Jump to content

The Politics Thread


shull

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, beyond our ken said:

What's wrong with free bikes for poor kids?

A huge step forward in social fairness and a great incentive towards living a healthy life-keeping some cars from doing the meaningless school run to boot.

It's a great idea.

To argue against free access to the internet, greatest benefit  of which will be to connect poorer families up to a wealth of information and support, would be the same as arguing against free books for schoolchildren and free libraries when they were the main access route to life-changing information and education.

The modern world is moving fast and it is right that we take steps to make sure that poorer kids don't get left behind.

Why only "poor" kids? 

Social fairness, a fecking free bike? :lol: 

You are more than naïve if you believe free bikes will stop the school run. 

Let's be realistic about free broadband, I'll help you here, the vast majority of children for the vast majority of time do not use the internet for "information or support" and, again, why only free broadband for "poor" people?

Where do we stop this free handouts, which only reinforces families that are already entrenched is the social security system, that you can get stuff without any effort or hard work.

Also, how poor do you need to be be to get this free stuff? 

Nothing is for "free" so the money has to come from somewhere, at the expense of other "stuff". 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


5 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:

"Sir" Keir Starmer to the likes of us, never forget the "Sir" part. "Sir" anything in charge of the Labour Party, think about that for a minute. The original Labour Party Keir will be spinning in his grave.

Sarwar in Scotland, the millionaire whose family don't pay their workers minimum wage. Wonder if they think he's "bright and personable"? Never mind, I'm sure he has the founding values of Labour at his core and sending his children to private school is a reflection of those values.

 

I'm assuming you don't have kids.

Surely you wouldn't drastically reduce their life choices based on your political principles? What kind of person does that to their own kids?

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm assuming you don't have kids.
Surely you wouldn't drastically reduce their life choices based on your political principles? What kind of person does that to their own kids?
Well done on not reading my posts, far less understanding them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:

'm not blaming him for using private schools, I get it, I understand it, I might have done it myself for my son if I could've.

 

Just now, salmonbuddie said:
2 hours ago, oaksoft said:
I'm assuming you don't have kids.
Surely you wouldn't drastically reduce their life choices based on your political principles? What kind of person does that to their own kids?

Well done on not reading my posts, far less understanding them.

I noticed earlier, what a walloper. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, salmonbuddie said:
3 hours ago, oaksoft said:
I'm assuming you don't have kids.
Surely you wouldn't drastically reduce their life choices based on your political principles? What kind of person does that to their own kids?

Well done on not reading my posts, far less understanding them.

So you WOULD send your kids to private school.

So why the hell are you having a go at him for doing it when you would do exactly the same?

It's just this sort of plastic lefty nonsense which attracts ridicule.

BTW, I DID read your post and I DID understand it. What I didn't do was read your subsequent post first. Compared to your utter rank hypocrisy, I believe I can live with my failing.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you WOULD send your kids to private school.
So why the hell are you having a go at him for doing it when you would do exactly the same?
It's just this sort of plastic lefty nonsense which attracts ridicule.
BTW, I DID read your post and I DID understand it. What I didn't do was read your subsequent post first. Compared to your utter rank hypocrisy, I believe I can live with my failing.
And there's the "not understanding" part. Between this and Peter Weir you're having a mare, oaky, stop while you're behind.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:

I didn't say he was perfect...

emoji846.png

Seriously, though, this is about Starmer and Sarwar, heads of the party supposedly representing "the common people". How about addressing that instead.

Are you honestly saying that you have to be "common" to be a representative of a political party? 

How, exactly, do you define "common"? 

You come across as having a chip about people that are not from the street.

Oh, and I said in an earlier post Sarwar "came across" as bright and personable. 

8 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:

Where did I say that?

Socialism, which this pair is supposed to represent, isn't hard or complicated (to me anyway), it's the battle to attain four things:

Equal access to education for all (get rid of private schools)
Equal access to healthcare for all
A roof over everyone's head (that wants one)
No-one going hungry


I'm not blaming him for using private schools, I get it, I understand it, I might have done it myself for my son if I could've. It's the hypocrisy of doing that and leading Labour I don't have any time for.

Point 1 - already in place, irrespective of private schools.

Point 2 - already in place, with countless billions being poured into the NHS every year, still never enough, seemingly.

Point 3 - Not so sure on this one, the number of people homeless isn't all down to the government, private buyers had hit the housing market hard. That'll be common people jumping aboard the property boom, damn them for not wanting to be common. 

Point 4 - I have some experience of these issues, being involved with a scheme up here. As usual, a mixture of people who truly deserve help and people who quite simply, have never tried to lift themselves and their family out of the support that is provided. No sob stories here please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Point 1 - already in place, irrespective of private schools.
Point 2 - already in place, with countless billions being poured into the NHS every year, still never enough, seemingly.
Point 3 - Not so sure on this one, the number of people homeless isn't all down to the government, private buyers had hit the housing market hard. That'll be common people jumping aboard the property boom, damn them for not wanting to be common. 
Point 4 - I have some experience of these issues, being involved with a scheme up here. As usual, a mixture of people who truly deserve help and people who quite simply, have never tried to lift themselves and their family out of the support that is provided. No sob stories here please. 


1 - should've said equal and free access to education. Private schools are an unfair advantage.

2 - for now, maybe, I strongly suspect there are people in power looking to use the NHS to line their own pockets. Quelle surprise...

3 - how did they manage that? Does social housing (or lack thereof) ring a bell? Enabling people to buy their houses from the council was misguided but I got it. Tying up the money raised from those sales thereby preventing replacements being built was unforgiveable.

4 - I have some experience down here. It's only my view but I can live with the fekkers ripping us off if it means that someone who genuinely needs help gets that help.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Are you honestly saying that you have to be "common" to be a representative of a political party? 
How, exactly, do you define "common"? 
You come across as having a chip about people that are not from the street.
Oh, and I said in an earlier post Sarwar "came across" as bright and personable.  


No, I'm saying that being a millionaire means that you're not the right person to be leading the party supposedly representing the working class. They'd be fine in the Conservative party...

[emoji846]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, salmonbuddie said:


 

 


1 - should've said equal and free access to education. Private schools are an unfair advantage.

2 - for now, maybe, I strongly suspect there are people in power looking to use the NHS to line their own pockets. Quelle surprise...

3 - how did they manage that? Does social housing (or lack thereof) ring a bell? Enabling people to buy their houses from the council was misguided but I got it. Tying up the money raised from those sales thereby preventing replacements being built was unforgiveable.

4 - I have some experience down here. It's only my view but I can live with the fekkers ripping us off if it means that someone who genuinely needs help gets that help.

 

1 - Unfair? Really?  For people who have worked hard and can offer their children a chance? Sorry, life's not that simple, and it shouldn't be I detest a "one size fits all" approach. 

2 - Oh, moving the goal posts? 

3 - Yet again, the usual approach of "blame" the government for everything, ignoring other forces that have added to this situation.

4 - Just about agree still makes my blood boil leeches milking the situation. Some focus on these members of society seem to be getting forgotten in this day of "help everybody". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, salmonbuddie said:


 

 


No, I'm saying that being a millionaire means that you're not the right person to be leading the party supposedly representing the working class. They'd be fine in the Conservative party...

emoji846.png
 

 

What if somebody worked hard and became a millionaire, are they unworthy?

This "label" is, frankly, pointless.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

1 - Unfair? Really?  For people who have worked hard and can offer their children a chance? Sorry, life's not that simple, and it shouldn't be I detest a "one size fits all" approach. 

A lot of people on low wages work hard. Do they not deserve the same privileges?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, FTOF said:

A lot of people on low wages work hard. Do they not deserve the same privileges?

Do people who work hard doing a simple job deserve the same as people who are inventive, are pushing boundaries and prepared to go the extra mile?

Not in the real world. 

Employers will, generally, reward people who contribute more to the company.

We all know people who work hard but have limitations.

10 minutes ago, FTOF said:

Sorry, life's not that simple,

If only life was like that.............................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, faraway saint said:

What if somebody worked hard and became a millionaire, are they unworthy?

This "label" is, frankly, pointless.

I don't think being a millionaire should stop you from being the leader of a Socialist party, especially if like Starmer you're from London where property prices probably puts you a good way down that road but Sarwar should be an automatic non-runner up here due to his company's wage history.

3 hours ago, faraway saint said:

Are you honestly saying that you have to be "common" to be a representative of a political party? 

How, exactly, do you define "common"? 

You come across as having a chip about people that are not from the street.

Oh, and I said in an earlier post Sarwar "came across" as bright and personable. 

Point 1 - already in place, irrespective of private schools.

Point 2 - already in place, with countless billions being poured into the NHS every year, still never enough, seemingly.

Point 3 - Not so sure on this one, the number of people homeless isn't all down to the government, private buyers had hit the housing market hard. That'll be common people jumping aboard the property boom, damn them for not wanting to be common. 

Point 4 - I have some experience of these issues, being involved with a scheme up here. As usual, a mixture of people who truly deserve help and people who quite simply, have never tried to lift themselves and their family out of the support that is provided. No sob stories here please. 

I think where the left often fails (and I've fallen into this trap myself) is that we forget people are aspirational - Tony Blair for all his faults has been the only Labour leader since Wilson in the 60s to avoid this pratfall.

Point 1 - I wouldn't ban private schools but I would remove their charitable status.

Point 2 - Again I wouldn't ban private health care but ways must be found to prevent it piggybacking on the NHS.

Point 3. - The housing market was skewed by the Tories back in the 80s when they sold off council houses at below market values and prevented councils replacing them causing shortages. Ownership/Renting should not really matter - what is important is security of tenure which is not always available with private renting

Point 4 - Why does it always come down to splitting people into the deserving and undeserving poor, the clear context is that some people are scum - isn't it?

********************

I will never vote Conservative as the party have demonized & marginalized people (from the enemy within & the looney left in the 80s to today's cultural wars & marginalization of workers rights due to the gig economy) over the course of my adult life, and continue to do so, since Thatcher came in quoting Francis of Assisi all of them have come into office talking of "levelling up" and all of them have done the complete opposite.

1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

Do people who work hard doing a simple job deserve the same as people who are inventive, are pushing boundaries and prepared to go the extra mile?

Not in the real world. 

Employers will, generally, reward people who contribute more to the company.

We all know people who work hard but have limitations.

If only life was like that.............................

In the "real world" no-one goes out alone into the Klondyke to discover gold anymore, even "inventive people who are pushing boundaries" today are merely taking advantage of the benefits society has offered and any rewards accrued should be taxed accordingly.

As usual the three posts I've quoted is a rehash of the "forelock tugging" you always come out with - the UK has one of the biggest (if not the biggest)  disparities in income between the Top&Bottom 10% in Europe - life really could be fairer, if only we choose it to be so...................

******************

I'm assuming that (like me) you're a 50+ homeowner with a decent pension to look forward to (we're all right Jack), our children may well be the first generation to be poorer than their parents (sic) - what a legacy we're leaving.

Wow that was a bit more than I intended to write!  :hammer

Edited by Bud the Baker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

As usual the three posts I've quoted is a rehash of the "forelock tugging" you always come out with

"Forelock tugging", a term the Bravehearts love, confirming the inferior complex that follows you/them around.  :lol:

Your usual chip on your shoulder post. 

The "world" you seem to desire has not, and never will, exist. :byebye

Get over it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2021 at 9:01 AM, oaksoft said:

The problem the SNP have is that anything short of a full majority is going to look like failure and might well kill any chance of a referendum being allowed.

It really is an incredibly ridiculous situation to be in but that's the reality.

Any gloating from the opposition should be tempered with the realisation that it could well be decades before the SNP lose power at Holyrood and IMO that challenge will end up coming from the Greens as environmental issues start to dominate the middle years of the century.

Hmm, I'm not so sure the opposition may not come from within the SNP itself ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:
6 hours ago, oaksoft said:
So you WOULD send your kids to private school.
So why the hell are you having a go at him for doing it when you would do exactly the same?
It's just this sort of plastic lefty nonsense which attracts ridicule.
BTW, I DID read your post and I DID understand it. What I didn't do was read your subsequent post first. Compared to your utter rank hypocrisy, I believe I can live with my failing.

And there's the "not understanding" part. Between this and Peter Weir you're having a mare, oaky, stop while you're behind.

Oh don't worry. I got my answer.

You've outed yourself as just another plastic lefty. Just like Bud the Baker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, lenziebud said:

Hmm, I'm not so sure the opposition may not come from within the SNP itself ?

It might well do depending on how the independence drive goes.

There are certainly people who are shit scared of doing anything on independence and those who want to go all Braveheart on us and make a UDI in the morning.

Also, power does funny things to people. All sorts of people start to get drunk on it and begin to make anti-leadership noises they wouldn't have dared make 14 years ago.

The issue of independence is holding a pretty disparate group of people right now. One way or another, that can't last forever but this is true of all parties who coalesce behind a few common ideals.

Back in the real world of today though, they are still the only game in town and any dreams of them losing power any time soon are pure fantasy IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

f**k me, the plastic lefties are all out in force tonight.

Abolish private health care?

Abolish private schooling?

And yet they'd use them at the drop of a hat if they could afford it.

If they can't have it, nobody can?

Is there anything more nasty than the politics of envy and spite?

Seriously, is there a full moon at the moment? 

What a state this thread is tonight. :D

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Oh don't worry. I got my answer.

You've outed yourself as just another plastic lefty. Just like Bud the Baker.

We've established that you don't respect "real" lefties either so it's a pointless insult. :1eye

This spat all started over Faraway's comparison between Starmer & Sarwar - I have no grievance with a  successful man like Starmer leading the Labour Party at UK level but not Sarwar at branch level for the reasons given.

As the diversion continued into specific policies the salient point is that every Tory leader since Thatcher has made an opening speech promising to "level up" and gone on to do the opposite.

You acknowledge that the real challenge over the coming decades will be to be to protect the environment but you're unwilling to recognize that any successful solution to this must come from a Green/Red alliance and "ridiculous taxes:1eye this will inevitably bring.

I look forward to your next unpleasant epistle...<_<

 

 

Edited by Bud the Baker
Link to comment
Share on other sites



f**k me, the plastic lefties are all out in force tonight.
Abolish private health care?
Abolish private schooling?
And yet they'd use them at the drop of a hat if they could afford it.
If they can't have it, nobody can?
Is there anything more nasty than the politics of envy and spite?
Seriously, is there a full moon at the moment? 
What a state this thread is tonight. [emoji3]


Really? Where did anyone say any of that? You really are incapable of comprehending the English language, aren't you.

Your pathetic ad hominem attacks won't work, either.

To summarise, and speaking for myself only.

Do I, personally, understand parents doing anything in otheir power to give their kids a 'better' start in life? Of course I do, I'm a father and a grandfather.

Would I have paid for private education for that reason? I genuinely don't know, I would've had lots of thinking to do. The end result of generations of sending kids to private education is exemplified by the fekkers currently in power at WM.

Would I pay for private health care for me or my family? If it was life threatening, in a heartbeat.

However, those are subjective views. Looking at things objectively (that means looking at the bigger picture, oaky, I know you struggle with these things) then I firmly believe that taking away the opportunity to buy these things and jump the queue (there's the important bit) because you're financially well off is just wrong.

If that makes me a 'plastic lefty' rather than a Peter Weir then so be it, I can live with that.
Link to comment
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...
×
×
  • Create New...