GasGas:
Most of the surviving Ford Escorts in the UK are the ones built in Saarlouis, West Germany.The British ones are mostly gone.
My Focus is an excellent car, for what it is. It was built in Saarlois, too. My status-obsessed neighbour was going on about his ‘German’ BMW. I had to point out my car was German, and his was South African!
Remind us what your Focus is worth v the Mk1 Cortina examples I posted.
Franglais:
Mazzer2:
I fully understand your stance on Brexit as an expat, not saying it is true in your case but a lot of expats in Europe want the best of both worlds living somewhere nice but with the backstop of UK benefits, such as using the NHS and the UK’s education system, while looking at the UK through the opposite of rose tinted glasses. If you are living in France you are living in a country where at their last election over 30% of the population voted for a fascist party, fact of the matter is that in most European countries mainstream racism is far more prevalent than it is in the UK with far right parties getting high proportions of the vote while there is now no true right wing party in the UK although some parties may have right wing people in them. The UK is by no means free of racism, yet in the main it is streets ahead of most European countriesAnyone who is fully paying into the UK tax and N.I. system should IMO get the benefits of the education and NHS and a vote in the future of the UK.
Anyone who no longer resides in the UK, and pays no due taxes or NHI contributions should no longer get those benefits or get a vote.Yep, there seems to me, to be a rise in the “Alt Right”* and it is stronger in many Eu countries than in the UK. Clearly not all right wingers are fascist or racist. And Brexiteers are both of left and right leaning groups. And I also agree that the UK is probably less racist than many other countries I`ve been to, although I may not be particularly well placed to be a judge.
- Is that a PC / wishy washy / snowflake term for a fascist??
LOL about your “Alt right” was on the Newhaven boat last Sunday and a English women who had been living in France for 20 years had just been to England to see her children as they lived with the grandparents so they could be educated in England as in her opinion the French secondary were not good enough. In which case did they not think of that when they emigrated and the fact that is unlikely they are paying UK taxes or council tax a portion of which goes towards education means that not only are they taking away places from children who live local to the school but also getting it for free. If you make a new country your home then you have take the good and the bad not be able to go back whenever it suits you for benefits a bit like the student who moves out then goes home to mummy every Sunday for dinner and getting the washing done.
Mazzer2:
LOL about your “Alt right” was on the Newhaven boat last Sunday and a English women who had been living in France for 20 years had just been to England to see her children as they lived with the grandparents so they could be educated in England as in her opinion the French secondary were not good enough. In which case did they not think of that when they emigrated and the fact that is unlikely they are paying UK taxes or council tax a portion of which goes towards education means that not only are they taking away places from children who live local to the school but also getting it for free. If you make a new country your home then you have take the good and the bad not be able to go back whenever it suits you for benefits a bit like the student who moves out then goes home to mummy every Sunday for dinner and getting the washing done.
I’d guess that’s a combination of the EU Federation being a corrupt selective version in which the contributions side of the budget are nationalised but the benefits are pooled.A bit like all the profits belong to Germany but the losses belong to the UK/Greece and any other mug foolish enough to allow EU accountancy practices being imposed on them.In addition to which school can be difficult enough when its taught and disciplinary orders are being shouted at you in English.Let alone not being able to understand what you’re being taught and then being chastised for it in French.
Carryfast:
Franglais:
Anyone who is fully paying into the UK tax and N.I. system should IMO get the benefits of the education and NHS and a vote in the future of the UK.
Anyone who no longer resides in the UK, and pays no due taxes or NHI contributions should no longer get those benefits or get a vote.So we’re a net contributor to the EU budget by your logic that means only those countries should get to vote in the EU parliament.While you’ve not answered the the question as to whether the Sudeten Germans had more right to ‘vote’ Czechoslovakia into the 3rd Reich than ex pat free Czechs,many of who didn’t return to the country,had to liberate it by force by fighting for the Allies.
As for ‘the vote’ no one has the right to vote a country out of existence whether domestic or foreign and anyone has the right to vote if they apply for Brit citizenship which unlike Canada and NZ is very easy to do.Which makes your whole argument moot.
I said anyone whos "fully paying into the UK" system should have a vote. I meant anyone who pays what is lawfully asked of them. I didnt say or mean they had to be net contributors. Those who have been net beneficiaries are entitled to vote in the UK system, and I have no problem with that.
So the rest of your post following that error is, as you might say,“moot”.
Mazzer2:
LOL about your “Alt right” was on the Newhaven boat last Sunday and a English women who had been living in France for 20 years had just been to England to see her children as they lived with the grandparents so they could be educated in England as in her opinion the French secondary were not good enough. In which case did they not think of that when they emigrated and the fact that is unlikely they are paying UK taxes or council tax a portion of which goes towards education means that not only are they taking away places from children who live local to the school but also getting it for free. If you make a new country your home then you have take the good and the bad not be able to go back whenever it suits you for benefits a bit like the student who moves out then goes home to mummy every Sunday for dinner and getting the washing done.
I reckon we`d agree that those who selfishly “play the system” are not limited to any particular group, and would condemn them wherever they live?
Franglais:
Carryfast:
Franglais:
Anyone who is fully paying into the UK tax and N.I. system should IMO get the benefits of the education and NHS and a vote in the future of the UK.
Anyone who no longer resides in the UK, and pays no due taxes or NHI contributions should no longer get those benefits or get a vote.So we’re a net contributor to the EU budget by your logic that means only those countries should get to vote in the EU parliament.While you’ve not answered the the question as to whether the Sudeten Germans had more right to ‘vote’ Czechoslovakia into the 3rd Reich than ex pat free Czechs,many of who didn’t return to the country,had to liberate it by force by fighting for the Allies.
As for ‘the vote’ no one has the right to vote a country out of existence whether domestic or foreign and anyone has the right to vote if they apply for Brit citizenship which unlike Canada and NZ is very easy to do.Which makes your whole argument moot.
I said anyone who
s "fully paying into the UK" system should have a vote. I meant anyone who pays what is lawfully asked of them. I didnt say or mean they had to be net contributors. Those who have been net beneficiaries are entitled to vote in the UK system, and I have no problem with that.
So the rest of your post following that error is, as you might say,“moot”.
You seem to have missed the bit where I said ‘by your logic’ in that you can’t possibly be a ‘tax payer’ if you’re a net beneficiary paying in less tax than you recieve in benefits.IE,unlike you,I don’t buy the taxation/representation argument because that would mean anyone losing their job and claiming unemployment benefits for example loses their right to vote.While you’re just obviously all about applying the taxation/representation argument selectively when/as it suits you.
Having got that out of the way.My point,that Sudeten Germans didn’t have the right to vote Czechoslovakia out of existence and into the 3rd Reich,while free Czech ex pats certainly were in the right to take their country back by force if necessary,which as it turned out certainly was,stands.
Carryfast:
GasGas:
Most of the surviving Ford Escorts in the UK are the ones built in Saarlouis, West Germany.The British ones are mostly gone.
My Focus is an excellent car, for what it is. It was built in Saarlois, too. My status-obsessed neighbour was going on about his ‘German’ BMW. I had to point out my car was German, and his was South African!
Remind us what your Focus is worth v the Mk1 Cortina examples I posted.
My Focus has done 140,000 miles without anything other than scheduled servicing and some new suspension bushes. I don’t think you’d get anywhere near that with a 'tina. A Mk 1 Cortina is an antique…the only reason it’s valuable is because most of its fellows rusted away decades ago.
I’m old enough to remember what those Fords were like when they were new…as soon as the temperature fell below freezing they would have to be hand-cranked in the morning. I can leave my car for two weeks in the middle of winter, with the alarm and electronics draining the battery, and it will start first touch of the key.
GasGas:
My Focus has done 140,000 miles without anything other than scheduled servicing and some new suspension bushes. I don’t think you’d get anywhere near that with a 'tina. A Mk 1 Cortina is an antique…the only reason it’s valuable is because most of its fellows rusted away decades ago.I can leave my car for two weeks in the middle of winter, with the alarm and electronics draining the battery, and it will start first touch of the key.
To be fair a Mk1 Granada would do all that and get you where you’re going in much more comfort and drive far nicer.
While if a low survival rate antique is all it takes then an Austin 1100 or a Fiat 125 would be worth £40-65,000 while the example of the Taunus which I posted also fits the same definition of low survival rate antique.
While I’d agree that 4 cylinder,pre crossflow,steering box and live rear end old Ford’s,are a mug’s choice and silly prices compared to a Triumph 2.5 or Granada.But that doesn’t make the piece of junk Taunus as good as,let alone better than,a Cortina,in the day or now.
On that note whether it’s Spitfire v 109 or even FW190 or Essex Granada among others v Taunus remainers are going to have to come up with a better argument than the Brits ain’t good/bright enough to look after themselves without the ‘help’ of the Germans.Let alone us having to pay them for the privilege.
Franglais:
I meant anyone who pays what is lawfully asked of them. I didn`t say or mean they had to be net contributors. Those who have been net beneficiaries are entitled to vote in the UK system, and I have no problem with that.
Carryfast:
IE,unlike you,I don’t buy the taxation/representation argument because that would mean anyone losing their job and claiming unemployment benefits for example loses their right to vote.
If the state decided the unemployed etc pay zero tax, they get to vote then! They are paying what (zero) is required.
But remember that they do pay taxes. Be it only VAT and maybe fuel or tobacco duty, that is still tax.
Those who illegally evade taxes are removing themselves from being “fully paid up members of society” and it seems to me they shouldn’t get all the benefits and rights given to those who do follow the rules.
Franglais:
Franglais:
I meant anyone who pays what is lawfully asked of them. I didn`t say or mean they had to be net contributors. Those who have been net beneficiaries are entitled to vote in the UK system, and I have no problem with that.Carryfast:
IE,unlike you,I don’t buy the taxation/representation argument because that would mean anyone losing their job and claiming unemployment benefits for example loses their right to vote.
As I said a net beneficiary obviously doesn’t fit the definition of a ‘tax payer’ in which case the taxation and representation argument falls apart being a total contradiction.Especially when in the real world that translates as any foreign worker paying tax here has the right to vote the host country out of existence in favour of installing their own national government in this case that being the EU federation.
Franglais:
Franglais:
I meant anyone who pays what is lawfully asked of them. I didn`t say or mean they had to be net contributors. Those who have been net beneficiaries are entitled to vote in the UK system, and I have no problem with that.Carryfast:
IE,unlike you,I don’t buy the taxation/representation argument because that would mean anyone losing their job and claiming unemployment benefits for example loses their right to vote.If the state decided the unemployed etc pay zero tax, they get to vote then! They are paying what (zero) is required.
But remember that they do pay taxes. Be it only VAT and maybe fuel or tobacco duty, that is still tax.
Those who illegally evade taxes are removing themselves from being “fully paid up members of society” and it seems to me they shouldn’t get all the benefits and rights given to those who do follow the rules.
If you’re paying in less in taxes than the benefits you take out it’s obvious that you ain’t a tax ‘payer’ in any logical sense of the word.On that note no I don’t agree with the silly idea of representation being dependent on taxation status.I do believe that a non tax paying Brit has the right to vote on issues affecting Britain like Brexit within the current rules.As opposed to an Italian MEP or an unelected EU commissioner or an EU citizen living here intending to exercise EU self determination by corrupting the Brit vote count with the intention of imposing EU rule here.Just as in the case of the immigrant Sudeten tax payer voting Czechoslovakia out of existence and into the 3rd Reich and being stopped by an ex pat free Czech fighter pilot for example who then chooses to stay here or Canada etc rather than return home.
Franglais:
Franglais:
I meant anyone who pays what is lawfully asked of them. I didn`t say or mean they had to be net contributors. Those who have been net beneficiaries are entitled to vote in the UK system, and I have no problem with that.Carryfast:
IE,unlike you,I don’t buy the taxation/representation argument because that would mean anyone losing their job and claiming unemployment benefits for example loses their right to vote.If the state decided the unemployed etc pay zero tax, they get to vote then! They are paying what (zero) is required.
But remember that they do pay taxes. Be it only VAT and maybe fuel or tobacco duty, that is still tax.
Those who illegally evade taxes are removing themselves from being “fully paid up members of society” and it seems to me they shouldn’t get all the benefits and rights given to those who do follow the rules.
If you’re paying in less in taxes than the benefits you take out it’s obvious that you ain’t a tax ‘payer’ in any logical sense of the word.On that note no I don’t agree with the silly idea of representation being dependent on taxation status.I do believe that a non tax paying Brit has the right to vote on issues affecting Britain like Brexit within the current rules.As opposed to an Italian MEP or an unelected EU commissioner or an EU citizen living here intending to exercise EU self determination by corrupting the Brit vote count with the intention of imposing EU rule here.Just as in the case of the immigrant Sudeten tax payer voting Czechoslovakia out of existence and into the 3rd Reich and being stopped by an ex pat free Czech fighter pilot for example who then chooses to stay here or Canada etc rather than return home.
Carryfast:
On that note no I don’t agree with the silly idea of representation being dependent on taxation status.I do believe that a non tax paying Brit has the right to vote on issues affecting Britain like Brexit within the current rules.
I think that taxation status is important.
If someone is liable to pay tax (they have a status as being UK tax payers) even if their tax bill is zero, they should have a right to vote.
We agree there?
Does someone who was once a UK tax payer, but no longer has a tax liability, (no UK tax liability status) due to emigration, have a right to vote?
We can read what the rules are, so maybe I should instead ask,
Should they have the right to vote?
And what of foreign nationals living and working in the UK, and paying full UK taxes, income NI and VAT etc? These have full UK tax liability status.
Again the rules are there, but should they have a vote?
Must admit, I find these questions difficult to sort out myself.
So who is a Brit?
Someone who emigrated to Aus two years ago and doesn’t intend returning?
Someone born in ■■■ who has a job, home and pays taxes in the UK, and intends bringing up kids here?
Someone who holds a UK passport but lives in the UK part-time only, and doesn’t pay tax here?
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
Franglais:
Carryfast:
On that note no I don’t agree with the silly idea of representation being dependent on taxation status.I do believe that a non tax paying Brit has the right to vote on issues affecting Britain like Brexit within the current rules.I think that taxation status is important.
If someone is liable to pay tax (they have a status as being UK tax payers) even if their tax bill is zero, they should have a right to vote.
We agree there?Does someone who was once a UK tax payer, but no longer has a tax liability, (no UK tax liability status) due to emigration, have a right to vote?
We can read what the rules are, so maybe I should instead ask,
Should they have the right to vote?And what of foreign nationals living and working in the UK, and paying full UK taxes, income NI and VAT etc? These have full UK tax liability status.
Again the rules are there, but should they have a vote?Must admit, I find these questions difficult to sort out myself.
So who is a Brit?
Someone who emigrated to Aus two years ago and doesn’t intend returning?
Someone born in ■■■ who has a job, home and pays taxes in the UK, and intends bringing up kids here?
Someone who holds a UK passport but lives in the UK part-time only, and doesn’t pay tax here?
I’d guess the Sudeten German voting Czechoslovakia out of existence in favour of the 3rd Reich v the free Czech ex pat fighting to get his country back is the relevant analogy which covers all the bases in this case.IE the issue of taxation v representation is totally irrelevant anyway in that comparison.While the reason why you find it all difficult to understand or want to understand is because you’re obviously on the side of the Federation over the Nation State which contradicts any notion of the so called ‘Brit’ because you don’t recognise the Nation Sate status of this country only the 4th Reich EU.Which makes you closer to the Sudeten German wanting to vote Czechoslovakia out of existence in favour of the 3rd Reich than the ex pat Free Czech ( or Australian ex pat Brit ).
Assuming that Australia can even be classed as a foreign country as opposed to an independent autonomous ethnic Brit based state.Which is why the Globalists are so keen on an immigration policy there which discriminates against Brits in favour of more Asian immigration.
carryfast wrote:
Snip…
Assuming that Australia can even be classed as a foreign country as opposed to an independent autonomous ethnic Brit based state.Which is why the Globalists are so keen on an immigration policy there which discriminates against Brits in favour of more Asian immigration.
Really? ■■■■■■■■■■■ now?
Whenever you think that Carryfast can’t outdo himself, up he pops, with another ill informed googled piece of ‘knowedge’.
Unless he really espouses the purity of the white race.
the nodding donkey:
carryfast
Assuming that Australia can even be classed as a foreign country as opposed to an independent autonomous ethnic Brit based state.Which is why the Globalists are so keen on an immigration policy there which discriminates against Brits in favour of more Asian immigration.
Really? ■■■■■■■■■■■ now?
Whenever you think that Carryfast can’t outdo himself, up he pops, with another ill informed googled piece of ‘knowedge’.Unless he really espouses the purity of the white race.
No I said a Brit based country which means it’s not supposed to be for the French or Dutch or Swedish either just as it’s not supposed to be for the Chinese or Japanese or Indian.While to be fair I usually return after 3 weeks in the Italian sun looking as dark as any Indian let alone Australian sun.So remind us why should it be as easy if not easier for a Chinese/Japanese/Indian to emigrate to Australia as/than a Brit.
Also don’t see any references here to skin colour including the natives.You know in the days when there was free movement between UK/Oz unlike now.
the nodding donkey:
carryfast wrote:
Snip…
Assuming that Australia can even be classed as a foreign country as opposed to an independent autonomous ethnic Brit based state.Which is why the Globalists are so keen on an immigration policy there which discriminates against Brits in favour of more Asian immigration.
Really? ■■■■■■■■■■■ now?
Whenever you think that Carryfast can’t outdo himself, up he pops, with another ill informed googled piece of ‘knowedge’.Unless he really espouses the purity of the white race.
I don’t think your imagination is running away with you.
Unfortunately.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
Franglais:
the nodding donkey:
carryfast wrote:
Snip…
Assuming that Australia can even be classed as a foreign country as opposed to an independent autonomous ethnic Brit based state.Which is why the Globalists are so keen on an immigration policy there which discriminates against Brits in favour of more Asian immigration.
Really? ■■■■■■■■■■■ now?
Whenever you think that Carryfast can’t outdo himself, up he pops, with another ill informed googled piece of ‘knowedge’.Unless he really espouses the purity of the white race.
I don’t think your imagination is running away with you.
Unfortunately.
The fact that you choose to twist an issue of National Cultural Identity into one of race and skin colour says more about your ideology than mine.
Unfortunately.
Are you also saying that the APP is a white supremacist organisation ?.
Franglais:
the nodding donkey:
Whenever you think that Carryfast can’t outdo himself, up he pops, with another ill informed googled piece of ‘knowedge’.Unless he really espouses the purity of the white race.
I don’t think your imagination is running away with you.
Unfortunately.
The fact that you obviously want to twist what I said into supposedly being about race and skin colour rather than the National cultural identity of the Country says more about your ideology and motives than it does mine.
Unfortunately.
So are you saying that the APP is an illegal white supremacist party ?.
