Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Wait, companies in the UK are advertising in Europe (probably because immigrants will accept lower wages), and that's anti-white? Unless I'm very much mistaken, Poland is about the whitest country on earth (90%+).

Made no comment on the phenomenon being anti-white, I stated the opposite in fact.

It is however highly discriminatory, and nothing is done about it. Now compare that with the CAB documentation.

It's discriminatory that they want to hire the people who will work for the lowest wage? Seems like standard business practice to me.

 Compel wrote:
And the phrase, "protected status" isn't mentioned once on that first link.

However protected status is given, mentioned or not.
You have to look at what is ACTUALLY happening, protection happens to go one way.
Protected status is a back door arrangement, but it is very real.

This is very common in UK society today, you just wont read about it in the Guardian.

So you're not allowed to advertise a job unless you manage to reach everyone in the world in a language that person understands.

Have fun with that.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Wait, companies in the UK are advertising in Europe (probably because immigrants will accept lower wages), and that's anti-white? Unless I'm very much mistaken, Poland is about the whitest country on earth (90%+).

Made no comment on the phenomenon being anti-white, I stated the opposite in fact.

It is however highly discriminatory, and nothing is done about it. Now compare that with the CAB documentation.

It's discriminatory that they want to hire the people who will work for the lowest wage? Seems like standard business practice to me.

Is it the lowest wage? Any proof of that. You assume that people the employees are Eastern European it is because of wage cuts. This is not actually true.

The real reason for hiring eastern Europeans exclusively is worse actually, an outright bigoted opinion that Britons are too lazy. This mantra has been repeated by peolle who should know better on both sides of the political divide and in industry.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Wait, companies in the UK are advertising in Europe (probably because immigrants will accept lower wages), and that's anti-white? Unless I'm very much mistaken, Poland is about the whitest country on earth (90%+).

Made no comment on the phenomenon being anti-white, I stated the opposite in fact.

It is however highly discriminatory, and nothing is done about it. Now compare that with the CAB documentation.

It's discriminatory that they want to hire the people who will work for the lowest wage? Seems like standard business practice to me.

Is it the lowest wage? Any proof of that. You assume that people the employees are Eastern European it is because of wage cuts. This is not actually true.

The real reason for hiring eastern Europeans exclusively is worse actually, an outright bigoted opinion that Britons are too lazy. This mantra has been repeated by peolle who should know better on both sides of the political divide and in industry.

No it isn't.

Unsubstantiated claims for everyone!

I have never bought nor read the Guardian in my life, but thanks for the strawman characterisation...

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
So you're not allowed to advertise a job unless you manage to reach everyone in the world in a language that person understands.

Have fun with that.

Not the issue, political correctness doesnt have to make sense, it remains part of the principle of equal opportunities, However the opposite, advertising for jobs in English exclusively in non-English speaking media is rife.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Wait, companies in the UK are advertising in Europe (probably because immigrants will accept lower wages), and that's anti-white? Unless I'm very much mistaken, Poland is about the whitest country on earth (90%+).

Made no comment on the phenomenon being anti-white, I stated the opposite in fact.

It is however highly discriminatory, and nothing is done about it. Now compare that with the CAB documentation.

It's discriminatory that they want to hire the people who will work for the lowest wage? Seems like standard business practice to me.

Is it the lowest wage? Any proof of that. You assume that people the employees are Eastern European it is because of wage cuts. This is not actually true.

The real reason for hiring eastern Europeans exclusively is worse actually, an outright bigoted opinion that Britons are too lazy. This mantra has been repeated by peolle who should know better on both sides of the political divide and in industry.

No it isn't.

Unsubstantiated claims for everyone!

Your flat dismissal wirthout even looking what you are critiqueing is getting tiring.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/01/brits-lazy-lord-heseltine-five-more-people_n_5546757.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2521076/The-bosses-love-jobs-Brits-werent-LAZY.html
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/british-workers-arent-lazy-they-just-have-standards-rightly-so-1586804

You ought to take the time to see what is being said there. Writing off an entire people group as lazy is just racism.
If someone said we wont hire blacks because they are lazy, they would be outed as a bigot very quickly, however there is no protected status on the Uk citizenry as a whole, and the laziness is touted indirectly was a white mans attitude.

There is no excuse to claim Britons are lazy because one doesnt know all Britons, or see laziness in others. To not hire a Briton because they are Bitish and therefore likely to be lazy is the sort of race discrimination that should be penalised. However Britons dont have a protected status, unlike components ethnicities.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Compel wrote:
I have never bought nor read the Guardian in my life, but thanks for the strawman characterisation...

Remember that next time you automatically dismiss an article because it is in the Daily Mail. The Guardian is just its mirror opposite, but the left wing progressive alternate, and an apologist for political correctness that is the cause of this mess.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Wait, companies in the UK are advertising in Europe (probably because immigrants will accept lower wages), and that's anti-white? Unless I'm very much mistaken, Poland is about the whitest country on earth (90%+).

Made no comment on the phenomenon being anti-white, I stated the opposite in fact.

It is however highly discriminatory, and nothing is done about it. Now compare that with the CAB documentation.

It's discriminatory that they want to hire the people who will work for the lowest wage? Seems like standard business practice to me.

Is it the lowest wage? Any proof of that. You assume that people the employees are Eastern European it is because of wage cuts. This is not actually true.

I assume they would hire immigrants because immigrants tend to work for less. Big difference.

The real reason for hiring eastern Europeans exclusively is worse actually, an outright bigoted opinion that Britons are too lazy. This mantra has been repeated by peolle who should know better on both sides of the political divide and in industry.

From the articles you have posted, they are hiring immigrants because they will work longer hours. Again, just sounds like standard business practice, not discrimination. Not nice practice, but they will make more money.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Compel wrote:
I have never bought nor read the Guardian in my life, but thanks for the strawman characterisation...

Remember that next time you automatically dismiss an article because it is in the Daily Mail. The Guardian is just its mirror opposite, but the left wing progressive alternate, and an apologist for treating people with respect that is the cause of this mess.

"The Guardian is gak!"
"I don't read it."
"So the Daily Mail isn't bad!"

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Wait, companies in the UK are advertising in Europe (probably because immigrants will accept lower wages), and that's anti-white? Unless I'm very much mistaken, Poland is about the whitest country on earth (90%+).

Made no comment on the phenomenon being anti-white, I stated the opposite in fact.

It is however highly discriminatory, and nothing is done about it. Now compare that with the CAB documentation.

It's discriminatory that they want to hire the people who will work for the lowest wage? Seems like standard business practice to me.

Is it the lowest wage? Any proof of that. You assume that people the employees are Eastern European it is because of wage cuts. This is not actually true.

I assume they would hire immigrants because immigrants tend to work for less. Big difference.

You assumed. I sourced.

 Orlanth wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
So you're not allowed to advertise a job unless you manage to reach everyone in the world in a language that person understands.

Have fun with that.

Not the issue, political correctness doesnt have to make sense, it remains part of the principle of equal opportunities, However the opposite, advertising for jobs in English exclusively in non-English speaking media is rife.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Wait, companies in the UK are advertising in Europe (probably because immigrants will accept lower wages), and that's anti-white? Unless I'm very much mistaken, Poland is about the whitest country on earth (90%+).

Made no comment on the phenomenon being anti-white, I stated the opposite in fact.

It is however highly discriminatory, and nothing is done about it. Now compare that with the CAB documentation.

It's discriminatory that they want to hire the people who will work for the lowest wage? Seems like standard business practice to me.

Is it the lowest wage? Any proof of that. You assume that people the employees are Eastern European it is because of wage cuts. This is not actually true.

The real reason for hiring eastern Europeans exclusively is worse actually, an outright bigoted opinion that Britons are too lazy. This mantra has been repeated by peolle who should know better on both sides of the political divide and in industry.

No it isn't.

Unsubstantiated claims for everyone!

Your flat dismissal wirthout even looking what you are critiqueing is getting tiring.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/01/brits-lazy-lord-heseltine-five-more-people_n_5546757.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2521076/The-bosses-love-jobs-Brits-werent-LAZY.html
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/british-workers-arent-lazy-they-just-have-standards-rightly-so-1586804

Sorry, next time I'll be psychic and know what you're using as a source before you've posted it.

If there is a widespread belief that British people are lazy, it's a bit surprising given the large number of British people involved in many high-pace industries here and around the rest of the world.

I have heard that farmers in Kent, for example, have found it increasingly difficult to recruit British workers for the hop harvest and similar, and had good success in recruiting pickers from eastern Europe. This is due to social and economic reasons.

One of the arguments against Brexit is the difficulty it is likely to cause in recruitment of seasonal labour for farming. However, probably it will lead to an increase in casual labour wages for such workers, either to attract Britons or to off-set the increased difficulty for foreigners to get a working visa.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

I assume they would hire immigrants because immigrants tend to work for less. Big difference.

You assumed. I sourced.

A. The point was immigrants in general, not "Eastern Europeans".

B. I assumed as much, because that is one of the big draws of immigrant labor. This is basic economics. Certainly working longer hours goes along with that, and I never denied as much. I just never talked about it.

C. Your sourcing was three crappy articles (Seriously, Daily Mail and HuffPo?) that had nothing to do with wages, and didn't disprove anything.

D. Where is the response to the rest of my statement?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

I assume they would hire immigrants because immigrants tend to work for less. Big difference.

You assumed. I sourced.

A. The point was immigrants in general, not "Eastern Europeans".

Not relevant, it was blindly assumptive. The actual reasons are well documented and are not to do with immigrants getting lower pay.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

B. I assumed as much, because that is one of the big draws of immigrant labor. This is basic economics. Certainly working longer hours goes along with that, and I never denied as much. I just never talked about it.

The only cases where this is true is if wages are illegally below the minimum wage.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

C. Your sourcing was three crappy articles (Seriously, Daily Mail and HuffPo?) that had nothing to do with wages, and didn't disprove anything.

I stopped at three. You can find others, including double sourcing that the individuals listed (counting the politicians not Madonna) have these opinions.

Nice that you handwave away evidence while sticking to evidenceless assumptions. There is no point continuing with you, if you will not accept sourced material that contradicts your worldview.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

D. Where is the response to the rest of my statement?

I didnt need to bother with it, You compounded your false assumptions.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If there is a widespread belief that British people are lazy, it's a bit surprising given the large number of British people involved in many high-pace industries here and around the rest of the world.

I have heard that farmers in Kent, for example, have found it increasingly difficult to recruit British workers for the hop harvest and similar, and had good success in recruiting pickers from eastern Europe. This is due to social and economic reasons.

One of the arguments against Brexit is the difficulty it is likely to cause in recruitment of seasonal labour for farming. However, probably it will lead to an increase in casual labour wages for such workers, either to attract Britons or to off-set the increased difficulty for foreigners to get a working visa.

I think an issue with British people being 'lazy' stems from the fact that a lot of us are extremely well educated. Mostly because we had no choice but to go into University after school, and that creates an issue where by you look down on manual labour or "basic" jobs like cleaning or even retail. Because it has been drilled into our heads that we are better than that.

"Nae son o' mine is cleaning bloody bogs in a bloody McDonalds." - Compel's mother, shortly after I finished uni and had joined JSA for some income while interviewing for something relating to my career.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If there is a widespread belief that British people are lazy, it's a bit surprising given the large number of British people involved in many high-pace industries here and around the rest of the world.

Generally its a class issue relating to blue collar workers. Not white collar graduate workers and highly skilled professionals.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

I have heard that farmers in Kent, for example, have found it increasingly difficult to recruit British workers for the hop harvest and similar, and had good success in recruiting pickers from eastern Europe. This is due to social and economic reasons.

There are valid reasons beyond the bigoted assumption that Brition are lazy. First there is the benefit trap, this is especially true of agricultural work where you cannot easily access the place of work by public transport. While the law is intended o make working more efficient than dole, the hard reality is that hard to reach occupations especially when seasonal and low paid are not worth taking. Transport costs to and from work are not renumerated, and it causes a break in claim which when the season work ends means a costly delay before housing tax credit and housing benefit is reestablished. Also back to work incentives which can be lucrative are reset by taking employment and do not kick in again until after a minimum period of unemployment, normally six months. The most norable one of these is Extended Payments for Housing Benefit. Which you only get for work expected to last five weeks or more, and has a six month cooldown. The benefit, four weeks housing benefit regardless of actual wage is a good incentive to work, but not an incentive to take up short term employment such as harvest work.
All in all, the system has been mismanaged by successive government and is not set up to provide incentive for long term umemployed to take seasonal work.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

One of the arguments against Brexit is the difficulty it is likely to cause in recruitment of seasonal labour for farming. However, probably it will lead to an increase in casual labour wages for such workers, either to attract Britons or to off-set the increased difficulty for foreigners to get a working visa.

The farmers I know say the main problem is that there isn't enough work for young rural people to stay in the rural areas, and house prices are being pushed upwards as people from the city buy up reural housing as second homes pricing agricultural workers out of the market.
This doesnt affect overseas workers as you can 'bus' them in and its handled elsewhere. There is no infrastructure for busing in local workers from suburban communities. Again government in this case local government mismanagement is to blame.

When I left uni I tried to apply for a job at McDonald's to tid me over whilst I settled in back at home.

Turns out I'm over qualified.

Yeah, I got that same "overqualified" thing when I tried to join the police as an administrative / data entry person.

That job ended up paying more than the entry level job in IT I finally got, which was far more difficult work.

I still think I would have scripted the **** out of that data entry job that they would have found far better work for me there in short order.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

I assume they would hire immigrants because immigrants tend to work for less. Big difference.

You assumed. I sourced.

A. The point was immigrants in general, not "Eastern Europeans".

Not relevant, it was blindly assumptive. The actual reasons are well documented and are not to do with immigrants getting lower pay.

Then post the documentation.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

B. I assumed as much, because that is one of the big draws of immigrant labor. This is basic economics. Certainly working longer hours goes along with that, and I never denied as much. I just never talked about it.

The only cases where this is true is if wages are illegally below the minimum wage.

Not true at all. Immigrants are (generally) willing to work for lower wage. Non-immigrants will be less willing to work for minimum wage/normal wage for the job.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

C. Your sourcing was three crappy articles (Seriously, Daily Mail and HuffPo?) that had nothing to do with wages, and didn't disprove anything.

I stopped at three. You can find others, including double sourcing that the individuals listed (counting the politicians not Madonna) have these opinions.

What you posted wasn't a study, wasn't an sort of evidence, but opinionated, claptrap. Post something substantial

Nice that you handwave away evidence while sticking to evidenceless assumptions. There is no point continuing with you, if you will not accept sourced material that contradicts your worldview.

My worldview of what? You appear to be assuming a lot about me here.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

D. Where is the response to the rest of my statement?

I didnt need to bother with it, You compounded your false assumptions.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Then post the documentation.

Sigh. I did.

We are done. I gave links, I even double sourced, you gave excuses.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Then post the documentation.

Sigh. I did.

We are done. I gave links, I even double sourced, you gave excuses.

You gave a fething "five people who think British people are lazy" thing as "evidence". You gave another argument that argued that it's good that British workers don't want to work long hours, and another that was a weird anecdotal evidance about workers not showing up to work at low-wage jobs.
Nothing in there proved that:
Low wages are not an incentive when hiring immigrants
British companies hate hiring British workers, and think they are lazy.

Post actual evidence, scientific surveys, studies, provable facts, ect, that show what you are trying to prove.


If you want to get huffy about it, sure, but at least try and engage.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If there is a widespread belief that British people are lazy, it's a bit surprising given the large number of British people involved in many high-pace industries here and around the rest of the world.

Just to take a wander down a highly speculative (and theoretical) hypothesis on that front, I think to an extent it might be more to do with how other nations perceive the workplace and themselves within it.

As someone who specialises in pre-ww1 munitions development, I examine quite a lot of sources relating to a number of related industries around the world in that period of time; namely armaments, chemicals, engines, aircraft, specialist instruments (optics, early computing devices, navigational tools, etc) and so on. That naturally entails a lot of business and industrial history, which means I get the pleasure of wandering through texts to do with salesmanship, biographies of famous businesspeople from around the globe, etcetc.

And in all of that, it's often very interesting to see how other people perceive the British, and each other in turn within the workplace context. So for example, the British saw the Germans and the French as far more sleazy (likely to indulge in bribes), and usually viewed their business transactions as something of a craft to be mastered, but left at the workplace. The British hobbyist is a strong tradition, and whilst hardworking whilst at work, the average British employee was always far more interested in what he was going to be doing as soon as his hours were up.

Conversely, the Americans and the Germans were far more likely to live and breathe their businesses, something you tended to only see in the most hard-headed of British entrepreneurs. The hours involved were far less of a concern, the Germans because they tended to view a job/company as a life and rarely look outside it, the Americans because the thrill of the bootstrapping mentality; always looking to better themselves and 'win' at life and their profession.

Both in turn usually regarded the Brit as being lazy/undedicated, and the French as worse still. The British meanwhile saw the Americans as pushy/shallow and the Germans as unimaginative. The French regarded all with a certain disdain, purely on the basis that they were not French and therefore unsophisticated. Meanwhile, to go outside the West, the Americans were constantly baffled at how the Chinese would always appear to be at work, but never seem to do anything unless it was necessary to preserve face (a very Chinese cultural concern), and the Chinese in turn viewed all the Americans as distastefully blunt and deceptive in their desire to always 'win' in transactions.

Assuming even the slightest aspect of these attitudes towards each other persists (and I would speculate on my own empirical evidence of contemporary times that they do), it's not so much that the British are less hard-working than those other cultures, but that we quite simply don't tend to care about our work in the same way. We're professional, but for most of us, a job is just something we do to pay the bills. We don't inhale company culture, we see any imposition on our private lives by our jobs as an inconvenience, we hate contrived buzzwords, and perhaps the greatest of all sins, we quite simply don't take any of it seriously.

But in today's modern employment culture, where companies like Asda demand you pledge your lifelong fealty to them just in the online pre-interview stage, when every employer demands to know 'Why do you want to work here?' and regards 'to pay my rent' as a negative answer? When we live in the days of the zero-hours contract where you're expected to be at the beck and call of your employers and be grateful for the 'opportunities' they offer? Professionalism and being hard-working is not regarded as sufficient, we are expected by the average large to multi-national firm to also mouth words of devotion and pretend to be happy to sacrifice our lives in pursuit of others profits and a Worker of the Month mug.

And we just can't do it very convincingly. Because for us, it just isn't true.*

*Disclaimer:- Everything I just said may be complete bollocks, I'm just musing.

Different cultures definitely come into it. Here in the US, we do so well because our productivity is so damn high. Anecdotally, I've heard that Japan (one of the other major economic powers) works a lot more hours for the same amount of work.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Wait, companies in the UK are advertising in Europe (probably because immigrants will accept lower wages), and that's anti-white? Unless I'm very much mistaken, Poland is about the whitest country on earth (90%+).

If English citizens are unable to apply for those jobs, then yes, it is discrimination.

If those companies are advertising in the UK as well as Poland, then its not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Wait, companies in the UK are advertising in Europe (probably because immigrants will accept lower wages), and that's anti-white? Unless I'm very much mistaken, Poland is about the whitest country on earth (90%+).

Made no comment on the phenomenon being anti-white, I stated the opposite in fact.

It is however highly discriminatory, and nothing is done about it. Now compare that with the CAB documentation.

It's discriminatory that they want to hire the people who will work for the lowest wage? Seems like standard business practice to me.

They can hire who they like. They cannot however hide their jobs, and only advertise to a select group of people (e.g. people in Poland). Doing so is by definition, discrimination against the native population of the country they operate in, and even other migrants in England. What about Romanian immigrants, or Africans, or Asians? Aren't they being disciminated against too, if a local company in their home town chooses not to advertise vacancies locally?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Then post the documentation.

Sigh. I did.

We are done. I gave links, I even double sourced, you gave excuses.

You gave a fething "five people who think British people are lazy" thing as "evidence". You gave another argument that argued that it's good that British workers don't want to work long hours, and another that was a weird anecdotal evidance about workers not showing up to work at low-wage jobs.
Nothing in there proved that:
Low wages are not an incentive when hiring immigrants
British companies hate hiring British workers, and think they are lazy.

Post actual evidence, scientific surveys, studies, provable facts, ect, that show what you are trying to prove.


If you want to get huffy about it, sure, but at least try and engage.

These are just five people who think the British are lazy, one or two were individuals, some were groups of people. More importantly they are groups of people with power and influence. the fact that Madonna is listed in the given list is frankly irrelevant, the fct that several Tory MP's are listed is not. Besides that was one link. There were several more, an that is the tip of the iceberg.

The phenomena was even mentioned before on this thread, in that case I used different examples.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/1890/696154.page#8945305

If British people truly are lazy, then how does importing foreigners solve that problem? Its at best a band aid.

We should looking at the reasons why they're lazy and trying to change them. Perhaps by reforming the welfare system? By raising the minimum wage? By controlling the supply of labour to those industries, to prevent an over supply of labour that despresses wages and makes those jobs pay less than benefits?

I've only once in my life wilfully walked away from a job and went back to the dole, and that was because the employer was treating people like gak, not because I was lazy...



3 weeks later I was in another full time job.

Being vindicated is nice, but I wish I had been wrong frankly.

RMT president Sean Hoyle claims that the primary goal of the current RMT strike is to undermine the elected government.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/rail-union-boss-vows-to-topple-tories-c0hm3r3sh
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rmt-aslef-union-strikes-bring-down-tory-government-a7482461.html


Sean Hoyle quotes

RMT president Sean Hoyle reportedly said the union's "rule number one" was to “strive to replace the capitalist system with a socialist order”.

In excerpts of speeches published by The Times, Mr Hoyle reportedly told a meeting of hard-left activists last month, “if we all spit together we can drown the bastards”.

RMT general secretary Mick Cash attempts to deny the claims:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38357582




Yet this fether doesn't believe that voters have the right to elect the government if he doesn't agree with the government they elect.

 Orlanth wrote:
That post is a good example of the brainwashing resulting from social engineering in the Blair years.

 Orlanth wrote:
First British values are no more childish than say US values of French values

Forcing some kind of 'loyalty' test on public servants is hardly a sign of maturity is it?

 Orlanth wrote:
Nobody would claim it childish to raise the Saltaire

I would if, for example, public servants were required to paint their faces blue and recite the Declaration of Arbroath at the start of every working day; which isn't far off this ridiculous proposal.

Well done for completely missing the point.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
That post is a good example of the brainwashing resulting from social engineering in the Blair years.

You dont see it, and I am not surprised at that.

 Orlanth wrote:

Forcing some kind of 'loyalty' test on public servants is hardly a sign of maturity is it?

Expecting loyalty to the state from public servants is pretty much a given for any sane nation state.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

Well done for completely missing the point.

You had a point?

 Orlanth wrote:

You dont see it, and I am not surprised at that.

There is nothing to see.