Also confused by this....would you prefer she said person? MP? Female?
Aside of that, i hope she is a pain and isnt bending over to EU demands.
If nothing is better then ****, so be it.
Last edited:
Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th
- Thread starter Destination
- Start date
- Status
Also confused by this....would you prefer she said person? MP? Female?
Aside of that, i hope she is a pain and isnt bending over to EU demands.
If nothing is better then ****, so be it.
What ideas? I haven't had any ideas other than saying I don't see the point of something...
Your ideas however seem to be terrible. You're talking about continuing/increasing birthrates to prop up an aging population. And what happens when that new generation ages? Do you just continue infinitely increasing birth rates? That's completely unsustainable.
There are finite resources and space in this country and this planet. We are already seeing the strains of over-population.
And you're talking about income inequality - what about those receiving these benefits who don't need them? We've already had one poster in here prove that point. What about those receiving the benefits who aren't spending it on their kids?
Also the national living wage is just a pointless fallacy. Pay the lowest earners more and goods/services they produce increase in price therefore increasing inflation meaning the minimum wages need to constantly increase to take this in to account. Again just a cycle of perpetual increase.
Let's hear your amazing ideas then? Because unless you want to start rounding up the over 70s and giving them the sweet embrace of death, there isn't really much alternative.
Look at the benefits bill compared to our pension bill. It's absolutely minuscule in comparison.
i think you need to read a history book, Mao was a disaster in every way.
And by continuing to increase the population you're only ever going to increase the pension bill...
A woman calling herself a woman? Whatever next.
and your solution is?
lmao you'd be first in line to have a go if she was using her skin colour as a selling point. Why is gender any different? She's obviously trying to make Thatcher comparisons and idiots are lapping it up
He's put the brakes on a pointless vanity project that was never procured properly and was going to cost the taxpayer tens of millions of pounds. Incidentally the person he replaced refused to co-operate with the investigation.
She's actually quoting Ken Clarke when he referred to May by that description during the leadership election...
I've already told you, I don't have one. You don't have to have a solution to know that someone else's idea is a load of crap however.
Yes. Exponentially. And it's not a claim, it's just reality lol And there's no need to "back it up" because everything is relative. Human population has increased exponentially, therefore so have the crap parents.
You cant just have a growing population but magically assume all the negative things stay constant lol. That's called delusion, ignorance.
Exponentially means something specific, and I'm not convinced that population growth meets it in any meaningful sense.
Ok that was quick. It's already descended into a silly semantics argument.
You need to have a look at some exponential growth curves and then compare it to a graph of human population. - and then go away until you can come up with a real argument.
I'm not talking about the growth of human population, I'm talking about the uk population, which is not growing exponentially.
I'm not even sure the global population is growing exponentially, particularly given its forecast to top out at about 10bn.
You're still on semantics though.
Do you really have an argument against the actual point or are you just being a silly grammar nazi? This isn't a maths thread and there are **** parents out there AND they're increasing, deal with it. Me understanding what exponentially means and refraining from using it in a hyperbolic sense isn't going to magically solve the problem of all the **** parents out there.
No, but if you insist on using the wrong words for things then you won't understand the scale of the problems you're discussing. If you say something is growing "exponentially" then that means something, and if what it means is not what is actually happening then you are at best misinformed and at worst actively lying.
I doubt the percentage of "bad" parents is increasing in any meaningful sense. I doubt you can even quantify in a measurable sense what a "bad" parent is. I certainly doubt that you can find any evidence to show that the percentage is growing, let alone exponentially.
I doubt the percentage of "bad" parents is increasing in any meaningful sense. I doubt you can even quantify in a measurable sense what a "bad" parent is. I certainly doubt that you can find any evidence to show that the percentage is growing, let alone exponentially.
Ok I'm so sorry for using the word exponentially. I hope there hasn't been any lasting damage done.
But yeah anyway back in the real world, **** and hopeless parents still making babies out there. A lot of them are complete accidents too.
Can I ask what you think Boris did for London? The cable car was a shambles, the garden bridge would have been a shambles, he always overruled local planners and local concerns to favour big money developments when asked to do so, the new Routemaster is so disproportionately expensive that all orders have stopped, and he bought broken water cannons to placate idiots everywhere. The successful transport projects all pre-dated Boris' time in office and would have been implemented regardless of who was Mayor. (Which is also true of Ken - his claim to have delivered the Overground was rubbish.)
- Status