Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
johnh

General Election

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, RPG said:

Very funny indeed. But the sentiment I posted still holds good. I normally pride myself on my spelling (usually after 3 or 4 corrections) but this one did slip through the net.

Here is what I really meant!

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kowtow

How long did you have to search to find that pic? I'm impressed.

It was literally one of the first images that came up when searching "cow towing" - there are a surprising amount of pictures of cows being towed on the internet to be fair!

 

Apologies, I'm quite a pedant & that really jumped out at me when I was reading through the thread last night. I do utterly disagree with you about Brexit though & think it will be a complete disaster for the country, but I'm just a London lefty who works in the public sector so I would!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Johnsy said:

It was literally one of the first images that came up when searching "cow towing" - there are a surprising amount of pictures of cows being towed on the internet to be fair!

 

Apologies, I'm quite a pedant & that really jumped out at me when I was reading through the thread last night. I do utterly disagree with you about Brexit though & think it will be a complete disaster for the country, but I'm just a London lefty who works in the public sector so I would!

No worries. I can be a bit of a pedant myself on occasion. My latest bugbear is with people who don't know how to use there, their and they're! There also seems to be a trend towards misuse (or transposition) of our and are and new and knew for some reason. We were taught those lessons at state run Primary school in the 1960's. Parrot fashion may no longer be in fashion but I can still remember 'The new Gnu went to the zoo. What he was, nobody knew' being drilled into us as young kids learning basic English. I dread to think of some of the things being taught at the moment - another reason I have previously been reluctant to return to UK.

It would be a boring old world if we all agreed on everything. I just hope brexit works out even better than expected for those that want it and as a pleasant surprise for those that don't.

Here is a Brexit effect that I am sure we can all appreciate.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/wetherspoon-cutting-60p-price-drinks-17595782?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, RPG said:

That's possibly one of the stupidest things I've ever read. 

If they're happy with the tax system. They're understand and be happy with how the extra £20 is divided as it's the same system. Absolutely no logic to beat up the 10th one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, pete0 said:

That's possibly one of the stupidest things I've ever read. 

If they're happy with the tax system. They're understand and be happy with how the extra £20 is divided as it's the same system. Absolutely no logic to beat up the 10th one.

Agreed that there is no reason but it does happen and it also highlights a higher principle imho. If we drive high earners out of UK by taxing them too highly then we lose much of the entrepreneurial investment from the workplace, thereby adversely affecting the economy and jobs. There has to be a balance. It is, of course, right in UK for high earners to pay more tax than the low earners, but moderation in all things or higher taxes on the rich will actually end up producing less overall tax revenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could put our higher rate tax up by 5% and it would still be one of the lowest in the western world, these high earners are going no where. 
I think the common man will soon have to carry the burden of Brexit in all tax brackets, because I believe our government will be offering massive tax breaks to encourage companies to come here and to stop companies leaving, and we will be picking up the bill for it. 
I pay what I consider a huge amount in tax revenue and NI would I be willing to pay another 5% yes definitely, but not if they used it to give companies huge tax breaks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2020/01/28/dwp-minister-thinks-foodbanks-are-a-perfect-solution/?fbclid=IwAR0kQqkWzuAeBPLGYMBIRPaAoMU_-Y6sUV6vEq1hVAEIObOUnNHNPPd6Wxw

Does my head in every time I see about food banks. Meant to be a first world country and we've got people who can't even afford to feed themselves. Or should I say a government that starving the very people they're meant to protect. 

Also on a side note, tories who actually donate to food banks need to give their head a wobble. Essentially you're voting to starve people so you can give them a tin of beans and make yourself feel good. If you really want to do something about it cast your vote accordingly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, pete0 said:

https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2020/01/28/dwp-minister-thinks-foodbanks-are-a-perfect-solution/?fbclid=IwAR0kQqkWzuAeBPLGYMBIRPaAoMU_-Y6sUV6vEq1hVAEIObOUnNHNPPd6Wxw

Does my head in every time I see about food banks. Meant to be a first world country and we've got people who can't even afford to feed themselves. Or should I say a government that starving the very people they're meant to protect. 

Also on a side note, tories who actually donate to food banks need to give their head a wobble. Essentially you're voting to starve people so you can give them a tin of beans and make yourself feel good. If you really want to do something about it cast your vote accordingly. 

Agree with your sentiments about how there should never be food banks in a first world country pete0 but I suspect we won't ever agree on the causes of them - and, therefore, the solution.

While we have open borders, cheap foreign labour making UK citizens unemployed and are providing welfare to people who have contributed nothing to the welfare system, all we do is stoke demand for welfare even higher and suppress salaries. That is basic Keynesian theory - and Keynes is being defined more and more, nowadays, as a Liberal.

That said, I have no time for zero hours contracts and the like and I can see this Tory government (now that it has such a majority) pushing back against these type of contracts.

The solution lies in controlling demand for welfare not increasing the supply of it imho. Also, controlling immigration (and, with it, the supply of cheap foreign labour) should see employers having to increase salaries and scrap zero hours contracts which will reduce unemployment even further. Combined, these measures should steadily obviate the need for food banks.

Not looking for an argument but we can't continue like we are, and, with Brexit, we obviously aren't doing. Throwing yet more money at welfare would only make the demand on it even higher and require austerity in other areas to fund it. We have to move people into more secure, higher paid, permanent employment. It's better for them and better for UK.

For me, the solution is a strong Tory government (which we have already got) moving slightly to the Left (which seems to be already happening), rather than the extreme left policies of Corbyn and whichever clone replaces him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, RPG said:

Agree with your sentiments about how there should never be food banks in a first world country pete0 but I suspect we won't ever agree on the causes of them - and, therefore, the solution.

While we have open borders, cheap foreign labour making UK citizens unemployed and are providing welfare to people who have contributed nothing to the welfare system, all we do is stoke demand for welfare even higher and suppress salaries. That is basic Keynesian theory - and Keynes is being defined more and more, nowadays, as a Liberal.

Most have left as the cost of living here leaves you with very little disposable income. They don't have any left to send home as the daily mail claims. 

That said, I have no time for zero hours contracts and the like and I can see this Tory government (now that it has such a majority) pushing back against these type of contracts.

They encourage it to disfigure employing stats. Just look at how much Sainsbury's donate to the party. 

The solution lies in controlling demand for welfare not increasing the supply of it imho. Also, controlling immigration (and, with it, the supply of foreign labour) should see employers having to increase salaries and scrap zero hours contracts which will reduce unemployment even further. Combined, these measures should obviate the need for food banks.

That's absolutely nonsensical. Welfare is there as a safety net. It should be supplied based on need full stop. Immigrants are net contributors. As for them lowering wages I'm pretty sure the majority don't get to pick their salary. 

Not looking for an argument but we can't continue like we are, and throwing yet more money at welfare would only make the demand on it even higher and require austerity in other areas to fund it. We have to move people into more secure, higher paid, permanent employment. It's better for them and better for UK.

That would be labour's solution. The tories have done the opposite, lowering employment rights, encouraging zero hour contracts. Tories believe in trickle down and have been making the rich richer but have done nothing to ensure companies distribute that extra wealth. Wages aren't growing fast enough, disposable income is down. 

 

For me, the solution is a strong Tory government (which we have already got) moving slightly to the Left (which seems to be already happening), rather than the extreme left policies of Corbyn and whichever clone replaces him.

Number of food banks before the tory government: 0. What are they doing to reduce the number? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, pete0 said:

 

Agreed that welfare is a safety net but a safety net for who? Post brexit the number of claimants will, at the very least, stop increasing so much and may well go down.

If we reduce the number of workers in the work force (immigration controls) then salaries have to go up if employers want to employ workers. Further, if a higher percentage of people are in (proper, permanent, fairly paid) work, then the demand on the welfare budget drops. I know this link is from the Express but it is accurate.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1232829/brexit-news-migration-priti-patel-border-controls-boris-johnson

Trickle down theory is fine in theory but I agree, doesn't work well  by itself in practice. I think a top down AND bottom up solution is what Johnson is looking at. Continue with trickle down policies but massively supplement them by a bottom up approach too. When the two initiatives meet, somewhere in the middle, then UK will be well set imho.

Zero hours contracts should go or at the very least, not be someone's only option. No argument there.

Your last para is, on the face of it, fair comment. But for the first time in a long time we now have a Tory government with a massive majority, and a majority that was partially won by traditional Labour strongholds lending their support to the Tory party. That has, quite rightly, to be taken into account in all policy decisions and that is why I think that we will see the Tory party shifting slightly to the left. The effects of any shift to the left are obviously not going to be felt overnight but I hope and believe that there will be some pleasant surprises from this government for those who might class themselves as left of centre.

The opportunity to earn a decent salary and, consequently, not be reliant on food banks would be an ideal place to start, I agree.

Not directly relevant to this conversation but maybe an indication of future government action:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-51298820

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, pete0 said:

MPs expenses allowance per day to rise above what common folk get on universal credit per month

https://welfareweekly.com/lords-allowance-more-than-universal-credit/?fbclid=IwAR0cx5tvQ2kPBRnHX6SDFN0e03YB6gFlbZTMPVuS-hNrkMJ74hGW8tw4bbM

Thats not MPs expenses Pete, members in the house of lords aren't salaried that allowance is it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chach said:

Thats not MPs expenses Pete, members in the house of lords aren't salaried that allowance is it.

Plus their travel expenses are paid and the poor impoverished guys have subsidised restaurant facilities; how's anyone supposed to survive on £323 a day?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, MikeO said:

Plus their travel expenses are paid and the poor impoverished guys have subsidised restaurant facilities; how's anyone supposed to survive on £323 a day?

Be fair Mike.  During the recent storms, some of the poor guys won't have been able to get into London.  I think they have to sign in to get their money?  (Talking about the Lords here)

(this is an ironic post!😁)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, johnh said:

Be fair Mike.  During the recent storms, some of the poor guys won't have been able to get into London.  I think they have to sign in to get their money?  (Talking about the Lords here)

(this is an ironic post!😁)

So very similar to Universal Credit then!:unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MikeO said:

Plus their travel expenses are paid and the poor impoverished guys have subsidised restaurant facilities; how's anyone supposed to survive on £323 a day?

Makes your blood boil their all there on a jolly, contributing the sum of diddly squat 😡

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, MikeO said:

Plus their travel expenses are paid and the poor impoverished guys have subsidised restaurant facilities; how's anyone supposed to survive on £323 a day?

The comparison to UC is bogus though, whether you agree with the function they perform is a different matter as is whether the level of UC is high enough, the remuneration for politicians needs to be commensurate with industry. There's likely people on this thread who earn more than a MP so not surprising we're not attracting the best and brightest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Chach said:

The comparison to UC is bogus though, whether you agree with the function they perform is a different matter as is whether the level of UC is high enough, the remuneration for politicians needs to be commensurate with industry. There's likely people on this thread who earn more than a MP so not surprising we're not attracting the best and brightest.

Why? Politians should be doing their best for the people. If anything any of them only there for the money should be fucked off as there greed will influence them to pick their own needs ahead of the nations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, pete0 said:

Why? Politians should be doing their best for the people. If anything any of them only there for the money should be fucked off as there greed will influence them to pick their own needs ahead of the nations. 

I don't consider it greedy to want to earn somewhere approaching your earning potential, I also disagree with the last part of your statement and its evidently true that the more comfortable people are (I'm not talking about the super rich here, I am talking comfortable) the more they are inclined to care about the vulnerable in society which is why inner city types are more likely to vote for progressive parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chach said:

I don't consider it greedy to want to earn somewhere approaching your earning potential, I also disagree with the last part of your statement and its evidently true that the more comfortable people are (I'm not talking about the super rich here, I am talking comfortable) the more they are inclined to care about the vulnerable in society which is why inner city types are more likely to vote for progressive parties.

Any evidence of that? Beyond the North West I don't see any rich boroughs voting Labour. 

The whole point of a politician is to put your country and the people before yourself. Earning potential shouldn't come into it as if you're doing that you're not gonna maximise the wellbeing of the county. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, pete0 said:

Any evidence of that? Beyond the North West I don't see any rich boroughs voting Labour. 

The whole point of a politician is to put your country and the people before yourself. Earning potential shouldn't come into it as if you're doing that you're not gonna maximise the wellbeing of the county. 

In an election where Labour were decimated they won a majority of the seats in London. I'm not just referring to the UK there either its a Western thing, the more comfortable people are the more they care about social issues in general, climate change, LGBTI rights etc.

I see your sentiment but I don't think politics should or needs to be such an all encompassing sacrifice, it's human nature to worry about your own households needs before you worry about other peoples.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Labour are a failed party. They allowed themselves to be overtaken by cultural marxists and will die on that hill. They're still up there insisting they have some sort of moral high ground whilst they pander to anyone and anything that might throw a vote on their way, so long as they aren't the white working class.

I'm not able to vote as not a single political party is anywhere near my alignment and so I must say with a heavy heart that this country has no future and sectarian violence is inevitable. 

80+% of Liverpool got behind them, and as far as I'm aware it's mostly white working class. One of if not the biggest margin in the country. No coincidence that were also the least media influenced. Labour were cheated by a media no better than North Korea's. Do you blame the opposition for 'letting' the Nazis get into power? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chach said:

In an election where Labour were decimated they won a majority of the seats in London. I'm not just referring to the UK there either its a Western thing, the more comfortable people are the more they care about social issues in general, climate change, LGBTI rights etc.

I see your sentiment but I don't think politics should or needs to be such an all encompassing sacrifice, it's human nature to worry about your own households needs before you worry about other peoples.

 

Completely disagree. Bar your mental health you should never put someone before yourself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pete0 said:

Completely disagree. Bar your mental health you should never put someone before yourself. 

What are you disagreeing with there? My point is the same sentiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chach said:

What are you disagreeing with there? My point is the same sentiment.

You say it's human nature to put your own needs first. For me a politician should see the whole country as his household and do the best for everyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, pete0 said:

Do you blame the opposition for 'letting' the Nazis get into power? 

This is a bad example mate, the opposition in that instance actually acquiesced to the removal of the democratic apparatus that resulted in Germany becoming a dictatorship.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chach said:

This is a bad example mate, the opposition in that instance actually acquiesced to the removal of the democratic apparatus that resulted in Germany becoming a dictatorship.  

My bad 🖐️. Point still stands, the other parties then. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Progressives are the most fascist people on the face of the earth. They believe it is quaint that they employ polish baby sitters or get their coffee from Italian baristas. But more importantly they dont give a damn that their car is washed my an illegal immigrant on less than minimum wage or that their clothes and consumer goods are made at a Chinese or Vietnamese sweat shop.

They live in cloud cuckoo land and have no idea how the real world works. They look at ethnic minorities as an easy vote and feel entitled to their servitude.

Progressives have been guilty of some hypocrisy but Jesus mate, try and keep a little bit of balance. That is not Fascism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Liverpool stands out for being very politically left leaning, like most metropolitan areas really except it still maintains a lot of it's local identity. It also is living in the hang over of Thatcherism and votes to keep tories out rather than to back Labour.

Labour won the student votes after the betrayal of the Lib Dems over tuition fees so a lot of the middle class students vote that way now where they previously would have voted Lib Dem.

We may not like it but we are beginning to see sectarianism form in this country, just like in the US really. Labour, like the Democrats in the US, have aligned themselves with multi-culturalism and chase the immigrant vote. The white working classes have been fooled into thinking that they should vote Tory/Republican when really nobody has their best interests in mind.

Again, I will stress, we might not like this idea but look at the voting demographics and it explains the rise of populism and nationalism across the country and the western world really.

Think the chanting of oh Jeremy Corbyn and a heavy backing of unions in general show Liverpool back labour. You say the anti b thatcher like we'd vote tory if it wasn't for a chip on our shoulder. Most on this city find tories to be disgusting because of how they treat people, you don't need to look back at thatcher for that the last decade shows enough. 

The white working class have been fooled. But that's by the far right media. You can't blame Labour for that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

You're right, I got my monikers wrong, there is a distinct twist of communism around many progressives. There's nothing more pathetic than seeing upper middle class mummy's boys protesting under Socialist Worker banners and chanting "The Workers United".

That Momentum crew have a very authoritarian bent, not even interested in any other candidate and just want to install Long-Bailey as the new Labour leader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

The chanting of "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" shows that the city is littered with communists and contrarians. They are loud and aggressive and completely intolerant of any opposition. To suggest that the media is far right shows how far left many people have gone. The BBC is obnoxiously left leaning, it's programming is practically progressive propaganda. The media is absolutely decadent, I don't watch a single thing barring a bit of Saturday and Sunday morning tv. I'm socially conservative, old fashioned and according to the media a far right extremist. 

Fundamentally communism is great. Unfortunately it's historically abused by far rights. Just look at the terrible far left scandanavian countries, would you not want to be more like them. Happier, everyone happier. 

The BBC has been proven to be bias towards the right. Literally this current government are replicating the nazis with their help and the rest of the media. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

The chanting of "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" shows that the city is littered with communists and contrarians. They are loud and aggressive and completely intolerant of any opposition. To suggest that the media is far right shows how far left many people have gone. The BBC is obnoxiously left leaning, it's programming is practically progressive propaganda. The media is absolutely decadent, I don't watch a single thing barring a bit of Saturday and Sunday morning tv. I'm socially conservative, old fashioned and according to the media a far right extremist. 

I’ve met many Socialist in my life but I can honestly say that I don’t know a single communist. 
The most loud abusive and violent groups I’m aware of are the far right racist groups like the NF and white supremacy groups. 
On the issue of more grenade attacks in Sweden than any other country in the world doesn’t mean a socialist government are responsible for that, or we would have suffered the same fate when we had ten years of Blair, instead we’ve had more attacks in this country under a right wing government, and it isn’t there fault. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Sweden has had the most grenade attacks of any country on earth that is not an active war zone. Truly an inspiration to us all. All of the Scandinavian countries are seeing a resurgence in nationalist parties. Why is that?

Communism is great when you are a useless eater having your every need provided for you. Not so great when you are the provider. It is a stupid idea that has NEVER EVER worked anywhere on earth. It punishes entrepreneurs and encourages fecklessness. 

Replicating Nazis, hilarious, you're hysterical. I was just watching an episode of Dr Who the other day and it just really inspired me to run to my local synagogue and start rounding everyone up.

That's your best, grenades. Does any other county even still use them. 

Point is they are happier than us, no? Why would you not want to be more like them? 

Like I said doesn't work because of the far right. What far left communism is there? Like Palfy says though it's socialist not communist any how. Punishes entrepreneurs? True entrepreneurs are happy to share. Only punishes mono/oligopolies. By punish, makes them play their fair share. We've got victorian deseases and children without food in their belly whilst the rich get richer. How's that on? Or better yet tory idealogy like this https://www.ft.com/content/7b75c07e-50b6-11ea-8841-482eed0038b1?fbclid=IwAR2OCn4Qi9epPJHyM-MOwupCTjlu1l1ALhyHSukPTtxCjSk24dcbWaj9jr0

Not hilarious one bit. As a nation we are disgusting and very much replicating nazi Germany. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TallPaul1878 said:

They have an active genuine far right movement in Sweden and all across Scandinavia called Nord Front. They hold huge rallies and are making waves in their political system. Scandinavians are NOT happy with their state of things.

You're off your rocker.

Not gonna answer the rest? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

They have an active genuine far right movement in Sweden and all across Scandinavia called Nord Front. They hold huge rallies and are making waves in their political system. Scandinavians are NOT happy with their state of things.

You're off your rocker.

0,03% last elections. 🤦‍♂️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Communism has changed mate. They know it's unpopular amongst the general public. Ever heard of "The Long March Through The Institutions"?

Commies were told to stop leafleting and stop trying to recruit. To stop getting involved in politics because they could not win. Instead they focus on social issues. To put themselves into institutions like the education system, the legal profession, the media.

Seeing as you are quite the commie yourself I don't see any point in further conversation. 

Really don't see how that addresses anything. What's wrong with the ideals of communism? Do you not believe everyone should be treated equally? Do you believe you're part of a master race, caste, or class that makes you more important? That you should and deserve to be treated better than someone else? Do you even consider those not of your race, caste or class to even be someone else or do you view them as something else? 

(I've previously said in the perfect world communism would be best. Fact is it's ruined by power hungry individuals).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Communism has changed mate. They know it's unpopular amongst the general public. Ever heard of "The Long March Through The Institutions"?

Commies were told to stop leafleting and stop trying to recruit. To stop getting involved in politics because they could not win. Instead they focus on social issues. To put themselves into institutions like the education system, the legal profession, the media.

Seeing as you are quite the commie yourself I don't see any point in further conversation. 

I don’t know what shit you have been reading, but my advice to you is put it down it’s doing you no favours, seriously. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pete0 said:

Really don't see how that addresses anything. What's wrong with the ideals of communism? Do you not believe everyone should be treated equally? Do you believe you're part of a master race, caste, or class that makes you more important? That you should and deserve to be treated better than someone else? Do you even consider those not of your race, caste or class to even be someone else or do you view them as something else? 

(I've previously said in the perfect world communism would be best. Fact is it's ruined by power hungry individuals).

i agree with you pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

What has not being a communist got to do with being a racist as Pete is implying that I am and that I don't appreciate?

i agree that in theory communism is a great thing.  Same with Socialism.  I believe everyone is equal and should be treated as such.  that's what i agreed with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Aah, playing the racism card I see. If you dont agree with someone just call then racist. That's where you're going here.

Can't be arsed with disingenuous cunts like that.

I'm talking equality. That's ultimately what socialism and communism is. 

As for you being offended. That's your problem. I'm sure you'd be just as offended if someone called you a commie oh wait that's what you did. Funny thing is I've not thrown insults unlike you. I've made a point, you can't justify shitting on my beliefs or that yours are well founded. I've not limited it to racism, I find your ideology inhuman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

That's not communism or socialism. It's altruism. Communism and socialism don't have the monopoly on social justice, they just have the most people involved in social justice. Communists and socialists tend not to believe in equality, they believe in equity. There's a distinction there, positive discrimination and quotas are a form of equity. It's giving people a leg up because they start from a lower position, something that isn't bad in and of itself but is prone to unintended consequences (by concentrating on one group you neglect another).

You see this very much so in the American education system. When everyone is given a "fair crack of the whip" you find that Indian and Chinese students rise to the top and that African American students struggle the most. Equality doesn't work there so they need to intervene. Should Indian and Chinese students be held back to make way for others? 

the american education system is the definition of unequal and inequitable.  i'm not sure where you got that info but our system is broken beyond belief.  i live in this country.  the reason african americans do badly on the whole is due to their unequal treatment.  less opportunities, less money for the same job as others, systematic racism, your analogy is as wrong as it can get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

13 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

I never said the education system was equal.

no you said this

25 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

You see this very much so in the American education system. When everyone is given a "fair crack of the whip" you find that Indian and Chinese students rise to the top and that African American students struggle the most. 

which i stated was untrue because they aren't given a fair crack due to the issues i stated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Then why are Asian students allowed to flourish? Does that not fly in the face of white supremacists? What are the policies that cause black americans to struggle? Who are the people in the institutions that are holding them down? Are there other external factors involved? What are the barriers to entry?

"Allowed" isn't the right word here. You have to consider the socioeconomic factors across different backgrounds. It's not so black and white (no pun intended) as you're trying to make it seem. 

Those with the most money more often than not will have a better access to education, more opportunities, greater ability to get out of legal trouble, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Then why are Asian students allowed to flourish? Does that not fly in the face of white supremacists? What are the policies that cause black americans to struggle? Who are the people in the institutions that are holding them down? Are there other external factors involved? What are the barriers to entry?

i don't know where you get were asians are flourishing.  plenty struggle too.  new orleans has a large vietnamese population that doesn't do well and they have massive gangs.  i blame capitalism and greed.  rich want more, they take from the middle class and poor.  they move to more exclusive cities which takes resources and tax money away from the cities so the poor and middle class suffer more, the schools suffer more.  their parents jobs suffer because the rich want more tax cuts and so the middle class and poor pay more.  this keeps them oppressed.  the majority of african americans live in the cities (by that i mean not suburbs) where the schools are bad, housing is bad, etc.  but they can't leave, they don't have the resources to leave and move to the nice suburbs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Honestly I think globalism has a lot to answer for. It has robbed men of their jobs, it has led to the collapse of the nuclear family and it has led to the erosion of community cohesion.

Couldn't disagree more, don't understand the logic. Perhaps we should go back to feudalism? Where in the middle of the two do you think would be best?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

The industrial revolution has had disastrous consequences for mankind and the environment. Apart from modern healthcare and sanitation humanity has achieved nothing to improve the lives of ordinary people.

So despite the down-vote to my previous answer you think feudalism was great and the industrial revolution was a big mistake?

Let's get back to the old times where people knew their place eh? Sadly genie can't be put back in the bottle though, we evolve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/02/2020 at 00:16, pete0 said:

Any evidence of that? Beyond the North West I don't see any rich boroughs voting Labour. 

The whole point of a politician is to put your country and the people before yourself. Earning potential shouldn't come into it as if you're doing that you're not gonna maximise the wellbeing of the county. 

This is just madness. Basically what you are saying is that politicians should be wealthy enough to be able to not earn or only earn a very minimal wage. Either that or someone who is not learned or skilful enough to earn a better wage doing a job to earn more money for their family. 

I just can't get my head around how on earth you think that could ever be a realistic idea.

On 16/02/2020 at 20:44, pete0 said:

Fundamentally communism is great. Unfortunately it's historically abused by far rights. Just look at the terrible far left scandanavian countries, would you not want to be more like them. Happier, everyone happier. 

The BBC has been proven to be bias towards the right. Literally this current government are replicating the nazis with their help and the rest of the media. 

 

Communism abused by the far right? What are you smoking. 

Communism doesn't work because someone has to be in charge. It may work in small groups where everyone can effectively have a say but essentially Communism is a dictatorship. The leading party gradually take steps to protect their own position and weaken their rivals, as is human nature unfortunately. 

You also have to rethink your Scandinavian "socialist" countries again. We have done this before. They are not. They use many of the things you claim to hate in order to balance the bits you like.

4 hours ago, markjazzbassist said:

i agree that in theory communism is a great thing.  Same with Socialism.  I believe everyone is equal and should be treated as such.  that's what i agreed with.

That belief is not socialism or Communism in my opinion. That just means your a good person, who has been brought up we and has nothing to do with being to the left or right.

The question is why should the people who go out in life to make the best of themselves be valued at the same level as those that dont. Do you believe a highly skilled and successful worker (let's say Doctor) should be treated the same as a lowly skilled and underperforming one? Should an astronaut get the same pay as a truck driver? Should the best footballer in the country get paid the same as the worst? Who decides what vocation people get to do? What if one year no-one wants to be a midwife and there is a shortage. Who picks and selects who does what? 

I know this is aimed at communism that socialism, but it's just a bonkers pie in the sky idea that only holds people back rather than allows them to be the best they can be. 

Everyone should treat eachother with the same respect as they would expect to be treated with. If the whole world just did that we would all live much fairer, happier and successful lives. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bailey said:

This is just madness. Basically what you are saying is that politicians should be wealthy enough to be able to not earn or only earn a very minimal wage. Either that or someone who is not learned or skilful enough to earn a better wage doing a job to earn more money for their family. 

I just can't get my head around how on earth you think that could ever be a realistic idea.

Not madness at all. If wealth was shared more fairly there wouldn't be a massive difference from the bottom to the top. If an MP needs to earn more than the average wage then they're not doing a very good job for everyone. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/youngest-mp-salary-charity-workers-labour-nadia-whittome-a9246686.html%3famp

That skills argument is bollocks. Fair enough harder jobs deserve more pay. But compare a doctor to a nurse, both work just as hard albeit a doctor has a higher skill set. Do they really deserve to making 4x more than a nurse? 

Biggest irk is shareholders. Absolute sham of an idea. Beyond the initial cash investment when first distributed they are just stocks that are meaningless beyond what market powers say. Profits should be shared much more with workers, unions have been destroyed and the rich are getting richer without having any skills or putting in hard graft. Basically the same with landlords too, look at the richest family in the country the Grosvernors. What do they actually do? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Bailey said:

Communism abused by the far right? What are you smoking. 

Communism doesn't work because someone has to be in charge. It may work in small groups where everyone can effectively have a say but essentially Communism is a dictatorship. The leading party gradually take steps to protect their own position and weaken their rivals, as is human nature unfortunately. 

You also have to rethink your Scandinavian "socialist" countries again. We have done this before. They are not. They use many of the things you claim to hate in order to balance the bits you like.

Pretty sure it'd work with someone in charge who has strong moral values like Corbyn. You've even given a pretty good example about small communities so I don't see how you're struggling with the concept/idealogy of it working. 

It's a poor excuse to say human nature. It's not, it's not for people like me, Mike, Shukes, MJB and probably many more on here. Others do ruin it though and I would gladly move to another planet with the rest of us hippies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bailey said:

Everyone should treat eachother with the same respect as they would expect to be treated with. If the whole world just did that we would all live much fairer, happier and successful lives. 

That sounds very much like socialism, pleased you’ve seen the light brother, that sentiment couldn’t be attributed to the leadership of Johnson and Trump and their governments, that are systematically punishing the people in society that require the most help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Sounds nothing like socialism and you know it! Altruism and egalitarianism are not the sole preserve of the far left.

You don’t find them within the far right that’s for sure, you find more people are inline with parties like the BNP, and we all know what they stand for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

No chance it'd work. As a skilled worker I'd be off in a shot as would anyone else with a brain cell in their head. Why on earth would I choose to take such a career if an even larger portion of my wage has to be given over to those who CANNOT and WILL NOT do the job? Not my fault people are thick and lazy!

Doctors earn more than nurses because it is precisely a far more skilled job. We all respect the job that nurses do but seriously it is not that highly skilled. It just isn't!

Nothing to do with thick and lazy, it's education and opportunity. I'm sure there's 1000s of people who could do your job with the right training. Hate to break it you but all of us are replaceable no matter what skills. 

You obviously don't respect nurses, I'd argue you have very little understanding of respect. But I'll not digress into your superior complex. Back to the question in hand how can you justify the salary disparity between doctors and nurses, one can afford luxury holidays and some of the other is having to use food banks to get by. Better yet, how can you even justify wages and benefits being that low that food banks have become a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, pete0 said:

Not madness at all. If wealth was shared more fairly there wouldn't be a massive difference from the bottom to the top. If an MP needs to earn more than the average wage then they're not doing a very good job for everyone. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/youngest-mp-salary-charity-workers-labour-nadia-whittome-a9246686.html%3famp

That skills argument is bollocks. Fair enough harder jobs deserve more pay. But compare a doctor to a nurse, both work just as hard albeit a doctor has a higher skill set. Do they really deserve to making 4x more than a nurse? 

Biggest irk is shareholders. Absolute sham of an idea. Beyond the initial cash investment when first distributed they are just stocks that are meaningless beyond what market powers say. Profits should be shared much more with workers, unions have been destroyed and the rich are getting richer without having any skills or putting in hard graft. Basically the same with landlords too, look at the richest family in the country the Grosvernors. What do they actually do? 

Yes doctors do. I know I couldn't be a specialist doctor. I could maybe get to a GP with the right amount of application but I would expect that I could be a nurse. You make it sound as though it's easy to be a doctor.

"Beyond the initial cash investment". So how do businesses start when they aren't getting people to invest in their ideas? 

If workers have a problem with their boss they should take the risk themselves and go out on their own. Then they can see how hard it is to start, run and manage a business. Then they can share whatever they want with whoever, it's a free world. If it was easy, everyone would do it and we wouldn't be having this conversation because everyone would be empowered by their breakaway bosses.

15 hours ago, pete0 said:

Pretty sure it'd work with someone in charge who has strong moral values like Corbyn. You've even given a pretty good example about small communities so I don't see how you're struggling with the concept/idealogy of it working. 

It's a poor excuse to say human nature. It's not, it's not for people like me, Mike, Shukes, MJB and probably many more on here. Others do ruin it though and I would gladly move to another planet with the rest of us hippies. 

Corbyn 😂. Nepotism was rife under Labour with him. Likewise he promoted his followers over those better skilled in the job. Who puts Diane Abbott anywhere else but as a lollipop woman? 

Small groups is relatively easy. 10 people in a community on an island somewhere might work. There is no money, only survival, so everyone has no choice but to chip in. Try and implement that into any developed country or even in an island group of 50+ people and it will fall apart because a group of people have to lead, another group will want to lead and some will want to do as little as possible. 

14 hours ago, Palfy said:

That sounds very much like socialism, pleased you’ve seen the light brother, that sentiment couldn’t be attributed to the leadership of Johnson and Trump and their governments, that are systematically punishing the people in society that require the most help. 

Socialism is a political and economic theory. Being nice to each other should be a given. 

FWIW this Boris Govt is probably as centrist as any previous Tory government. What has he done as PM to punish people?

14 hours ago, Palfy said:

You don’t find them within the far right that’s for sure, you find more people are inline with parties like the BNP, and we all know what they stand for. 

Same with the far left. They are extremists and thankfully there is very little of them in mainstream UK politics. 

13 hours ago, pete0 said:

Nothing to do with thick and lazy, it's education and opportunity. I'm sure there's 1000s of people who could do your job with the right training. Hate to break it you but all of us are replaceable no matter what skills. 

You obviously don't respect nurses, I'd argue you have very little understanding of respect. But I'll not digress into your superior complex. Back to the question in hand how can you justify the salary disparity between doctors and nurses, one can afford luxury holidays and some of the other is having to use food banks to get by. Better yet, how can you even justify wages and benefits being that low that food banks have become a thing.

You're so naive. There are so many people who don't give enough of shit, no matter how well you train them. I work with a lot of aspiring young men and women who want a career in law and I can assure you that it has nothing to do with education and opportunity. To a lot of people work pays the bills and it's an inconvenience. 

I am not saying that education and upbringing don't have a large part to play in getting someone into that position, but when in that position, it's clear that some people care and some people don't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

The BNP have been eradicated. They got Nick Griffin on TV, exposed his policies and the general public roundly ridiculed them. Since then the BNP have had literally no presence in politics any more. Apart from one sole nutter committing a heinous act by murdering Jo Cox the far right is by and large a bogeyman that the media trots out to try and downplay rising nationalism.

Nationalism in and of itself is not a bad thing. It's just in-group preference on a large scale. Something that the left is also very keen on (surveys suggest left leaning people are much more intolerant of right leaning people than vice versa). Japan is by and large a homogenous nationalist country and they are hardly committing atrocities on a large scale. Since the end of WW2 a multi-cultural Britain has been involved in countless foreign wars resulting in the deaths and displacement of MILLIONS of innocent people.

You accuse the left of being loud and aggressive, yet the most loud and aggressive are the right nationalist parties and their followers, they change their names but can’t change that they are full of racist thugs, who go out of there way to beat people and disrupt peaceful marches that don’t  suit their ideology, of a white British society. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...