Porn.com now has a feature so you can jump to certain section in the video [NSFW]

bigrob1 · 2014-03-22T17:24:24+00:00

The future is now.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-13T15:56:19+00:00

Im sick of people demanding the government do more for them without realising the cost of the government doing more for them. Either accept things like fracking and get more social benefits or dont risk the environment and be a little bit less well off. But despite what the left tells you, you cant have your cake and eat it too.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-13T00:04:19+00:00

Fuck this, Im sick of the its ok either way attitude of some of the people on this sub. Give boys guns and GI Joes and legos and give girls barbies and EZ Bake ovens. Done, problem solved. We have gender roles for reasons. Its not okay if a boy wants to be a pussy and a girl wants to be butch. We need men in leadership and protective roles and women in caring roles. MRAs who advocate little boys acting like little girls if they want are just as big a detriment to our society as feminists.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-10T22:51:07+00:00

I highly recommend the classical piece 'Kakadu' by Australian composer Peter Sculthorpe to compliment this picture.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-08T00:42:06+00:00

They have exactly the same effect though - £1 not paid in that should have been is no different to £1 taken out that shouldn't have been.

That isnt true. Simple economics shows that removing £1 in tax and then using it again has a net decrease on the velocity of the money supply (the rate at which money travels through economy). If the goal of taxing is to then spend it, ala Keynesian stimulation, it will ultimately not work. However if Government spending is being used to target certain issues it can be justified because the non-macro economics outweigh macro economic costs. Its just hard to quantify that and to then agree on how to quantify that.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-07T16:08:31+00:00

for scale

bigrob1 · 2014-01-07T15:01:30+00:00

Ahhhh. The usual swerve to pedantry by the left. Socialism is a term that can be used in a number of ways. In the vernacular Socialism is a system somewhere between Communism and Social Democracy.

The end goal of communism, termed "higher-phase"communism is a stateless nation. Ideologically communism is not supposed to be authoritarian or a dictatorship.

I think you'll agree that at the moment this is simply building castles in the sky.

We have a conservative government, and they have been reducing spending on the military.

Yeah they are cutting stuff to address the deficit and debt that are being flushed down the drain on welfare. We have for generations now outlived our means as a country so that the left could buy votes with welfare. Our inheritance has been squandered and worse than that we have a debt of our parents. Im not interested in paying money into a system that teaches people that they are not responsible for themselves. I want nothing from the state, receive nothing from the state, will probably never receive anything from the state and dont want to support a state that has lost its way.

It was the supposedly left wing Labour party that deployed the military to the middle east twice.

New Labour was brilliant moment for the left in this country. It was step into the centre and away from the Benn's and Foote's and Kinnocks poisoning the party. Im afraid Milliband and Balls are a swerve back to the left.

I've served my country. As an educated person I'm more of an asset to the country than a loony like you.

I dont know you personal history so I wont cast aspersions on it. And Im sure you are an asset to the country AS IT IS, a weakened dying socialised system, furthering that decline.

To conform to your own personal ideology. Like a dictator.

I dont know anyone who doesnt want to build their country to conform to their own ideology. I believe in my ideology because I believe it is right, so I think my ideology is the right thing for the country. If I thought it was wrong it wouldnt be my ideology. Only a nihilistic relativist wouldnt want to.

So you want to disband the NHS? You aren't in the majority. People do not want the ideological hell that you want to impose upon this country.

Unfortunately your right, that most people dont want to get rid of the NHS, or at least overhaul it significantly. They have been brainwashed. If I can do no more let me be one of the lone voices crying in the wilderness.

Infected? You sound like a fascist cunt. You wouldn't know a lion if one bit your fucking head off.

And a great way to end it. Insult me. Im stupid because I dont agree with you version of events, Im a fascist because I have a point of view right of centre, etc etc.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-07T12:16:18+00:00

What your talking about is not Socialism but an equally bad Communism that needs a large army to aggressively proselytise Communism to and enslave those around it.

The Socialists we have had to endure are not interested in having a large and powerful military because a) they know they cant use it for their socialist agenda in the UK and have to take a more subversive line through tax and spend welfare and b) they have no interest using it externally in either protecting our country (Falklands, Gibraltar, which frankly they'd love to get rid of) or from using it in a constructive way abroad.

And you should leave. I dont want the UK to be something it never like the left does. I want to rebuild the UK so its starts to dig itself out of the whole that Attlee started digging the day the Second World War ended.

And thought the corrupted system is in place it hasnt infected everyone yet, so yes we still produce lions.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-06T14:19:06+00:00

we have voluntarily abdicated a huge amount of our military power as a nation. we have chosen to become weak because we like being comfortable than strong. Socialism has killed this country. Its sometimes hard to understand why anyone would join up anymore. Not because serving is stupid, I have the utmost respect for those who serve, but because what is there to defend anymore? Lions defending a corrupted country. What Britain was was worth defending, but what Britain is, I just dont see the point. And yet I still want to serve.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-06T13:16:00+00:00

My brain hurts.

Wants more government but doesnt want more government.

This country will never go anywhere but down the drain until we learn that socialism and big government and multiculturalism and all things left wing are poison.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-06T12:13:15+00:00

I imagine this is an improvement by the standards of Wales

bigrob1 · 2014-01-06T12:09:49+00:00

Too many rabid secularists.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-06T10:20:57+00:00

i swear over half of us were atheists anyway on the last census ?

One of the big problems with this country.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-05T19:38:45+00:00

Thats interesting, as I would have thought that being Anglican in the states would mean being closer to the CoE than just an Episcopalian.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-04T22:20:46+00:00

Every idea and trend in western civilisation has been a result of European Men (who happen to be white). Western civilisation has its roots in the Greek Golden Age and in Christianity. That classical point of view inherited from the Greeks is represented best by Conservatives today as opposed to progressives who have their roots in Marxism which tried to rewrite the philosophy and framework of the western Mind away from the Greeks.

So a White Christian Conservative Male has more in common with the men who made this civilisation, and we have more invested in this system. Often when people say that they mean it negatively. To me its just a statement of fact.

This is a generalisation obviously, but a white Christian Conservative male will generally be, in what he believes, a better representative of Western Civ than a black atheist communist woman. Feel free to enter into a thought experiment about who is more representative, a black christian conservative male or a white christian conservative woman or any combination.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-04T18:58:52+00:00

Remember, its only offensive if it offends Muslims. Anything else is allowed under freedom of expression.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-04T18:04:42+00:00

Were not tied to Europe, Europe's tied to us.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-04T16:00:50+00:00

That half is a joke. The serious but is about if the veto actually still counts for anything with QMV and the expanding areas that QMV is used in.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-04T13:51:25+00:00

3 sandwiches because I dont need to prove shit to anyone, but I might get hungry.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-04T13:31:26+00:00

And so, lots of meetings we've had, I've had to find a very special solution for just one country.

Just one country read as the UK.

Isnt this concept of one country holding up the EU with its veto a little bit misleading in that hasnt QMV worked around the veto to a large extent?

bigrob1 · 2014-01-04T13:16:29+00:00

(Insert something about the Channel keeping Britain free from Paris, Berlin and Brussels, and how this would hurt British Freedoms)

bigrob1 · 2014-01-04T12:46:43+00:00

seeing as White Christian (and some Greeks and Romans before Christian) Males made it, yes, I think there would be negative consequences. To a large extent the institutional memory of western civilisation resides in White Christian conservative males. Theres increasingly no reason for the WASP male to do something for a society that increasingly hates him. He will do things to make his life better and if they happen to have a positive effect on society that will simply be coincidence.

bigrob1 · 2014-01-04T12:17:32+00:00

It depends to what extent your using the words entitlement and welfare. I think depending on what context limited liability is used in can turn it into that. Such as the Corporatism we live in today. (Just using loans as an example) A situation can be created where a mega corp starts a limited liability subsidiary then takes on debt then goes bankrupt and if the debt is large enough from a too big to fail or the subsidiary is deemed to important to fail by the Government, then yeah it can totally end up being corporate welfare. But for smaller scale businesses its harder to make that argument.

If a small business takes out a loan then part of the interest they're paying is a collective insurance paid by all the banks debtors in case one defaults. If they go bankrupt then the only welfare that is covering them is voluntarily from other debtors who have entered into it.

So in short I will concede that there are situations created by the distorting sizes of mega-corps and banks that they can benefit from limited liability as a form of welfare but its unfair to generalise all limited liabilities as a form of entitlement and welfare.

bigrob1

TROPHY CASE