Culturist Conference 2013

[Binxie]

I think a large part of that problem is that "english" people rarely move abroad for work, its something thats a lot more common in europe, and thats because of poor language education (and education generally)......

We've become part of the european union with the idea of taking from it, but not wanting to be actively involved in it, as demonstrated by reluctance to use the euro etc. Its a shame, as I think the benefits of being in the european union far outweigh the negatives, and personally I'd rather Identify as european then english.

Why should they have to move abroad for work? They were born here and it is their home.

It is interesting that you note employment and education though, and I think the two are linked. Its obviously not the blame of migrant workers who often come here to do jobs that many of our own people won't or can't do, but there is an issue with why the English/British people will not or cannot fulfil those roles. It is linked. You see, during the boom or bust years, politicians fully supported migration because it kept wages down for their business buddies. This has over the years contributed to a lack of education, particularly in those who would have traditionally done apprenticeships in manual or semi-professional roles.

Businesses as a whole would prefer to take on skilled migrant workers who will work for minimum wage rather than having to pay to train our youngsters, which has inevitably led to a point where there are entire sections of society who are now classed as 'Neets'. Our own people do not want to work for minimum wage because of the benefits system which for too long has allowed people to sit about for years at a time without ever having to lift a finger.

Because of this situation, it is not a far cry to suggest that cheap migrant workers are akin to modern day slavery. As I say, I don't blame them, I blame the politicians for leading us to this situation in the first place.

 

[Pickman's model]

and therefore the publick for voting for them

 

[Binxie]

ah the thick people in the provinces argument! fuck off

don't be appropriating the Welsh for your bullshit 'arguments' thanks

Piss off you Wealisc nob.

 

[Binxie]

and therefore the publick for voting for them

You're not wrong.

 

[Pickman's model]

Piss off you Wealisc nob.

you are ernestolynch and i claim my £5

 

[butchersapron]

You see, during the boom or bust years, politicians fully supported migration because it kept wages down for their business buddies. This has over the years contributed to a lack of education, particularly in those who would have traditionally done apprenticeships in manual or semi-professional roles.

What does this confused mess mean? What and when were the 'boom or bust years'? Why Would politicians want people to leave the country and why would it bring down wages - it would have the opposite effect by decreasing the size of the labour market. Why would this lead to a lack of education - and why would it have happened in the largest period of expansion of education for over a century?

 

[Binxie]

What does this confused mess mean? What and when were the 'boom or bust years'? Why Would politicians want people to leave the country and why would it bring down wages - it would have the opposite effect by decreasing the size of the labour market. Why would this lead to a lack of education - and why would it have happened in the largest period of expansion of education for over a century?

Mid 90's until around 2008...

They supported immigration in, not out....

 

[butchersapron]

Mid 90's until around 2008...

They supported immigration in, not out....

You should have said immigration then not migration - i appreciate that English may not be your first language but this is rather an important point. And what then were 'boom or bust years'? What characterised them? Why do you know think, in the middle of a deepening long-term recession that we are know past the time of 'bust'?

edit: a reply to my first questions would be nice too.

 

[Binxie]

You should have said immigration then not migration - i appreciate that English may not be your first language but this is rather an important point. And what then were 'boom or bust years'? What characterised them? Why do you know think, in the middle of a deepening long-term recession that we are know past the time of 'bust'?

edit: a reply to my first questions would be nice too.

We've never come out of the 'bust' period. Seriously, are you for real?

 

[butchersapron]

We've never come out of the 'bust' period. Seriously, are you for real?

Yes 'Binxie' i am for real. You identified a period from the mid-1990s to 2008 that you called the 'bust or boom years' - the implicit claim being that we are now past that period - that booms and busts are finished. I asked you to say what characterised the bust or boom years (I wonder, did anyone ever hear a politicians saying they offer us and work towards bust or boom) and why we are now past them. You have been unable to. In fact, you've made it worse as you now identify this period only as bust years and claim that we're still in them - making a nonsense of your claim about 'boom or bust years'.

I also asked some other questions based on your confusion about these years and what they entailed as regards education and immigration. You ignored them too. Now come on, you're obviously a very clever chap as you try and use long words and that, so give them questions a go please. And the ones about the jews secretly/not secretly running the word with a jewish globalist agenda.

 

[sim667]

Why should they have to move abroad for work? They were born here and it is their home.

It is interesting that you note employment and education though, and I think the two are linked. Its obviously not the blame of migrant workers who often come here to do jobs that many of our own people won't or can't do, but there is an issue with why the English/British people will not or cannot fulfil those roles. It is linked. You see, during the boom or bust years, politicians fully supported migration because it kept wages down for their business buddies. This has over the years contributed to a lack of education, particularly in those who would have traditionally done apprenticeships in manual or semi-professional roles.

Businesses as a whole would prefer to take on skilled migrant workers who will work for minimum wage rather than having to pay to train our youngsters, which has inevitably led to a point where there are entire sections of society who are now classed as 'Neets'. Our own people do not want to work for minimum wage because of the benefits system which for too long has allowed people to sit about for years at a time without ever having to lift a finger.

Because of this situation, it is not a far cry to suggest that cheap migrant workers are akin to modern day slavery. As I say, I don't blame them, I blame the politicians for leading us to this situation in the first place.

The difference being the size and location of our little isle in comparison to many european countries, a small seperated country that has proactively discouraged its public from properly integrating into the europe union despite joining it for the trade benefits. The "english" supporters of racist organisations such as the EDL and UKIP say they are secularised by "immigration" from the european union (infact its not immigration, its free movement within the european union) something which the "english" are perfectly entitled to do, but in fact they'd rather sit and secularise themself moaning that they're being marginalised by immigration. When its actually that they choose not to have sights set on larger goals, seeing the sea as a boundary between us and them.

Please dont come at me with you ideal tabloid excuse that "Neets" are a culmination of a society where people think its acceptable to sit on benefits, benefits are a safety net which has been relied on by the poorest people since the desecration of the UK's heavy industry in favour of service industry, since immoral and in some cases illegal banking practices crippled the economy. To make it all worse we now end up with a bunch of Eton lads who think that the way to sort out the economy is to introduce what is essentially subsidised labour, for, in some cases, companies who aren't even contributing their dues to the tax system. Additionally those same Eton lads have undertaken a ideological attack on the poorest in society by placing an affordable Higher Education out of reach, making extra taxes as far reaching as possible and demonising those who are unable to find work, or unable to work for physical reasons. All whilst they've masked their despicable practices behind companies who profiteer from speading their vacuous interpretation of the message "We're all in this together", when it in fact they're in it with their lot, taking everything they can for their own kin whilst draining everyone else of their will to live.

Now in the future businesses as a whole will have no option to take on skilled migrant workers from abroad as the government have decided that education is more a of a luxury for the rich than a necessity for the economy. Whilst actually workfare is more akin to modern day slavery than migrant workers, or at least similar to the workhouse system of working disproportionate hours for your 'keep'.

 

[Binxie]

Please dont come at me with you ideal tabloid excuse that "Neets" are a culmination of a society where people think its acceptable to sit on benefits, benefits are a safety net which has been relied on by the poorest people since the desecration of the UK's heavy industry in favour of service industry, since immoral and in some cases illegal banking practices crippled the economy.

Again, because of a desire to see profit over all else, after our corporations shipped all the manufacturing jobs over to China and India.

I'm not saying it is the fault of 'Neets', or anyone else who has ended up being stuck on benefits, but I do think we should be doing more than just chucking benefits payments at them which doesn't help the problem (I'm not advocating we take it away either, I'm actually suggesting we spend a bit more money, and help get them trained.

You can't blame the English for being resentful towards the EU. We have always throughout our history being isolationist, even since the Tudor days against Cathlocism, which I guess you could equate with medieval version of the EU. We were asked to vote on an economic treaty, it was always the intention of those same 'Eton Lads' to turn it into more than that, but they knew we'd have never voted for it if we had all the information before.

Although surely a referendum in the next few years would put an end to this debate once and for all, we should just let the people decide and be done with it.

 

[butchersapron]

Again, because of a desire to see profit over all else, after our corporations shipped all the manufacturing jobs over to China and India.

Manufacturing jobs make up around 10% of the workforce and add more than that figure to GDP and the UK manufacturing sector is the 6th largest in the world. How did that happen if all manufacturing jobs have been exported to china and india?

 

[Binxie]

Manufacturing jobs make up around 10% of the workforce and add more than that figure to GDP and the UK manufacturing sector is the 6th largest in the world. How did that happen if all manufacturing jobs have been exported to china and india?

Hmm... Ok mate. When I said all, I obviously didn't mean all, it was an exaggeration. Most manufacturing is now done in developing countries. I like how you all jump on silly nit-picks without addressing the point though, really adds to your credibility.

 

[TruXta]

Hmm... Ok mate. When I said all, I obviously didn't mean all, it was an exaggeration. Most manufacturing is now done in developing countries. I like how you all jump on silly nit-picks without addressing the point though, really adds to your credibility.

A lot of Western countries have seen falling industrial sector employment and a rise in the service sector. Nothing particular to the UK about that.

 

[sim667]

Again, because of a desire to see profit over all else, after our corporations shipped all the manufacturing jobs over to China and India.

I'm not saying it is the fault of 'Neets', or anyone else who has ended up being stuck on benefits, but I do think we should be doing more than just chucking benefits payments at them which doesn't help the problem (I'm not advocating we take it away either, I'm actually suggesting we spend a bit more money, and help get them trained.

You can't blame the English for being resentful towards the EU. We have always throughout our history being isolationist, even since the Tudor days against Cathlocism, which I guess you could equate with medieval version of the EU. We were asked to vote on an economic treaty, it was always the intention of those same 'Eton Lads' to turn it into more than that, but they knew we'd have never voted for it if we had all the information before.

Although surely a referendum in the next few years would put an end to this debate once and for all, we should just let the people decide and be done with it.

Well, you'd be letting the public decide based on information provided by an anti european government.

If we vote to leave, ill be trying to move to europe pretty damn quick.

 

[Binxie]

A lot of Western countries have seen falling industrial sector employment and a rise in the service sector. Nothing particular to the UK about that.

I never said there was anything particular to the UK with that. It comes mainly from top-down decisions made by the richest corporations, the kind of cunts who are meeting in Watford next month.

 

[butchersapron]

Hmm... Ok mate. When I said all, I obviously didn't mean all, it was an exaggeration. Most manufacturing is now done in developing countries. I like how you all jump on silly nit-picks without addressing the point though, really adds to your credibility.

Hang on, i'm sitting here waiting for you to reply to my questions from earlier today. I've been waiting a fair while now and have even restated them and told you why they're important for your points. Still nothing back from you though. So don't blame me if you keep throwing daft confused generalisations and absurd claims onto the thread that i think it's worth knocking down whilst i wait.

 

[butchersapron]

I never said there was anything particular to the UK with that. It comes mainly from top-down decisions made by the richest corporations, the kind of cunts who are meeting in Watford next month.

The jews?

 

[TruXta]

I never said there was anything particular to the UK with that. It comes mainly from top-down decisions made by the richest corporations, the kind of cunts who are meeting in Watford next month.

So why do you think the UK is still the 6th largest manufacturer in the world?

 

[Binxie]

Well, you'd be letting the public decide based on information provided by an anti european government.

If we vote to leave, ill be trying to move to europe pretty damn quick.

And that's your right to vote that way in a democratic society. There is no right or wrong answer on this. I would hope that there was as much information for both for and against for people to make a conscious and informed decision.

 

[Binxie]

The jews?

I'm sure there are Jews there, but I don't think its only the Jews.

 

[Binxie]

So why do you think the UK is still the 6th largest manufacturer in the world?

Depends what you class as manufacturing. If by manufacturing you mean help companies develop technological innovation and then move the mass-production over to India to build on the cheap then I guess we do have a good manufacturing credential.

 

[TruXta]

Depends what you class as manufacturing. If by manufacturing you mean help companies develop technological innovation and then move the mass-production over to India to build on the cheap then I guess we do have a good manufacturing credential.

Just out of laziness, here's Wikipedia. The important bit is in bold.

Although the manufacturing sector's share of both employment and the UK's GDP has steadily fallen since the 1960s, data from the OECD shows that manufacturing output in terms of both production and value has steadily increased since 1945. A 2009 report from PricewaterhouseCoopers, citing data from the UK Office for National Statistics, stated that manufacturing output (gross value added at 2007 prices) has increased in 35 of the 50 years between 1958 and 2007, and output in 2007 was at record levels, approximately double that in 1958.[1]
This is a trend common in many mature Western economies. Heavy industry, employing many thousands of people and producing large volumes of low-value goods (such as steelmaking) has either become highly efficient (producing the same amount of output from fewer manufacturing sites employing fewer people- for example, productivity in the UK's steel industry increased by a factor of 8 between 1978 and 2006 [2]) or has been replaced by smaller industrial units producing high-value goods (such as the aerospace and electronics industries).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

[Binxie]

Just out of laziness, here's Wikipedia. The important bit is in bold.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_in_the_United_Kingdom

Ok fair enough, so why is there still a shortage of jobs?

 

[TruXta]

Ok fair enough, so why is there still a shortage of jobs?

That's capitalism for you mate, strategic reserves of labour and all that shite.

 

[Binxie]

That's capitalism for you mate, strategic reserves of labour and all that shite.

I'm with you on the capitalism thing. But this is my point, why are we allowing A) New people into the country when we have so many unemployed already. and B) Allowing a system where for many and understandably, it is better for them financially to stay unemployed.

The current system is making people resentful of foreigners, and obviously the less intelligent ones like the BNP blame the immigrants themselves because they can't see the overall picture. This is why I say that the UAF and the EDL are both different camps used and steered for keeping controlled opposition.

 

[TruXta]

I'm with you on the capitalism thing. But this is my point, why are we allowing A) New people into the country when we have so many unemployed already. and B) Allowing a system where for many and understandably, it is better for them financially to stay unemployed.

The current system is making people resentful of foreigners, and obviously the less intelligent ones like the BNP blame the immigrants themselves because they can't see the overall picture. This is why I say that the UAF and the EDL are both different camps used and steered for keeping controlled opposition.

People have been resentful of foreigners for millenia. That's just the way most societies work.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Don't get all conspiracy theory Firky. I have just found this website and was having a browse and I was just a bit annoyed reading people making racist comments about how the British do not have a culture. No one would dare say that about any other nation, so why is it deemed acceptable to say that about the British?

Your argument is based on a false premise - that people mean that "the British have no British culture", when it's fairly obvious to anyone who doesn't have a doctorate in disingenuousness that what people mean is that we have no over-riding dominant British culture, we instead have pieces of regional culture that make up a patchwork British culture. In that respect we're similar to the post-war West Germans, with their dominant regional culture and a (very) subsidiary national culture based on a few essentialist traits like beer-drinking.
Obviously, the right in Britain like to imagine or perhaps pretend that there's some basic British culture common to all Britons, but of course have to discard anything that doesn't reflect well on right ideology, which is why relatively few Britons identify with the ideas of British culture proffered by the right - it's simplistic rubbish. Rallying to a British flag is meaningless if all it symbolises to most people is the fact of union 306 years ago.

 

[TruXta]

Your argument is based on a false premise - that people mean that "the British have no British culture", when it's fairly obvious to anyone who doesn't have a doctorate in disingenuousness that what people mean is that we have no over-riding dominant British culture, we instead have pieces of regional culture that make up a patchwork British culture. In that respect we're similar to the post-war West Germans, with their dominant regional culture and a (very) subsidiary national culture based on a few essentialist traits like beer-drinking.
Obviously, the right in Britain like to imagine or perhaps pretend that there's some basic British culture common to all Britons, but of course have to discard anything that doesn't reflect well on right ideology, which is why relatively few Britons identify with the ideas of British culture proffered by the right - it's simplistic rubbish. Rallying to a British flag is meaningless if all it symbolises to most people is the fact of union 306 years ago.

I wonder, would it be fair to say that there is a British culture, but it's really only that of the upper classes?