Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

so you've campaigned round your local farms have you, and having called the farmer a fat, lazy slob, he was more than happy to tell you that he wouldn't employ locals?

and have you seen "locals" being turned away from the farm gate when they have asked for a job?

and what about the restaurants seeking staff of all sorts of categories?

and how many "job seekers" have you interviewed and asked them if they were prepared to take these jobs, even if it meant little gain over the benefits they would receive?

cynic you post crap

ukip up to 19%
lab 30
CON 30

UKIP WILL OVR TAKE THEM BY NEXT ELECTION GET THESE IMMIGRANTS OUT AND EMPTY OUR PRISONS OF CRIMINALS SEND THEM HOME AND ANY IMMIGRANT BREAKINTHE UK LAW DEPORT THEM THE SAME WEEK

please be more specific about "crap" - eg perhaps you can tell us all where my comment and observation are erroneous

posting some poll result is a complete irrelevance

the uk as been taken over by low life scum down to very poor government
most mps are now immigrants our fathers and brothers died fighting for the uk died for fcuk all . betrayed

vote ukip is the only hope

Update - Conservatives and Labour tied
by YouGov in Political Trackers and Politics
Tue October 28, 2014 6 a.m. GMT

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 27th Oct - Con 32%, Lab 32%, LD 8%, UKIP 18%;

UKIP still at level of zero MPs at the GE.

What is Labour's forecasted majority?

Latest polls

Three showing a tie. The Labour rot has set in.

Ashcroft: CON 31%, LAB 31%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 18%, GRN 5% (tabs)
Populus: CON 34%, LAB 36%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 3% (tabs)
YouGov/Sun: CON 32%, LAB 32%, LDEM 8%, UKIP 18%
ComRes/Indy: CON 30%(+1), LAB 30%(-5), LDEM 9%(-1), UKIP 19%(+4), GRN 4%

so MrT, you can't think of any point at all where my comment and observation (48685) was erroneous, so now have no option than to resort to your customary soapbox polemic

=======

fred - ZERO! ..... though i'ld accept that labour may have the most seats

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2808527/Miliband-warned-faces-catastrophe-losing-Labour-s-seats-Scotland-wake-leader-Lamont-quitting.html

I think the important point which tends to get missed about immigration, is the thing about the rights of over 400m people in the EU to stop whatever they are doing and how they are currently living, be it busily, lazily, good, bad or indifferent and come over here, without absolutely any restriction, and set up home and try to get themselves a job.

There is no adequate thought given to the likely effect on our existing education and health services or the funding of our benefits systems.

The issue of overcrowding individual areas into zones full of specific types and classes of immigrants is also completely ignored. This is currently being highlighted by the likes of David Blunkett, a member of the government's opposition party and a previous Home Secretary. He speaks serious words, that fully deserve to be listened to.

After all, the UK is 'an island' and it is pretty full already. It also has valuable history, traditions and culture which fully deserve to be protected, rather than damaged beyond repair by the effects of totally uncontrolled immigration.

This particular aspect of EU law which allows member citizens to seek work and travel freely anywhere they want to, without any restriction, is so blatantly crazy and so utterly wrong, ANYONE can see it.

The whole 'EU thing' has now gone too far. The votes for UKIP that are about to be seen are going to utterly shock.

Add to that, the latest EU demand for an extra £1.7bn from the UK's citizens, to spread around like so much confetti to the likes of Germany and France and the above coffin on things is nailed shut.

Damn it! My street is without proper street lighting to save money. The EU is run by unelected beaurocrats who just piss money up the wall. It is a crazy organisation and I for one, now strongly want 'OUT' of it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11189253/Strip-Ed-Miliband-of-any-power-over-Scottish-Labour-party-grandees-demand-in-direct-challenge-to-leader.html

EL - just to play devil's advocate, don't forget that the reverse is also true about uk citizens working and living abroad (eu) without restriction ..... whether or not they get the same fringe benefits when living abroad is another matter

above post wrong , if a person from the uk wants to work and ive in another country they have to buy insurance that makes it impossible for the low paid workers to leave the uk and work outside the uk the scum coming to the uk get ever thing
it must be the same for all or get out of the eu

answer that cynic we can not get free health in any eu country and I do travel a lot the doctors want paying or will not see you yes you can get minor treatment and that is that

By Hannah Furness, Arts Correspondent
10:08AM GMT 28 Oct 2014
Chairman of Department for Culture, Media and Sport committee, says licence fee must be 'tweaked' immediately, with BBC funding methods changed altogether in coming decades

The BBC licence fee is "worse than the poll tax" and is "unsustainable" in the long term, a Conservative MP has said.

John Whittingdale, chairman of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport committee, said the licence fee must be "tweaked" immediately, with BBC funding methods changed altogether in the coming decades.

Speaking at a TV Question Time-style event held at Bafta, as part of a panel, he said the licence fee should now take into account viewers' wealth and reflect their changing viewing habits.

Earlier this year, culture secretary Sajid Javid suggested the licence fee could be cut if the Conservatives were in power after the next election, saying £145.50 a year is a “large amount” of money and “needs to be looked at”.

Mr Javid also raised the prospect of a fundamental reform of the flat-rate licence fee to reflect changing technology and viewing habits, saying "nothing is ruled out” for the future.

The future of the licence fee will be debated in full after the next general election, after the BBC has been compelled to make cuts to its spending.

Mr Whittingdale, who appeared on a panel alongside the BBC's controller of drama Ben Stephenson, has now made clear his support for fundamental change to the way the corporation is funded.

Saying he did not believe the licence fee would survive in its current form in the next few decades, he said: "I think in the long term it's unsustainable.

"I think most people, almost everybody, accepts that the licence fee as it currently stands need some tweaking to sort out anomalies.

"People's viewing habits have changed and it needs to reflect that. That's a very simple change and I think people see that.

"You then have the question of whether or not it should remain a flat poll tax, collected through some fairly draconian measures, and whether it should still be criminally enforceable.

"Government has already announced consultation on decriminalisation. I've been looking at other countries and I think there's quite an attractive option of linking it to a specific household tax - maybe council tax.

"I think in the longer term we are potentially looking at reducing at least a proportion of the licence fee that is compulsory and offering choice."

He added BBC-commissioned research showing the public overwhelmingly support the licence fee had been the result of the corporation setting its own questions, as he called for a wider "package" of options to be presented to viewers.

"It's a question of introducing choice," he said. "I'm not saying I wouldn't pay the licence fee - I would go on paying the licence fee.

"[But] It is a poll tax. It's actually worse than a poll tax because under the poll tax, if you were on a very low income you would get a considerable subsidy.

"The BBC licence fee, there is no means-tested element whatsoever; it doesn't matter how poor you are, you pay £145.50 and go to prison if you don't pay it."

He added the era when "everybody either watched or listened to the BBC" was becoming "less true", in the face of the catch-up services, online streaming, and more choice.

Mr Stephenson, controller of drama commissioning at the BBC, warned the corporation would not be able to maintain the same quality of output if its funding was cut, adding it was currently the "envy of the world".

TANKER

As far as i can remember all the care workers charged with abusing and neglecting the elderly in care homes were British. Filipino workers don't like working with the English because they are mostly lazy and uncaring and always going missing for fag breaks.

By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor
11:41AM GMT 28 Oct 2014
The University of Montreal has found that men who had sex with more than 20 women lower their prostate cancer risk

Sleeping with more than 20 women protects men against prostate cancer, a study has suggested.

Men who had slept with more than 20 women lowered their risk of developing danced by almost one third, and were 19 per cent less likely to develop the most aggressive form.

In contrast, men who slept with 20 men doubled their risk of developing prostate cancer compared with men who have never had sex with another man.

Researchers at the University of Montreal believe that intercourse protects men, and men who are more promiscuous have more sex than those in monogamous relationships.

However, for homosexual men the benefit is lost because of the increased risk of picking up a sexually transmitted disease, and the damage to their bodies from intercourse. However gay men with just one partner are at no greater risk.

"It is possible that having many female sexual partners results in a higher frequency of ejaculations, whose protective effect against prostate cancer has been previously observed in cohort studies," said lead researcher Dr Marie-Elise Parent.


But when asked whether public health authorities should recommend men to sleep with many women in their lives Dr Parent added: "We're not there yet."

The study looked at more than 3,200 men over a four year period between 2005 and 2009.

Overall, men with prostate cancer were twice as likely to have a relative with cancer. However, the researchers were surprised to find that the number of sexual partners also affected the development of their cancer.

Men who said they had never had sexual intercourse were almost twice as likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer as those who said they had.

When a man has slept with more than 20 women during his lifetime there was a 28 per cent reduction in the risk of having prostate cancer, and a 19 per cent reduction for aggressive types of cancer.

On the other hand, those who have slept with more than 20 men are twice as likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer of all types compared to those who have never slept with a man.

And their risk of having a less aggressive prostate cancer increases by 500 per cent compared to those who have had only one male partner.

Dr Parent said that she could only formulate "highly speculative" hypotheses to explain the association.

"It could come from greater exposure to STIs, or it could be that anal intercourse produces physical trauma to the prostate," she said.

Previous studies have found that sexual intercourse may have a protective effect against prostate cancer because it reduces the concentration of carcinogenic crystal-like substances in the fluid of the prostate.

The study, published in the Journal Cancer Epidemiology is the first to find a link between the number of sexual partners and the risk of developing cancer.

"We were fortunate to have participants from Montreal who were comfortable talking about their sexuality, no matter what sexual experiences they have had, and this openness would probably not have been the same 20 or 30 years ago," said lead researcher Dr Marie-Elise Parent.

"Indeed, thanks to them, we now know that the number and type of partners must be taken into account to better understand the causes of prostate cancer."

I remember they done research with Monks, that was about 30 years ago and found it was low . And also recent research says Masturbation helped to prevent it. So the best way is to take it into your own hands.

48697 - i think that technically, a uk citizen should also get free health care across eu, but might easily be wrong on that .... anyway, that was not really the issue

other than uk, almost every other country across eu has far worse unemployment problems, and that applies to both the qualified and the semi-literate, so it's no great surprise that unskilled jobs in the rest of europe are difficult to come by ..... however, the world is much bigger than just europe

in uk, there is no question that across the service industries of all fields, the majority of workers are "non-british"
this tells you several things ...... (a) employers see these people as hard workers (generally true) ..... (b) they will often work for low wages, because they see it better than not working at all ..... (c) these low wages are often significantly more than they can earn in the in home countries

do they "steal" jobs from their "british" counterparts? ..... in all honesty, probably not

''So the best way is to take it into your own hands''. Or you could tell the missus that you are a few short of the 20 women needed for optimum safety.---------ps good luck with that.
2517

I've just been counting and I reckon I'm quite a few short of 20!!