If you wish to discuss the resignation of the Prime Minister then please use the topic here https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/theresa-may-resigns.183205/
As per usual
Actually they probably want British people to have freedom to go anywhere and do anything just because they're British, but not to extend that right to citizens of other countries.
Conversely, freedom of movement also has an impact on the lives of people who find house prices in their local area have become inflated due to demand versus supply, with demand having been fuelled by rising population.
Brexit or no Brexit, population is still going to rise.
The lobger we deny real climate change, the more uninhabitable deserts we'll create, forcing more and more people into the habitable areas that are left, and, due to our temperate location, we're going to see an awful lot more people being attracted this way. Plus, that's also going to be the case if we keep going to places in the Middle East and bombing the s**t out of them (Iraq, possibly soon Iran) or encouraging civil wars (Syria)
As has been mentioned before, population growth is inevitable in developing countries, as life expectancy increases, without the corresponding decrease in children. However eventually it balances out again. This has happened in the UK, US and everywhere else. Bangladesh for example, only has a fertility rate of 2.2 children/woman.This is indeed an inalienable truth. The problem is that population growth is largest in developing countries. How do we best intervene?
In addition the per capita impact on the environment is often inversely proportionate to the birth rate. A single child born in the US or the more affluent parts of Europe probably puts more demands on the earth's resources than a family of ten in a developing nation in the African sub-continent.As has been mentioned before, population growth is inevitable in developing countries, as life expectancy increases, without the corresponding decrease in children. However eventually it balances out again. This has happened in the UK, US and everywhere else. Bangladesh for example, only has a fertility rate of 2.2 children/woman.
Edit: The best way to intervene is a brexiteers nightmare, increasing foreign aid! (To speed up development of the country)
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/to...lled-rather-than-risk-breakup-of-uk-1-5968122DUP deputy leader Nigel Dodds has said he would rather see Brexit cancelled than allow for the break-up for the United Kingdom.
I bet he would!!Well you backed the wrong horse then didnt you... NI is going to be thrown under a bus as soon as it can if we get a hardline brexit leader in place.
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/to...lled-rather-than-risk-breakup-of-uk-1-5968122
Donald Trump: sent in Nigel Farage and go for a No Deal.
Not sure why we should take advice from someone whose not-so-hidden agenda is to weaken the EU which is one of the few bodies big enough to stand up to him. Any trade deal between the UK and the Trump administration will be about as even-handed as a mouse and an elephant on a seesaw.Donald Trump: sent in Nigel Farage and go for a No Deal.
I thought "no, that's his recent tariff deal with Canada", but then I realised you didn't say "moose".Any trade deal between the UK and the Trump administration will be about as even-handed as a mouse and an elephant on a seesaw.
I thought "no, that's his recent tariff deal with Canada", but then I realised you didn't say "moose".
Lots of people on twitter saying what Trump is saying is what should be done. These are the same people who told Obama he should keep his nose out of the UK's business. (Even Farage is quoted as saying the same thing about Obama)Donald Trump: sent in Nigel Farage and go for a No Deal.
You miss the point. The people criticising Obama sticking his nose in where its not wanted are now paising Trump for doing the same thing.Trump and Obama can say whatever they like. So can Putin. We can choose to ignore them.
I'm saying either are entitled to stick their nose in - everyone can voice an opinion. Ignore the people who praise trump. People will be hypocritical - that's politics whilst it's very divided (as it is in the UK and US at present)
(Sarcasm mode on)It's not good diplomacy to precede a state visit (that is - a visit predicated on good relations between the two nations) with political opining.
The President is here as a guest of the country and our head of state, and should behave with good grace. Sending angry tweets about Sadiq Khan and saying who he things should be the next Prime Minister are not on.
or to make us think "that Boris bloke, I wouldn't want him to be PM but then again it could be worse!"(Sarcasm mode on)
But surely he was invited over because we need his sage insight and guidance at this troubled time? :P
It's not good diplomacy to precede a state visit (that is - a visit predicated on good relations between the two nations) with political opining.
Khan was at it as well.Sending angry tweets about Sadiq Khan and saying who he things should be the next Prime Minister are not on.
Ah so that makes it OK for the us president to stick his unwelcome nose into the uks business then.Khan was at it as well.
Khan was at it as well.
This time, Trump launched into his tirade against Khan out of the blue without any apparent provocation.
I think what provoked Trump was something Khan wrote in the Guardian:
It was probably reported by Fox News, he spends most of his time watching it.I'm having a very difficult time believing Trump would read anything in the Guardian,