Do you want to discuss boring politics? (20 Viewers)

Forums New posts
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
LarryGrayson said:
nhs in safe hands
Click to expand...
A spokesperson for Cancer Research UK said: “There is no good evidence of a link between the Covid-19 vaccine and cancer risk. The vaccine is a safe and effective way to protect against the infection and prevent serious symptoms.”

Then there is this recent Italian study of 300,000 people in Italy which shows..
lightshot_1757181101.jpeg
Here is the link.

COVID-19 vaccination, all-cause mortality, and hospitalization for cancer: 30-month cohort study in an Italian province - PMC

Anecdotal reports suggested an association between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and some cancers, but no formal assessment has been published. This population-wide cohort analysis was aimed at evaluating the risk of all-cause death and cancer ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
 
L

LarryGrayson

Member
Captain Dart said:
A spokesperson for Cancer Research UK said: “There is no good evidence of a link between the Covid-19 vaccine and cancer risk. The vaccine is a safe and effective way to protect against the infection and prevent serious symptoms.”

Then there is this recent Italian study of 300,000 people in Italy which shows..
View attachment 45875
Here is the paper.
Click to expand...
wuts the medical consensus 404 page not found sounds right to me
 
Sky Blue Pete

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Captain Dart said:
A spokesperson for Cancer Research UK said: “There is no good evidence of a link between the Covid-19 vaccine and cancer risk. The vaccine is a safe and effective way to protect against the infection and prevent serious symptoms.”

Then there is this recent Italian study of 300,000 people in Italy which shows..
View attachment 45875
Here is the paper.
Click to expand...
Need to be careful sharing random Twitter pages with no context
 
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
DT-R said:
I mean, it's a good soundbite! It's just not completely true, really.

17 years ago, under a labour government, when my son was born, my missus had to leave work as it cost more to pay for childcare than what she made in wages. It was a David Cameron, Tory Government that upped the free childcare to 30 hours so when my daughter was born, she was able to go back to work and we were better off in our pocket for it.

It was also the same David Cameron government that upped the 20% ceiling from £42k a year to £50k, meaning middle wage earners could earn more before hitting the 40% tax bracket

They also upped the personal income tax from £10.5k to £12.5k, meaning low earning households can earn more before paying tax, and that people who have a low wage topped up by benefits who work part time could earn more aswell.

If i could be bothered to research it, I could probably find more, but these are issues that I know of because they all immediately affected me and my family/situation. And as a family, we were better off under that Cameron/Tory Government money wise, than the previous Labour government (which I voted for at that time).

Sent from my SM-S711B using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
And who's paying for that free childcare? It ain't actually free. Someone somewhere is getting taxed and redistributing the wealth to you.

Nice to see you agree with socialist principles rather than if you chose to have kids so you should pay for it yourself.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
PVA said:
It's the stamp duty that is the issue and reason for resigning.

I don't believe having money or owning two houses is a resigning issue, as much as some people seem to have a problem with it.
Click to expand...

Who has a problem with it?
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
SkyBlueDom26 said:
It’s not Elon musks or the owner of amazons fault that people are homeless, why should they hand out hard earned money! Socialism is just a lazy way of describing bitter jealous people
Click to expand...
Well in some ways it is.

Bezos is renowned for paying poor wages and having poor working conditions and restricting access to things like unions. Others, such as Uber etc, are even worse basically proving zero hours contracts or treating you as self employed so you have to buy all the equipment yourself out of your own pocket (sometimes having to buy from them specifically at inflated prices) and if you don't do as they say they restrict the amount of work you get so you can't earn anything. The people working long hours in his warehouses etc are probably getting about 1% of the value that Bezos gets. A man who works so hard he spends half his time riding a penis into space.

Then there's the supply and demand issue of housing. These people own a number of homes and vast estates these people own that could house thousands of people if built on but instead it's so one person can spend a week there a year. This also applies to 'old money' and especially aristocracy.
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
SkyBlueDom26 said:
Er cause maybe they are responsible for millions of jobs and if they give all the money up then a lot of people would be jobless. Boosh wannabe is starting to change its disappointing lad
Click to expand...
Who's saying they should give all the money up?

What is being asked is for a fairer allocation of that wealth. And that doesn't mean everyone gets the same. It means recognising the value that everyone brings. Hard work should see you get more. Can anyone work hard enough to say they deserve hundreds of thousands of times more than someone else who works? No. That is purely greed.

Many people are expected to do overtime for free. Loads of people give their time for nothing to volunteer in a number of areas and if everyone stopped doing that for one day the world would collapse.

And that's not taking into account the many rich people who get their money from inheritance and such. Why should they deserve so much when they do nothing? Place I used to work was helping set up trust funds for a client as they were expecting twins. When those twins were born they were richer than the junior partner on a decent salary and with 20 years of experience as a qualified accountant who had helped set it up. Do you call that fair?
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
fatso said:
You are forgetting that socialism wants a redistribution of the wealth, so wealth creators stop creating wealth, (because what's the point) and those who create fuck all and do fuck all, are rewarded for doing fuck all.
Then eventually all men are equally wealthy, which means we are all in the same queue at the food bank.

Fantastic idea.
Click to expand...
Well because a redistribution of wealth does not mean an equal redistribution. It means a fair and equitable one.

Those that work hard deserve more than those that do not. Those that have jobs that require specialist skills or knowledge deserve more than those that do not. Those that work in hazardous or arduous conditions deserve more than those that do not. Those that work unsociable hours deserve more than those that do not. Those jobs where demand exceeds supply deserve more than those where a large number of people want a small number of jobs. And there are undoubtedly many other factors that could go into making it fairer.

Many of these will contradict, and that is why there is a more equitable distribution as it values what everyone puts in rather than just cherry picking the small handful that benefit those that already have a lot as capitalism does. That is greed and why we have such a need for wealth redistribution.

*And before anyone mentions Marx and how socialism is a precursor to communism, I doubt many people believe that now. I certainly don't
 
DT-R

DT-R

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
And who's paying for that free childcare? It ain't actually free. Someone somewhere is getting taxed and redistributing the wealth to you.

Nice to see you agree with socialist principles rather than if you chose to have kids so you should pay for it yourself.
Click to expand...
Of course somebody is paying for it. Thats how government scheme work you muppet! Trying for a gotcha because your tax bill paid my kids childcare!

That is how shit works. How many people on here have taken advantage of buying their council house at a cheaper rate? How many people traded in their £150 banger for £2k in a government scheme to get old, shitty cars off the road? How many took £5k from the government to buy a new electric car? I haven't done ANY of those things, yet the taxes I pay, helped pay for all of them! Faux outrage that i paid for somebody else's car!!!! Argh, how dare they! Etc etc. Thats how the world fucking works!

All I was saying, in reply to false statements about the tories only looking after the rich, is that, no they quite clearly dont. Where they redirect that money from, isnt a concern to me. Just like the money redirected to get people driving electric cars. I dont want or need an electric car, yet I've still paid towards one.

Sent from my SM-S711B using Tapatalk
 
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
DT-R said:
Of course somebody is paying for it. Thats how government scheme work you muppet! Trying for a gotcha because your tax bill paid my kids childcare!

That is how shit works. How many people on here have taken advantage of buying their council house at a cheaper rate? How many people traded in their £150 banger for £2k in a government scheme to get old, shitty cars off the road? How many took £5k from the government to buy a new electric car? I haven't done ANY of those things, yet the taxes I pay, helped pay for all of them! Faux outrage that i paid for somebody else's car!!!! Argh, how dare they! Etc etc. Thats how the world fucking works!

All I was saying, in reply to false statements about the tories only looking after the rich, is that, no they quite clearly dont. Where they redirect that money from, isnt a concern to me. Just like the money redirected to get people driving electric cars. I dont want or need an electric car, yet I've still paid towards one.

Sent from my SM-S711B using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
And I'm just pointing out that that's redistribution of wealth. You know, the thing capitalism doesn't want unless it's to them.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
Well because a redistribution of wealth does not mean an equal redistribution. It means a fair and equitable one.

Those that work hard deserve more than those that do not. Those that have jobs that require specialist skills or knowledge deserve more than those that do not. Those that work in hazardous or arduous conditions deserve more than those that do not. Those that work unsociable hours deserve more than those that do not. Those jobs where demand exceeds supply deserve more than those where a large number of people want a small number of jobs. And there are undoubtedly many other factors that could go into making it fairer.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. I don't why people can't grasp this simple fact. More often than not when people speak against wealth redistribution their argument actually supports it. They will say things like 'people should be rewarded for working hard'. That's exactly the point, people aren't being rewarded for working hard.

The last 15 years have seen the biggest transfer of wealth from the ordinary person to the super rich in history. We have record numbers of people who are in work still needing benefits to survive while the companies employing them make huge profits and dish them out to shareholders.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
What is being asked is for a fairer allocation of that wealth. And that doesn't mean everyone gets the same. It means recognising the value that everyone brings. Hard work should see you get more. Can anyone work hard enough to say they deserve hundreds of thousands of times more than someone else who works? No. That is purely greed.

Many people are expected to do overtime for free. Loads of people give their time for nothing to volunteer in a number of areas and if everyone stopped doing that for one day the world would collapse.
Click to expand...
I was chatting to some people earlier today who were commenting on how much more of your day is taken up with work then previously. People aren't talking about going back to how things were decades ago or some radical, never seen before, system. A lot of what people are looking for is what we had relatively recently.

Appreciate this won't apply to everyone but for a lot of people things were relatively OK until we entered the age of austerity. Were things perfect? Absolutely not, but they were far better than now and there was a sense that if you did work hard you got rewarded.

Compared to then my workday has increased approx 50%, my annual leave has decreased approx 50%, pay has stagnated, struggling to keep pace with inflation, bonus payments have ceased completely, company benefits have been gradually removed to the point that jobs advertise being able to park as a benefit. Meanwhile my workload has increased around 300% while staff are laid off to make companies more 'efficient'.

If you really believe that people who work hard should be rewarded than you are actually in favour of wealth distribution. Don't let those who have the wealth fool you into thinking otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 18 (members: 0, guests: 18)
Top