|
Post by peterboat on Feb 18, 2021 18:58:51 GMT
I ask you savings bonds, whats new about them? Nothing is the answer I have premium bonds, in fact I have just won £125 on them which is way more than any interest I could get in the bank. Anyway maybe the recent cuts to winning want reversing and see if the public can be brought back on board and those prizes could be more numerous. What I am saying this is just another waste of space idea by a party thats way behind in the polls which by the looks of things is where they are going to stay
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Feb 18, 2021 19:17:27 GMT
I have just won £125 on them which is way more than any interest I could get in the bank. I went to see my bank manager today. He said I should pay more interest. I tried to, but it was so boring.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Feb 18, 2021 22:14:45 GMT
Typical Labour. They can seemingly only ever react to any crisis by putting tax payers into even more debt. Apparently the funds would be to 'rebuild Britain'. Read: give public workers inflation causing pay rises, make the career of producing children more lucrative, perhaps even give 'legacy compensation' payments to those who don't have white skin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2021 10:25:19 GMT
Starmer has no charisma and no game plan. He’s just a stand in between the idiot Corbyn and the next possible leader. The biggest problem is finding the next leader, as at the moment they don’t have any political heavyweights capable of fulfilling the role. As I’ve said before, I don’t believe there will be another labour government in my lifetime. Miracles are just mainstream media hype.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Feb 20, 2021 12:54:34 GMT
Typical Labour. They can seemingly only ever react to any crisis by putting tax payers into even more debt. Apparently the funds would be to 'rebuild Britain'. Read: give public workers inflation causing pay rises, make the career of producing children more lucrative, perhaps even give 'legacy compensation' payments to those who don't have white skin. ?? the bonds would put them in debt to the taxpayer. Twisted shite followed by racist shite.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Feb 20, 2021 14:42:15 GMT
Investors in UK Government undated bonds sometimes have to wait a very long time to get their capital returned Gordon Brown repaid bonds from the South Sea bubble recovery fund of 1711, The bonds from financing the Napoleonic and Crimean wars (1752) the compensation fund from the abolition of slavery (1835 fund to "buy" the fredom of slaves) The Irish distress loan of 1847 and 1917 war bonds. So providing you didn't need to get the capital returned it wasn't a bad investment, reliable and the interest rate not too depressingly low. (Incidentallly don't think that Good Old Gordon was re-paying out of the goodness of his socialist heart .... it was just that the rates were so low then he could borrow it again at a much cheaper interest rate )
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Feb 20, 2021 15:11:02 GMT
Typical Labour. They can seemingly only ever react to any crisis by putting tax payers into even more debt. Apparently the funds would be to 'rebuild Britain'. Read: give public workers inflation causing pay rises, make the career of producing children more lucrative, perhaps even give 'legacy compensation' payments to those who don't have white skin. ?? the bonds would put them in debt to the taxpayer. Twisted shite followed by racist shite. I'm not sure how a white person suggesting that a demand made by groups representing those with non white skins might come about constitutes racism.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Feb 20, 2021 15:22:38 GMT
?? the bonds would put them in debt to the taxpayer. Twisted shite followed by racist shite. I'm not sure how a white person suggesting that a demand made by groups representing those with non white skins might come about constitutes racism. What does the colour of anyone's skin have to do with any of this? Dog whistle politics.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2021 16:51:34 GMT
Labour are now quite simply an anti British party, waste of space.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Feb 20, 2021 19:01:53 GMT
I'm not sure how a white person suggesting that a demand made by groups representing those with non white skins might come about constitutes racism. What does the colour of anyone's skin have to do with any of this? Dog whistle politics. Because the suggestion by these groups is that money payments are made in reparation for the slavery that ended 200 years ago. Not to all people, only to people who don't have white skins. So we can see that colour is important, to these groups. Does this make these people racist, or dog whistlers perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by phil70 on Feb 21, 2021 8:19:32 GMT
Bump Phil
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Feb 21, 2021 8:53:50 GMT
What does the colour of anyone's skin have to do with any of this? Dog whistle politics. Because the suggestion by these groups is that money payments are made in reparation for the slavery that ended 200 years ago. Not to all people, only to people who don't have white skins. So we can see that colour is important, to these groups. Does this make these people racist, or dog whistlers perhaps? That suggestion being made by "those groups" shows a complete and total ignorance of history.
England was the first country to produce anti slavery laws largely due to the pressure from Archbishop Lanfranc (the moral advisor to the King) with a result that the first law was passed placing limitations upon slavery within the realm. Within 50 years slavery had almost disappeared from England ...... When was this ? the 12th century !!!
International slave trade was a harder matter to do anything about, even if there could be a law about it, it would have been pointless there was no way enforcement was possible.
Even so in the early 19th centuary Britain banned International slave trading by any nation. Slavery was banned anywhere in the British Empire and Slaves were freed ( In effect Britain compensated their owners running up an huge loan (about 5% of GDP) finally paid back by Gordon Brown in 2015) It wasn't freedom immediately but three stages Under 5's immediately then re-classification as apprentices for a set period (with some renumeration) then freedom over a period of 4 to 6 years
Originally there was only a token force sent by the Royal Navy to enforce the ban on international trade .... just 1 ship .... however it is worth remembering that at this time Britain was fighting
in effect a world war.
After that war the Naval fleet was vastly increased. The Royal Navy waged a war against the Atlantic Slave trade that cost a total of 5,000 lives, an average of 2% of GDP every year for 60 years. That on top of the huge compensation package loan. In that period Britain released over 150,000 slaves from captured vessels
Even after the West African anti slavery patrol ended The Royal Navy then continued and still does anti slavery actions in the Indian Ocean
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2021 9:10:20 GMT
All good stuff from JohnV there but it seems to have skipped over the part where slavery was promoted (by Britain) to the extent that the industries in the West Indies were so profitable and widespread that for a time they were the main event in the British economy and remained so for nearly two centuries.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2021 9:20:48 GMT
What does the colour of anyone's skin have to do with any of this? Dog whistle politics. Because the suggestion by these groups is that money payments are made in reparation for the slavery that ended 200 years ago. Not to all people, only to people who don't have white skins. So we can see that colour is important, to these groups. Does this make these people racist, or dog whistlers perhaps? Who are these groups and what are they campaigning for (in a bit more detail). Preferably stuff that relates to the UK.
Genuine question.
I'd like to know if it is just fringe groups or more of a 'movement'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2021 9:28:53 GMT
What does the colour of anyone's skin have to do with any of this? Dog whistle politics. Because the suggestion by these groups is that money payments are made in reparation for the slavery that ended 200 years ago. Not to all people, only to people who don't have white skins. So we can see that colour is important, to these groups. Does this make these people racist, or dog whistlers perhaps? I'd also like to point out to NotRacist of Barmouth that reparations were made at the ending of slavery - to the owners, not the slaves.
|
|