Do you want to discuss boring politics? (18 Viewers)

Brighton Sky Blue said:

People care less about the face at the top and more about the money in their pocket and their day to day lives which for most means interacting with some kind of public service and paying for the cost of living.

We can of course disagree on what people prioritise more.

Click to expand...

Mucca Mad Boys said:

The problem for your worldview is that voters have come to link declining public service provisions and living standards with the advent of mass immigration.

In cities like London, Birmingham and Manchester, social housing, for example, 45-60% (depending on which city + area) is taken up by social housing. Of that cohort, around 40-55% are in employment.

Hence, the working class has totally abandoned Labour. There’s been polling conducted post-2024 that paints the picture that Labour is the party of the metropolitan middle class.

Click to expand...

Grendel said:

Why was Thatcher elected in 3 consecutive elections then?

Click to expand...

Mucca Mad Boys said:

The problem for your worldview is that voters have come to link declining public service provisions and living standards with the advent of mass immigration.

In cities like London, Birmingham and Manchester, social housing, for example, 45-60% (depending on which city + area) is taken up by social housing. Of that cohort, around 40-55% are in employment.

Click to expand...

Brighton Sky Blue said:

I agree, and I think people are wrong if they've come to that conclusion.

Click to expand...

Mucca Mad Boys said:

They’re not because GDP per capita has steadily declined in line with mass migration. Again, the evidence of its impact on social housing, house and rental price increases…

The British state under Labour and Conservative governments have proven that it cannot build enough houses to keep up with net migration.

With respect, working class people do not need middle class politicians and activists telling them what they can see in their communities is ‘wrong’.

Click to expand...

Brighton Sky Blue said:

Ignoring the little dig at 'the left' wanting more extreme lockdowns, my point is the likes of Johnson should be in prison, not just voted out of office. Just a disgusting excuse for a man who wanted the bodies to 'pile high'.

Click to expand...

CCFCSteve said:

That genuinely wasn’t a dig. It was an observation from my memory of the time. Anyway, lets see what the inquiry throws up….I imagine we’ll both end up disappointed!

Click to expand...

SBT said:

Hell yeah I wondered how long it would take before you were back to blame the immigrants

Is the social housing disproportionately taken up by immigrants? If not, why bring them up?

Click to expand...

Brighton Sky Blue said:

Correlation is not causation and there are other things that have happened in line with declining public services and rising living costs. I'm not a middle class politician or activist either, I'm a person with a different opinion to yours, and I can say 'I think you're wrong' without saying 'I know you're wrong'.

We simply have differing opinions on the cause of and solution to the country's problems, but please don't label me as something I'm not.

Click to expand...

Mucca Mad Boys said:

Apologies, I wasn’t specifically calling you such. It was a broader comment.

Ask yourself why businesses want mass immigration? It’s all about supply and demand. If you restrict the supply of labour, wages invariably have to increase as businesses compete for workers. Likewise, there's reports that Boris allowed the 'Boriswave' to happen because the government was concerned with inflation from wages rises - this is something Aaron Bastani shared on, who many will recognise as the co-founder of Novara (a v left wing media outlet).

Likewise, on public service provision, if you increase your population by 300-900k per year, that's a pressure on the state because you need to build infrastructure to keep up; houses, roads, schools, hospitals and so on.

This is why the OBR is beginning to change its tone on immigration because anyone earning less than 35k per year will be a net drain of the treasury which undermines the the economic assumption that has underpinned UK (and European) economic thinking for 30 years.

You just won't find a country that has high wages, high (low-wage) immigration and a generous welfare state.

Click to expand...

Brighton Sky Blue said:

I think there's quite a revealing misunderstanding here that people like me want open borders, super high net immigration and so on. I don't, and that comes from not wanting the country to be reliant on foreign labour full stop. I want better pay and conditions for our workforce and an education and skills focus that allows us to attract and produce enough of our own workers for the sectors that need them.

My view all along has been that the issues surrounding immigration are a symptom, not cause of, the country's problems.

Click to expand...

Mucca Mad Boys said:

I don’t think you’re an open border zealot. What I would say is that you’re quite clearly uncomfortable drawing a line on what you’d control.

In the interests of open conversation, what would you manage?

For example, I think it’s reasonable to expect:
- high earner of above £35-40k+ per annum and in continuous employment
- self-sufficiency: therefore, access to the social housing and benefits need to be restricted imo and an expectation people have ‘substantial’ savings at all times
- English proficiency - self-explantory
- Being able to deport foreign born criminals
- A public benefit test to be passed before indefinite leave to remain is granted
- one thing I’d consider; healthcare provisions. No free access to the NHS before indefinite leave to remain is granted - personally not 100% sold on this but something I’ve thought about

If those conditions are met, welcome to Britain! Irrespective of race, nationality, religion, sex or sexual orientation.

Click to expand...

Brighton Sky Blue said:

Bloody useless

Manhunt for asylum seeker jailed for sexual assault mistakenly released

Ethiopian national Hadush Kebatu sparked nationwide protests after sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl.

www.bbc.co.uk

Click to expand...

SkyBlueDom26 said:

How the fuck can that happen

Click to expand...

Brighton Sky Blue said:

The Falklands
Rising living standards for middle England
Temporarily improved economic situation from the Reaganomics boom

Or was Bill Clinton's campaign manager wrong when he said 'it's the economy, stupid'?

Click to expand...

Grendel said:

The economy was in pretty good shape when Major was booted out and far worse when he managed to get elected.

What happened?

Click to expand...

wingy said:

Japan have gone female

In the PM stakes, I believe she's also into Heavy metal!

Click to expand...

SkyBlueDom26 said:

How the fuck can that happen

Click to expand...

Captain Dart said:

View attachment 46779

Click to expand...

Brighton Sky Blue said:

Not uncomfortable, but I genuinely don't know what number for net immigration I'm happy with without having had time to really get into the weeds on it and I won't just throw a number out at random.

I don't have much objection to most of those suggestions however the earnings threshold runs into a clear problem that it will surely then leave lots of sectors badly understaffed. Are you suggesting British workers should replace those on low wages or the wages themselves need to go up? Then there is the separate matter of students, who are big net contributors financially and are propping up a lot of our universities.

Click to expand...

Mucca Mad Boys said:

Based on polling, the public generally want 0-100k net migration.

Ultimately, the public just want reassurance that migration is controlled and people who do come integrate and provide an economic benefit. Post-Brexit, EEA migration has been cut but unfortunately its been supplanted by non-EEA migration. Generally, EEA migrants tend to be economically net-contributors and the opposite is true for most non-EEA nations. In this respect, the public won't necessary care about numbers if there's confidence robust controls on migration are in place.

We should aspire to be a high wage economy like Australia and in order to achieve that aim, you need to regulate the labour market and this is a position traditionally supported by trade unionists so should be a bread and butter Labour position. Take social care as an example, we're reliant on cheap-imported labour but its not without cost because there's been several high profile cases where patients have died because care workers are not proficient enough in English to communicate with emergency services. There's also v little prospect of working conditions and wages to increase when you have an infinite supply of cheap labour.

There are sectors in the economy where the government has created the demand for immigration, particularly the NHS. If you systematically cut training places for doctors and nurses (etc), then of course you need to import labour to fill those gaps. This is being used as a justification for more immigration.

Side note: its cases like the Epping migrant committing a sex offence within days of arriving via small boats, given a lenient sentence and subsequently released makes a complete mockery of our system and creates a toxic atmosphere around the issue. What better ammunition for those decrying "two-tier justice?"

Click to expand...

Brighton Sky Blue said:

I think I read from this that we're broadly in agreement on what we want a successful outcome to look like. What you haven't really addressed and I'll ask again on, is students. Most will come here paying considerable amounts to live and study here and incur very little cost from the state while they are here. They have a pretty obvious incentive not to go around breaking the law either.

Click to expand...

Mucca Mad Boys said:

Based on polling, the public generally want 0-100k net migration.

Ultimately, the public just want reassurance that migration is controlled and people who do come integrate and provide an economic benefit. Post-Brexit, EEA migration has been cut but unfortunately its been supplanted by non-EEA migration. Generally, EEA migrants tend to be economically net-contributors and the opposite is true for most non-EEA nations. In this respect, the public won't necessary care about numbers if there's confidence robust controls on migration are in place.

We should aspire to be a high wage economy like Australia and in order to achieve that aim, you need to regulate the labour market and this is a position traditionally supported by trade unionists so should be a bread and butter Labour position. Take social care as an example, we're reliant on cheap-imported labour but its not without cost because there's been several high profile cases where patients have died because care workers are not proficient enough in English to communicate with emergency services. There's also v little prospect of working conditions and wages to increase when you have an infinite supply of cheap labour.

There are sectors in the economy where the government has created the demand for immigration, particularly the NHS. If you systematically cut training places for doctors and nurses (etc), then of course you need to import labour to fill those gaps. This is being used as a justification for more immigration.

Side note: its cases like the Epping migrant committing a sex offence within days of arriving via small boats, given a lenient sentence and subsequently released makes a complete mockery of our system and creates a toxic atmosphere around the issue. What better ammunition for those decrying "two-tier justice?"

Click to expand...

duffer said:

Just a correction of an obvious error. There was no two-tier justice here, the man in question received the maximum sentence that can be given at a magistrates court.

The release was also an obvious error. One of 262 in a year.

So the idea that this bloke has been treated leniently is a complete fiction. In fact he got the maximum sentence that he could receive at the magistrates, and then was subject to a huge manhunt that none of the the other 261 mistaken releases had.

I'm all in favour of not giving ammunition to the two-tier justice myth, because it doesn't stand up to analysis.

Also, given that 40% of those arrested in the immigration riots had previous convictions for things like domestic violence, I feel a bit sick when their cheerleaders talk about law and order or protecting women. It's a tad hypocritical.

https://www.essex.police.uk/news/essex/news/news/2025/september/epping-man-jailed-over-sexual-assaults/

Shocking amount of prisoners released in error as numbers more than double in a year

Thousands of inmates have also been freed early since then in a bid to cut jail overcrowding

www.independent.co.uk

Click to expand...

Mucca Mad Boys said:

Good luck correcting an ‘error’ that wasn’t stated as fact. I said it gives ammunition to those who decry “two tier justice” and in politics and public opinion, perceptions matter much more than reality.

Most people aren’t familiar with guidelines and I’m sure if you went around and asked ordinary people what worse; A) Sexual assault or racist tweets and B) which crime should carry a harsher sentence? You’ll see what ordinary people think.

Click to expand...

Sky Blue Pete said:

They need to understand better or listen more then
Otherwise they’re bashing their heads against the wall time and time again

Click to expand...

Mucca Mad Boys said:

On immigration, perhaps the political class should do what the electorate has instructed them to do. Every government from 2005 has been elected to control migration and the opposite has happened. If a party was elected maintain/increase immigration, that’d be fair enough because there was a mandate for it.

Frankly, if sexual assault carries a lesser sentence than racist tweets, that needs to be changed. As a basic principle, crimes with physical harm are worse than crimes that offend.

Click to expand...

Sky Blue Pete said:

Pretty sure inciting racial hatred causes harm but the legal system isn’t just about pissing people off it’s something Britain is hugely respected for

Click to expand...

Mucca Mad Boys said:

How do you quantify that specifically? Is there any direct evidence that the tweet lead to violence?

Now weigh that up against the 2 women sexually assault where the crime, perpetrator and victims are quantifiable.

Under normal circumstances, Lucy Connolly wouldn’t have got 31 months and probably successfully defends if she went to trial. In any case, it’s mockery that sex offenders get much more lenient sentences. Most ordinary people see that is just nonsense. The proof is in the pudding that she is now a ‘martyr’ of sorts because people have looked past what she said and looked to the ridiculousness of the sentencing. Again, in normal circumstances, a person saying what she said wouldn’t have been given the light of day following what she said. It’s a massive own goal for the establishment and anyone with political antennae can see that.

Click to expand...