The all encompassing BNP thread - keep all crap in here.

[Vidar]

Be the Next 1930's Germany? No thanks.

Edit - you make it sound like you're trying to choose between the lesser of the two evils... how ironic is that.

A sad fact is that many of the remaining British WW2 veterans would disagree with you... I had the pleasure of speaking to such a chap, sadly now deceased, a couple of years ago who explained to me that it would have been better for us if Germany had won the war and that it was now a common opinion of other Veterans also.

I do actually believe we would be far better with the BNP than keeping down the same line with the current 3 parties.

 

[Monkey Puzzle]

A sad fact is that many of the remaining British WW2 veterans would disagree with you... I had the pleasure of speaking to such a chap, sadly now deceased, a couple of years ago who explained to me that it would have been better for us if Germany had won the war and that it was now a common opinion of other Veterans also.

I do actually believe we would be far better with the BNP than keeping down the same line with the current 3 parties.

Why'd he think a Nazi victory would have been better?

 

[cotton_flex]

The BNP will take the progress this country has made back a 100 years.

 

[ShaolinDreams]

it not even worth imagining how the BNP will run this country, it will never happen.

 

[Iraklis F.C.]

A sad fact is that many of the remaining British WW2 veterans would disagree with you... I had the pleasure of speaking to such a chap, sadly now deceased, a couple of years ago who explained to me that it would have been better for us if Germany had won the war and that it was now a common opinion of other Veterans also.

I do actually believe we would be far better with the BNP than keeping down the same line with the current 3 parties.

you know older people as they age tend to say lots of nonsenses

 

[RDM]

then you stumble across the BNP, who have some brilliant and innovative policies that would really shake things up in this country and then some which are abit far fetched.

What exactly are these brilliant and innovative policies? When I read their "manifesto" it was a load of populist rubbish with no detail whatsoever on how to implement it.

A sad fact is that many of the remaining British WW2 veterans would disagree with you... I had the pleasure of speaking to such a chap, sadly now deceased, a couple of years ago who explained to me that it would have been better for us if Germany had won the war and that it was now a common opinion of other Veterans also.

Yes I am sure living under a totalitarian facist state that executes anyone that disagrees with them would be lovely. Unless of course you happen to be gay, jewish, mentally or physically handicapped and a whole host of other "impurities"...

 

[Sankari]

We can start here.

http://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage.ft?news_id=fto112320081848123861&referrer_id=yahoofinance

Which shows the huge expansion of the public sector under Labour.

That's fine, but it doesn't prove that "millions of public sector non-jobs" have been created by Labour.

We can then use the lack of improvement in most areas of the public sector (about the only area where there has been improvement is the NHS, but even that is debatable and not being delivered efficiently) to determine that the extra employees are not productive.

LOL? That's absolute nonsense. There are any number of reasons for lack of improvement. You can't simply extrapolate a single cause without closely examining the evidence. Remember that the private companies involved at PFI level are responsible for the sudden bloating of unnecessary staff in the NHS. It was they who introduced multiple layers of middle-men, managers, accountants and consultants, thereby increasing inefficiency and cost.

As for them being on the dole vs employed by the taxpayer, the dole is cheaper for the taxpayer, so yes, I'd prefer them to be on the dole than in a subsidised but largely irrelevant role at a higher cost.

The sooner you get people into work, the sooner their salaries re-enter the economy in the form of personal expenditure. Dole recipients don't stimulate the economy. A working nation is better than a dole queue nation.

I would go one better, let's have a look at the lists of agencies and groups that make up the 'civil service' (never mind the public sector) and evaluate the new ones.

http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/jobs/Departments-NDPBs-AtoL/A-to-L.aspx

First one on the list, 11 million. Pointless and irrelevant, a jobs club.

Next under scrutiny, the 'commission for rural communities'

Another jobs club that should not be a government agency

Communities scotland?

Another waste of time quango.

Regional development bodies, such as the east midlands development agency (there are 9 of these)?

Another waste of time, taxpayers money should not be going to form what are basically pressure groups for areas.

OK, so you've cherry-picked a handful of cases which you don't believe are necessary. You've provided no evidence that they're not productive or beneficial, and you haven't even told me how many people they employ.

The food standards agency? I'm yet to be convinced of their real value.

Do you think this agency is unnecessary, or you think its job should be done by another government body?

Identities and passport service? A massive expansion of the previous passport office in preparation for ID cards and biometrics.

In other words, it was created to meet an emerging need. Can't see the problem there.

That's the A-L page just for a start, do you want me to continue on to the other second page?

Yes please. I'm still waiting for the evidence that Labour has created "millions of public sector non-jobs".

I haven't even looked at the expansions of existing departments, or the failure to close pointless quangos from previous administrations yet, all the departments highlighted above have been created by Labour.

It'll be great if you can get some figures together. How soon can I expect those? Remember, we're looking for evidence of "millions of public sector non-jobs" created by Labour. Millions.

All these people are being employed through taxation, they aren't producing direct benefits, otherwise their work could be funded without using the money that people have no choice but to hand over, they are pointless jobs.

That's a gross oversimplification and a classic case of poor reasoning.

 

[Vonhelmet]

A sad fact is that many of the remaining British WW2 veterans would disagree with you... I had the pleasure of speaking to such a chap, sadly now deceased, a couple of years ago who explained to me that it would have been better for us if Germany had won the war and that it was now a common opinion of other Veterans also.

Citation please. Anecdotal evidence really isn't going to cut it for that sort of thing.

 

[slambo69]

The problem as I see it is the overall political system in this country, there are a great many like minded people such as myself who are completley fed up with the way this country works, take the last local election in my area, several months ago, my whole life people explained to me the importance of voting, how countless lives had been lost to ensure I had the right to vote etc but when I get to the polling station I have three options, Labour, Lib dems and the Tories basically three parties with virtually no difference. If I dont want to vote for either of them I have two choices, spoil my ballot slip "None of the above" or something to that effect or dont vote. So one way or another one of these cloned drones is going to end up running things, whats the point? And then god forbid one of these clones does a bad job, steals from the tax payer etc etc what can we do about it? Petition for resignation which is likely to be ignored. We cant file for a vote of no confidence and pass the job on to someone else via a vote.

So like me you take a step back and have a look at the alternatives, Green Party, Ukip etc etc none of which have any real common sense policies, then you stumble across the BNP, who have some brilliant and innovative policies that would really shake things up in this country and then some which are abit far fetched. Who do you go for? As far as I see it there is sadly no other party even remotley capable of breaking us out of this self perpetuating cycle... so they get my vote wherever and when ever for now!

This self perpetuating cycle? The cycle of democracy and capitalism? Go live in another country, the majority of them have far more corrupt systems than us and then come back and complain about the UK so much that it makes you choose a far left party. History has shown us that any party to the far left/right has always been bad, why would the BNP be any different?

A sad fact is that many of the remaining British WW2 veterans would disagree with you... I had the pleasure of speaking to such a chap, sadly now deceased, a couple of years ago who explained to me that it would have been better for us if Germany had won the war and that it was now a common opinion of other Veterans also.

I do actually believe we would be far better with the BNP than keeping down the same line with the current 3 parties.

This post sounds like your actually sympathising with the Nazis, which in my opinion, totally ruins anyones credibility. Obviously you never experienced the gas chambers, camps, prisons, torture techniques or the lack of freedom of speech and neithar have I, but Ive learnt enough at school and in life to know that is something I will never support. There is a reason leading journalists, politicians, professors, academics etc. think of someone like the Nazis when they think what the BNP would be like in power - but apparently you know better?

Oh, both my grandads and grandmothers fought in the war and helped the war effort respectively, they enjoy being able to bad mouth the government and watch their children and grandchildren live and learn in a freedom of choice and speech environment. So theres 4 vets who disagree with you.

 

[4T5]

A sad fact is that many of the remaining British WW2 veterans would disagree with you... I had the pleasure of speaking to such a chap, sadly now deceased, a couple of years ago who explained to me that it would have been better for us if Germany had won the war and that it was now a common opinion of other Veterans also.

I do actually believe we would be far better with the BNP than keeping down the same line with the current 3 parties.

Mate I am all for freedom of speech & fight for it even when I don't agree with what's said but I have to draw a line at that statement.
I am old enough to have had conversations with a Living relative who served during WW2 & he would turn in his grave at your statement. I have also known a Living survivor of a death camp & have actually touched his tattoo the Nazis branded him with.
You Sir are a Disgrace.

 

[Dolph]

That's fine, but it doesn't prove that "millions of public sector non-jobs" have been created by Labour.

Let's turn this around then (which is how it should be justified after all, the justification should come from those who want to spend money, not those who do not) and I'll ask you to demonstate that the massive increase in public sector employment has been beneficial for the nation...

LOL? That's absolute nonsense. There are any number of reasons for lack of improvement. You can't simply extrapolate a single cause without closely examining the evidence. Remember that the private companies involved at PFI level are responsible for the sudden bloating of unnecessary staff in the NHS. It was they who introduced multiple layers of middle-men, managers, accountants and consultants, thereby increasing inefficiency and cost.

Which is why non-PFI hospitals suffer from as much, if not more, management bloat than the PFI ones (not that I think PFI is a good idea, it's the worst of both worlds).

What about the dramatic increases in paperwork in police forces and nursing, requiring more staff to simply provide the same level of frontline service Is that helping?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1535860/Police-paperwork-costs-hit-625m.html

The sooner you get people into work, the sooner their salaries re-enter the economy in the form of personal expenditure. Dole recipients don't stimulate the economy. A working nation is better than a dole queue nation.

Taxation funded jobs don't achieve that that, you are just recycling money. Paying someone out of taxation, then taxing their income in inefficient compared to not taking the money in taxation in the first place and giving
larger disposible income for people to return to the economy.

Unproductive or unnecessary tax payer funded jobs are no different to the dole, apart from the fact they are more expensive.

OK, so you've cherry-picked a handful of cases which you don't believe are necessary. You've provided no evidence that they're not productive or beneficial, and you haven't even told me how many people they employ.

Most of them are essentially state funded pressure groups, these are not things that should be funded by the state. If there is a need for them, they will be formed, in a more efficient manner without state intervention.

Again, the justification has to come from those wishing to spend money, not those wishing to stop spending it, so please provide evidence that these agencies are actually useful and necessary.

As for size, they don't publish that sort of data, because our government lacks transparacy, and I don't have the time or the inclination to submit a freedom of information request to get the information after a few months.

Do you think this agency is unnecessary, or you think its job should be done by another government body?

I think the minimum of their role (ensuring basic food standards) could be done by a much smaller, more efficient operation than they have now. I'm unconvinced about the value of their 'educational' nagging of the populace.

In other words, it was created to meet an emerging need. Can't see the problem there.

There is no need for ID cards, so it was created to meet a created and pointless need that is more indicative of Labour's authoritarian tendancies than any benefit to the people.

Yes please. I'm still waiting for the evidence that Labour has created "millions of public sector non-jobs".

I'm still waiting for justification of the public sector expansion under Labour, but it's clear from previous threads you have this strange belief that taxation should never be questioned and there is no reason to justify it, so I'm not holding out much hope.

It'll be great if you can get some figures together. How soon can I expect those? Remember, we're looking for evidence of "millions of public sector non-jobs" created by Labour. Millions.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...mployment-rises-to-eightyear-high-588298.html

It's from 2003, but it shows the size of the expansion (and it's actually accelerated since then as my earlier link shows.)

There's also a good study from the ECB regarding public sector efficiency, again from 2003, showing that our efficiency level is poor.

http://www.ecb.int/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecbwp242.pdf

I can't find a more recent study, but all the trends highlighted as a problem have carried on and accelerated, so it's highly likely our position is, at best, as bad as it was then.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0093a33c-d962-11db-9b4a-000b5df10621.html?nclick_check=1

The ECB also advocate efficiency and reductions in public sector spending in 2007, something that our government completely ignored and indeed did the opposite of.

So, do you still think our public sector is spending money and creating jobs efficiently?

That's a gross oversimplification and a classic case of poor reasoning.

Can you give examples of essential work that would not be done if the government wasn't doing it?

 

[dirtydog]

Still no proof of these so-called millions of non-jobs.

Can you give examples of essential work that would not be done if the government wasn't doing it?

Oh I don't know, health care for those who can't afford it, military, police, intelligence services, I'm sure you can think of some more.

 

[Dolph]

Still no proof of these so-called millions of non-jobs.


Oh I don't know, health care for those who can't afford it, military, police, intelligence services, I'm sure you can think of some more.

I'll give you the military to a point, healthcare doesn't need to be provided by the government to achieve that, they only need to ensure access to healthcare, I'm pretty sure the job of obtaining evidence and presenting it along with the suspect to the courts doesn't require the state to provide it (I'd actually give you the courts system incidentally), only to regulate it. The intelligence service again only needs a legal framework to operate in, it does not need to be provided by the state.

 

[dirtydog]

The intelligence service again only needs a legal framework to operate in, it does not need to be provided by the state.

I specifically mentioned that because surely you wouldn't want state secrets and classified information being handled by private companies, it needs to be done by a government agency for security reasons.

 

[Dolph]

I specifically mentioned that because surely you wouldn't want state secrets and classified information being handled by private companies, it needs to be done by a government agency for security reasons.

That's almost comical, do you really think that government agencies are better at security than private ones?

The official secrets act already provides adequate protection for state secrets, and state secrets and classified information are already routinely handled by the private sector.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

Just like the Maggie the Hun flyers
" We won't raise taxes "

Did she ever say that ?

As for Maggie and her hated Conservatives, they inherited an appallingly bad and unstable economy from Labour in 1979 and an inflation rate of over 13%. By 1982 it was down to over 8% and by election year in 1983 it was down to just over 4%.

Unemployment suffered though it has to be said but there was a global recession in the early 1980s that affected the United States very badly and when they sneeze the world usuakky catches a cold.

 

[alexakasloth]

A sad fact is that many of the remaining British WW2 veterans would disagree with you... I had the pleasure of speaking to such a chap, sadly now deceased, a couple of years ago who explained to me that it would have been better for us if Germany had won the war and that it was now a common opinion of other Veterans also.

I do actually believe we would be far better with the BNP than keeping down the same line with the current 3 parties.

Either that...or he was a racist chap who was talking out of his arse, afterall, the way you talk about him make the man sound like he sympathises with the Nazis. It appears that you see his opinion in high regard because he fought in WW2, but that does not make him a smart person.

 

[Stolly]

A sad fact is that many of the remaining British WW2 veterans would disagree with you... I had the pleasure of speaking to such a chap, sadly now deceased, a couple of years ago who explained to me that it would have been better for us if Germany had won the war and that it was now a common opinion of other Veterans also.

I do actually believe we would be far better with the BNP than keeping down the same line with the current 3 parties.

Unless you are a Jew, Slav, Romany, Homosexual, have mental problems, or indeed are stupid enough to speak out against the system like you have just done.

In fact, since you seem to agree with him, why don't you go ahead and pretend they did win ?

You've shown disent, i've reported you to the authorities. I suggest you drag yourself out into the street, put yourself against the nearest wall and have yourself shot.

We'll send your family off to a German work camp for you.

 

[Delvis]

Citation please. Anecdotal evidence really isn't going to cut it for that sort of thing.

This post sounds like your actually sympathising with the Nazis, which in my opinion, totally ruins anyones credibility. Obviously you never experienced the gas chambers, camps, prisons, torture techniques or the lack of freedom of speech and neithar have I, but Ive learnt enough at school and in life to know that is something I will never support.

Mate I am all for freedom of speech & fight for it even when I don't agree with what's said but I have to draw a line at that statement.
I am old enough to have had conversations with a Living relative who served during WW2 & he would turn in his grave at your statement. I have also known a Living survivor of a death camp & have actually touched his tattoo the Nazis branded him with.
You Sir are a Disgrace.

There is a reason leading journalists, politicians, professors, academics etc. think of someone like the Nazis when they think what the BNP would be like in power - but apparently you know better?

Oh, both my grandads and grandmothers fought in the war and helped the war effort respectively, they enjoy being able to bad mouth the government and watch their children and grandchildren live and learn in a freedom of choice and speech environment. So theres 4 vets who disagree with you.

His original statement was actually what a war veteran had said, not himself.

Sad thing is guys, there are many WW2 veterans that have said this, and even stated it in interviews that they think the country would be better off now if the Germans had won.

Take Germany now for instance, they're teenagers for instance are by far more respectful to elders than ours over here, for various reasons.

I'm not going to go on, cause I'll only get slated for saying something.

However one does wonder what would have happened to Britain / Germany itself if Hitler still ruled for x amount of years. Probably would be a different story.

 

[Neil79]

H
Sad thing is guys, there are many WW2 veterans that have said this, and even stated it in interviews that they think the country would be better off now if the Germans had won.

.

Agreed i have also pointed this out in the past