Pistolpete2

Let me begin by saying that I concede, as the FT has indeed spelled out on a number of occasions in recent months that the Eastern Caribbean is saddled with issues ref drug trafficking and related crime, bad government, unsustainable debt and lack of a vision for the future, not helped by a brain drain,

St Lucia has never wrestled its way out of third world status and the bulk of the population wouldn't know what to expect if it had - hence the problem. In the UK, we at least have the reasonable expectation that there is sufficient talent to bring to bear on any given problem to be able to right the previous wrongs, having first recognised them as wrongs. Some folks wouldn't give rat's arse about this domestic stuff here on Island as they drive around in their latest Audi or Honda SUV and they can live a fine isolated life, but it (the above - top) bothers me in true Don Quixotic style (much like Russell Brand - I guess, in some respects)

but the UK seems to be for ever dealing with the same old underlying issue of DEBT and resultant necessary cuts in the pipeline. We've been on about it on here for the longest while as THE ISSUE to be concerned about and here we go again. The UK cannot raise taxes* as it would cut off the one escape route and avenue to a future which would be caused by a re-burgeoning business/industrial sector - what else could there be to pay the bills?

Anyway, check what success Francois Hollande is having with raising taxes in an uncompetitive France.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/...ublic-finances

See also the FT (source) itself.

* I do however believe that there could be better strategic meetings held by the likes of HMRC, to work out how the collect taxes rightfully owing but not collected, which appear to currently be in excess of 30 billion quid.

chris955

I agree about the brilliant shows on this country and they do indeed celebrate the many wonderful things about Britain. It is more the gutter press that seem to thrive on the doom and gloom. The quality papers not so much.

Pistolpete2

By gutter press you are presumably referring to the Financial Times? They have boobs on page 1 - Government boobs!

SultanOfSwing

This thread is set up as a loaded question really, isn't it?

A much more objective question would be "What's crap about Britian", or perhaps more accurately, "What things are crap in the UK?"

That is an easier question to answer because while the UK itself isn't crap, things like the UKIP and channel 4 programmes about dogging and men with tits absolutely are

Pistolpete2

Well indeed, and one could post from that standpoint, but the inability to address the DEBT issue could well turn out to be all-consuming, particularly if you had to raise interest rates to defend the pound a la Turkey, unless you can do a Richard Branson and move to your own island, while still claiming to be an interested Brit.

SultanOfSwing

That still falls under the 'things that happen to be crap in the UK' category. It doesn't make the UK inherently crap though, especially since they are not exactly unique worldwide in an inability to handle their debts.

Pistolpete2

I agree with that, but expectations (of lifestyle - things like the NHS taken for granted, benefit streams, state pensions) can cause folks to become particularly disenchanted when they have to miss out and this is at the crux - certainly from where I stand on the MBTTUK section (altruism in my own little way, rather than trying to put the kibosh on the best laid plans of others)

Certainly has me bothered, for MYSELF - the disenchanted folks that is

SultanOfSwing

OK, I get you now.

Harvester523

They more or less admitted it, they were 'professional jurors', i.e. they volunteered - unemployed or retired. They had made up their minds before the case was even heard. Without going into details, it was obvious to me the other person was the guilty party, and distressing as it was a child abuse case. So, the other party got off scot free, and the accused had their child taken away.
I wouldn't trust any jury in Britain, knowing that, there is virtually no vetting process, anyone can do it. I can think of plenty of people who would be incompetent as jurors.

Editha

You can't be a 'professional juror' in the UK. You can't volunteer either.

It's not clear to me what kind of case you are referring to. 'Taking a child away' sounds like a family court case, but these are not tried by a jury. A criminal case has no power to take a child from a parent, although, obviously, a prison sentence will have the same effect.

Harvester523

The question wasn't whether people need or want loads of land or not, but whether they can obtain it. Sorry, but your 'born in France' scenario doesn't hold water. One pair of neighbours have unskilled jobs, a new house and several acres of land, another neighbour had a good job, inherited his house and has spent tens of thousands on it. France is not a third world country full of impoverished peasants. Any French youngster with any sense is now in the UK. I haven't retired to France, I still work thanks to the Great British government suddenly pulling the rug out from under us and making me wait another 5 years for my pension - without any warning - so the pound is irrelevant. Where else would you get away with that? You're told all your life that you're going to get a pension, then with no time to make any other arrangements, it's snatched away. How would you feel if a private pension company suddenly said you couldn't have your payout for another five years?
You, like some others, obviously know very little about France, and yet I live here, and I've lived in the UK - that must count for something.
On the contrary, I couldn't have what I wanted because I was born in Britain. I've moved house many times, every time further away from where I was born, because just like today's young, house prices were too high - and I remember 11% mortgages! I've worked all my life, never claimed benefits, but bear in mind that it only needs something like illness or divorce to be thrown into the works, and you're back at the bottom of the heap again.

Harvester523

Well maybe the system's changed, but the facts are the facts. When I was on a jury, you could volunteer, and it was a child abuse case, i.e. physical harm. Perhaps you're too young to know these things.

Editha

Actually, I'm a retired solicitor who specialized in child abuse cases.

Harvester523

In that case you should know that it was possible to volunteer.

Editha

No it isn't, wasn't and never has been.

You are clearly confused, but it is difficult to tell how.