SNP victory could split Britain

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9453802/why-an-snp-surge-at-westminster-could-mean-the-end-of-britain/

…To the SNP, the next general election is just a staging post. Winning a majority of Scottish seats would be an excellent start, but influencing the governance of the UK is of relatively minor importance. Any deal with Labour — or even a stage-managed week of negotiations — will be conducted with the 2016 Holyrood elections in mind. An SNP majority next year would bring the power to call for a second referendum. And if a majority of Scottish voters call for one, through an SNP (and Green) vote, how can Westminster reasonably say no? This is why so many Scottish unionists will vote tactically in May: it is crucial that the nationalists’ momentum is checked now.

Then comes Europe. Should Cameron lose the election less badly than Miliband and earn a second term, he is committed to a referendum on EU membership. While Scots are more Eurosceptic than the SNP allows (a third say they would vote to leave), the English are still far more likely to vote to leave the EU. If they do, and Scotland votes to stay in, the thirst for independence might prove unquenchable. (Equally, how would England react if Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish votes determined the outcome of the EU referendum?) Cameron’s European difficulties are another opportunity for the nationalists. And a reminder that the Union can be lost in London as well as in Scotland….

dis gonna be good anticipation pull up a chair listen watch

Nationalism is contagious, mind.

26 million UK Muslims by 2051?

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5632/uk_muslim_population_of_26_million_by_2051

….All of that is true, and might be a reasonable objection to the calculations presented above. So might the possibility that non-Muslim British birth rates could rise, thus more than off-setting any Muslim increase. Indeed, there is some evidence that this might be happening in some European countries.

However, for a high immigration country such as Britain, it’s a matter of when that British Muslim demographic transition happens.

At the moment there is little sign of British Muslim birth rates significantly falling. According to the Office for National Statistics, Pakistan-born women in Britain have an average of 4∙7 children, while Bangladeshi women in Britain have 3∙9, both significantly above that average British birth rate of 1∙6 children.

Furthermore, as Britain continues to attract a high number of relatively poor Third World immigrants, inherited cultural patterns of large families could remain an enduring feature of Britain’s immigrant community.

In those circumstances, the demographic transition date could well be indefinitely postponed….

ISIS destroy priceless art, sculptures, books…

…every culture superior to their own, in essence.

Their reason is Islam. Commands to destroy.
As you can imagine, this isn’t properly covered in The Guardian.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2970270/Islamic-State-fighters-destroy-antiquities-Iraq-video.html

what wtf blackadder

The Christian kidnapping are still flying under the radar.

17-year high as dumb Millennials pay into pension work scheme

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/feb/26/young-people-boost-uk-pensions-to-17-year-high

The proportion of employees saving money into a workplace pension scheme is at its highest level for 17 years, driven by a huge increase in the number of people in their 20s saving for retirement.

In 2013, half of all employees saved into their company pension; this grew to 59% in 2014, according to figures from the Office for National Statistics. Although the increase was across age groups, the biggest leap was among the 22- to 29-year-olds, with 53% saving into a workplace pension last year compared to 36% in 2013.

The same workplaces which don’t give you the same job for life?

The increase, which reverses more than a decade of falling workplace pension scheme participation, is largely down to the government’s automatic pension enrolment programme.

READ THE FINE PRINT.

Auto enrolment was introduced at the end of 2012 to compel employers to enrol all workers aged between 22 and the state pension age and who earn more than £8,000 a year into a workplace pension scheme.

“Auto-enrolment is a huge success and has reversed the decline in the numbers saving into pensions,” said the TUC’s head of campaigns, Nigel Stanley. “Like the minimum wage, compulsory employer pension contributions have gone from controversial to consensus in just a few years.”

They’re laughing. It’s going into their own soon-to-be-drawn pots.

He added that under the current rules contribution levels were not enough to give people “a decent retirement income”.

cracking up dawn french

“Once every employer is covered by auto-enrolment we need to start raising minimum contribution levels and make sure we include the part-time women workers [who are] excluded from saving each time this government has raised the earnings level that triggers auto-enrolment,” he said.

When auto-enrolment is rolled out completely in 2018 the minimum contribution into a scheme will be 8% of an employee’s qualifying earnings, of which at least 3% must come from the employer. Currently employees only have to pay in 1% of their earnings, with their employer matching this with a further 1%.

I’m sure 1% stands up well against some of the interest on their student loan debt.

The ONS statistics showed that almost half the employer contributions made in 2014 were under 4%, while a third of employees contributed less than 2% of their salary.

While the proportion of people saving in a pension through work grew overall, those who are doing it through a “gold-plated” final salary scheme fell to its lowest level ever.

They are Bigfoot. You hear about them, but you never confirm their existence.

For the first time since ONS records began defined benefit (final salary) pension schemes represented less than half of total workplace pension membership.

While the increase in pension participation has been largely driven by auto-enrolment, there is also evidence that those who do not qualify are saving more.

There was a surprising increase in participation among 16-21 year olds, who don’t qualify for auto-enrolment. The proportion saving in final salary schemes increased from 3.5% to 4.4% between 2013 and 2014 and the number in defined contribution, or stockmarket linked, schemes grew from 4% to 4.5%.

What a pity none of it will be there by the time you retire, you utter morons.

I know what their rationale is. They hope to retire early like their Boomer parents.

Top comment says;

Don’t worry theyll opt out once the see the pensions wiped out by the next banking collapse. Pensions are a form of gambling on the stock market. The only winners are the traders. Retire at the wrong time of the boom bust cycle and you’re screwed. You are literally better to to keep saving the cash on deposit.

Giving the people who rob you everyday extra money that you could use to pay down your debt to them?

Commenters’ Thoughts on Fitness Tests and Respect for Women

Rarely do I encounter new ideas. This genuinely surprises me.

On the Rock

In the post Men, some really great comments were made that I wish to highlight regarding Fitness testing and how one man views women (I would really like to hear other men’s thoughts on this).  These were fantastic comments that should not get buried.  (it ended up having a really interesting comment thread that you may wish to read in it’s entirety).

A Northern Observer asks regarding Fitness Testing:

We’re all sinners, and we all – consciously or not – know we’re bound to get ourselves into serious trouble if we’re left to our own devices. I submit fitness testing is a “safe” way to be (re)assured that there’s someone out there who’ll pull back on our reigns and “Whoa Nellie!” when we need it. This in turn means you don’t have to worry about running amuck in other matters and landing yourself in real trouble.

So, would you agree that…

View original post 1,464 more words

Dominance vs Domineering

On the Rock

Commenter Wudang asked me to explain the following:

What do we really mean by alpha and social dominance and the man in the relationship being dominant and why is that not oppressive.

Matt King (King A) followed up with a link to Roissy’s post called Arrogance Vs. Confidence.  I think this post is spot on.  First, I would like to go through some of Roissy’s points:

Arrogant man – Gets defensive when challenged.

Confident man – Has nothing to prove.

Most have us have seen the arrogant man do this at some point.  He’s ready to fight, often at the drop of a hat, to defend his manhood.  The confident man, on the other hand, doesn’t feel the need.  He knows, without question, who is the man and feels no need to take it further.  I’ve seen this presented with humor, with aloofness, and with simple straight, no backing…

View original post 1,038 more words

Emulsifiers in food and inflammatory disease

http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2015/02/common-ingredient-packaged-food-may-trigger-inflammatory-disease

The ingredients that lend a smooth, stable consistency to ice cream, chocolate bars, and other packaged snacks may promote certain chronic inflammatory diseases. That’s the claim of a new study, which finds increases in metabolic disease and intestinal inflammation in mice fed two common emulsifiers used in processed food. The authors are a long way from confirming similar effects in humans, but they suggest that these ingredients cause damage by disrupting the barrier between the immune system and the microbiome—the collection of microbes that inhabit our bodies……

Yes stupidity is contagious

They’ve been knowingly putting this in the food btw.

The connection with immunity is interesting……..