PDA

View Full Version : Britain is a nanny state



Jimbob2005
06-03-2005, 03:14 PM
Seriously, though:

* A superman costume had on a label on the cape: "May not carry out the ability to fly"
* A packet of nuts says "Warning: may contain nuts"
* Baby on board signs - c'mon, are we really gonna ram into the back of any random person's car?

There is so much shit but I am generally too knackered and have the can't be arsed attitude to list most aspects of Nanny Britain.

Still, it's pathetic, don't you think?

_ߥ_vil_
06-03-2005, 03:15 PM
Seriously, though:

* A superman costume had on a label on the cape: "May not carry out the ability to fly"
* A packet of nuts says "Warning: may contain nuts"
* Baby on board signs - c'mon, are we really gonna ram into the back of any random person's car?

There is so much shit but I am generally too knackered and have the can't be arsed attitude to list most aspects of Nanny Britain.

Still, it's pathetic, don't you think?

How about *Net nanny*???

Mentally_Challenged
06-03-2005, 03:23 PM
I've seen a milk carton with 'Warning: May contain milk.'

Ahhh, that made me laugh at the time...

Jimbob2005
06-03-2005, 03:24 PM
^ I was watching a repeat of Grumpy Old Men 'bout an hour ago. That was where I heard that superman cape thing - I just about pissed myself laughing!

Noodles is gay
06-03-2005, 05:33 PM
have you only just worked this out? :eek:

This place has been going downhill for years - bloody Labour government http://www.puppstheories.com/forum/html/emoticons/angryNEW.gif


ooh did anybody hear about the re-enactment of the Battle of Trafalgar? To mark the 200th anniversary of our tremendous victory over the French there will be a re-enactment at Southsea. However, we cannot risk offending the French so the re-enactment will be between a red fleet and blue fleet; not the French and British. This, my friends, is utterly RIDICULOUS!


Anyone wish to cry (http://nannyknowsbest.blogspot.com/) themselves to sleep?

TheUnholyNightbringer
06-03-2005, 07:12 PM
^ Old news. Heard that a while ago.

It's not just in Britain, it's in a lot of democratic countries.

Not Ozymandias
06-03-2005, 07:22 PM
* Baby on board signs - c'mon, are we really gonna ram into the back of any random person's car?
No, but you'll be more careful - which lessens the chance for accident and that is the whole point.

Until your coffee cups start carrying warnings that the coffee is hot you're still lagging behind America.

Chris
06-03-2005, 08:14 PM
ooh did anybody hear about the re-enactment of the Battle of Trafalgar? To mark the 200th anniversary of our tremendous victory over the French there will be a re-enactment at Southsea. However, we cannot risk offending the French so the re-enactment will be between a red fleet and blue fleet; not the French and British. This, my friends, is utterly RIDICULOUS!


Southsea aye...might have to pop along to that and ridicule the French

Rye
06-03-2005, 08:50 PM
No, but you'll be more careful - which lessens the chance for accident and that is the whole point.

Until your coffee cups start carrying warnings that the coffee is hot you're still lagging behind America.

I was thinking the same! Also, 'slippery when wet' signs.

Jimbob2005
06-04-2005, 02:57 AM
I was thinking the same! Also, 'slippery when wet' signs.
I've seen signs like that on areas of wet carpet at the gym, which is seriously retarded.

notoriousdoc
06-04-2005, 03:14 AM
This place has been going downhill for years - bloody Labour government http://www.puppstheories.com/forum/html/emoticons/angryNEW.gif


Please Jen, for god's sake GET over the Conservative party. Nothing they say makes any sense. They're all criminals who only think about money and don't give a toss about the under and middle classes in this country. Look what happened when the conservatives were in power last, millions were unemployed, they brought in the poll tax, privatised everything and banned free school milk

Jesus
06-04-2005, 03:37 AM
the re-enactment of the Battle of Trafalgar is utterly RIDICULOUS!


Indeed it is.

Piedude
06-04-2005, 04:32 AM
Please Jen, for god's sake GET over the Conservative party... They're all criminals

Illegal War anyone?
Back to the topic, having to wear goggles when playing conkers? Then again, our old science teacher made us wear goggles for every experiment, including wiring a plug

Noodles is gay
06-04-2005, 04:34 AM
^ exactly.

Although one of my science teachers was cool - we're old enough to make our own choices over whether we want to wear goggles or not. THat's the right way of doing things!


Until your coffee cups start carrying warnings that the coffee is hot you're still lagging behind America.

they do.


They're all criminals

no, that would be the BNP.


who only think about money and don't give a toss about the under and middle classes in this country.

Money is very important! Of course they think about money - money pays for education, the military, public transport, the NHS! THeir policy on the NHS was far superior to Labour's, and that's thinking about the 'under and middle classes' in this country (because, obviously, us rich gits go private ;)). No university top-up fees! Again - who's that best for? The rich people who can afford to pay for university? no.


Look what happened when the conservatives were in power last, millions were unemployed, they brought in the poll tax, privatised everything and banned free school milk

Well, personally, I'd prefer no milk in schools and a decent education system rather than the other way round - 15% for a pass at GCSE maths! It's absurd. You only need to look at how the 'average Brit' types to see our failing school system.

What about grammar schools? We have Labour to thank for their demise, but at least we have a lovely 'fair' and 'level playing field' for all the kids. It doesn't matter that the more intellectually able are being put into a classroom with idiots because at least everyone has the same chance, hey?

Noodles is gay
06-04-2005, 04:49 AM
I should be PM, I'd get this place into shape soon enough. :cool:

felix_leiter
06-05-2005, 06:24 AM
Baby on Board signs arent a sign of a nanny state-people decide to have them themselves, and that's fair enough.

Nanny state is security cameras everywhere, an other things coming directly from the government.

It's all to do with New Labour ideals about running people's lives for them.

Notorious Doc, what are you talking about? Do you even understand the aims and ethos behind the conservative party? judging by your post you have no clue whatsoever.

notoriousdoc
06-05-2005, 06:27 AM
I should be PM, I'd get this place into shape soon enough. :cool:

I ahve to say, I agree with that

notoriousdoc
06-05-2005, 06:31 AM
Baby on Board signs arent a sign of a nanny state-people decide to have them themselves, and that's fair enough.

Nanny state is security cameras everywhere, an other things coming directly from the government.

It's all to do with New Labour ideals about running people's lives for them.

Notorious Doc, what are you talking about? Do you even understand the aims and ethos behind the conservative party? judging by your post you have no clue whatsoever.

Nu labour suck, but not as much as the conservatives. But in the end, none of this matters anyone who is in power are just figureheads to corporate sonsors who rule the world, with thier finger on proverbial button

darko
06-05-2005, 06:57 AM
you mean Bush?

cus lets face it, Blair couldnt be anymore up his ass

notoriousdoc
06-05-2005, 07:04 AM
you mean Bush?

cus lets face it, Blair couldnt be anymore up his ass

if he was any further up, he would be his colon

darko
06-05-2005, 07:10 AM
if he was any further up, he would be his colon


true, so true

wheelchairman
06-05-2005, 09:59 AM
I always find it amusing when pot-heads who love certain educational options, support the Conservative party.

cheers for not thinking things through.

Noodles is gay
06-05-2005, 10:17 AM
I don't see how 'certain educational options' have anything to do with politics! Except for the fact that they used to be offered at grammar schools which have now been abolished thanks to Labour.

I have thought things through.

wheelchairman
06-05-2005, 10:35 AM
I don't see how 'certain educational options' have anything to do with politics! Except for the fact that they used to be offered at grammar schools which have now been abolished thanks to Labour.

I have thought things through.
New Labour and Labour are two different things. New Labour is conservatism. The Conservatives are famous for cutting out of education and slashing down options. Public Education would've been considered 'Nanny-State' by the crazy lady that invented that ridiculous term.

I don't see how anyone who thinks things through, can support the conservative party. Unless they completely hate the lower classes. The stingent moral policies, the ridiculous privitization, which truly didn't help your nation, and the funding of the police (you'd think that pumping the police force/military to ever-increasing numbers would be considered 'nanny-state', but no, Conservatives want to rob the poor of good education, health-care, and home, and then when they turn to crime, arrest the poor bastards before they can do anything.

I'm obviously in a bad mood. It's probably not your fault, seeing as I believe you go to a private school don't you? Of course you'd support the interests of the establishment.

Noodles is gay
06-05-2005, 11:35 AM
Of course you'd support the interests of the establishment.

Yes! Of course I support the interests of the establishment!

I don't know where you got the idea that the Tories 'rob the poor of a good education' - they'd get rid of university fees (which surely rich people can afford), and are in favour of grammar schools which provide decent education to people without them paying for it!

There's nothing wrong with arresting people who turn to crime - I'd prefer that to Labour's approach which is to be 'soft' on the ones they do catch and ignore the ones they don't.

wheelchairman
06-05-2005, 11:45 AM
Yes! Of course I support the interests of the establishment!

I don't know where you got the idea that the Tories 'rob the poor of a good education' - they'd get rid of university fees (which surely rich people can afford), and are in favour of grammar schools which provide decent education to people without them paying for it!

There's nothing wrong with arresting people who turn to crime - I'd prefer that to Labour's approach which is to be 'soft' on the ones they do catch and ignore the ones they don't.
Oh, as an 'opposition' party, the Tories suddenly support a host of different kinds of social-welfare ideas. That was proven to be the opposite the last time they were in power though. It's an empty campaign promise simply gaining on the unpopularity of a New Labour decision.

And no, arresting criminals is not wrong. But the institution of crime needs to understand that people turn to crime because of their social conditions. And that 'tough on crime' policies simply don't work. And cutting down on social benefits won't 'motivate' these people either. It's a cruel system these people support, and it shows that they are completely out of touch with the wants and needs of a large part of their 'supporters'.

notoriousdoc
06-05-2005, 11:45 AM
Sorry to say as I am, Jen only likes conservatives because she was probably brought up with thinking that way, her dad being rich and all...

Noodles is gay
06-05-2005, 11:50 AM
^ my dad's not 'rich'. But yes, he also supports the Tories :o


It's a cruel system these people support

Being cruel is the way to get things done.

And being tough on crime does work - I think it's California that has the 'three strikes' which works extremely well, and could easily work here too.

It's not an empty campaign promise! Labour got rid of grammar school, Tories would bring them back! THey've always supported them and they wouldn't change now; because grammar schools are GOOD!

Oh, and if they gained power and didn't do what they said they would then there'd be utter uproar! It wouldn't work at all.

Noodles is gay
06-05-2005, 11:56 AM
Btw, Noods, what's with the Oxford dust-up with the gvt now? Ox is in need of independence to get more funds from alumni & students, is that it?

Maria

GVT? Government?

Oxbridge is seriously short of money, they're finding it extremely difficult to compete with those mega-rich American universities, and so are demanding that the government do something about it because it Oxbridge starts slipping the country will be left with crap universities to go with it's crap comprehensives. So yeah, they're asking the gov. either to give them money or to allow them to charge extremely high amounts to students and get money of the alumni too.

I think that's what you meant...?

wheelchairman
06-05-2005, 11:58 AM
^ my dad's not 'rich'. But yes, he also supports the Tories :o



Being cruel is the way to get things done.

And being tough on crime does work - I think it's California that has the 'three strikes' which works extremely well, and could easily work here too.

It's not an empty campaign promise! Labour got rid of grammar school, Tories would bring them back! THey've always supported them and they wouldn't change now; because grammar schools are GOOD!

Oh, and if they gained power and didn't do what they said they would then there'd be utter uproar! It wouldn't work at all.
Being cruel isn't really the way to get things done, not if you want popular support.

The 3 strikes rules in California are a joke. You do realize they are having huge criminal problems right? Stuffing people in prison doesn't lessen crime, since it's their own conditions of living that are making people turn to crime (the need to make money). All it is making a need for more prisons. It's absolutely ridiculous, not to mention completely devoid of any sense of justice. I know you've never been to LA. But you really shouldn't believe that 3 Strikes works because you read so in some paper or something. I don't think crime has lessened by 1%.

The only way to lower crime, would be fundamentally changing the social conditions and opportunities for rising up. People, have a tendency of getting poorer in California. (This, was one of the reasons behind the recent recall of the Governor. California went from the world's best economy to quite a ways lower.)

And campaign promises are broken all the time, especially in Britain. That's why parties have Spin Doctors.

Noodles is gay
06-05-2005, 12:02 PM
yeah, I read those damnable papers again. Didn't know it didn't work.


The only way to lower crime, would be fundamentally changing the social conditions and opportunities for rising up.

But surely grammar schools and no university fees would better educate the poorer people and, therefore, raise living conditions and the chance of a decent job and, hence, lower crime. Which is what the Tories wanted to do.

More money in the NHS would be pretty useful too.

notoriousdoc
06-05-2005, 12:02 PM
^ my dad's not 'rich'. But yes, he also supports the Tories :o
He is in comparison Jen

Noodles is gay
06-05-2005, 12:04 PM
To Noods: twas rude, but true. Blunt statement, remember you're talking to a French lady. *embarrassed pout* only kidding

Yep gvt=government

Oxford is still the 8th/5th (depending on the survey) uni in the world. But it is crying out for indie status & Brown is somewhat chary of letting it go or so I am told... & its per student budget is in the red (-8000 pds a year). Disaster is nigh.

Maria

Bloody French....:p

yeah; out of the top 20 universities in the world 17 are in the US, 2 are in England!

But yeah, that's exactly right. I thought the student budget was closer to -15000, on average, though!

notoriousdoc
06-05-2005, 12:06 PM
The best way to stop crime is re-education I think, You take them out of the world and train them for a job so they can earn, think colleges and aprenticeships. You gotta get 'em young as well

RXP
06-05-2005, 12:07 PM
university fees (which surely rich people can afford)

HAHAHAHAHA.

Top up fees ia a middle class tax. That's why the tories are so against it. I'm pretty sure if your dirt poor and wanna go uni it's better to have to pay nothing now and to pay once you get a job. I'd much rather do that then be hurdled with debt when I come out of uni like I'm gonna be.

punkangel
06-05-2005, 12:08 PM
The best way to stop crime is re-education I think, You take them out of the world and train them for a job so they can earn, think colleges and aprenticeships. You gotta get 'em young as well


Little off the subject: re-send your PM...it was an unconfirmed reading recipt..(blah, blah, blaaaaaaa) thing and I can't get into it

notoriousdoc
06-05-2005, 12:21 PM
Little off the subject: re-send your PM...it was an unconfirmed reading recipt..(blah, blah, blaaaaaaa) thing and I can't get into it

WTF ?

felix_leiter
06-05-2005, 03:20 PM
The loss of Grammar schools is the worst thing to happen to education in the UK. Without them, the working classes have no hope and equality cannot prevail, and are caught in a constant cycle of deprivation.

The fact that Labour has removed them says something about the idiocy inherent in Labour policies-arent they supposed to help those with less fortunate backgrounds

Wheelchairman, I'd say a worse thing than privatisation was the strikes of the 1970s. At least with privatisation you give people a reason to keep standards high and serve the country and people better, rather than a bunch of little Stalin's holding the country to ransom with strikes.

wheelchairman
06-05-2005, 03:25 PM
The loss of Grammar schools is the worst thing to happen to education in the UK. Without them, the working classes have no hope and equality cannot prevail, and are caught in a constant cycle of deprivation.

The fact that Labour has removed them says something about the idiocy inherent in Labour policies-arent they supposed to help those with less fortunate backgrounds

Wheelchairman, I'd say a worse thing than privatisation was the strikes of the 1970s. At least with privatisation you give people a reason to keep standards high and serve the country and people better, rather than a bunch of little Stalin's holding the country to ransom with strikes.

Mindblowing statement there. So you are against the working class trying to improve their own living condition? Historically Britain has a bad way with respect to the needs of the workers. (What with the Weaver's starving on the streets long ago to the fact that you haven't had a minimum wage until just recently.)

There would be no welfare state to begin with, if it weren't for the organization of the working class.

felix_leiter
06-05-2005, 03:37 PM
The organization of the working class? Please read my comment again you have misunderstood.

wheelchairman
06-05-2005, 03:52 PM
Strikes implies Unions, Unions are the Organization of the Working Class (that might be subject-specific vocab.)

But actually I had misunderstood, I have a cold, so things are a little more confused for me.

Privitization of the public sector has always been a bad thing. You'd think living in England it would be obvious, what with the privitization of the rails and all that.

felix_leiter
06-05-2005, 04:04 PM
Yeah the crap rail companies get fired when they're shit though. If there's no work at that company people leave it and prove themselves again to get another job, and that keeps only the highest quality of worker or boss doing the job.

wheelchairman
06-06-2005, 03:03 AM
Yeah the crap rail companies get fired when they're shit though. If there's no work at that company people leave it and prove themselves again to get another job, and that keeps only the highest quality of worker or boss doing the job.
You know nothing about business do you? Crap bosses tend to keep their jobs. And why hasn't this worked with the rails then?

felix_leiter
06-06-2005, 07:17 AM
Tend to. Not always