• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Tottenham Riots

The example was labouring on a public building construction. A little different to building someone's house, carting bricks around a building site all day.

It seems like Red Mullet wants everyone to go into prison no matter what the logical argument made against this though.
 
[quote author=Richey link=topic=46360.msg1384964#msg1384964 date=1314051689]
So your reasoning is that we should lock up more criminals so law abiding people who volunteer can have more to do?

and yes i would let a criminal build my house if it was a builder who had broken the law. Probably not otherwise, but they wouldn't be asked to would they?
[/quote]


No not really, my point was there's plenty of unemployed people so why give the job to a criminal? Which no-one seems to answer!

And I bet you lying and wouldn't allow a criminal to build your house (imo). There are enough cowboys out there that there will be a trust issue.
 
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=46360.msg1384970#msg1384970 date=1314052329]
The example was labouring on a public building construction. A little different to building someone's house, carting bricks around a building site all day.

It seems like Red Mullet wants everyone to go into prison no matter what the logical argument made against this though.
[/quote]


Any reason why you're not giving the job of carting bricks around to someone who hasn't broken the law? You can create jobs that way!


You seemly have missed my point, which is criminals should be kept away from society and the privileges you're given them (such as the job as a labourer) should belong to someone who hasn't broken the law.


I'm on the side of the innocent rather than the criminal.
 
[quote author=Atlas link=topic=46360.msg1384989#msg1384989 date=1314058141]
You're on the side of being a massive judgemental tard
[/quote]


Fantastically intelligent response there. I applaud you.
 
I have answered your question. Several times.

The way community service works is that community safety units look for local work that can be done which is not currently done because of lack of resource. Its filling in gaps. If noone breaks the law then fences would probably go unpainted, litter would take a lot longer to pick up and charity shops would open for less days. These are not golden opportunities that are being given to criminals ahead of law abiding people. If a group of law abiding people are already volunteering to do them then its not a gap and is therefore not considered for community service.
 
[quote author=Red Mullet link=topic=46360.msg1384999#msg1384999 date=1314060072]
[quote author=Atlas link=topic=46360.msg1384989#msg1384989 date=1314058141]
You're on the side of being a massive judgemental tard
[/quote]


Fantastically intelligent response there. I applaud you.
[/quote]

It's as 'fantastically intelligent' as many of your posts in this thread.
 
Bit harsh perhaps.

I don't agree with Red Mullet but he has an opinion and is entitled to argue it.
 
It would help if he actually listened to what other people were saying though rather than ignoring them and carrying on labouring the same point
 
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=46360.msg1385257#msg1385257 date=1314104137]
It would help if he actually listened to what other people were saying though rather than ignoring them and carrying on labouring the same point
[/quote]

True, but nobody's perfect.
 
[quote author=Richey link=topic=46360.msg1385241#msg1385241 date=1314102842]
Bit harsh perhaps.

I don't agree with Red Mullet but he has an opinion and is entitled to argue it.
[/quote]


It wasn't unexpected from those posters
 
Hmm, well I am going to be quite careful about how I put this SR, because you do seem to have been in a slightly better mood of late, but when we are talking about posters carrying on labouring the same point, the example of 'bankers' and, well, erm, 'YOU' does seem to spring to mind ever so slightly...........
 
[quote author=Richey link=topic=46360.msg1385269#msg1385269 date=1314104910]
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=46360.msg1385257#msg1385257 date=1314104137]
It would help if he actually listened to what other people were saying though rather than ignoring them and carrying on labouring the same point
[/quote]

True, but nobody's perfect.
[/quote]


I listened, I disagreed, did you listen? Nope.


Considering poster are getting agitated over people having different opinions (the shock, imagine people having different opinions!) I don't think this thread is worth continuing.
 
[quote author=Red Mullet link=topic=46360.msg1385286#msg1385286 date=1314105857]
[quote author=Richey link=topic=46360.msg1385269#msg1385269 date=1314104910]
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=46360.msg1385257#msg1385257 date=1314104137]
It would help if he actually listened to what other people were saying though rather than ignoring them and carrying on labouring the same point
[/quote]

True, but nobody's perfect.
[/quote]


I listened, I disagreed, did you listen? Nope.


Considering poster are getting agitated over people having different opinions (the shock, imagine people having different opinions!) I don't think this thread is worth continuing.
[/quote]

Well, yes I did listen. And I answered a few times.

Your point was about community service taking jobs away from non-criminals, and I answered by saying that this never ever happens, using the process of how community service work is allocated as a reference.

I would say that amounts to listening doesn't it?
 
[quote author=Richey link=topic=46360.msg1385282#msg1385282 date=1314105722]
Hmm, well I am going to be quite careful about how I put this SR, because you do seem to have been in a slightly better mood of late, but when we are talking about posters carrying on labouring the same point, the example of 'bankers' and, well, erm, 'YOU' does seem to spring to mind ever so slightly...........
[/quote]

Yeah, but I was right!
 
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=46360.msg1385291#msg1385291 date=1314106112]
[quote author=Richey link=topic=46360.msg1385282#msg1385282 date=1314105722]
Hmm, well I am going to be quite careful about how I put this SR, because you do seem to have been in a slightly better mood of late, but when we are talking about posters carrying on labouring the same point, the example of 'bankers' and, well, erm, 'YOU' does seem to spring to mind ever so slightly...........
[/quote]

Yeah, but I was right!
[/quote]

Not getting into that again.

Besides, RM's last post has made me question the wisdom of my previous defence of him
 
[quote author=Sunny link=topic=46360.msg1384571#msg1384571 date=1314023222]
You've got admit mate you are kind of on a mission at a moment. Get your points across by all means but I do think you're running the danger of becoming one of those loonies who preaches that much that people stop listening after a while. You know, the "fucks sake not him again" syndrome.
[/quote]

I know given what you've said I really should avoid posting this, but it's truly mental:

http://www.bloomberg.com/data-visualization/federal-reserve-emergency-lending#/compare/?comparelist=Citigroup_Inc-Morgan_Stanley-Bank_of_America_Corp-Goldman_Sachs_Group_Inc

The Fed has been lending:

Citigroup an average of about $19 billion a day for around 700 days
Morgan Stanley an average of about $7 billion a day for about a year
Bank of America an average of about $20 billion a day for about 500 days
Goldman Sachs an average of about $7.5 billion a day for around 430 days

And people reckon the problem is social security!
 
They are.

I can't actually believe they're real to be honest.

I think I must be understanding them wrong, I'm gonna dig into this more and find out the answer.

I'm suspecting that actually, rather than being the average amount borrowed per day, they must be the average amount owed per day, otherwise that's some crazy fucking shit
 
[quote author=Red Mullet link=topic=46360.msg1384978#msg1384978 date=1314054301]
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=46360.msg1384970#msg1384970 date=1314052329]
The example was labouring on a public building construction. A little different to building someone's house, carting bricks around a building site all day.

It seems like Red Mullet wants everyone to go into prison no matter what the logical argument made against this though.
[/quote]


Any reason why you're not giving the job of carting bricks around to someone who hasn't broken the law? You can create jobs that way!


You seemly have missed my point, which is criminals should be kept away from society and the privileges you're given them (such as the job as a labourer) should belong to someone who hasn't broken the law.


I'm on the side of the innocent rather than the criminal.
[/quote]

You don't get it.

Okay, look at it this way, X amount of labourers replaced by criminals, Y amount saved. Y amount used to build extra hospital, more builders tradesmen & labourers needed in that development.

By replacing some level of unskilled labour you then save cash that can be used elsewhere which in turn can provide more benefit to society as a whole. Yes, it's an extreme & unlikely example, but you get my meaning, by replacing some employment with unpaid labour you don't neccessarily lose jobs overall.
 
Blimey, rich people with a conscience....



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14646975

Some of France's wealthiest people have called on the government to tackle its deficit by raising taxes - on the rich.

Sixteen executives, including Europe's richest woman, the L'Oreal heiress Liliane Bettencourt, offered in an open letter to pay a "special contribution" in a spirit of "solidarity".

Later the government is due to announce tighter fiscal measures as it seeks to reassure markets and curb the deficit.

They are expected to include a special tax on the super-rich.

Before the announcement, expected on Wednesday evening, a letter appeared on the website of the French magazine Le Nouvel Observateur.

It was signed by some of France's most high-profile chief executives, including Christophe de Margerie of oil firm Total, Frederic Oudea of bank Societe Generale, and Air France's Jean-Cyril Spinetta.

They said: "We, the presidents and leaders of industry, businessmen and women, bankers and wealthy citizens would like the richest people to have to pay a 'special contribution'."

They said they had benefited from the French system and that: "When the public finances deficit and the prospects of a worsening state debt threaten the future of France and Europe and when the government is asking everybody for solidarity, it seems necessary for us to contribute."

They warned, however, that the contribution should not be so severe that it would provoke an exodus of the rich or increased tax avoidance.

The move follows a call by US billionaire investor Warren Buffett for higher taxes on the American ultra-rich.

Rating fears

The French government has already said it is working on a special tax on those earning more than 1m euros (£900,000) a year.

The measures are expected to be part of a new package aimed at cutting up to 14bn euros from the budget deficit over the next two years.

It is not clear exactly what form they will take, but they are expected to include a reduction in tax breaks and increased taxes on big companies.

The government has been forced to act after recent fears that France's AAA credit rating could be downgraded.

France plans to trim its public deficit to 5.7 % this year, 4.6 % next year and 3% in 2013.
 
HA!

Alternatively, what you could do (if you were Home Secretary that is) is get prisoners who were on day release - and supposed to be putting something back into the community - to paint your house.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/aug/24/prison-inmates-painting-jacqui-smith?CMP=twt_gu

An investigation has been launched into how two prisoners on day-release were allowed to do painting work for former home secretary Jacqui Smith.

Smith made a contribution to charity after the offenders spent a few hours decorating a room at her home in Redditch while they were on release from jail working in the community.

The former MP said on Wednesday that she would be happy to answer any questions about the incident and that the two men came to her house because they did not have any other work to do.

Speaking on London radio station LBC, where she was hosting a programme as a stand-in for regular presenter James O'Brien she also accused The Lying Rag, which broke the story, of putting the "very worst spin" on what happened.

The Lying Rag said that Smith had hired the two prisoners to paint her "luxury" home when they should have been cleaning up the local community.

This was confirmed on Wednesday by the prison service. A spokesman for the service said that the two inmates, from HMP Hewell in Redditch, were meant to be doing work to "help the whole community" as part of a scheme run by a local charity, the Batchley support group.


He said: "The decision to provide prisoners for this work was taken without consultation with HMP Hewell or the Ministry of Justice and was a mistake.

"Offenders should work on projects which help the whole community. The scheme has been suspended while a full internal investigation is undertaken."

Smith, who has been on the receiving end of hostile media coverage ever since it emerged that she had mistakenly included the cost of two pay-per-view porn films in a bill submitted as part of her parliamentary expenses, used her LBC show on Wednesday to clarify what happened.

"Just to set, I hope, the record a little bit straight, these are guys that were working with a local community organisation in Redditch, a community organisation that actually gives work experience opportunities to prisoners as they come towards the end of their sentence," she said.

"They do a whole range of odd jobs and working in the local community – I think a really good scheme and really well done by this community group.

"On one day, when actually they didn't have anything else on, they did come to my house and do three hours-worth of painting, for which me and my husband made a donation to the community group."

By coincidence, Smith made her comments during a phone-in on government plans to toughen community sentences. Under the proposals, offenders facing a "community payback" punishment will have to work intensely, doing a minimum of 28 hours over a four-day week, instead of being allowed spread the punishment over a longer period of time.



Smith, who resigned as home secretary after her parliamentary expense claims became controversial, lost her seat at the 2010 election.

Well, those walls were probably awful for stains . . .
 
[quote author=Red Mullet link=topic=46360.msg1384999#msg1384999 date=1314060072]
[quote author=Atlas link=topic=46360.msg1384989#msg1384989 date=1314058141]
You're on the side of being a massive judgemental tard
[/quote]


Fantastically intelligent response there. I applaud you.
[/quote]

Well after posting thousands of posts you would imagine one would get noticed for being intelligent!
 
I can confirm those earlier figures were misleading.

Rather than being the amount borrowed each day they were the average amount in debt each day, peaking at:

Citigroup - about $100bn
Morgan Stanley - about $105bn
Bank of America - about $90bn
Goldman Sachs - about $70bn
 
[quote author=singlerider link=topic=46360.msg1386799#msg1386799 date=1314254601]
I can confirm those earlier figures were misleading.

Rather than being the amount borrowed each day they were the average amount in debt each day, peaking at:

Citigroup - about $100bn
Morgan Stanley - about $105bn
Bank of America - about $90bn
Goldman Sachs - about $70bn
[/quote]

Peddler of sensationalist mis-info.

Can't trust a word you say.
 
Bump

Just in case you didn't see it, mainly because it hardly made the news (there's a shock), the man who supplied Mark Duggan a loaded gun was jailed today.

Yes folks, the lovely, caring, doting father who was innocently shot by those nasty policemen, was given a loaded gun.

I'm shocked, really I am.

Funny isn't it, the police rightly get hauled over the coals for things like the De Menezes killing but things like this tend to go unnoticed, when its found that the character who did get shot was actually a nasty little thug, who was well known to Operation Trident officers as player in the black on black tit for tat shit that blighted London for years.
 
Back
Top Bottom