|
Post by victoria on Jun 29, 2016 18:10:17 GMT -5
Yes, just to confirm that the advert thing relates to a debate about promoting realistic body images in young women and girls, in situations where (eg in adverts in tube stations) there is no choice about choosing not see them, as there is for tv for example. About 1.6m women and girls here have eating disorders. Absolutely nothing to do with muslims and indeed it was I think started during Mr Johnson's time as mayor, and he is the pro brexit leader and basically posh and rich. I'll let you know if I ever see him converting but I doubt it! Have a look at these links for background www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/31606/1/the-five-worst-examples-of-body-shaming-adswww.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11213078/Victorias-Secret-lingerie-advert-changed-from-perfect-body-after-internet-storm.htmlwww.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/body-shaming-adverts-banned-london-transport-tube-sadiq-khan-a7079591.htmlOr one on a different topic in the New York subway following Governor and mayoral intervention on grounds of offensiveness showing that stopping ads thought to be offensive isn't just a British tendency: www.reuters.com/article/us-amazon-com-new-york-nazi-idUSKBN0TD2OK20151126 (the ads for that series over here were less 'in your face' and not on trains, so presumably the issue didn't arise: I think same reaction would have happened here if they had been). We have about about 4.5% muslims in the uk, which is more than the about 1% in the usa, but its small stuff percentage wise, and miniscule in terms of how many of them are very orthodox or strict. We have a common law system in the uk, like most of the usa, and within a free system of that sort, if people wish to have faith based dispute resolution systems such as sharia based law in its moderate forms, or other religions such as Judaism then thats their right here, and they freely exercise it, provided always that no UK law is broken since the law of the land prevails. I suspect its the same in the usa save perhaps for Louisiana which I think has a pre napoleonic system of civil law in some aspects and I don't have a clue about that. Very different in civil law systems which originate from old Roman law, such as most of the EU, where one is not born inherently free subject to the law as we are, but has rights and freedoms only to the extent granted by law and no further. The two sound similar but the two lead to very different approaches to interpreting laws. Lawyers in Louisiana must have fun trying to apply federal common law with local civil law, now I think about it, just as applying EU law with its civil (Roman) tradition in the UK, with its own common law tradition has proved difficult at times. It boils down to the age old debate which the USA has had over your written constitution down the years : do the clauses define and hence limit the extent of your rights or are they in fact simply statements of key inherent rights among all the others you were born with as free people (or, pre 1776, born with as englishmen and women). The significance of "we hold these truths to be self evident" in the declaration of independence so skilfully drafted by Jefferson perhaps becomes clear when seen in that light. He did not say "We have decided that everyone shall have the following rights". And recall that the 9th amendment to constitution makes it clear just in case "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." But I digress, at well past midnight uk time! Heres to all free democratic peoples, on the 100th anniversary of the Somme when so many from both sides of the Atlantic died for europe and its freedom, even if sometimes democracy leads to brexit. PS totally different note but someone told me that 'up north' in the cold and barren Brexit zones of England, (sorry, I mean Mordor) there are signs of people stockpiling food from supermarkets. Or perhaps there is a sale on....lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 21:17:18 GMT -5
Yes, just to confirm that the advert thing relates to a debate about promoting realistic body images in young women and girls, in situations where (eg in adverts in tube stations) there is no choice about choosing not see them, as there is for tv for example. About 1.6m women and girls here have eating disorders. Absolutely nothing to do with muslims and indeed it was I think started during Mr Johnson's time as mayor, and he is the pro brexit leader and basically posh and rich. I'll let you know if I ever see him converting but I doubt it! Have a look at these links for background www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/31606/1/the-five-worst-examples-of-body-shaming-adswww.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11213078/Victorias-Secret-lingerie-advert-changed-from-perfect-body-after-internet-storm.htmlwww.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/body-shaming-adverts-banned-london-transport-tube-sadiq-khan-a7079591.htmlOr one on a different topic in the New York subway following Governor and mayoral intervention on grounds of offensiveness showing that stopping ads thought to be offensive isn't just a British tendency: www.reuters.com/article/us-amazon-com-new-york-nazi-idUSKBN0TD2OK20151126 (the ads for that series over here were less 'in your face' and not on trains, so presumably the issue didn't arise: I think same reaction would have happened here if they had been). We have about about 4.5% muslims in the uk, which is more than the about 1% in the usa, but its small stuff percentage wise, and miniscule in terms of how many of them are very orthodox or strict. We have a common law system in the uk, like most of the usa, and within a free system of that sort, if people wish to have faith based dispute resolution systems such as sharia based law in its moderate forms, or other religions such as Judaism then thats their right here, and they freely exercise it, provided always that no UK law is broken since the law of the land prevails. I suspect its the same in the usa save perhaps for Louisiana which I think has a pre napoleonic system of civil law in some aspects and I don't have a clue about that. Very different in civil law systems which originate from old Roman law, such as most of the EU, where one is not born inherently free subject to the law as we are, but has rights and freedoms only to the extent granted by law and no further. The two sound similar but the two lead to very different approaches to interpreting laws. Lawyers in Louisiana must have fun trying to apply federal common law with local civil law, now I think about it, just as applying EU law with its civil (Roman) tradition in the UK, with its own common law tradition has proved difficult at times. It boils down to the age old debate which the USA has had over your written constitution down the years : do the clauses define and hence limit the extent of your rights or are they in fact simply statements of key inherent rights among all the others you were born with as free people (or, pre 1776, born with as englishmen and women). The significance of "we hold these truths to be self evident" in the declaration of independence so skilfully drafted by Jefferson perhaps becomes clear when seen in that light. He did not say "We have decided that everyone shall have the following rights". And recall that the 9th amendment to constitution makes it clear just in case "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." But I digress, at well past midnight uk time! Heres to all free democratic peoples, on the 100th anniversary of the Somme when so many from both sides of the Atlantic died for europe and its freedom, even if sometimes democracy leads to brexit. PS totally different note but someone told me that 'up north' in the cold and barren Brexit zones of England, (sorry, I mean Mordor) there are signs of people stockpiling food from supermarkets. Or perhaps there is a sale on....lol Wow this completely contradicts what he has told me. He also told me the number 1 name in London is Muhhamed. He was telling me he's gotten harassed walking home from a pub drunk through an area where sharia law is enforced. I'll read those links tomorrow
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2016 21:20:37 GMT -5
I've gone to Ibitha 7 times and I stayed in an area that all the northern england folks vacation ar and it was like nothing I've ever seen. They were maniacs.
|
|
|
Post by mnkdfann on Jun 29, 2016 21:58:04 GMT -5
Wow this completely contradicts what he has told me. He also told me the number 1 name in London is Muhhamed. He was telling me he's gotten harassed walking home from a pub drunk through an area where sharia law is enforced. I'll read those links tomorrow There is some truth to the bit about the #1 name for male newborns being Muhammed but there are some caveats. E.g., various spellings of the name being grouped together. blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/08/mohammed-really-is-the-single-most-popular-boys-name-in-england-and-wales/But, of course, each year there is always a number one name, and it often varies from year to year. No one seems to care if it is Oliver or Andrew. I recall walking home sort of drunk with friends in London about a decade ago. We were slightly 'harassed' by a couple of fun-loving Brits. But it had nothing to do with anyone being Muslim. It was more like some locals slightly teasing some drunk tourists.
|
|
|
Post by victoria on Jun 30, 2016 3:13:50 GMT -5
Wow this completely contradicts what he has told me. He also told me the number 1 name in London is Muhhamed. He was telling me he's gotten harassed walking home from a pub drunk through an area where sharia law is enforced. I'll read those links tomorrow There is some truth to the bit about the #1 name for male newborns being Muhammed but there are some caveats. E.g., various spellings of the name being grouped together. blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/08/mohammed-really-is-the-single-most-popular-boys-name-in-england-and-wales/But, of course, each year there is always a number one name, and it often varies from year to year. No one seems to care if it is Oliver or Andrew. I recall walking home sort of drunk with friends in London about a decade ago. We were slightly 'harassed' by a couple of fun-loving Brits. But it had nothing to do with anyone being Muslim. It was more like some locals slightly teasing some drunk tourists. In London in 2015 most popular name was indeed Muhammad followed by Oliver Alexander Daniel and Joshua. www.standard.co.uk/news/london/revealed-the-most-popular-name-for-baby-boys-in-london-according-to-official-data-a2871406.html The the most popular English and Welsh names in the same article are very different. The UK is a country of multiple nationalities such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, English and others and at any given time the biggest ethnic name likely depends on which group has been most fertile that year! I'm afraid the UK has an alcohol problem of massive proportions and some towns you really wouldn't want to be out at night. But that's nowt to do with muslims who by and large don't drink. Fortunate since very many of them are medical professionals for the nhs, which could not survive without incoming doctors nurses and pharmacists... We are getting a bit off topic here in my view, partly down to me.
|
|
|
Post by victoria on Jun 30, 2016 3:36:38 GMT -5
I've gone to Ibitha 7 times and I stayed in an area that all the northern england folks vacation ar and it was like nothing I've ever seen. They were maniacs. Yes, it's embarrassing. No wonder we aren't popular in the EU. It's why I tend to vacation in Canada and the US where people are much more educated and sensible in my experience. And you have wildlife bigger than squirrels and pigeons.
|
|
|
Post by LosingMyBullishness on Jun 30, 2016 4:57:32 GMT -5
Thanks Victoria, your comments are a great read indeed. Why did Cameron in the first place allowed a referendum? - The influencial tabloid press such as 'the Sun' has been constantly bashing the EU to nourish the fears of their readers and serves nationalistic group thinking. - Nigel Farage has been quite successful as populistic leader of Ukip proving that there are significant Brexit-voters. - In such situations opportunitic main stream politicians pop up and utilize it for their own purposes. In this case it was Boris Johnson. - Some year ago an english Professor of International and Comparative Law told us that there is a huge problem as Britain has a very fixed class society. According to him the less privilied class has lost its faith in moving up the social ladder and created their own realm with its own values, behaviour patterns etc. - There is the english channel (very shallow and indead only temporarily filled up with water) as a clear separation from the 'mainland'. - The german and french influence in the EU is large and english media has been utilizing wars (Germany) and habits (France) for centuries to alienate from these countries and people. - Migration: The fear to get left behind either by education or sheer amount is strong in the less priviledged class. As well is the lack of knowledge about other countries and the appreciation of tolerance and freedom of movement.
I such a setting a referendum is high risk if Cameron was keen to keep the UK in the EU.
|
|
|
Post by victoria on Jun 30, 2016 6:43:50 GMT -5
Thanks Victoria, your comments are a great read indeed. Why did Cameron in the first place allowed a referendum? - The influencial tabloid press such as 'the Sun' has been constantly bashing the EU to nourish the fears of their readers and serves nationalistic group thinking. - Nigel Farage has been quite successful as populistic leader of Ukip proving that there are significant Brexit-voters. - In such situations opportunitic main stream politicians pop up and utilize it for their own purposes. In this case it was Boris Johnson. - Some year ago an english Professor of International and Comparative Law told us that there is a huge problem as Britain has a very fixed class society. According to him the less privilied class has lost its faith in moving up the social ladder and created their own realm with its own values, behaviour patterns etc. - There is the english channel (very shallow and indead only temporarily filled up with water) as a clear separation from the 'mainland'. - The german and french influence in the EU is large and english media has been utilizing wars (Germany) and habits (France) for centuries to alienate from these countries and people. - Migration: The fear to get left behind either by education or sheer amount is strong in the less priviledged class. As well is the lack of knowledge about other countries and the appreciation of tolerance and freedom of movement. I such a setting a referendum is high risk if Cameron was keen to keep the UK in the EU. I think I agree with what you say. There's huge wealth disparity in the uk especially between London and the rest, so I think perhaps geographic location is a big factor and a sort of socioeconomic class itself. Cameron offered a referendum in our last election to get votes from Ukip and stop more right wing people voting Ukip, and to try to entice anti Europe people from the left. However nobody really expected a conservative government and we all expected another coalition, and the referendum would have been abandoned as an easy bargaining chip in that. However the conservatives unexpectedly won, then Cameron had to do the referendum he had promised despite not really expecting to have to do it. Nobody seriously expected the referendum which then happened to lead to brexit but, again, the vote went against expectations. So, tragically, narrow politics has led to what is tacitly understood here even by brexit voters to be a catastrophe. Technically the referendum merely advises the government of the peoples' view, it was not a referendum which binds parliament or government so technically it could be ignored but the reality is that with a heavy heart most people accept that democracy probably means we now have to cut our own throats. One piece of breaking news here is that one leading candidate to replace Cameron has announced that if elected she will not now seek to scrap our membership of the European Convention on Human rights and fundamental freedoms as had also been considered so at least there is some chance of not suffering that final blow here.
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Jun 30, 2016 7:54:18 GMT -5
The FTSE100 has recovered nearly all of its losses in the past few days.
As Keith Bliss just wrote in an article for Yahoo Finance, "If you fell asleep Thursday night and did not wake up until this morning, you would assume that the UK voters elected to stay in the EU. Certainly as we look at the behavior and complexion of the market today, it’s as if nothing happened."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2016 8:20:48 GMT -5
There is some truth to the bit about the #1 name for male newborns being Muhammed but there are some caveats. E.g., various spellings of the name being grouped together. blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/08/mohammed-really-is-the-single-most-popular-boys-name-in-england-and-wales/But, of course, each year there is always a number one name, and it often varies from year to year. No one seems to care if it is Oliver or Andrew. I recall walking home sort of drunk with friends in London about a decade ago. We were slightly 'harassed' by a couple of fun-loving Brits. But it had nothing to do with anyone being Muslim. It was more like some locals slightly teasing some drunk tourists. In London in 2015 most popular name was indeed Muhammad followed by Oliver Alexander Daniel and Joshua. www.standard.co.uk/news/london/revealed-the-most-popular-name-for-baby-boys-in-london-according-to-official-data-a2871406.html The the most popular English and Welsh names in the same article are very different. The UK is a country of multiple nationalities such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, English and others and at any given time the biggest ethnic name likely depends on which group has been most fertile that year! I'm afraid the UK has an alcohol problem of massive proportions and some towns you really wouldn't want to be out at night. But that's nowt to do with muslims who by and large don't drink. Fortunate since very many of them are medical professionals for the nhs, which could not survive without incoming doctors nurses and pharmacists... We are getting a bit off topic here in my view, partly down to me. I like learning about other peoples country. One year in Ibiza we stayed on the Northern part of the Island in San Antonio for a night and we left after being there 3-4 hours. Granted it was all young kids from Northern England but I couldnt believe how shit faced and AGGRESSIVE they were. However you can find just as many wacked out people in arm pit areas of the US. Its like two different worlds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2016 8:23:31 GMT -5
I've gone to Ibitha 7 times and I stayed in an area that all the northern england folks vacation ar and it was like nothing I've ever seen. They were maniacs. Yes, it's embarrassing. No wonder we aren't popular in the EU. It's why I tend to vacation in Canada and the US where people are much more educated and sensible in my experience. And you have wildlife bigger than squirrels and pigeons. I have always been very envious of people that live in Europe. I guess the grass is always greener. You guys could go to a different country every weekend with a better exchange rate (well that could change now) after a couple of hours on a plan. I live in NYC, and if I get on a plane and fly for a couple of hours I can go to Ohio. Not exactly an exciting vacation lol
|
|
|
Post by victoria on Jun 30, 2016 8:29:46 GMT -5
Mnholdem re FTSE recovery: We make very bouncy british cats here which not only bounce but apologise politely for doing so. The FTSE indices have recovered so if one had a tracker fund that would be fine but from what I have read (somewhere on way to work so no link and not checked detail), whilst FTSE companies which derive income globally have risen, UK stocks based on UK trade and industry such as house building, airlines, domestic banks etc have fallen. That is not good news. A major expansion of Heathrow airport (London's main airport) has been frozen and a Singaporean bank has suspended providing property loans for UK property projects. UK 10 year gilts (=T bonds) have dropped below a 1% yield for the first time ever recently. But I think the takeaway is that money can be made from volatility in the market up and down, but in capital and industrial and social terms its not currently looking good. Part of the concern is, irrespective of money, what kind of place will the UK become for those living there - which is partly money related, but not solely. Then again, from what seems to be the message from 'up north' and outside London, perhaps life has got so depressing that just about anything different might seem to be better for them (though its hard to see how losing EU subsidies for agriculture and industry, and possibly losing employment rights originating in the EU could be a positive...). By contrast London - which mostly generates the wealth - has a lot to lose. Yesterday the Irish government called for calm and explained its passport office is under pressure due to the numbers of applications...
|
|
|
Post by prosper on Jun 30, 2016 10:17:09 GMT -5
BREXIT could be great. Imagine if NAFTA would rename itself to NAAFTA (North Amarican/Atlantic Free Trade) and invite our UK best allies to join?
|
|
|
Post by victoria on Jun 30, 2016 11:15:06 GMT -5
My take on that is that what was missing from the 'pro brexit' side was any plan at all, as is now becoming clear. I said during the campaign that really the leave side should have had something to offer as an alternative to the EU to replace it: a vision of the future, such as agreement in principle to a trade deal with the US and Canada or even agreeing to adopt the dollar here (and heck, why not: why shouldn't we all just spend our money in both places without barriers and enjoy the best of all we have to offer?). But there was no plan. I do know that some people actually voted for brexit because there was a trade deal with the US on the table in the form of TTIP, which was close to being concluded with the EU, and once finalised would have opened up much more tariff-free trade for us all on both sides of the atlantic. However from the perspective of 'anti globalisation' proponents, TTIP was anathema and actually caused them to vote for brexit... and I suspect TTIP will now collapse. President Obama has already said, sadly, that trade deal with the UK is now the lowest priority (UK is at the 'back of the queue') so I suspect a UK-USA-CAN trade treaty may be a long way off. I'd very much welcome it myself: we have much more in common in most ways with the USA and Canada (where I feel totally at home when Im there, in both places) than most of the EU save for Ireland. TTIP: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Investment_Partnership
|
|
|
Post by LosingMyBullishness on Jun 30, 2016 19:31:24 GMT -5
My take on that is that what was missing from the 'pro brexit' side was any plan at all, as is now becoming clear. I said during the campaign that really the leave side should have had something to offer as an alternative to the EU to replace it: a vision of the future, such as agreement in principle to a trade deal with the US and Canada or even agreeing to adopt the dollar here (and heck, why not: why shouldn't we all just spend our money in both places without barriers and enjoy the best of all we have to offer?). But there was no plan. I do know that some people actually voted for brexit because there was a trade deal with the US on the table in the form of TTIP, which was close to being concluded with the EU, and once finalised would have opened up much more tariff-free trade for us all on both sides of the atlantic. However from the perspective of 'anti globalisation' proponents, TTIP was anathema and actually caused them to vote for brexit... and I suspect TTIP will now collapse. President Obama has already said, sadly, that trade deal with the UK is now the lowest priority (UK is at the 'back of the queue') so I suspect a UK-USA-CAN trade treaty may be a long way off. I'd very much welcome it myself: we have much more in common in most ways with the USA and Canada (where I feel totally at home when Im there, in both places) than most of the EU save for Ireland. TTIP: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Investment_PartnershipInteresting. First I wonder if this is more about England and Wales than about UK. Probably just stirred up by Media and politics but Scotland and Northern Ireland might prefer to stay in the EU. A trade union with Canada and the US? Are people in England really keen on leaning even further over the Atlantic? Canada surely is a nice place but is has just 40m people compared to the the 450m non-UK market in the EU. England, basically London, would play a limited role in such a trade union, more like a financial beachhead to Europe seen in Brussels as mere satellite dependent on Washington. Frankfurt would certainly like to take over some EU business from London. What did weird Nigel say about freedom and independence.. Fascinating what the Turkish government achieved when they opened the gates to Europe to improve their position in negotiations about their EU accession.
|
|