses-twitter-reaction-5658897

 

Yes, the fact that Farage was rejected by the UK electorate seven times more than demonstrates his status as a failure. Using Social History can provide clues into why this happened. The Rankean Empiricists may stay in their 19th Century cocoon wrapped in the false beliefs that Great Men still determine history. Strikes me as pig ignorance really.

 

What kind of crap is this, "Rankean Empiricists may stay in their 19thth Century cocoon......" "Marxist historiography and Progressivism", what did you do, swallow a hard backed copy of Wikipidia?

 

I think if Marx had spent a little bit of time in one of Stalin 's gulags instead of swanning about in Hampstead he might have had a different idea about great men changing the course of history.

 

Rankin's views are simply immaterial in this day and age.

 

But what the hell that has to do with this debate I have no idea, neither Trump nor Farage come, or will ever come, within a 30 million dead Chinese of being great men that will change the course of history.

 

God what bunkum.

 

If Farage had faded away to the obscurity he deserves, he would at least have had some small political victories to retire on. It is his jumping up and making a complete <deleted> of himself with Trump that sticks in my craw.

 

What Trump, who might just achieve history as the biggest con-man ever, was doing putting this guy up at one of his rallies would be beyond belief if it did not oh so adequately illustrate his complete lack of understanding of anything about UK politics.

 

But then that goes with his complete lack of understanding of European, Asian, Russian, etc, etc, etc, etc politics.

 

Aligning himself with Farage is simply another nail in Trumps white supremacist bigoted coffin.

 

 

 

 

 

[nausea]

Farage is a destroyer, not a builder. Such people have their uses. Whether this is good for the UK remains to be seen.

 

[Linzz]

Immigration " they're coming to steal our jobs" is a cliche used by the Trump/Farage camp but a common refrain in many countries. Nevertheless there remains an element of truth to it.

 

In my country I know more illegal Thais than I do Thais legally holding visas. Their visa runs out, they do not renew it nor do they leave but go underground. Doing this they have an advantage of driving real wages down. In fact not only because they are willing to work for less 7 days (which still is heaps in Thai terms) but because they fly under the radar and have no registration of any kind they therefore do not pay any taxes (apart from VAT), they deal mostly in untraceable cash transactions, accordingly they can outbid any legitimate trader. If say, your income taxes are roughly a quarter to one third, then that is one of a hell discount they can provide to secure work. They do not wear a sign saying they are illegal immigrants, no one asks or cares.

I do not blame them for using the system to better their lives and families but it does not sit well with me to find these enterprising illegals doing pretty well sending money back to Thailand and because of the exchange rate becoming quite rich in comparison to their compatriots when they return. One I know  has been here for 15 years, another 10. One finally got caught (I think but not sure) not being able to supply ID in a traffic accident. But that still did not cost him, only the legit taxpayer because Immigration paid for his return home because he "hasn't any money". Actually he had quite a business with vehicles and plant. Of course he contributed to the country's economy but he also used services roads etc that others have to pay for.Immigration does not concern itself with his assets, which is outside their jurisdiction, he assigned them to his partner who put everything into her Thai bank account. It seems that Immigration, Police, Inland Revenue, Social Welfare, banks are prevented from sharing files without special application, so they only concern themselves with their own jurisdictions. Dysfunctional in my view but that's human rights for you.

 

I don't know what the situation is in America or even the UK, if its similar or not, but if it is then it should be addressed and may explain in some  measure that objections to immigrants is not always race based as the Marxist/Progressives think is axiomatic. But I don't know how it's possible to address it without being draconian. Looks like trying to close the barn door after the horse has bolted.

[Srikcir]

22 minutes ago, Linzz said:

I don't know what the situation is in America

  There is a lot of published data on the topic.

According to the U.S. Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy estimates for 2013 which do not count federal taxes, undocumented immigrants paid $11.6 billion in state and local taxes in 2013. This includes sales, income and property (owned and rented) taxes. ITEP also estimates that at least 50% of undocumented immigrant households currently file income tax returns using Individual Tax Identification Numbers (ITINs), and many who do not file income tax returns still have taxes deducted from their paychecks.

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/adding-billions-tax-dollars-paid-undocumented-immigrants

As much as  75% of the undocumented immigrant population is believed to pay into the U.S. Social Security system whose benefits they wouldn't be eligible to receive anyway unless they became U.S. citizens. The average tax rate for undocumented immigrants in the USA is higher than the rate paid by America's top earners having an average nationwide effective tax rate of just 5.4%.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-01/study-undocumented-immigrants-pay-billions-in-taxes

[MiKT]

1 hour ago, Linzz said:

Immigration " they're coming to steal our jobs" is a cliche used by the Trump/Farage camp but a common refrain in many countries. Nevertheless there remains an element of truth to it.

 

In my country I know more illegal Thais than I do Thais legally holding visas. Their visa runs out, they do not renew it nor do they leave but go underground. Doing this they have an advantage of driving real wages down. In fact not only because they are willing to work for less 7 days (which still is heaps in Thai terms) but because they fly under the radar and have no registration of any kind they therefore do not pay any taxes (apart from VAT), they deal mostly in untraceable cash transactions, accordingly they can outbid any legitimate trader. If say, your income taxes are roughly a quarter to one third, then that is one of a hell discount they can provide to secure work. They do not wear a sign saying they are illegal immigrants, no one asks or cares.

I do not blame them for using the system to better their lives and families but it does not sit well with me to find these enterprising illegals doing pretty well sending money back to Thailand and because of the exchange rate becoming quite rich in comparison to their compatriots when they return. One I know  has been here for 15 years, another 10. One finally got caught (I think but not sure) not being able to supply ID in a traffic accident. But that still did not cost him, only the legit taxpayer because Immigration paid for his return home because he "hasn't any money". Actually he had quite a business with vehicles and plant. Of course he contributed to the country's economy but he also used services roads etc that others have to pay for.Immigration does not concern itself with his assets, which is outside their jurisdiction, he assigned them to his partner who put everything into her Thai bank account. It seems that Immigration, Police, Inland Revenue, Social Welfare, banks are prevented from sharing files without special application, so they only concern themselves with their own jurisdictions. Dysfunctional in my view but that's human rights for you.

 

I don't know what the situation is in America or even the UK, if its similar or not, but if it is then it should be addressed and may explain in some  measure that objections to immigrants is not always race based as the Marxist/Progressives think is axiomatic. But I don't know how it's possible to address it without being draconian. Looks like trying to close the barn door after the horse has bolted.

 

 

I don't know what country you come from, but as it is not the US or the UK and assuming from your English it is in Europe or Scandinavia, I can only think you don't actually know many Thais'.

 

As an ethnic group there are an incredibly small number in the UK and Europe and if you had any idea how hard it is for Thai's to get a visa, you would know that only a very tiny number can get away with staying illegally in any country.

 

Compared to other immigrants Thai's must cause the least number of problems of any country.

 

But that's not to say they should not pay taxes etc. It's just they are the least of your worries.

 

But also, part of your post does not make any sense at all. If their income tax is 1/2 or 1/3 they are still paying tax. How come if they are underground? You must come from a country with incredibly sloppy tax authorities. Its certainly would not happen in the UK or Germany.

 

Or else this is just the usual Nige type knock immigrants/Thai's BS. In fact I think you are a TROLL.

 

 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Linzz said:

Immigration " they're coming to steal our jobs" is a cliche used by the Trump/Farage camp but a common refrain in many countries. Nevertheless there remains an element of truth to it.

 

In my country I know more illegal Thais than I do Thais legally holding visas. Their visa runs out, they do not renew it nor do they leave but go underground. Doing this they have an advantage of driving real wages down. In fact not only because they are willing to work for less 7 days (which still is heaps in Thai terms) but because they fly under the radar and have no registration of any kind they therefore do not pay any taxes (apart from VAT), they deal mostly in untraceable cash transactions, accordingly they can outbid any legitimate trader. If say, your income taxes are roughly a quarter to one third, then that is one of a hell discount they can provide to secure work. They do not wear a sign saying they are illegal immigrants, no one asks or cares.

I do not blame them for using the system to better their lives and families but it does not sit well with me to find these enterprising illegals doing pretty well sending money back to Thailand and because of the exchange rate becoming quite rich in comparison to their compatriots when they return. One I know  has been here for 15 years, another 10. One finally got caught (I think but not sure) not being able to supply ID in a traffic accident. But that still did not cost him, only the legit taxpayer because Immigration paid for his return home because he "hasn't any money". Actually he had quite a business with vehicles and plant. Of course he contributed to the country's economy but he also used services roads etc that others have to pay for.Immigration does not concern itself with his assets, which is outside their jurisdiction, he assigned them to his partner who put everything into her Thai bank account. It seems that Immigration, Police, Inland Revenue, Social Welfare, banks are prevented from sharing files without special application, so they only concern themselves with their own jurisdictions. Dysfunctional in my view but that's human rights for you.

 

I don't know what the situation is in America or even the UK, if its similar or not, but if it is then it should be addressed and may explain in some  measure that objections to immigrants is not always race based as the Marxist/Progressives think is axiomatic. But I don't know how it's possible to address it without being draconian. Looks like trying to close the barn door after the horse has bolted.

Start fining employers ten thousand quid per undocumented worker and set up a police employer team, and it'll soon go away.

[Linzz]

7 hours ago, MiKT said:

 

 

I don't know what country you come from, but as it is not the US or the UK and assuming from your English it is in Europe or Scandinavia, I can only think you don't actually know many Thais'.

 

As an ethnic group there are an incredibly small number in the UK and Europe and if you had any idea how hard it is for Thai's to get a visa, you would know that only a very tiny number can get away with staying illegally in any country.

 

Compared to other immigrants Thai's must cause the least number of problems of any country.

 

But that's not to say they should not pay taxes etc. It's just they are the least of your worries.

 

But also, part of your post does not make any sense at all. If their income tax is 1/2 or 1/3 they are still paying tax. How come if they are underground? You must come from a country with incredibly sloppy tax authorities. Its certainly would not happen in the UK or Germany.

 

Or else this is just the usual Nige type knock immigrants/Thai's BS. In fact I think you are a TROLL.

 

 

 

 

 

Well thanks for calling me a TROLL when it's you who doesn't understand. I am a kiwi and reside in NZ. There's not a huge number of Thais in NZ either but I was simply using them as an example of what else may happen in other countries with other ethnicities. I have only first hand experience with Thsi's.hence my comment. My post makes sense if you read that if the usual tax contributions are between a quarter and a third for most citizens but does not reach to illegals because they are in hiding means they don't pay anything at all. I said they do not pay any taxes apart from VAT if you read my post. Therefore they can outbid legitimate traders.

Hope that clarifies it. Nor was I knocking Thai's. TROLL indeed!why would I knock immigrants of any kind when my Thai wife is one? You seem to be very quick to pigeonhole me when it suits your LW narrative.

 

Edited August 29, 2016 by Linzz
Addition

[Linzz]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Start fining employers ten thousand quid per undocumented worker and set up a police employer team, and it'll soon go away.

 

It doesn't because some employers love cash deals because there is no documentation and they do not have to be responsible for the tax gathering, paperwork ,accident compensation payments, holiday pay. sick pay etc and they do not have to pay so much for the same job done. Also since the illegals are invisible, what employees? Even if the authorities suspect, they cannot prove anything with invisible payments also.

 

Occasionally they are uncovered but mainly illegal workers in Thai restaurants who are also paid cash much less than the minimum wage. Both parties think they are ok, management because they hire cheap labour and the employees because they still earn more than they would in Thailand. Think this is common with other nationalities also namely Indian and Chinese.

Edited August 29, 2016 by Linzz

[Linzz]

I think things are not as simplistic as anti immigrant equals racism. But the longer immigrants have an effect on legal citizens in the manner I posted above then it would morph into that and I am sure it does. I would not be surprised if this is also common to other countries with various nationalities

[Rimmer]

Multiple off topic bickering posts and quoted replies to them have been removed, can we stop this now please and get back to discussing the topic, thank you

[PTC]

On August 28, 2016 at 7:17 PM, MiKT said:

 

What kind of crap is this, "Rankean Empiricists may stay in their 19thth Century cocoon......" "Marxist historiography and Progressivism", what did you do, swallow a hard backed copy of Wikipidia?

 

I think if Marx had spent a little bit of time in one of Stalin 's gulags instead of swanning about in Hampstead he might have had a different idea about great men changing the course of history.

 

Rankin's views are simply immaterial in this day and age.

 

But what the hell that has to do with this debate I have no idea, neither Trump nor Farage come, or will ever come, within a 30 million dead Chinese of being great men that will change the course of history.

 

God what bunkum.

 

If Farage had faded away to the obscurity he deserves, he would at least have had some small political victories to retire on. It is his jumping up and making a complete <deleted> of himself with Trump that sticks in my craw.

 

What Trump, who might just achieve history as the biggest con-man ever, was doing putting this guy up at one of his rallies would be beyond belief if it did not oh so adequately illustrate his complete lack of understanding of anything about UK politics.

 

But then that goes with his complete lack of understanding of European, Asian, Russian, etc, etc, etc, etc politics.

 

Aligning himself with Farage is simply another nail in Trumps white supremacist bigoted coffin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is actually my point about the failure of Farage.

[PTC]

Let's continue to explore Farage's failure. His failure as a businessman has been demonstrated. His failure to be elected multiple times as a UK Member of Parliament has also been described and referenced. However it is his failure as the public face of Brexit that is most galling and the one that the besotted racists hail as a victory.

 

A number of commentators have put forward the idea that the Brexit campaign has tainted UK politics. This is the ultimate failure of Farage. His use of gutter racism and bigotry to mobilize hated and chauvinism to sell a destructive agenda will mark him in history as a failure.

 

Remember the anti immigrant poster?

 

This is what Farage's so called leadership created.

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/2016/06/nigel-farage-s-anti-eu-poster-depicting-migrants-resembles-nazi-propaganda

 

What did such tactics lead to? A increase in racially motivated attacks by those of a 'certain type' actively courted by the failure, Farage. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-eu-referendum-racial-racism-abuse-hate-crime-reported-latest-leave-immigration-a7104191.html

 

Irrespective of some old men getting their adult diapers in a twist, the failure of Farage is manifest. He represents the worst of Old England, the narrow-minded, selfish, cultural imperialists who reject constructivism, inclusiveness and cooperation. Farage's failure has assisted England's transition to a third-rate non-entity.

[jayboy]

Let's continue to explore Farage's failure. His failure as a businessman has been demonstrated. His failure to be elected multiple times as a UK Member of Parliament has also been described and referenced. However it is his failure as the public face of Brexit that is most galling and the one that the besotted racists hail as a victory.

 

A number of commentators have put forward the idea that the Brexit campaign has tainted UK politics. This is the ultimate failure of Farage. His use of gutter racism and bigotry to mobilize hated and chauvinism to sell a destructive agenda will mark him in history as a failure.

 

Remember the anti immigrant poster?

 

This is what Farage's so called leadership created.

 

http://www.newstatesman.com/2016/06/nigel-farage-s-anti-eu-poster-depicting-migrants-resembles-nazi-propaganda

 

What did such tactics lead to? A increase in racially motivated attacks by those of a 'certain type' actively courted by the failure, Farage. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-eu-referendum-racial-racism-abuse-hate-crime-reported-latest-leave-immigration-a7104191.html

 

Irrespective of some old men getting their adult diapers in a twist, the failure of Farage is manifest. He represents the worst of Old England, the narrow-minded, selfish, cultural imperialists who reject constructivism, inclusiveness and cooperation. Farage's failure has assisted England's transition to a third-rate non-entity.

You have made the point several times that Farage has a flawed record.Few would disagree with you so I am not sure why you feel the need to make the same rather commonplace point again and again.

However on this occasion you have become completely incoherent citing Farage's failure as the public face of Brexit.Perhaps you need to be reminded which side won the referendum.

The reality is of course is that without Farage's pressure and gadfly activism it would have been impossible for Brexit to go from a minority movement to one that finally triumphed.Farage's victory was one of the most remarkable in modern times.

[PTC]

I wonder at the need for some people to adore 'Great People' as makers of history. This is a discredited approach to the analysis of world affairs. This rejection of social history and movements as change makers is somewhat irrational, some might even call it incoherent thought.

 

In any case, Farage's failures are well documented, in business, in UK electoral politics, in pushing the great unwashed into the mud of race baiting and hatred. So we are left with the remaining idea that as the face of Brexit, Farage is a success?

 

Well, Michael Portillo thinks that Farage deserves a place in history

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/687539/nigel-farage-michael-portillo-eu-brexit

 

I enjoy watching Portillo's train adventures. Quaint, uncomplicated, non-controversial slightly romantic views of England (and now America). The question though is whether 'deserving a place in history' is or is not the same notion as being a 'failure'. Since I respect Portillo, I will accept his notion but he is not lauding Farage as a success, just acknowledging a role and impact.

 

Of the 18 people the New Statesman blames for Brexit http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/06/18-people-blame-brexit Farage scores 9/10, but then so does Margaret Thatcher and Rupert Murdoch. Cameron gets a 10/10 and Dear Boris a 14/10. Would Brexit have occurred without Farage. That is unknowable. Should Farage be regarded as a success because of Brexit. No. He failed the British people. He failed the future of British politics. He failed future history. Racism, bigotry, division. All indicators of Failure.

 

[jayboy]

I wonder at the need for some people to adore 'Great People' as makers of history. This is a discredited approach to the analysis of world affairs. This rejection of social history and movements as change makers is somewhat irrational, some might even call it incoherent thought.

 

In any case, Farage's failures are well documented, in business, in UK electoral politics, in pushing the great unwashed into the mud of race baiting and hatred. So we are left with the remaining idea that as the face of Brexit, Farage is a success?

 

Well, Michael Portillo thinks that Farage deserves a place in history

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/687539/nigel-farage-michael-portillo-eu-brexit

 

I enjoy watching Portillo's train adventures. Quaint, uncomplicated, non-controversial slightly romantic views of England (and now America). The question though is whether 'deserving a place in history' is or is not the same notion as being a 'failure'. Since I respect Portillo, I will accept his notion but he is not lauding Farage as a success, just acknowledging a role and impact.

 

Of the 18 people the New Statesman blames for Brexit http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/06/18-people-blame-brexit Farage scores 9/10, but then so does Margaret Thatcher and Rupert Murdoch. Cameron gets a 10/10 and Dear Boris a 14/10. Would Brexit have occurred without Farage. That is unknowable. Should Farage be regarded as a success because of Brexit. No. He failed the British people. He failed the future of British politics. He failed future history. Racism, bigotry, division. All indicators of Failure.

 

Do you not become weary of repeating the same stuff? Don't you understand that it is Farage's role and impact on the successful Brexit referendum we are considering, not his record and personal qualities?

Of course there is room for subjectivity but most authoritative sources would give Farage the central place.Without him Brexit would never have emerged as a serious issue.

And please drop your Great Men of History spiel.Besides being irrelevant it shows In matters of academic history you are out of your depth.Regurgitated Wikipedia is always obvious however assiduous are the attempts to hide it.

[ballpoint]

On 8/25/2016 at 0:39 PM, Jingthing said:

Why is he bothering with campaigning in Mississippi? Weird. That's a safe republican state even if they were running a sewer rat.

He's going to lead them out of the Union when Hillary wins the election.  Missiexit.