buctootim

Society seems to have developed a bit of a schizophrenia about sex. I don't think there has ever been so much focus on sex and sexual angles to stories as there is now in the media - its a national obsession - second only to shopping. I agree - regulate, health checks and tax.

Jeremy Corbyn has come out and said he wants the sex industry to be decriminalised. He told students in London he wanted a society "where we don't automatically criminalise people". Meanwhile ex Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman said prostitution was "exploitation and abuse" not "an industry". Northern Ireland made paying sex illegal a couple of years ago. The European Parliament recently voted in favour of a resolution that supports the so-called ‘Nordic model’ of sex work - criminalizing the buying of sex while making selling of it exempt from punishment (as is currently the case in Sweden, Iceland and Norway). It seems to me that the worst aspects of the sex industry - trafficking of women and involvement of vulnerable people - are far more likely to be tackled by regulating it than criminalising it. I agree with Corbyn, why should we criminalise what two consenting adults do. Its the worlds oldest industry, not a party political or EU issue. Any thoughts?

Are you saying Cameron is dishonest, slippery and will say anything for a vote? Who'd have thought? Its a pity more of you didnt realise that in May.

...

Holden

I didnt watch the programme but from previous news items it seems you need to re-point the joints and maintain the earthworks regularly otherwise it will eventually fail. The Iraqi engineers cant get into the area because of IS and obviously IS arent doing it.

How odd.

Nice rant. Why should the left be up in arms? No-one expects anything different from him - he's a Tory who has spent his whole career getting paid extremely well for running retail operations paying his staff at or near minimum wage. Its the Conservatives he embarasses , not the left.

Why do Nissan Sunderland pay suppliers in euros and not sterling?

The worlds changed and its the EUs fault. If it wasnt for the EU we'd still have British Leyland, lard and the four day week. Bastards.

Let the buggers in the south fry in case someone pushes a button and we have an ice age. Im betting on a Tuesday.

Poor Wes. He gets more irate and insulting of people who aren't convinced by the shambolic efforts of the Brexit camp so far. The only attempts at a plan we have seen came from people unconnected to anybody who might be a minister in a post Brexit government. Boris cant even say how many bites at the cherry we will get. Pssst the second link you cite is one I found and posted up - so you have managed to make a statement and contradict yourself within the same line - well done, not easily achieved. Go have a little sit down with some fruit cake and Jerusalem on the wireless.

Thats the one - the Reindeer coalition. If only they banded together politically they could negotiate a better deal with the EU than they can individually

We know Whitey. You talk about this stuff as its new and not been considered before and therefore all calculations are wrong. It isnt.

Agree, finally some leave ideas to discuss. That paper was a finalist in something I hadnt heard of before - the IEA's Brexit blueprint prize. http://www.iea.org.uk/brexit Both it and the winner envisage the UK remaining as part of EFTA, but only the parts they like, not the parts they dont. Its moot how realistic that is, but I'll read them with interest.

Im surprised you are so critical of Farage, but tbf you can vote him out.

He doesnt say anything apart from the EU is bad and we should leave. Thats the trouble. What the leave campaign needs to do is to set out what Britain outside of the EU would look like - show how comparable countries, perhaps Japan or South Korea, operate - what trade arrangements they have?; how do the WTO rules affect restrictive trade in services?; would we leave the EU one day after the vote - or five years later once all alternative deals are signed up? how long would access deals take to negotiate and what would interim arrangements look like?; what incentives the government would create to retain current overseas investment affected by leaving - eg Nissan and Honda?; what effect would a reduction in European labour would have on skills shortage / wage rates / employment?; which bits of EU legislation would be scrapped and which would kept? etc etc The trouble is they wont set out an alternative vision because they cant. The leave coalition is too underpowered and shaky for that - they agree on leaving but not what happens then. They've got as far as jump, but not as far how to land without breaking their legs.

Ive got a better, simpler idea - they work in the interests of the voters instead of the companies who will give them directorships and consultancies.

blather

I didnt say it cant be done by Britain, Im saying it isnt. On most issues Conservative governments have a long track record of siding with industry lobbies rather than the consumer or employee.

I saw the link to a standard moan about the EU by a long standing eurosceptic but missed the plan - what he suggests we do instead. It always seems to be that part which is missing. Is there a page 2?

So you're pro EU now.

It doesn't - but if you are going to ditch the status quo then you have to at least think that on the balance of probability things will be better. I honestly cannot see any realistic outcome whereby we leave and dont end up economically worse off than before. So for me it becomes 'do the political advantages of leaving outweigh the economic losses?' - which could range from mild to severe. On immigration / freedom of movement its moot tending a bit towards the negative but not by much once you consider the British expats. On the rest some of the best legislation in Britain has come about in the EU or European countries and initially been resisted in the UK - environmental standards in farming, car crash standards, food and chemical safety, maximum working hours, food labelling, energy efficiency labelling etc. The case for leaving would have to be a lot more compelling than it currently is.

Those hoary old 'whatabouts' were explained / debunked long ago Whitey. The science is there if you care to read and its been discussed on this thread previously, so forgive me if we don't go over it again. There are lots of comprehensive summaries around - like this. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/page4.php http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Aerosols/page3.php http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm The cosmic ray theory was from one guy in 1998. There are lots on unknowns in climate science which will affect the rate of climate change - rate of deforestation; increase in livestock production; warmer air increases evaporation from the oceans and raises the moisture carrying capacity of air - leading to more clouds; methane release from melting permafrost; reduced reflective ice caps / carbon black on snow from new shipping lanes etc - but no-one seriously challenges its existence anymore.

Note he didnt deny he flashed the stewardess.