/ot/ - off-topic

Torn between voting for Labour or SNP. I live in Scotland and my constituency is an SNP safeseat but equally if I was still living in England I would be voting Labour to get the Tories out.

labour, bc it's my constituency's second and i want these tory rats out. i want the nhs saved. i want the richest and corporations to get taxed appropriately, and i want zero hours contracts to get thrown out. also i don't fancy having my internet censored thanks, theresa.

i really hope the leftists pull together on this one, but realistically i'm bracing for a tory landslide.

>>194057
The only thing that's making me consider voting Tory is Brexit. As much as she makes my fucking skin crawl, I've no doubt that Theresa will fight for a better outcome for us than Corbyn. I'm basically weighting up the consequences of now vs 10 years from now. Leaning towards now though, probably gonna vote Labour.

Tory

I dont want my future children being blown the fuck up

>>194095
>muh rich corporations need to be massively taxed!

Don't you realize that if you put your corporate tax up, all you are fucking over is your precious local businesses that the Left fucking "love" so much? Giant corporations can simply MOVE to another country that has lower corp. tax and give your country absolutely NOTHING. There are more businesses in Liechtenstein than there are people because their corporate tax is low. Based Trump lowered Corporate tax to 15% from 35% and now smaller businesses/regional businesses can thrive and larger corporations now have to choose weather is worth moving their company or not. 15% is better than zero percent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLhi3MJ58Hg&t=602s

Only shitty thing the Torys are doing is internet censorship

US jersey fag here, we are doing our primaries for governor. I voted for Murphy. Can't wait for Christie to get the fuck out of office. Good on you britfags for going out and voting!

SNP or Labour, probably SNP even though I don't want independence (voted no in the referendum).
My constituency has been a labour strong hold for many years until the last election so theres virtually no chance of any other party besides Labour or SNP being elected here.

If Labour supported the free market and guaranteed us another referendum once the Brexit plan has been negotiated to see if we would want to still go ahead with Brexit I would be more inclined to vote for them as I'm in favour of not decreasing taxes for highest earners, more funding for NHS and other public services etc.

I'm a med student and SNP has increased funding for the Scottish NHS significantly whilst they have been in power so I would like that to continue.

>>194102

This, plus putting the government as a middle man between profits and workers is fucking retarded. Supporting workers rights and negotiations is a lot more effective. If you're worried about NHS, focus more on peoe who want to cut down on corruption and misspending.

>>194113
>If you're worried about NHS, focus more on peoe who want to cut down on corruption and misspending.

Focus more on cutting down corruption and misspending than what?
These factors alone (though valid issues) cannot be solved quickly enough to reduce the NHS budget in the coming years, it takes many years to reduce corruption and waste in an organisation of that scale on a significant level and the issue of NHS spending needs addressed now.

Cons: Privatise everything and let it go to shit.

Labour: Nationalise everything but instead of running it effectively just shove it full of as many people on the public payroll as possible! Also more shitskins!

There's no winning.

i'm either going for labour or snp after i check predictions to see who has the best chance in my constituency at keeping out the tories, which isn't hard since it's an ex mining town and was a labour safeseat until recently. it also has a load of loyalist orange order dumbfucks who want to fuck kate middleton under a union flag so i still think there's a chance for a tory manjority.

main reason is that i rely on the nhs for a few medications for a long term condition of my own and regular appointments which are a nightmare to find a space in and it's pretty much my main priority

>>194129
GREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEN

I spoil my ballot nowadays. It's exercising my right to vote whilst also being like "you're all wank, sorry".

>I wait for the day we can just sort things out using machine algorithms and logic.

Pic related.

>>194057
my main man Jezza of course

I have expat friends who probably won't come back to the UK if corbyn gets in. That and my brother will en up paying for his 80k plus tax too.

I fucking hate May but Corbyn is going to fuck this country up even more.

Imagine an entire nation where everything is as costly and badly run as TfL.

>>194200
>anarchism

breathes in
HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA

>>194233 sounds like someone needs despooking ne~?

Can't wait for everyone to cry at the results.
>laughs in binary

>>194343

Watch Labour get in and we end up with more terrorism and debt

Yay

I hate that millennials on my facebook are like
>haha i luff corbyn
>corbyn is daddy
more like
>corbyn is deficit
>mmmm yeah destroy the economy more daddy corbyn, give me promises you can't keep like the piece of trash I am mmmm

We can't keep the country going by just taxing the rich and making everything free. Real life doesnt work like that. And what a way to live: work less because it's ok as someone who worked hard for what they earn will pay for it for you. It's what's gone wrong in England, including the highly abused benefits system where every millennial and their dog is claiming ESA for their anxiety, crippling depression and other 101 disorders so they can sit at home all day instead of learning how to cope with their issues and get a job. Back in ye olde days this wasn't allowed. You either worked to survive or died. Only got one arm? Work a job that only requires one arm. Can't walk cuz bad back? Work a seated job. Why is it generally accepted and not frowned upon to expect free handouts? And why increase benefits? to increase the need not to find a job? sage4blog I'm just mad and can't vocalise my views without people thinking I'm Hitler kek

>>194102
You understand that Corbyn's proposed corporation tax rate is still lower than most if not all IECD/G8 countries right?

>>194351
Labour's record at repaying national debt is better in both absolute and relative terms compared to the Tories. They've deepened the national debt as well as destroying public services. I'd rather be a country in debt with good public services than just a country in debt.
Don't understand the Tory love. What are they genuinely doing in your interests? I want to understand more about why you choose them, civilly if possible.

>>194353
Its not so much Tory love. Corbyn is too unrealistic and sounds like he honestly believes if he knocks his own tooth out and puts it under his pillow the first night he becomes prime minister and pretends to be fast asleep that he can catch the tooth fairy and bargain for enough money to make everything free with zero debt and gr8 benefits, even more reason to immigrate to the UK kek. Realistically where's the money coming from because there ain't enough rich folk in the whole of the UK to pay for the paupers, and eventually they'll get sick of the taxes here and move?

>Labour's actual proven track record of running the country is way better than the Tories
>"My opinion on Corbyn means the Tories are a better choice"
>"Lefties are snowflakes who are all about ~muh feelings~"

Voted Labour today, on the basis of their policies, not because Corbyn is "my daddy" (gross). I love democracy, and I'm excited to see whether the amount of discussion this election has generated will result in elevated voter turnout - especially amongst the demographic of people who need politics the most.

>>194356
Nigga I hate May, but Blair engineered the biggest demographic change in the shortest space of time this country has ever seen.

That's a colossal record of mismanagement. Entire neighborhoods changed beyond all recognition in the 10 years he had tenure.

>>194364
Why do you think it's a wasted vote?

Like is it because you don't like labour or do you think there will be significant Tory gain in Scotland? –I voted SNP btw.

The obvious choice
Would eat haggis out of her swampy arsehole tbh

just got back from the polling station (labour stronghold). voted labour but honestly, I believe that the tories will get the most seats. wondering if a coalition really will happen or not

Problem is, it's all well and good voting Labour to bring back housing benefits for young teenagers who are probably mothers to some chav on the estate, disabled and all that. But the money has to come from somewhere and Corbyn best have a magical tree there he's planted, watered and tended because it isn't going to magically appear without someone shelling out for all these costs.

I'm sick of seeing all the top bloggers, actors ect shout for who you should vote for too. Majority being Labour since its basically a trend at this point.

Allow more random fucks to come over here and take jobs. But then again most of the foreigners are skilled and have been raised that way. Most British people in the household don't even push their kids to work, educate themselves or do fuck all apart from want free hand outs anyway. They're good for nothing.

>>194386

The British have failed themselves by this point and the NHS probably won't last another 100 years. It's the golden hight light of why so many people want to come here. Eventually it will be privatised anyway.

>>194386
I think many people are willing to pay more tax in order to keep the NHS and improve other social services, and Corbyn isn't in exactly pro-immigration so.

Obviously the current tory austerity hasn't got people out of poverty or off benefits so why not at least try and improve life for people from these backgrounds so they might be willing to participate in society again because making life harder for them doesn't work, just widens the gap between rich and poor.

>>194387
>>194388
I've got zero issue with paying more tax provided it works. But if it were simply a case of money in of itself making something better, than the UK's educational system would eclipse that of Japan (we pay far more in per-pupil terms) and London Underground would be the best metro system in the world.

Clearly money doesn't determine the quality of a public service in of itself.

Go to a hospital in Hong Kong if ever you get the chance. They spend far less in terms of tax & spend but it puts the NHS to shame.

Liberal Democrats. To protect my privacy

>>194361
"the biggest demographic change"? Wtf does that even mean? What demographic are you talking about here? Which neighbourhoods are you talking about, and in what way did they change for the worst?

If you're going to use vaguely intelligent sounding phrases, you might need to be slightly more specific on what you're fucking talking about so that I can attempt to discuss it with you.

Labour.

Nobody fucking keeps their promises and policies anyway but on the off-chance that they do, I would want the ones that best refect my opinions. I think that Tories might take it (unfortunately, but I'll keep hoping against it) but current results are showing Labour creeping up, and there was talk of May having to resign if she lost too many seats which would hopefully put Labour in the driver's seat.

But I'm not holding out much hope. Remember when polls said Hillary would win and everyone woke up to Trump taking the spot? Yeah.

>>194407
I'm talking about mass immigration you fucking idiot. New Labour presided over the biggest demographic shift in this country's history.

>Which neighbourhoods are you talking about

Go to Bradford, go to Birmingham, go to London.

All of these places are now minority White English or well on their way to becoming so. This didn't happen as a result of some whimsical process, it was a result of systematic policy that made student visas, chain migration and settlement (ILR/naturalization) exceptionally easy. The results of this policy can be seen on an everyday basis (the various ethnic gang battles that Birmingham has to deal with between Pakistanis and Blacks, the Somalian crime wave that accompanied their migration to parts of South London in the mid 2000s) as well as on a grander scale (Salman Abedi's parents gained refugee status and eventually ILR in spite of belonging to a fucking Islamist militant group - The LIFG).

So understand that it isn't something you can ignore anymore, or sweep under the rug, or pretend has no deleterious effect on the country. I'm not even ethnically English and I see it.

>>194420
>go to bradford
no thanks kek

>>194399
I think the main difference between the countries you've listed and the UK is that there is a much bigger degree of privatisation especially in education and healthcare so it's a bit difficult to compare them.

But we have the most efficient health care system in the world in terms of what we pay for what we get so I think that, along with the fact that I believe it should be free at the point of service means that health care as it is in Hong Kong does not appeal to me.
If you have been to any of the big, really new hospitals in the UK they are world class, state of the art.

I mean my high school had 1p per day per pupil to spend on pupils, I had to pay for notebooks and they would run out of jotters at the end of each month so I can't believe that budget wasn't at least some of the problem, I'm not arguing it's everything but it's significant and again I believe it should be free for everybody.

And trains etc got so expensive when we decided to kinda privatise some of it but not all of it, it's just been really poorly handled in general, which is why people want it to be re-nationalised because privatisation seems to have just made it cost more.

>>194429
>But we have the most efficient health care system in the world
Is this what Brits genuinely think? Lmao no

>>194429
What the hell are you talking about? Virtually all OECD countries have wholly public and free primary and secondary education, which is what I'm talking about.

The fact is that having more tablet computers and interactive whiteboards doesn't make kids smarter. The fact is that the operative factors you can change are things like class discipline.

>>194429
>that health care as it is in Hong Kong does not appeal to me.

It's 10 bucks a day for health care at a hospital in Hong Kong. Not a big deal.

>trains

I agree. But labour will never run them effectively. They will run them for the sake of making sure as many staff as possible are on the public payroll, just like they did in the 1970s.

>>194364
Well look at that, it's the biggest voter turnout since 1997.

>>194420
Found the racist. I'm not arguing with you if your main focus is gang wars and "ethnic crime". There's plenty of non-ethnic crime, and plenty of gang wars between white Brits, why aren't you bothered about that? It has exactly the same effect on the country, the only difference is skin colour. I'm from London and I've lived in Birmingham. Weirdly enough, everyone seems pretty happy and they seem to be largely prosperous cities with new developments happening all the time. So detrimental, much racial issues. Idiot, go vote UKIP or something, that's about your intellectual capacity right?

>>194471
samefag

Sorry, best be absolutely correct before someone argues a semantic point: "the only difference is skin colour AND NATIONALITY." Xenophobia and racism. There, fixed.

>>194471
My bitter heart is happy to be proved wrong

>>194399
I agree that the fault lies not only in money but also with how people in the UK just don't have drive to better their workplaces or give great service. Everyone wants to go on the dole or study a masters in advanced fingerpainting and will then still complain about NHS waiting times.
However in hk there is no safety net to catch you if you can't make a living and competition is so high that people will strive more to keep a job imho. The eternal problem is keeping the support for people that need it but stopping everyone else from using it as a fallback. How do you motivate people when they already had what they need?

>>194473
Yes exactly, it's like free university plans. I've got no issue with providing an academically competent person with free room, board and tuition fees to study STEM fields.

But why exactly should any moron with 3 D's at A-Level be allowed to study crap like Sociology at the public's expense?

>>194471
>go vote UKIP or something

The funny thing is UKIP is to the left of just about every mainstream political movement outside of Western Europe and North America. You guys love Japan, but Japan's perennial ruling party (it is essentially a de facto one party state) is the LDP, which is well to the right of UKIP on matters like immigration.

If you were truly this reflexively disgusted by right-wing viewpoints, why are you on a weeb site and most likely a weeb yourself?

>There's plenty of non-ethnic crime

It is an objective fact that certain ethnic groups commit far more crime than others. Blacks in London are responsible for over 50% of all street crime despite constituting just 10-15% of the population. That means if there were no blacks in London, the street crime rate would fall by 50%.

That's a huge change right there, and I haven't even gotten started on Pakistani welfare dependency, gang grooming, terrorism etc.

>Weirdly enough, everyone seems pretty happy

Not an argument.

>why aren't you bothered about that?

Because we never had an option to refuse them entry into the country in the first place. We were always stuck with them - with people like Afro-Caribbeans, Somalians and Pakistanis however, we had a choice and we chose to allow them into our country.

>they seem to be largely prosperous cities with new developments happening all the time.

Also not an argument.

London's infrastructure is garbage-tier compared to East Asian metropolises - so what "developments" are you talking about? That and the ease of capital flows and mass immigration is fast making it a feudal city where the majority of people won't be able to own a property 50 years from now.

Naturally the Labour-voting moron has never actually traveled outside of Western Europe or the US and I'd put money on you being monolingual to boot.

So much for your worldly anti-racism.

>>194473
>but also with how people in the UK just don't have drive to better their workplaces or give great service.

In order to have this drive you have to feel as though you belong to a group, with all of the attendant pressures and motivating factors (e.g. shame culture) that this brings.

If nobody feels like they belong to a group with standards for inclusion and exclusion, with a sense of common roots/origin and a common cause, then it's very difficult to motivate people in the same way you would collectivist societies like Japan where public services can be run effectively for these reasons.

The UK and other "multicultural" societies have no sense of togetherness, and the profound and increasing sense of alienation that these societies impart on their populations is what leads to a lot of present-day issues - you could even argue convincingly that weebs, being white people with no sense of group identity, are a product of this sublimation of a desire to feel a sense of belonging to something, anything.

Even Chinese people are driven by a sense of "we Chinese need to work together to improve our country because we want to show the world that we are at least the equals if not better than everyone else!" And the results are plain to see, for all the kvetching about their rudeness (and they are rude), Chinese really do feel shame, try to look at these things objectively and improve them. And it is working.

I don't see that from Brits, I don't see any sense of collective shame. You look at London and its filthier than many mainland Chinese cities these days, but nobody talks about that because it's simply considered to be part and parcel of living in a big city, likewise with the criminality - daily stabbings are just part and parcel of living in a big city, despite even second and third tier Chinese cities, with vastly poorer residents being safer. Sadiq Khan said the same thing about terrorism, as did the ex-President of France (Francois Hollande): People need to reconcile themselves to the fact terrorism is something we're going to have to live with as part of living in a big city from now on.

It's the frog in slowly boiling water. Things get slowly, progressively worse but because the process is incremental, nobody notices. On that note just about every European and American city was safer in the 1950s than it is today. How's that for "progress"?

>>194477
tl;dr western elites want to reconcile their populations to mediocrity.

>>194476
You've arrived at a different point to me anon, I don't actually care if they get a silly degree as long as they still work afterwards. I'm complaining about when people study unrealistic topics but refuse to take an unrelated afterwards even though they signed up for that life, but as long as they work hard in whatever job they can get then it's fine with me. Whether it's because they want to be an actor but aren't prepared to work in a supermarket to get there or just because they want to sponge off of 6 kids, people that refuse to work are my problem. Brits are lazy because they know the welfare state will carry them.
Shit like job centres pushing people into 0 hour contracts doesn't help though.

>>194480
>Shit like job centres pushing people into 0 hour contracts doesn't help though.

Completely agreed. I'm not some hardcore capitalist, I actually agree with state-ownership and a welfare state. But what you have at the moment is a system so dysfunctional it is is subsidizing the birth rate of the bottom 10% of society (who are the only ones, at least among white people, who are actually having kids anyway). I believe it was the Tory coalition government that changed child benefits so it excluded everyone other than those on less than £40k combined income. Talk about punishing the middle class…

Anyway. I quite like the Japanese salaryman system - as much as they demand of them, there's still very much a realistic expectation of holding a job for life. That's the sort of thing I'd like to see, a society that develops around an implicitly understood quid pro quo arrangement that you'll give your all for work, but you'll be rewarded with long-term stability if you do.

I agree about the degrees also, even in technical professions most of what you learn, you learn on the job - I just think it's outrageous some Corbynite types expect an entire society to pay for hundreds of thousands of kids studying English Lit at university.

>>194468
Yeah but I still think it should be free at the point of service, and realistically it's never going to be that cheap here if we had to pay for it out of pocket, cost of living is too high to not have to charge patients more, we would have to pay more because of medication licencing etc.

>>194476
Because most people on here aren't blathering on about ethnic crime rates, and therefore I'm not discussing it with them? Also because I'm not a weeb? Is this just projection - are you just a fat ugly animu-loving virgin who hates a society you have no hope of being a productive part of? It would make sense, given your political views.

>An objective fact that certain ethnic groups commit far more crime than others.
No, it's an objective fact that black people are more likely to be stopped, searched and jailed for a crime, even though they're less likely to be convicted of one. It's also an objective fact that though Asian people get stopped and searched more than white people, they get convicted and jailed less often. However, people of any colour that isn't white receive a far longer than average sentence. However most of the judicidial system - from police to courts - is white. None of this takes into account their nationality, just their skin colour. So what is your argument here - against race, or against immigrants? Where have you even gotten these bullshit statistics from? Have you just made them up? Reactionary politics like yours just strengthen the far left cry of institutional racism.

People being happy in their changing communities isn't a factor in how successful a government is? Pretty sure it is - in fact, it tends to be a pretty accurate measure of how successful a party's actions were. Plenty of people remember Thatcher's government as awful, and it wasn't because they loved every second of her rule. Just trying to devalue the point of someone who's been a member of both the communities that you brought up?

You're right, we don't have an option to refuse British nationals into the country, but we do have a choice to make criminal sentences and prosecution a lot harsher. Are you in favour of legal and prison reforms, in order to make sure that people of any colour breaking the law are all receiving the harshest sentences possible? Are you voting Labour so that more funding - rather than less, like under the current Conservative government - is directed to our police force?

How is comparing a city that is being built by a democratic government to one being built by a theocratic dictatorship a fair comparison? Would you rather live in a country like Saudi Arabia, just to have a less diverse but more economically successful society? (Just a spoiler though: the fascism masquerading as socialism that you appear to admire so much has historically not been very successful.)

Fucking hell, top kek. Wrong and wrong. I was right about UKIP being your intellectual level. I'd "put money" on you being an avid reader of the Daily Mail and a big fan of Katie Hopkins, sounds like where you get your political arguments from. "I am obviously soooooo much more educated than this person, because the far right have always known best, which is why all countries with a right-wing government are are totally not a huge fucking mess~"

>>194483
I sort of agree, I'm kind of in two minds about payment for GP visits though. I mean we simply do not enjoy the lack of resource scarcity Britain had in the 1950s when a lot of this welfare statism was founded.

More generally my point was that I do not trust higher levels of spending to deliver an accompanying level of higher quality service. I always use the Underground and the educational system internationally as examples of this.

>>194484
>No, it's an objective fact that black people are more likely to be stopped, searched and jailed for a crime, even though they're less likely to be convicted of one.

Proof?

Also, from this am I to believe you think all races commit crime at exactly the same rate?

Note that black people are overrepresented as criminals regardless of whether it is Japan, Switzerland or Germany. Are we to assume all of these countries are engaging in tacit and systematic oppression of the black man, or should we just invoke occam's razor and adopt the most likely answer: That black people are simply more prone to criminality on average?

>However most of the judicidial system - from police to courts - is white.

Not an argument.

>Where have you even gotten these bullshit statistics from?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7856787/Violent-inner-city-crime-the-figures-and-a-question-of-race.html

They're from the Met, who released them under the FoI act:

>"The data provide a breakdown of the ethnicity of the 18,091 men and boys who police took action against for a range of violent and sexual offences in London in 2009-10.They show that among those proceeded against for street crimes, 54 per cent were black; for robbery, 59 per cent; and for gun crimes, 67 per cent. Street crimes include muggings, assault with intent to rob and snatching property."

Are you suggesting there are a non-trivial number of stabbings uniformly committed by whites that go unreported by the police and the media? If so, I'd like to see some evidence.

>People being happy in their changing communities isn't a factor in how successful a government is?

You have provided no evidence of this. Show evidence that white people in neighborhoods that have changed overwhelmingly over the past 15 years have become correspondingly happier, it seems to me that all the evidence on this subject (e.g. Putnam's research) points to the opposite, moreover it seems that if they really were happier, white flight wouldn't be so widespread across the UK.

>but we do have a choice to make criminal sentences and prosecution a lot harsher.

Yes, which is something the left have made a lot harder ever since the ending of the death penalty in the late 1960s. Some 160 Brits have been killed by recidivist murderers who were released from jail since then, and it was New Labour who engineered policies like tariff sentencing. I'm not entirely sure why you're moaning at

>Are you in favour of legal and prison reforms, in order to make sure that people of any colour breaking the law are all receiving the harshest sentences possible?

What specific reforms are you referring to here? List them.

>Are you voting Labour so that more funding - rather than less, like under the current Conservative government - is directed to our police force?

I do not see any correlation between the number of police and a reduction in criminality. The police are largely a responsive force, they do not prevent criminal action - they merely turn up after the act has been committed. In order for crime to be prevented you need a law abiding populace who fears and respects the law and laws themselves that have deterrent effect (See: Singapore).

>How is comparing a city that is being built by a democratic government to one being built by a theocratic dictatorship a fair comparison?

I thought liberal democracies were supposed to be better than "dictatorships"? Also, theocratic? Where did I mention a theocratic country?

>Would you rather live in a country like Saudi Arabia, just to have a less diverse but more economically successful society?

KSA is economically successful because they have the ability to sell the ground from under their feet. That being said I have no issue with their form of government, my only issue with them is the lack of capital controls that allow them to purchase property so easily and establish Islamic foundations in various countries (again, something engineered by liberals and leftists, so no party or politics that I've ever supported).

>I'd "put money" on you being an avid reader of the Daily Mail and a big fan of Katie Hopkins

Why does the Daily Mail trigger you people so much?

>because the far right have always known best, which is why all countries with a right-wing government are are totally not a huge fucking mess~"

Which governments and countries are you referring to? Japan, Singapore and China all have governments to the right of most "nationalist" parties in Europe and are all significantly better run than most if not all Western countries, factoring in their relative stages of development.

>>194486
Pic related, crime in Japan by type and ethnic group. Bear in mind there's only a few ten thousand Nigerians in Japan so for them to factor in at all is astonishing.

>>194487
Crime in Switzerland by top 10 ethnic groups.

>>194490
Crime in Germany, broken down by immigrant background.

And just to note, there is virtually no distinction between the Cons and Labour in terms of actual policy, and certainly not ideology: The Cons spend about 45% of GDP on public service, whereas Corbyn's Labour wants to spend, what, 50-55%?

Anyone who actually believes this is some ideological battle between "elitist tory toffs who hate the poor" and "the downtrodden" is a delusional sad-sack who needs to conjure up a fantasy of some biblical-tier dichotomous conflict in order to generate some excitement in otherwise shitty lives.

>>194486
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/479990/infographic.pdf

No, of course not. I'm just of the belief that if you're paying attention to one section of society far more closely than any other, you're more likely to spot wrong-doing. You completely ignored my point about a high-profile white British guy molesting children for decades, with many others knowing about this… why's that?

Interesting how all of those countries have a history of racism. The fact that you've used Germany as an example to try and disprove my point is fucking laughable.

>Not an argument
So glad I'm having this discussion with the Argument Standards Committee. Maybe that should say "I can't argue this with newspaper articles, which are notoriously biased, or with philosophical theories, so I'm going to ignore it." You should be a politican mate, you'd be good at it. kek

>"The data provided a breakdown of the ethnicity…who police TOOK ACTION AGAINST… They show that AMONGST THOSE PROCEEDED AGAINST.."
That's weird. It almost sounds like the paper interpreted the data to make ethnic minorities sound bad. Wonder how many white people they chose not to proceed against? Funny how they just didn't provide the raw data so people could see the whole truth.

I'd love to be able to show you evidence that the police and the media aren't being as hard on white people committing crime, but don't you think that would be a bit fucking stupid of them to release information like that? I've already provided proof above - from the government itself, not the Shitty Telegraph - that they disproportionately search, arrest, and jail ethnic minorities over white people. Many would take that as proof in itself that they're trying their level best NOT to make white people into criminals?

>show evidence that white people in neighbourhoods that have changed overwhelmingly over the past 15 years have become correspondingly happier
Oh yeah, because there's nothing else in the UK that could make the population unhappy. Economy's in the toilet, the NHS is crumbling, public services are shit, living expenses higher than ever, weather gets worse by the year… but no you're right, it's the raving gangs of ethnic criminals that are causing people to leave. Where's your evidence that those communities that have gotten unhappier are unhappier solely because of other races/nationalities/whatever the fuck you're trying to argue against here?

>the death penalty
Fucking hell, calm down Herr Farmer. You don't have to kill people to punish them for crimes. A whole 160 people since the late 60s?!?!?! Pretty sure more people have won the Lottery than that since then. Okay, so one past policy wasn't the best idea. What have YOU done to fix it for the future? Hopefully it was vote to continue placing austerity measures on the people who arrest criminals and get them to court in the first place, because when we have no police left to find terrorists obviously they will all be being swiftly convicted. ????

>list specific reforms
Fuck off you mong. I've got a life that doesn't involve crafting political policies on crime for someone on an internet messageboard. Are you in favour of legal/prison reform, or is blaming ethnic minorities because a newspaper article a strong enough stance for you?

>I do not see any correlation between the number of police and a reduction in criminality.
Obviously we don't need investigative police work, or police on the streets looking for potential street crimes. Who do you think is conducting these stop and searches that get the evil ethnic minorities arrested? Carrying a knife is a criminal offence sure, but carrying an offensive weapon doesn't hurt anyone does it - it's using it that does. Are you seriously saying that preventing someone from committing a serious crime isn't preventing criminal action…?

>Where did I mention a theocratic country?
Sorry, you didn't. You obviously meant a Communist dictatorship instead, as they are always spending lots of money on improving their societies so their citizens can live a happier life. You were clearly thinking of places like North Korea, a much happier place than the UK, which is why East Asian suicide rates are much higher than the rest of the world. Got you.

>I have no issue with Saudi Arabian government
Are you… for real? They're the regime that are purchasing and providing arms for terrorists to attack the UK. Nothing to do with the left accepting other people's religious practices. Are you on fucking crack or something? Christ on a bicycle the far-right get thicker every fucking day, I'm actually laughing at how much of a dumbass you are wow

>Trigger
It doesn't trigger me at all you fucking moron. It's just a great barometer of how much of a gullible cuck someone is, and you have reached maximum cuck. Enjoy being shafted by the media, Mr Shrewd Political Mind?

>>194493
Yeah, because a 15% increase when you have a national income of billions is absolutely nothing, you're right. Didn't realise you were also a top mathematician as well as an experienced politician and global crime expert. Kek

I don't need to create excitement in my life thanks, I already have enough thanks to the real things that I do and engage in every single day. Maybe you should try it rather than blaming immigrants for everything that makes you mad. I don't think it's an ideological battle between the rich and the poor, because I don't live in a comic book (projecting again?), I think it's about how the most influential force in the world - money - affects society and the people in it. Or have you got some newspaper article that can "prove" to me that no leaders of the world are interested in their economic standing and how their population affects that?

>>194496
You realize the PDF you linked states nothing in support of your argument right, and even shows that the conviction rate of white offenders is the highest?

>Interesting how all of those countries have a history of racism.

Which countries do not have a history of racism, out of interest?

>The fact that you've used Germany as an example to try and disprove my point is fucking laughable.

So you're blaming the high crime rate of non-white immigrants to Germany on WW2? You're more stupid than I gave you credit for.

>That's weird.

"Took action against" = The CPS decided to prosecute them. Are you dense?

>Wonder how many white people they chose not to proceed against?

The CPS is run by a Pakistani.

>not the Shitty Telegraph

The Telegraph is not the source of the data, the Met and the person who requested the data under the FoI are.

>Oh yeah, because there's nothing else in the UK that could make the population unhappy.

Actually, according to Putnam's research even when you control for socio-economic status, diversity still makes everyone (not just whites) less trusting and less friendly within a given neighborhood:

http://archive.realtor.org/sites/default/files/BowlingAlone.pdf

>no you're right, it's the raving gangs of ethnic criminals that are causing people to leave.

I'm not talking about people leaving the country, I'm talking about white flight, which involves whites of all social classes leaving non-white areas.

If they love being minorities so much, why wouldn't they stay?

>A whole 160 people since the late 60s?!?!?!

And yet if the death penalty even killed one innocent person in a thousand years, you'd oppose it. The point here is that permissive criminal justice systems end up leading to innocent people being assaulted, raped and killed.

>because when we have no police left to find terrorists

MI5's funding has doubled over the past 10 years. As it takes about 20 people to track a single suspect, it is essentially impossible to track the number of people currently on the multiple watch lists that European and domestic institutions operate, there are simply too many of these people now. Unless you want to expand MI5's numbers to the point it becomes a sort of Stasi service.

It's amusing you don't see anything wrong with policies that let large numbers of high risk people into the country en mass though (e.g. Abedi's parents and the countless other terrorists that have struck in Western Europe who either received ILR/citizenship themselves or received it through their parents).

>Fuck off you mong

Why are you such a typical vulgar leftist? Do you study "hair dressing" and come from a single-parent family too? Do you spend your weekends doing drugs and spending money you don't have on useless crap?

You're the sort of person bringing this country down, not me.

>Are you in favour of legal/prison reform

You haven't listed any. "Legal/prison" reform can refer to anything, from early release schemes to turning prisons into hard labor camps.

>Are you seriously saying that preventing someone from committing a serious crime isn't preventing criminal action…?

Yes, I'm sure that those people who are stopped, searched and have knives taken off them then immediately cease all criminal activity from that point onwards.

>which is why East Asian suicide rates are much higher than the rest of the world.

Actually it's a mixed bag. Baltic states have some of the highest (higher than Japan's for example). But this can be attributed to differences in ethical philosophy - East Asians are more prone to suicide because they come from a culture where shame for perceived failure and indiscretion still exists.

>Are you… for real?

Yes, I have no issue with it. I'm not a liberal, so I don't believe in dropping bombs on countries until everyone within them is permitted to vote, have FEMEN protests and celebrate gay marriage. Have the lessons of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya taught morons like you nothing? Evidently not as the last messianic lefty figure you twats voted in (Blair) has started to rear his ugly face in public discourse about Brexit again.

>You obviously meant a Communist dictatorship instead

I mentioned three examples: Singapore, Japan and the PRC, which all have different models of government, none of which are really "communist" in any meaningful sense of the term.

>Enjoy being shafted by the media

The bulk of the media in the UK is liberal of varying shades. Even the Daily Mail is a "ok with mass immigration provided they all support the England football team" sort of rag. I disagree with mass immigration full stop, which puts me well to the right of the British MSM, and certainly well to the right of the BBC, which is overwhelmingly liberal on just about every level.

>>194497
>is absolutely nothing

Why isn't London Underground the best metro system in the world?

Why isn't the UK primary and secondary educational system better than Japan or Singapore's? It can't even beat Vietnam for fuck sake - and you think pouring another 30bn into it will somehow change things around? Do you have any functional proof all this gadgetry in schools makes kids smarter?

>>194499
No, it just supports all the things I said in the comment previous to the last one. You've picked out one anomaly in a system otherwise massively biased against ethnic minorities - and that higher conviction rate could easily be because they have actual irrefutable evidence, like CCTV? Please feel free to explain the rest of it with something rational, though.

Sorry, I should have specified. Germany has always had a huge far-right following, yes even to the point of starting one of two World Wars over it. Japan also has a huge far-right following, hilariously, as well as being a historically fascist country. Switzerland also joined in with fascism in WWII. So no, I'm not blaming WWII for "high crime rate of non-white immigrants", I'm blaming their fascist racist attitudes for a higher incidence of arrest and incarceration of ethnic minorities. Simple enough for you, dumbass, seeing as you seem to struggle with following logical argument?

>There's one ethnic minority person in the CPS, therefore the overwhelmingly huge portion of white British people could have no possible influence at all on their prosecution rate
Fuck off dickhead, if anyone is dense here it's you. You could challenge a lump of fucking iron.

>Met provided the data, Telegraph provided the interpretation that applied to thick racist nationalists like yourself, and clearly it works because here you fucking are
You are allowed to switch your brain on at any point in this conversation you know. It's getting boring having to explain basic points to you, only to have you not able to explain it to even a subpar level.

>diversity makes everyone less trusting and less friendly
No way, you're saying racist rhetoric (like the newspaper article and cherry-picked crime statistics from historically fascist countries that you've based your entire political viewpoint on) actually cause social unrest? Christ, it's like the dawning of a new day. I finally have seen the light… that racist rhetoric and creatively-interpreted "statistics" about diversity encourage fear and racial amnosity. Also, that's a research paper about America - America has a vastly different social climate to the UK, so try again.

>non-white areas
What the fuck are you talking about, you twat? "Non-white areas"? If you're talking about areas with large amounts of racial diversity, it's more likely to do with less money being spent on those areas or, you know, people being ignorant racists like yourself, more than anything else. I was born and have lived in areas where there is a large amount of ethnic diversity, and it's never been a problem for me in any way. Again, where's your proof that people are leaving solely because of ethnic criminals?

>I'm going to keep making completely incorrect guesses about your political stance because I'm so super educated on the ~liberal left snowflake~ and think anyone who disagrees with me is one, tehe!

>MI5's funding has doubled
I'll be expecting to see MI5 roaming the streets catching those horrid ethnic minorities carrying knives anytime soon then. WhY Do YoU kEeP iGnOrInG cOmPlEtElY vAlId QuEsTiOnS oMg it's literally like speaking to Theresa May

Weirdly enough, I do see something wrong with that! But that isn't what we are talking about, is it? We're talking about the police and their role in reducing crime rates, which is actually far larger overall than MI5 and Border Control, isn't it? So why don't you stop deflecting and ANSWER A QUESTION or something? :D

>Because using unpleasant language on a messageboard is completely indicative of my family background and career choice
Actually thinking of turning this conversation into a comedy sketch, it's so hilariously painful how far off the mark you are. Yes, I'm bringing the country down by being a degree-educated person with a full-time job, in no debt, in my own house, with a stable partner… because I said "fuck off you mong" to a far-right idiot on an imageboard. Oh no, not VULGARITY! How will my poor feelings EVER cope with such hardship?! Hahahahahahahahahahaha far right snowflake strikes again, kek

>You haven't listed any
Neither have you, dumbass. Just "kick out all immigrants" for you then?

>Because preventing a crime isn't crime prevention unless you can guarantee they never commit a crime again, so even prison is pointless so anyone who's had a speeding ticket should be executed

>Blair was voted in when I was 5 and, considering Corbyn is nothing like Blair, has nothing to do with the Labour Party in 2017
I actually don't agree with bombing other countries either, for any reason other than "we really have no other option than to try and fight them". However I'm really not sure you understand liberal agendas if you genuinely think the majority of left wing voters are in favour of war? 97% of the UK was against war in Syria, including the vast majority of the Labour shadow cabinet, yet the right wing Conservative government still did it. Maybe get your facts straight before you splerg out about "lefty twats". People were for the war in Iraq because the US (Republican) government lied about WMD so they could dig for oil. It's that "world leaders wanting to boost their economy" thing I mentioned in my last post, not because the left want a global prevalence of identity politics - especially not in 2003, when the Iraq War fucking started. (Personally I couldn't give a shit about identity politics, every European country has fought their own battles for minority recognition and I don't see why everyone else can't do the same.)

>Didn't mention Singapore or China at all, but nearly 15% of Singapore's population are immigrants, which is actually more than the UK at 13%

>"The bulk of media in the UK is liberal" but 80% of it is owned by 5 incredibly rich old white guys who benefit massively from social unrest, because then people vote in the Conservatives who help to keep them rich, but that fact is also the left somehow being wrong because it doesn't fit my rhetoric to realise that the UK population are being played for a fucking fool… and you have clearly been played like a fiddle :)

>>194507
>You've picked out one anomaly in a system otherwise massively biased against ethnic minorities

You haven't demonstrated this. The paper you provided suggests certain ethnic minority groups are stopped and searched, and arrested at higher rates, but that could easily be explained by a higher crime rate. It's functional proof of nothing in of itself.

>Please feel free to explain the rest of it with something rational, though.

The onus is on you to prove why a systematically racist criminal justice system convicts white defendants at higher rates than black ones, not me.

>Germany has always had a huge far-right following

Compared to which countries?

>Japan also has a huge far-right following

Compared to which countries?

>I'm blaming their fascist racist attitudes for a higher incidence of arrest and incarceration of ethnic minorities.

Then provide functional proof of a link between the arrest rates of say, Nigerians in Japan and Switzerland and "far right beliefs" that overrides their actual crime rate.

>Fuck off dickhead

Not an argument.

>You are allowed to switch your brain on at any point in this conversation you know.

Not an argument.

>No way, you're saying racist rhetoric

No. Robert Putnam's research is saying that racial diversity, even when controlling for income, crime levels, type of racial diversity, property prices and more, has a deleterious effect on social harmony. In other words, homogeneity is desirable.

>What the fuck are you talking about, you twat? "Non-white areas"?

Non-white areas. The concept is really basic, geographical areas that are largely populated by non-whites.

Shall I break it down into even simpler terms for you?

>America has a vastly different social climate to the UK, so try again.
>vastly different

You may think they do because you're monolingual and stupid and have never lived abroad, but this isn't true. Both America and the UK are anglosphere countries, so in the grand scheme of things they are very much alike in terms of governance, culture and politics.

In any event, I don't see how the UK's "social climate" with regards to race is any healthier. We're talking about a country where social workers were sent to diversity training for highlighting the scale and racial animus of Pakistani gang grooming in Northern towns.

>I'll be expecting to see MI5 roaming the streets catching those horrid ethnic minorities carrying knives anytime soon then.

You were talking about terrorism. Terror watch-lists are the responsibility of the intelligence services, not constables on the street, unless they've been specifically seconded to arrest someone who happens to be on such a list.

>Again, where's your proof that people are leaving solely because of ethnic criminals?

I didn't say "ethnic criminals". I said whites prefer living in predominantly white areas, and leave non-white areas because they feel like aliens in their own homeland.

>never been a problem for me

Well then I guess it's not a problem for anyone else, case closed.

>We're talking about the police and their role in reducing crime rates

You're free to provide functional proof that increasing police numbers exponentially leads to non-trivial reductions in the overall crime rate.

You haven't so far.

>Just "kick out all immigrants" for you then?

Nope. Restrict immigration to wealth-generating professions in the STEM fields, and restrict those work visas to temporary ones that require annual renewal. Make ILR and citizenship a lot harder to obtain, get rid of dual-citizenship allowances, make family reunification significantly harder (especially when talking about non-immediate family) or scrap it entirely, instant deportation for any foreign-born criminal upon conclusion of his sentence and so on.

>if you genuinely think the majority of left wing voters are in favour of war?

The majority of Labour voters wholeheartedly supported Blair's bombing of Yugoslavia.

>including the vast majority of the Labour shadow cabinet, yet the right wing Conservative government still did it.

Did what? I don't support the conservatives and I have no interest in defending May, so no dice. I don't give a damn about the sordid party politics that evidently satisfy a large part of your psychological economy.

>so they could dig for oil

That's what Iraq's largest oil contract went to Sinopec, right?

The war in Iraq was for ideological reasons (liberalism and ensuring the 'safety' of Israel).

>but nearly 15% of Singapore's population are immigrants

Since you're dumb and not worldly at all, I'll explain:

The distinction here is that Singapore's immigrant are almost all highly skilled STEM-related workers. Moreover, the vast majority of those will never receive Singaporean citizenship (which is very difficult to obtain) and of those who do, there is an institutional favoritism shown to Han Chinese migrants from the mainland, in order to maintain Han Chinese majority rule (LKY was quite open about this policy).

>"The bulk of media in the UK is liberal" but 80% of it is owned by 5 incredibly rich old white guys

This is meaningless, are you suggesting that "old white guys" cannot be liberals, when it was "old white guys" who founded the ideology in the late 18th and 19th centuries, you moron? Do you think the same Times of London that regularly runs opinion editorials about the necessity of mass immigration, or the same The Economist that runs stories about how all the Japanese are going to die out unless they open up their country to the third world are "right wing extremists" or something?

>>194507
>unless you can guarantee they never commit a crime again, so even prison is pointless so anyone who's had a speeding ticket should be executed

If someone continually commits sociopathic violence against innocent people, they deserve to die. Note use of the term "sociopathic". In other words not motivated by other factors, like pecuniary gain.

The recidivism rate of the death penalty is 0. And it works as a deterrent force, of that there is zero doubt (again, see Singapore's strict liability laws on drug trafficking).

>>194517
You know what? This conversation is pointless. You are a racist right-winger, looking for any reason to legitimise the way you think/feel.

If you are basing your view on the result of an inherently flawed system, then the result is likely to be flawed also. I'm not saying that ethnic minorities don't commit more crime - I'm not personally invested in protecting criminals of any colour - I'm just using logical argument to show that your reasoning is not solid.

The paper I provided proves that all ethnic groups other than white are stopped and searched disproportionately more. As a result, more of them are supposedly caught doing illegal things, which leads to a disproportionate amount of arrests. There's no proof white people aren't doing these things, but there is proof that people aren't trying to catch them as often. The anomaly in the system - that white people are convicted more often - is easily explained, as it's the ONLY stage in the process that is based on "beyond reasonable doubt" as in, you need to provide actual evidence. S&S, arrests, and sentencing are all based on an individual decision; which can and is often affected by individual bias. Again, you can't provide any proof that isn't happening, but raw government statistics and logical argument suggest strongly that it is happening. Your one newspaper article containing creatively interpreted data does little to trump this (for any rational thinker, anyway). Wasn't it you that mentioned Occam's Razor - if it's the theory that makes most sense, it's the most likely to be true?

I don't need to compare any other countries to Germany in order for that point to be valid, as they literally started a world war because of facism - an ideology which relies heavily on racism. No other country has ever done that, and again no rational person would be asking for an explanation. However, seeing as you don't seem to be able to use Google to educate yourself before making ill-informed rants, here is an easily sourced write-up on which countries have far-right political parties or have had fascist parties in power: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_populism

You'll notice Germany, Switzerland and Japan are all mentioned. Now, are you able to provide a breakdown of those 3 countries' criminal process system like I have provided for England, so that one could analyse for themselves? "The onus is on you to prove" that those countries aren't just racist fascists, and that your argument has some credibility as a theory - because if it did, you'd be able to provide something tangible.

As it stands, I don't really care about one research study that essentially just proves that American people are still largely racist - surprise - and by using language like "non-white areas" to mean "areas with a large cultural diversity", I can see the type of mind I'm arguing with. Even if I could provide some sort of irrefutable proof (though I'm not sure exactly what you'd expect me to provide) you woudldn't care, because you - like most extremist viewpoints - are reaching desperately for anything to validate how worthless and bitter you feel.

As it stands, I agree with a lot of your points on immigration, just not for the reasons you have provided. I don't really care about the ~feels~ of people who can't adjust to a changing world. We were the ones who went out and joined in global trade, and now we are reaping the consequences. Cry me a river. Also, I'm pretty sure bombing Yugoslavia has had little detrimental affect on our country, especially compared to bombing Iraq/Syria/Libya - nice reach though.

If you honestly think that America, the country that just voted in Trump, went to war with Iraq solely to fight for liberalism, then I don't think it's me that the problem with being "dumb and not worldly at all". Only far-right hypocrites, that cry about feeling like aliens in their own country yet criticise others for (supposedly) starting wars to help others not feel like aliens in their own country, think this about the people who make the decisions in American politics.

>Runs opinion pieces designed to make people argue amongst themselves about "lefty liberals" and "right-wing fascists"
Yup, you're right. Those opinion pieces create so much unity and peace, no disagreements at all. Completely unlike what I pointed out in my last comment.

Look, this conversation is seriously boring because it's trying to debate with a 12 year old. You've got some facts and knowledge, but all this boils down to for you is continuing to support your own viewpoint, even if others can provide strong support to it being incorrect. So, I'm going to enjoy my weekend with my fiancee and child, and you can continue to feel martyred on the internet. :)

>>194057
What do you guys think of the result? I was kinda hoping for a hung parliament because I don't like the Tory's and I don't want labour to take over just yet however im not happy with the Tory's and the DUP working together as the DUP are literally crazy. Im pro labour but I'd rather the Tory's undo themselves now and have some power than labour to take over and be scrutinised because of brexit deals etc

>>194624
I wouldn't be surprised if the DUP went on a crazy power trip in Northern Ireland now that they're definitely the UK govt's preferred party. Hopefully this doesn't lead to more violence in the area.

>>194517
>>194476
>>194486
>Not an argument.
You sound like the Nigeria sperg from the interracial relationships thread, kek.

>>194617
>The paper I provided proves that all ethnic groups other than white are stopped and searched disproportionately more. As a result, more of them are supposedly caught doing illegal things, which leads to a disproportionate amount of arrests.

What proportion of total arrests do you suppose those made under stop and search constitute?

Blacks aren't just arrested at higher rates for possession of things (i.e. what you'd expect a stop and search to bring about) but violent offenses too, such as knife crime.

>>194617
And the rest of your post is ridiculous. A wiki entry on "right wing populism" somehow "proving" that you can write off the entire crime datasets of several large nations?

You obviously have no intention in engaging honestly with anon.

>>194626

What might be interesting is the attention that NI gets now. Even most Brits didn't really know what the DUP were other than 'one of those other parties'

Apparently the DUP are triggering homosexuals, which is fine by me.

I REALLY hate pakis and blacks. That's why I voted UKIP.

Make the UK white again.

Sage for retarded question, but do you anons prefer the term Brit or English to refer to you? Am foreign, and have always wondered. Are they just interchangeable and you don't really care? Do Scots care about being referred to as English?

>>194849
>Brit
Person from Great Britain
>English
Person from England

I'm Welsh, so I'm a Brit, but I'm not English. I wouldn't get upset if someone referred to me as English, but I wouldn't like it very much either.

>>194849

I refer to myself as English, but you can say Brit if you like. Saying English has more ethnic connotations tho, non-whites usually call themselves 'British' for example.