Doing his best King Charles impression.

What we have is a conflict between the population of the UK wanting their capital city to be run in the nation's best interests, who don't get to vote...

...and the interests of the people living in London, who want what's in their own personal interests (especially free stuff) and don't care about the rest of the country, and I'd argue even the future of London itself.

You do realise that these are elections for local councils, and a handful of local Mayors - they are all about local issues such as education, planning, local roads and transport, libraries, bin collections...

Are you really being critical of people voting in council elections according to what they want the councils to do?
 
Isn't London a net positive financially for the rest of the nation?
Not really. On paper yes. In reality it drains money from the rest of the economy, mostly via the banks headquartered there.

Joe Bloggs in Sunderland pays his mortgage to Barclays in his local town, who transfer that money to London.

Very little is actually produced in London. It sucks money from the rest of the country, claiming it all as though it produced it.
 
Are you really being critical of people voting in council elections according to what they want the councils to do?
Many recent immigrants don't care about the state of the UK as a whole, their local council or even their own street.

They just want money, from us all, and send lots of it back to their true home.

Many belong to supra-national virtual states. We're just a money-tree.
 
Not really. On paper yes. In reality it drains money from the rest of the economy, mostly via the banks headquartered there.

Joe Bloggs in Sunderland pays his mortgage to Barclays in his local town, who transfer that money to London.

Very little is actually produced in London. It sucks money from the rest of the country, claiming it all as though it produced it.

Explain to me, please, how, and by how much, Joe Bloggs would be better off if his local Barclays kept his mortgage payments.
 
Many recent immigrants don't care about the state of the UK as a whole, their local council or even their own street.

They just want money, from us all, and send lots of it back to their true home.

Please explain how they get money from their local council.
 

Attachments

  • 1775763397142.png
    1775763397142.png
    3.2 MB · Views: 6
Democracy is being undermined by bringing in no-hopers with no purpose other than being paid by big government to vote for more big government.

The corruption is allowing people who don't contribute to society to shape it.
And you seriously think the answer is a party that basically says vote for us because the other lot are no good.
 
Many recent immigrants don't care about the state of the UK as a whole, their local council or even their own street.

They just want money, from us all, and send lots of it back to their true home.

Many belong to supra-national virtual states. We're just a money-tree.
I know several who "don't like the UK" but their parents need the NHS, so they live here.
 
Not really. On paper yes. In reality it drains money from the rest of the economy, mostly via the banks headquartered there.

Joe Bloggs in Sunderland pays his mortgage to Barclays in his local town, who transfer that money to London.

Very little is actually produced in London. It sucks money from the rest of the country, claiming it all as though it produced it.
So yes it is a positive, you're just giving it less value than the Nissan car plant which is propped up on government subsidies.
 
Many recent immigrants don't care about the state of the UK as a whole, their local council or even their own street.

They just want money, from us all, and send lots of it back to their true home.

Many belong to supra-national virtual states. We're just a money-tree.
What's a supranational virtual state, and can you give us a couple of examples, to which these supposed money-senders are sending their money?
 
Blup said to Spline
Well stand against him then….

Indeed he did, and the context was this sequence

Londoners may regret protest votes for Reform or Greens in local elections, says Sadiq Khan | Local elections 2026 | The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-or-greens-in-local-elections-says-sadiq-khan

Are you sure Sadiq?
Foreigners, especially muslim ones, should not be in any positions of authority in this country.
Foreigners, especially muslim ones, should not be in any positions of authority in this country.
Well stand against him then….


Indeed I did.

Well stand against him then….
Who?

Sadiq Khan?

He's not standing in these elections.

So how could the "He" in that possibly be referring to anybody except Sadiq Khan?

Which leaves us with, semantically:

Well stand against him then….
Who?

Sadiq Khan?

Sadiq Khan is not standing in these elections.

And thus, semantically:

Who?

Sadiq Khan?

Sadiq Khan is not standing in these elections.
Nore is Sadiq


I meant Spline

When you wrote "nor is Sadiq" you meant "nor is Spline"? A somewhat strange thing to say in response to me pointing out that Sadiq Kahn was not standing in these elections after Blup had said Spline should stand against him.


Blup meant Spline

When Blup wrote "Well stand against him then…." to Spline he meant Spline should stand against Spline?

OK.
 
Back
Top