But they're intentionally leaving some parties out, despite the license fee payers saying they want them included.
I guess its a small scale thing in comparison they've been covering up for paedophiles for the last 40 odd years too.
I'm sure the smaller parties will get coverage befitting their opinion poll ratings.
I'm sure the smaller parties will get coverage befitting their opinion poll ratings.
As for the 40 years comment - LOL. Go back and sit in the corner in your tinfoil hat avoiding the TV Licensing man.
Sorry, are you either denying that the bbc covered up for paedophiles when it's widely know that they did, or are you just being a paedo apologist..... I'm not quite sure?
Except they're not. The Greens are polling higher than the lib dems but do not have the option to speak at any of the leaders' debates. The SNP look like they could win over 30 seats (they currently have 6) but have no invite either.
Sorry, are you either denying that the bbc covered up for paedophiles when it's widely know that they did, or are you just being a paedo apologist..... I'm not quite sure?
The SNP will get localised coverage from BBC Scotland, same for the other national parties like Plaid Cymru. If they put up candidates outside their self imposed borders I might agree they should be included, but the SNP will stop at Hadrians wall so they shouldn't be.
As for the Greens they've got a single MP. Why not invite George Galloway to the debate as well, as head of the Respect Party? He's also got the same number of seats.
It's widely known you read the Daily Mail sat in the corner of a room wearing a tinfoil hat. I'm not quite sure?
The SNP will get localised coverage from BBC Scotland, same for the other national parties like Plaid Cymru. If they put up candidates outside their self imposed borders I might agree they should be included, but the SNP will stop at Hadrians wall so they shouldn't be.
As for the Greens they've got a single MP. Why not invite George Galloway to the debate as well, as head of the Respect Party? He's also got the same number of seats
You talked about coverage in terms of the what the parties are polling. Now you're talking in terms of the seats they have. Which is it?
There were a hell of a lot of rumours about Saville. It should have been investigated.
It's widely known you read the Daily Mail sat in the corner of a room wearing a tinfoil hat. I'm not quite sure?
As for Savile, that's vastly off topic. If you want to discuss that, open a new thread.
As for Savile, that's vastly off topic. If you want to discuss that, open a new thread.
Actually this whole thing is going off topic. I'm out.
As a physician then, you should know that standing in one place for sixteen hours per day doing the same mindless repetitive task is much different than interacting with patients and staff.
so your take is overworked factory workers don't matter?
also, your working conditions are quite different than a factory so that's a poor comparison.
Geez, are you actually comparing yourself to a factory worker in China on an assembly line? Maybe I am reading this wrong.
Is your pay scale the same as well?
It says a LOT about you if you compare your working conditions and pay to the Chinese factory worker.
Good luck in your life!
LOL, what? You also make six figures a year, plus benefits, and have all the prestige that comes with your career. Talk about false equivalency. I've never understood why we have such disdain for laborers in this country, and we love, loooove to play the "who puts in more hours? who has it worse?" game. It's ridiculous.
That's called a factory job. If you worked at a Ford plant putting bolts into a truck it would be the same thing (coincidently those workers often work 10-12 hour days).
----------
I never said that. I'm saying that working conditions are bad for a lot of people.
----------
No but they are paid very well when compared to their peers. Similarly a factory worker in the US makes far more money than a physician in India.
----------
The documentary specifically highlighted the hours worked by these factory workers---implying it was unusual/bad. It isn't. That was my point.
----------
A central tenant of the documentary was that these workers put in too many hours per day. I was challenging that idea.
In response to your statement, these workers make far more money than their regional peers, giving them money and prestige. It's all relative.
Where is your proof that working conditions are good in china?