There's no need to be mean, scorza, I'm a lefty, just like you. Unlike you, I don't think foreigners are out to get me.
Poll: EU Referendum Voting Intentions
- Thread starter kindai
- Start date
- Status
There's no need to be mean, scorza, I'm a lefty, just like you. Unlike you, I don't think foreigners are out to get me.
Yes it does, examples:
If a person is not allowed to work on a building site because he refuses to replace his turban with a hard hat.
If a person from Somalia is refused a job because they cannot speak English.
Both of those are perfectly acceptable racism, just like not letting a person with no arms join the police is acceptable disabled discrimination.
-----------------
The is no racism in picking hard working employees over lazy ones, just common sense.
There's no need to be mean, scorza, I'm a lefty, just like you. Unlike you, I don't think foreigners are out to get me.
I know you're not a Sun reader, so wasn't referring to you
I don't think foreigners are out to get me, but the system as it stands allows for discrimination against UK workers and promotes low wages and poor working conditions. I honestly don't know how someone could describe themselves as a "lefty" and support the free movement of people - it just totally goes against the grain of social justice.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Neither of those are examples of racism. The first is a legally enforced intolerance of a particular form of religious clothing. The second is about not being able to communicate and has nothing to do with origin of birth.
There is if your policy is basically "assume anyone with an English sounding name is lazy and interview everyone with a Polish name", you are advocating prejudice based purely on nationality.
So your examples would be more accurate if it was employer who refused to hire/interview Somalians because he worked with a group of them once and found they were lazy and now applies that as a general ideology behind his ongoing recruitment needs.
I'm telling you now, if a major employer was found to have a single e-mail leaked that so much as loosely implied people with brown skin had any kind of negative work attribute, they'd be fired and the company would be is huge trouble. Yet it is perfectly fine for business people to go on national TV and just exclaim that white British people are lazy and/or unmotivated as much as they like.
Last edited:
That's the point, picking hard workers over lazy workers isn't racist.
No but picking Polish workers over English workers because you generalized English workers to be Lazy is pretty borderline in my opinion, whether it is or not is besides the point, it's a rubbish attitude to have and a bit of a dick move not hiring some who's native to this country whose desperate to have a job
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
It is if the only guide you have for that quality is their nationality and base your decision on who you hire on a prejudged notion that British people are lazy
Why doesn't he join the EU then? What's good for the goose should be good for the gander shouldn't it?
Most of them.
I'm not joking, the are too many to list because we are a major player and a leader in Europe despite what the tabloids tell people.
One good example is the ECHR which was our idea (Churchills).
Good example that - a treaty that was drawn up before the EEC even existed. For info it was drawn up by the Council of Europe which is independent of the EU to the extent that even Russia and Turkey are members.
Norway's government has recommended joining the EU for some time.
Knew someone would say that
They had two close referenda that kept them out. According to a minister: "The arguments for saying 'no' were that membership was a threat to the sovereignty of Norway, the fishing industries and agriculture would suffer, that membership would result in increased centralisation, and there would be less favourable conditions for equality and the welfare state."
I think deep down they're just very proud of their independence, since they were pushed around by Denmark and Sweden between 1397 and 1905. They're also far more interested in localism and environmental protection than most of Europe.
http://sciencenordic.com/why-norwegians-never-wanted-eu-membership
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
As above, why aren't they joining then?
The fact is it is best for Norway to have a fully inclusive EU with them being the one country outside it. That way they have the benefits of the single standards and setting one import policy with the EU whilst not being dictated to by Brussells directly.
Of course Norway don't want us following their example, because they would no longer be able to use the EU to access our services and would have to deal directly with us.
Knew someone would say that
They had two close referenda that kept them out. According to a minister: "The arguments for saying 'no' were that membership was a threat to the sovereignty of Norway, the fishing industries and agriculture would suffer, that membership would result in increased centralisation, and there would be less favourable conditions for equality and the welfare state."
I think deep down they're just very proud of their independence, since they were pushed around by Denmark and Sweden between 1397 and 1905. They're also far more interested in localism and environmental protection than most of Europe.
http://sciencenordic.com/why-norwegians-never-wanted-eu-membership
Dunno - those sound like pretty valid reasons to me:
- Threat to Norwegian sovereignty equally applies to the UK as our sovereignty is constantly being eroded;
- Fishing industry would suffer - certainly applies to the UK;
- Agriculture industry would suffer - doesn't appear to be the case for us. Yes I've heard farmers complaining about the EU but farmers are never happy are they?
- Increased centralisation - well duh, still makes no sense to me that we're pushing for decentralisation of powers to Wales, Scotland and the northern powerhouse while at the same time losing power to Brussels;
- Less favourable conditions for equality and the welfare state - seems to me to be what we spend most of our time arguing about. Though Norway's record on equality and welfare is much better than ours.
^ I don't disagree and I don't know the answers, just "thinking aloud".
Seems to me that you can almost draw a line with the USA on one end and Norway at the other. The EU average sits somewhere in the middle. Norway didn't want to join because they didn't want to come back to the middle. The UK did and I think a lot of good has come of that (consumer and employment rights, food safety, environmental protection...).
I worry that if the UK weren't in the EU it would swing to the USA end, not the Norway end...
...like by blocking EU fracking regulations, etc.
Seems to me that you can almost draw a line with the USA on one end and Norway at the other. The EU average sits somewhere in the middle. Norway didn't want to join because they didn't want to come back to the middle. The UK did and I think a lot of good has come of that (consumer and employment rights, food safety, environmental protection...).
I worry that if the UK weren't in the EU it would swing to the USA end, not the Norway end...
...like by blocking EU fracking regulations, etc.
So, would the EU be better off without us?
... and we'd be better off without them as we can come up with a set of fracking regulations that are better suited to Britain and our way of doing business.
EU lost nearly EUR1bn from 2014 budget - Olaf report
Because I know the euro-nationalists will mention it:
Which is a pathetic indictment rate. So I intend to write to my MP asking him to look into this. Not sure what I can do to persuade the Spanish government to stop building phantom ports though.
Because I know the euro-nationalists will mention it:
Which is a pathetic indictment rate. So I intend to write to my MP asking him to look into this. Not sure what I can do to persuade the Spanish government to stop building phantom ports though.
- Status