Do you want to discuss boring politics? (15 Viewers)

duffer · Jul 18, 2023

And of course, the Government's solution to a falling birth rate is a two-child benefit cap and a vigorous commitment to reduce immigration.

Supported completely by the (supposedly) Labour government in waiting.

For the first time in our lives, the average height of children is falling (malnutrition, basically), and the average lifespan of the poorest members of our society is reducing.

These things were all heading in a positive direction until relatively recently.

We are quite literally going backwards as nation, and no one in power or near power has any great interest in changing things.

skybluetony176 · Jul 18, 2023

fatso said:
No, the solution will be to encourage more immigration.

The government is struggling with that. They’ve just extended the Hong Kong program by 12 months because uptake has been far far lower than expected. An estimated 6.5M Hong Kongese qualify for automatic British citizenship and last time I looked less than 200K had taken up the offer over the original open door period.

I think you’re right though. We need more immigration. That’s going to be a difficult sell at a GE in the climate that the current government has created though.

shmmeee · Jul 18, 2023

fatso said:
Class sizes are predicted to fall dramatically in the coming years, ironically not due to political intervention, but because of the plummeting birth rate.
Already a couple of the better primary schools in Birmingham (where my daughter works) are saying they are actually undersubscribed for next September's intake. This has been unheard of before.

Intake will drop. Schools are paid per pupil so number of teachers will drop in line. We won’t get smaller class sizes.

Grendel · Jul 18, 2023

chiefdave said:
got more than double that in a couple of hours and then the GoFundMe appears to have been taken down

not going to pretend to know the inner working of the Labour Party or their selection process but some of the selections recently, and in particular the people who appear to have been blocked from running, raises a few eyebrows

page is back up and he’s got £75,000!

skybluetony176 · Jul 18, 2023

duffer said:
And of course, the Government's solution to a falling birth rate is a two-child benefit cap and a vigorous commitment to reduce immigration.

Supported completely by the (supposedly) Labour government in waiting.

For the first time in our lives, the average height of children is falling (malnutrition, basically), and the average lifespan of the poorest members of our society is reducing.

These things were all heading in a positive direction until relatively recently.

We are quite literally going backwards as nation, and no one in power or near power has any great interest in changing things.

We seem to be in a situation similar to the US with gun control. The answer in America to mass shootings is more gun ownership.

In the UK the answer to decline by moving further and further to the right is to continue moving further right. Apparently. If you listen to the government and it’s compliant press. No signs that new new labour are going to pull it back to the centre let alone to the left.

shmmeee · Jul 18, 2023

chiefdave said:
got more than double that in a couple of hours and then the GoFundMe appears to have been taken down

not going to pretend to know the inner working of the Labour Party or their selection process but some of the selections recently, and in particular the people who appear to have been blocked from running, raises a few eyebrows

Standard stuff really. Under Corbyn it was parachuting in Zara Sultana and the like. Still, a few people will earn some money off go fund me.

duffer · Jul 18, 2023

shmmeee said:
Standard stuff really. Under Corbyn it was parachuting in Zara Sultana and the like. Still, a few people will earn some money off go fund me.

Politely disagree mate. Whether you liked Corbyn or not, he at least tried to unite the left and right of the party.

Under Starmer it's quite clearly and obviously a purge of the left using any pretext available.

fernandopartridge · Jul 18, 2023

PVA said:

This is you, this is.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

clint van damme · Jul 18, 2023

duffer said:
Politely disagree mate. Whether you liked Corbyn or not, he at least tried to unite the left and right of the party.

Under Starmer it's quite clearly and obviously a purge of the left using any pretext available.

That was a major mistake by Corbyn.
Tactically, Starmer is probably right to purge the left if he wants to achieve his goal of a centre right tory lite party.

shmmeee · Jul 18, 2023

duffer said:
Politely disagree mate. Whether you liked Corbyn or not, he at least tried to unite the left and right of the party.

Under Starmer it's quite clearly and obviously a purge of the left using any pretext available.

He really didn’t. Not when it came to selections. He pulled all the same trucks everyone else does when in power.

skybluetony176 · Jul 18, 2023

I wonder if this will get as bunch coverage as the Huw Edwards story.

GB News Star Dan Wootton Unmasked in Cash-for-Sexual Images Catfishing Scandal

In the first part of its three-year special investigation, Byline Times reveals the accounts of victims targeted by the powerful TV presenter

bylinetimes.com

Probably not.

Deleted member 5849 · Jul 18, 2023

skybluetony176 said:
I wonder if this will get as bunch coverage as the Huw Edwards story.

GB News Star Dan Wootton Unmasked in Cash-for-Sexual Images Catfishing Scandal

In the first part of its three-year special investigation, Byline Times reveals the accounts of victims targeted by the powerful TV presenter

bylinetimes.com

Probably not.

Tbf he's a nobody.

PVA · Jul 18, 2023

fernandopartridge said:
This is you, this is.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

Fuck off and enjoy carrying on telling everyone how perfect your ideology is from the sidelines

skybluetony176 · Jul 18, 2023

Deleted member 5849 said:
Tbf he's a nobody.

Wash your mouth out. He’s the lead anchor on the fourth most important “news” channel in the UK. Him being a nobody isn’t the reason it won’t get the coverage though. If he was a nobody at the BBC it would be getting loads of coverage, even on the BBC itself.

shmmeee · Jul 18, 2023

PVA said:
Fuck off and enjoy carrying on telling everyone how perfect your ideology is from the sidelines

Sorry man, I can’t support keeping a policy that saves little short term and costs loads long term and outs hundreds of thousands of kids into poverty. I’d literally cut everything else first before putting kids into poverty, the long term effects and costs are astronomical.

Most importantly, we need British people having kids if we are also going to keep immigration low like he says.

Labours moderate offer should be “we can use the same money but with better priorities” not “we won’t change any policy”

PVA · Jul 18, 2023

shmmeee said:
Sorry man, I can’t support keeping a policy that saves little short term and costs loads long term and outs hundreds of thousands of kids into poverty. I’d literally cut everything else first before putting kids into poverty, the long term effects and costs are astronomical.

Most importantly, we need British people having kids if we are also going to keep immigration low like he says.

I absolutely don't support that policy either, I never said I did. I fully agree with you on it.

FP is just being a dick, that's why I was telling him to fuck off, nothing to do with that policy

shmmeee · Jul 18, 2023

PVA said:
I absolutely don't support that policy either, I never said I did. I fully agree with you on it.

FP is just being a dick, that's why I was telling him to fuck off, nothing to do with that policy

Apologies. This one has really pissed me off. Take £3bn from literally anywhere if money is the issue.

Im also concerned about a strategy which takes clearly fictional budget projections from the Tories and binds ourselves to them. I don’t feel they’re hitting the “there’s no money left” angle half as hard as the Tories did in 2010 and it’s far more justified.

skybluetony176 · Jul 18, 2023

Deleted member 5849 said:
Tbf he's a nobody.

TBF if half the accusations flying around online are true there’s a lot more to come out yet and the press will have to pick it up, along with the relevant authorities. Dan Wooton has apparently removed any mention of Hugh Edwards from his twitter history and the authorities. If there’s any truth in it of course.

Sky Blue Pete · Jul 18, 2023

skybluetony176 said:
I wonder if this will get as bunch coverage as the Huw Edwards story.

GB News Star Dan Wootton Unmasked in Cash-for-Sexual Images Catfishing Scandal

In the first part of its three-year special investigation, Byline Times reveals the accounts of victims targeted by the powerful TV presenter

bylinetimes.com

Probably not.

Not on gb news

PVA · Jul 18, 2023

shmmeee said:
Apologies. This one has really pissed me off. Take £3bn from literally anywhere if money is the issue.

Im also concerned about a strategy which takes clearly fictional budget projections from the Tories and binds ourselves to them. I don’t feel they’re hitting the “there’s no money left” angle half as hard as the Tories did in 2010 and it’s far more justified.

No need to apologise! And yes, you find the money to keep kids out of poverty, that's just a given surely.

PVA · Jul 18, 2023

Sky Blue Pete said:
Not on gb news

The funny thing is that just days ago GB News were saying it's a disgrace that the BBC were standing by Edwards.

And now this.

Which is much worse.

skybluetony176 · Jul 18, 2023

Sky Blue Pete said:
Not on gb news

The article came out yesterday before he was due to go on air yesterday with wife beater Stanley Johnson.

skybluetony176 · Jul 18, 2023

PVA said:
The funny thing is that just days ago GB News were saying it's a disgrace that the BBC were standing by Edwards.

And now this.

Which is much worse.

It’s being alleged that The Sun have known about his behaviour for a long time also, like the whole time.

fatso · Jul 18, 2023

skybluetony176 said:
The government is struggling with that. They’ve just extended the Hong Kong program by 12 months because uptake has been far far lower than expected. An estimated 6.5M Hong Kongese qualify for automatic British citizenship and last time I looked less than 200K had taken up the offer over the original open door period.

I think you’re right though. We need more immigration. That’s going to be a difficult sell at a GE in the climate that the current government has created though.

It won't be long before we are begging people in Hong Kong (as well as other countries) to come here. In fact we will be competing for young people globally.

A catastrophic collapse in birth rate is predicted and already evident. So in a few years time or so there won't be enough school leavers entering the workplace to generate the tax or revenue to pay for all the pensioners, and NHS etc etc.

There is a possible solution however, and that's to start shagging more!!!

fernandopartridge · Jul 18, 2023

PVA said:
I absolutely don't support that policy either, I never said I did. I fully agree with you on it.

FP is just being a dick, that's why I was telling him to fuck off, nothing to do with that policy

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

clint van damme · Jul 18, 2023

fernandopartridge said:
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

Speccy c**t

skybluetony176 · Jul 18, 2023

fatso said:
It won't be long before we are begging people in Hong Kong (as well as other countries) to come here. In fact we will be competing for young people globally.

A catastrophic collapse in birth rate is predicted and already evident. So in a few years time or so there won't be enough school leavers entering the workplace to generate the tax or revenue to pay for all the pensioners, and NHS etc etc.

There is a possible solution however, and that's to start shagging more!!!

It’s almost as if freedom of movement promoted a fluid workforce that negated us from the issues of falling birth rates and an ever ageing population.

fernandopartridge · Jul 18, 2023

clint van damme said:
Speccy c**t

I'm wearing lenses today you bastard

rob9872 · Jul 18, 2023

fatso said:
There is a possible solution however, and that's to start shagging more!!!

Let's get out there and spread our sky blue super seed far and wide

clint van damme · Jul 18, 2023

rob9872 said:
Let's get out there and spread our sky blue super seed far and wide

Aren't you already under a restraining order for this type of behaviour?
As the judge explained, you can't get women pregnant by wanking oner the side of a bridge on a windy day.

PVA · Jul 18, 2023

fernandopartridge said:
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

clint van damme · Jul 18, 2023

PVA said:

How many Jewish members expelled under Starmer?
Don't tell me, 'wrong kind of jews'.

Ian1779 · Jul 18, 2023

PVA said:

Supertanskiii must be your burner account.

duffer · Jul 18, 2023

shmmeee said:
He really didn’t. Not when it came to selections. He pulled all the same trucks everyone else does when in power.

It's gone way beyond selections for Starmer, he's clearing the party of the left wherever possible.

Do you genuinely think Corbyn would have deselected a popular, effective, but right-leaning mayoral candidate, already in post, and with a very substantial majority. Starmer actually just did that.

This isn't Labour party politics as usual, this is a determined shift to the right brooking no dissent.

If Corbyn had tried something similar there would have been an absolute meltdown from the centrists, whereas the left of the party (and the voters) are expected to shut up and stay loyal regardless.

Starmer is an idiot if he thinks this will protect him when in power. The Mail and Sun etc. will come for him regardless, and the unions and other progressives already treat him with deep suspicion. If he doesn't attract enough Tory funding the party membership will reduce to a rump, the big unions will stop funding Labour, and he won't be able to campaign effectively next time out regardless.

My prediction: Five years more Tory-lite and austerity, and when the voters see that nothing changes they'll switch back or switch off. It's the chance of a generation gone begging because of one man's cowardice and mendacity.

clint van damme · Jul 18, 2023

duffer said:
It's gone way beyond selections for Starmer, he's clearing the party of the left wherever possible.

Do you genuinely think Corbyn would have deselected a popular, effective, but right-leaning mayoral candidate, already in post, and with a very substantial majority. Starmer actually just did that.

This isn't Labour party politics as usual, this is a determined shift to the right brooking no dissent.

If Corbyn had tried something similar there would have been an absolute meltdown from the centrists, whereas the left of the party (and the voters) are expected to shut up and stay loyal regardless.

Starmer is an idiot if he thinks this will protect him when in power. The Mail and Sun etc. will come for him regardless, and the unions and other progressives already treat him with deep suspicion. If he doesn't attract enough Tory funding the party membership will reduce to a rump, the big unions will stop funding Labour, and he won't be able to campaign effectively next time out regardless.

My prediction: Five years more Tory-lite and austerity, and when the voters see that nothing changes they'll switch back or switch off. It's the chance of a generation gone begging because of one man's cowardice and mendacity.

Re: your last paragraph, the only thing I'd question is is it cowardice, or will it be mission accomplished?

Do you want to discuss boring politics? (15 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency