General Election 2019 thread (4 Viewers)

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · Nov 27, 2019

CCFCSteve said:
I won’t defend any politician for use of racist language. Johnson was an idiot to use that language in the article and yes, he should have apologised. As I’ve said before I don’t believe he’s a racist but only he will know, his language certainly hasn’t helped with people’s perception. I still haven’t read the whole article but understand it was defending women’s rights to wear the burka. If anyone has got it I’d like to read it (can’t find it anywhere and am not a telegraph reader - no comments please !!!)

I’ve also said previously that I don’t believe Corbyn is an anti Semite but if not his behaviour/handling of the matter is horrifically ill judged. the constant labour response of ‘but the torys are Islamophobes’ is not good enough. They are the party I would always have held in higher regard in respect of such issues. A slap of the wrists and warning letters is not what I (I’m not a blinkered Tory, I’ve voted for labour twice in there not too distant past) or others (including several labour MPs and peers) expect.

My genuine question is could anyone see a Jewish MP serving/being willing to serve in higher positions in a Labour shadow cabinet or cabinet with the way things currently are ?

Depends on the individual I suppose and if their career is of more importance to them than their religion.

As for Alexander I think it's more to do with his surroundings and upbringing rather than an actual dislike or hatred of people due to the colour of their skin. He considers it to be acceptable language because he is surrounded by people who also consider it acceptable language and their position of privilege mean they think they know better.

I for example have always wondered why in political discourse there is such a big thing about FGM, but circumcision is a perfectly acceptable cultural/religious practice. What if we changed it's description to MGM, or called FGM femicision? Would it then become acceptable? Surely if one is abhorrent so must the other be? Is that me being misogynistic, or an equalicist? As it is largely a Jewish practice does it make me anti-semitic? (FWIW I think both practices should be outlawed as they have no known medical benefits)

I think there's plenty of feminists who are sexist and people of colour who are racist because they use lazy stereotypes of men and white people in their initial judgements of people.

Brighton Sky Blue · Nov 27, 2019

Grendel said:
The world economy has shown growth off the scale over the last 40 years in all major industrialised societies that have adopted the capitalist model.

The Labour Party model is an antithesis if this. You can bluster and dance around slogans all you like but the model is regressive. It is a legitimate argument to state this is a throwback to a 1970’s world when the government in power was entirely reliant on union support and the reliance was generated purely by the power they could wield amongst the nationalised industries as a direct consequence of union collectivism.

If you seriously believe 2008 was a recession I suggest you try a labour model which has eye watering levels of inflation purely driven by union power and colossal wage demands

Ironically the capitalist model now will protect us from some of those extremities as globalisation does mean a much lower chance of spiralling inflation and the interest rate explosion. However, the reality is the spending plans are on a horrific scale - the share co-operative plans and nationalisation are clear direct throwbacks to this past

you need to make your mind up if the Blair years were real Labour Party years or not. If they are not then the investment by socialist administrations in all forms of public expenditure are lower than the subsequent Tory government. If they are then what you are supporting then is a social liberal government not a socialist one. A party ethos that is hugely different to what we see under Corbyn

Oddly you express little opinion on this.

It’s very obvious if you have not experienced an electric shock then you cannot really comment accurately what this is. You and everyone within your age group have never experienced the true gruesome impact of a socialist administration where actually the rich still are pretty rich and the poor get very poorer

be careful what you wish for

I want social democracy. That is the model that has by and large served our friends in Canada, Scandinavia, Central Europe and Australia pretty well. If you had been reading I have some big reservations about Labour this time round and it’s not a given I will be voting for them or anyone else.

2008 was a global financial crisis. I know you want to play the poor Yorkshireman contest but it was. Sparked by rampant deregulation of financial services and massive tax cuts for the rich. George W Bush put it on steroids and Obama with his stimulus package and other measures put it right. Go further back and the greatest American prosperity was achieved under the New Deal which I suppose people like you would have called commie nonsense. Their tax rates then were monstrous by comparison to now.

Grendel · Nov 27, 2019

Brighton Sky Blue said:
I want social democracy. That is the model that has by and large served our friends in Canada, Scandinavia, Central Europe and Australia pretty well. If you had been reading I have some big reservations about Labour this time round and it’s not a given I will be voting for them or anyone else.

2008 was a global financial crisis. I know you want to play the poor Yorkshireman contest but it was. Sparked by rampant deregulation of financial services and massive tax cuts for the rich. George W Bush put it on steroids and Obama with his stimulus package and other measures put it right. Go further back and the greatest American prosperity was achieved under the New Deal which I suppose people like you would have called commie nonsense. Their tax rates then were monstrous by comparison to now.

You have ignored every single thing I’ve said and indulged in playground language. I’ve tried a sensible response to your increasing histrionics - it’s now clearly pointless

CCFCSteve · Nov 27, 2019

chiefdave said:
How are they calculating £250 worse off?

From what I can see to get the £250 at the moment you'd need to be earning £11,250 or less. If someone is earning that on minimum wage then the day 1 increase in minimum wage proposed by Labour would increase their earnings to £13,703.

Once you factor in tax, NI and the marriage allowance that's a take home of £12,854 against £11,186 currently.

Does it only calculate as a loss in a very small subset who meet a specific criteria?

not sure mate, I’m divorced so never paid much attention to it ! I was responding to Ian/Dom’s discussion (based on Neils interview). The comment I made was about the higher dividend tax (£400) and also to say I have no issue with the removal of the marriage tax allowance.

Isnt the marriage allowance to do with being able to share transfer an element of your unused personal allowance though

think Neils underlying point was that people under £80k will also being paying for the increased spend (albeit I can’t imagine many !)

Brighton Sky Blue · Nov 27, 2019

Grendel said:
he lost the next election

Not true he won in 1950 and lost in 1951 with a higher share of the vote. The NHS has however stood the test of time.

Brighton Sky Blue · Nov 27, 2019

Grendel said:
You have ignored every single thing I’ve said and indulged in playground language. I’ve tried a sensible response to your increasing histrionics - it’s now clearly pointless

Your claim that 2008 wasn’t a big deal has been addressed. Your attempt at straw manning has as well. Go back to ranting on Twitter

shmmeee · Nov 27, 2019

chiefdave said:
How have you arrived at millions? The total number of claimants for the marriage allowance is 1.78m. Not all of those will be worse off overall.

1.78 is millions

/pedant

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · Nov 27, 2019

Grendel said:
The world economy has shown growth off the scale over the last 40 years in all major industrialised societies that have adopted the capitalist model.

Model designed to put economic growth above everything has higher economic growth than other societal models sensation!

But can you explain why having massive continual economic growth is so absolutely vital above all else? Why should it take precendence of physical and mental health? Why should it take precendence over our happiness and well-being? Why should it take precedence over the survival of many species of plants and animals, as well as the environment that actually sustains all life on the planet, including us?

The Earth is billions of years old - it has survived and thrived throughtout 99.99999% of it's existence without money, economics or capitalism. We as a species became dominant on this planet without them. So why is it suddenly the absolutely most vital thing for the continuation of our species? Capitalism relies on growth but last time I checked the Earth and it's resources weren't growing.

shmmeee · Nov 27, 2019

Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
Depends on the individual I suppose and if their career is of more importance to them than their religion.

As for Alexander I think it's more to do with his surroundings and upbringing rather than an actual dislike or hatred of people due to the colour of their skin. He considers it to be acceptable language because he is surrounded by people who also consider it acceptable language and their position of privilege mean they know better.

I for example have always wondered why in political discourse there is such a big thing about FGM, but circumcision is a perfectly acceptable cultural/religious practice. What if we changed it's description to MGM, or called FGM femicision? Would it then become acceptable? Surely if one is abhorrent so must the other be? Is that me being misogynistic, or an equalicist? As it is largely a Jewish practice does it make me anti-semitic? (FWIW I think both practices should be outlawed as they have no known medical benefits)

I think there's plenty of feminists who are sexist and people of colour who are racist because they use lazy stereotypes of men and white people in their initial judgements of people.

Cutting off a clitoris is an order of magnitude more barbaric than cutting off foreskin.

Agree though, neither should be done. No non essential medical treatment should be done until people can consent.

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · Nov 27, 2019

Grendel said:
IThe truth really is it would be better if no one voted at all in the election and then we’d have to redesign political systems and remove successive zombie governments - it will never happen

This is one of the few times I've agreed with you.

SkyBlueDom26 · Nov 27, 2019

Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
This is one of the few times I've agreed with you.

Fucking hell i must be dreaming!

tommydazzle · Nov 27, 2019

shmmeee said:
This is such a disingenuous take from the BBC. They’re removing married tax allowance. It’s £250/year at most and only helps if one of you isn’t working in my experience. It’s not likely to hit many low income people.

They should have been clearer about it but it’s a really desperate attack job.

It certainly can affect low income families. By definition one of the couple is on less than the personal allowance eg part time, zero hours etc and the other could be on minimum or just above minimum wage. I sorted this out for my parents as my dad's state pension plus his meagre factory pension put him just into paying tax. My mothers state pension means she's well below this so they were able to claim the £250 against some of her unused allowance. Obviously at their age they are not going to be compensated as Corbyn suggested by child care or working tax benefits. Just mentioning this for accuracy. I'm sure the Tory spin will be equally ill-thought out.

SkyBlueDom26 · Nov 27, 2019

New poll: Boris Johnson and the Conservative Party could win 366 seats at election | Daily Mail Online

Deleted member 5849 · Nov 27, 2019

Grendel said:
for the record I’ve voted conservative twice in my entire life

Guess there was a gap between National Front and BNP...

Grendel · Nov 27, 2019

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Not true he won in 1950 and lost in 1951 with a higher share of the vote. The NHS has however stood the test of time.

Under more Tory than labour administrations

Grendel · Nov 27, 2019

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Your claim that 2008 wasn’t a big deal has been addressed. Your attempt at straw manning has as well. Go back to ranting on Twitter

no it hasn’t been addressed. Quality of life for the vast majority remained massively superior compared to the catastrophic crashes previously and especially in the 70’s - tub thumping emotional response is all you are capable of

Grendel · Nov 27, 2019

Deleted member 5849 said:
Guess there was a gap between National Front and BNP...

Embarrassing - I have voted Green more than Tory

Otis · Nov 27, 2019

BBC News - 'Proof NHS at risk under US trade deal' - Labour
'Proof NHS at risk under US trade deal' - Labour

fellatio_Martinez · Nov 27, 2019

How long must it take Andrew Neil to form that hideous thatch on top of his head?

It looks like it's made up of recycled ginger pubes and shredded wheat.

Grendel · Nov 27, 2019

Otis said:
BBC News - 'Proof NHS at risk under US trade deal' - Labour
'Proof NHS at risk under US trade deal' - Labour

It’s been exposed throughout the day as utter rubbish

SkyBlueDom26 · Nov 27, 2019

Grendel said:
It’s been exposed throughout the day as utter rubbish

Its Corbyn being desperate

Otis · Nov 27, 2019

Grendel said:
It’s been exposed throughout the day as utter rubbish

Has it? The talks didn't happen?

Exposed by who?

chiefdave · Nov 27, 2019

Otis said:
Has it? The talks didn't happen?

Exposed by who?

Its been exposed by Grendel and Dom agreeing with each others posts.

SkyBlueDom26 · Nov 27, 2019

chiefdave said:
Its been exposed by Grendel and Dom agreeing with each others posts.

This thread is so biased towards one side tbh

Deleted member 5849 · Nov 27, 2019

SkyBlueDom26 said:
This thread is so biased towards one side tbh

shmmeee · Nov 27, 2019

tommydazzle said:
It certainly can affect low income families. By definition one of the couple is on less than the personal allowance eg part time, zero hours etc and the other could be on minimum or just above minimum wage. I sorted this out for my parents as my dad's state pension plus his meagre factory pension put him just into paying tax. My mothers state pension means she's well below this so they were able to claim the £250 against some of her unused allowance. Obviously at their age they are not going to be compensated as Corbyn suggested by child care or working tax benefits. Just mentioning this for accuracy. I'm sure the Tory spin will be equally ill-thought out.

As Dave showed someone on NMW will gain more than they’d lose. It’s mostly couples with a high earner and a partner either staying at home or just doing a few hours for pocket money that it’ll hit.

Edit sorry didn’t read properly. Pensioners is a valid case. Though as I’ve said our state pension is disgraceful compared to most developed countries.

shmmeee · Nov 27, 2019

Otis said:
BBC News - 'Proof NHS at risk under US trade deal' - Labour
'Proof NHS at risk under US trade deal' - Labour

The framing here is ridiculous. It’s like those far left sites that report AS accusations as “Corbyn is anti Semitic says Zionist”.

Look out the window and tell me if it’s raining BBC!

Grendel · Nov 27, 2019

Otis said:
Has it? The talks didn't happen?

Exposed by who?

Even the comments at the bottom say it’s hysteria. The document has been on the labour website for 6 weeks and it’s hilariously got for uk eyes only on the cover when handed out. It says nothing and has no proof of any arrangement. Corbyn only wins against Johnson on the NHS in every other measure he is behind so inevitably he will try and get traction but how can he reveal something that has been available for 6 weeks?

shmmeee · Nov 27, 2019

Brave Sir Boris running scared again

SkyBlueDom26 · Nov 27, 2019

shmmeee said:
Brave Sir Boris running scared again

Nobody has to do it

lifeskyblue · Nov 27, 2019

SkyBlueDom26 said:
Nobody has to do it

True. Nobody has to.
But in a democracy when you are hoping to get the support from the general public to be prime minister one would hope and expect you would put yourself forward for scrutiny and questions on both your policy and your personal integrity.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

skybluetony176 · Nov 27, 2019

shmmeee said:
Brave Sir Boris running scared again

Chick chick chick chick chicken, lay a little egg for me.

skybluetony176 · Nov 27, 2019

Having had chance to scan through some of the reported details from these documents I would think that the angriest people out there about this would be the “we know what we voted for” Brexit gang. They apparently voted to leave an undemocratic “dictatorship” not join an even worse one. They must be fuming. We have at least a veto and representatives in the EU Parliament. We’ll be handing over more sovereignty and rights to the US than we ever would to the EU had we remained and staying in the EU would be cheaper to boot on the single issue of the NHS alone.

skybluetony176 · Nov 27, 2019

Seriously, if you believe that you did know what you voted for you either have to vote anyone but Tory, abstain from voting or spoil your ballot paper in protest. You’re either full of shit or a moron otherwise, unless you’re grendull in which case you’re both.

Brighton Sky Blue · Nov 27, 2019

Grendel said:
no it hasn’t been addressed. Quality of life for the vast majority remained massively superior compared to the catastrophic crashes previously and especially in the 70’s - tub thumping emotional response is all you are capable of

Fair enough G the global recession was water off a duck’s back.

General Election 2019 thread (4 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

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

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

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency