Do you want to discuss boring politics? (26 Viewers)

duffer · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
I was sitting here mulling things over, and I have realised that a combination of 5 months Labour government and 5 months exposure to all the socialists on here has driven me further and further to the right. Well done chaps!

Hmm. In my experience no two people define the word 'socialist' in the same way. Do you think Starmer is a socialist, for instance?

It's almost a meaningless label, typically used as a pejorative.

If you're talking about people looking to make the world a slightly fairer place, with less inequality rather than more, and where education, health, opportunity, and even life expectancy, isn't limited by where you're born or who you're born to - then I'm sorry we haven't convinced you.

Similarly, if the absolute shit show of the last few Tory governments hasn't shown you what an incompetent, grasping, corrupt bunch of chancers the right wing of politics usually is, then I guess you've not been paying attention.

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

duffer said:
Hmm. In my experience no two people define the word 'socialist' in the same way. Do you think Starmer is a socialist, for instance?

It's almost a meaningless label, typically used as a pejorative.

If you're talking about people looking to make the world a slightly fairer place, with less inequality rather than more, and where education, health, opportunity, and even life expectancy, isn't limited by where you're born or who you're born to - then I'm sorry we haven't convinced you.

Similarly, if the absolute shit show of the last few Tory governments hasn't shown you what an incompetent, grasping, corrupt bunch of chancers the right wing of politics usually is, then I guess you've not been paying attention.

Starmer thinks he is.

Isn‘t the term “right wing” also typically used as a pejorative?

There have been a surprising number of posts from left leaning people on here which I would suggest aren’t supportive of the world being a fairer place or more equal for people of my generation. I have been genuinely shocked at times, tbh. Resulting in my shifting along the spectrum.

Im looking forward to joining the anti housing development, wind and solar farm protestors at the earliest opportunity. Something I wouldn’t have considered 6 months ago.

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
Starmer does.

Socialism means different things to different people like any political ideology. The only coherent definition you could get would be a general “believes in the power of collectivism to solve problems” but even that’s not consistent across every person for every topic.

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

shmmeee said:
Socialism means different things to different people like any political ideology. The only coherent definition you could get would be a general “believes in the power of collectivism to solve problems” but even that’s not consistent across every person for every topic.

Collectivism worked well for Russia.

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

duffer said:
Hmm. In my experience no two people define the word 'socialist' in the same way. Do you think Starmer is a socialist, for instance?

It's almost a meaningless label, typically used as a pejorative.

If you're talking about people looking to make the world a slightly fairer place, with less inequality rather than more, and where education, health, opportunity, and even life expectancy, isn't limited by where you're born or who you're born to - then I'm sorry we haven't convinced you.

Similarly, if the absolute shit show of the last few Tory governments hasn't shown you what an incompetent, grasping, corrupt bunch of chancers the right wing of politics usually is, then I guess you've not been paying attention.

You aren’t seriously suggesting that this Labour government has displayed outstanding competence so far, surely.

A chancellor appointed with great fanfares about her experience as an economist (a lie), another minister who has committed fraud, acceptance of freebies (clothes and spectacles), bestowing benefits to supporters (train drivers pay rises and subsequent nationalisation of rail companies).

Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.

Or, as The Who put it

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
Collectivism worked well for Russia.

Individualism works well in failed states.

PVA · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
You aren’t seriously suggesting that this Labour government has displayed outstanding competence so far, surely.

A chancellor appointed with great fanfares about her experience as an economist (a lie), another minister who has committed fraud, acceptance of freebies (clothes and spectacles), bestowing benefits to supporters (train drivers pay rises and subsequent nationalisation of rail companies).

Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.

Or, as The Who put it

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

- You keep using that line about Reeves' experience, all I can see is that her LinkedIn profile might have had some incorrect details. Oh no! Not her LinkedIn profile!

- Oh no! Not some spectacles! I guess that overshadows all Covid fraud, golden handshakes and disappearing money of the last 14 years.

- Train drivers don't deserve payrises but pensioners living halfway round the world do?

You have some valid complaints against the government, and if you just stuck to the sensible stuff you'd probably get fair replies.

But many of the issues you raise were carried out to a far worse extent over the last 14 years but you were happy to look the other way. It seems to me that it's not the the behaviour or policies you have an issue with but rather the colour of his tie and, frankly, the fact you lost.

fernandopartridge · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
Collectivism worked well for Russia.

Average life expectancy in Russia went from around 30 pre WW1 to around 70 by 1990. It declined after the market reforms and didn't get back to 1990 levels until 2015.

Meanwhile, outside of the collectivist system a few oligarchs got exceptionally rich from the previously shared resources, so that's alright.

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

fernandopartridge said:
Average life expectancy in Russia went from around 30 pre WW1 to around 70 by 1990. It declined after the market reforms and didn't get back to 1990 levels until 2015.

Meanwhile, outside of the collectivist system a few oligarchs got exceptionally rich from the previously shared resources, so that's alright.

Didnt collectivisation of farms result in quite a severe famine?

chiefdave · Dec 5, 2024

Sky Blue Pete said:
Are they telling them to pretend to be disabled

If you dig beyond the Daily Mail article it seems the assessments themselves are a bit of a shambles and instead of properly assessing people they're essentially looking out for key phrases and asking loaded questions designed to get answers which allow them to declare you fit for work.

That then led to people advising on how to handle an assessment and what questions to look out for as traps.

Of course that has led to the next step which is people working out how to game the system and how you can answer the questions to be declared not fit for work even if that isn't the case.

Essentially they need to use properly trained people to run a fit for purpose assessment but of course that would cost a lot more money.

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

PVA said:
- You keep using that line about Reeves' experience, all I can see is that her LinkedIn profile might have had some incorrect details. Oh no! Not her LinkedIn profile!

- Oh no! Not some spectacles! I guess that overshadows all Covid fraud, golden handshakes and disappearing money of the last 14 years.

- Train drivers don't deserve payrises but pensioners living halfway round the world do?

You have some valid complaints against the government, and if you just stuck to the sensible stuff you'd probably get fair replies.

But many of the issues you raise were carried out to a far worse extent over the last 14 years but you were happy to look the other way. It seems to me that it's not the the behaviour or policies you have an issue with but rather the colour of his tie and, frankly, the fact you lost.

The point is valid in was that there was a lot made of Reeves experience as an economist and what a fantastic qualification that was to be chancellor. Whether that was purely gleaned from Linkedin or not, she would have made the entry. Perhaps writing a fiction is better than publishing plagiarisms. Both give some indication of the character and trustworthiness of the individual.

I don’t believe that train drivers deserved the levels of pay rise they got or the amount they are now paid, especially when you compare it with an NHS consultant, nurse - or a bus driver for that matter. Given their resistance to modernisation, I am amazed they aren’t still insisting on having a stoker in the cab with them.

Labour tried to make themselves out to be holier than other parties. The principle of being willing to accept freebies suggests that, in fact, they are not. Thin end of wedges and slippery slopes spring to mind - it is early days after all.

As I have said previously, it is a combination of this government and the attitudes of many on here which have made me simply “lose my shit”. Someone, I can’t remember who, responded to that specific post suggesting that this was a good example of why it isn’t a particularly great idea to absolutely vilify a certain group (in my case boomers) as you are likely to get a significant abreaction.

I do realise that I am being pretty unreasonable, but fuck it.

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

chiefdave said:
If you dig beyond the Daily Mail article it seems the assessments themselves are a bit of a shambles and instead of properly assessing people they're essentially looking out for key phrases and asking loaded questions designed to get answers which allow them to declare you fit for work.

That then led to people advising on how to handle an assessment and what questions to look out for as traps.

Of course that has led to the next step which is people working out how to game the system and how you can answer the questions to be declared not fit for work even if that isn't the case.

Essentially they need to use properly trained people to run a fit for purpose assessment but of course that would cost a lot more money.

And potentially save a fortune, until people go crying to The Guardian that it is just too stressful. This is the problem with the continuation of processes temporarily introduced during Covid. I expect the assessors are WFH.

Or start an online petition.

Sky Blue Pete · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
Tax evasion is illegal, tax avoidance may not be.

I might argue that choosing an £80k company EV rather than an £80k ICE company car is tax avoidance because the real benefit is the value of the car whilst the tax regime will only charge you tax on, say, 2% of the list price for the former whereas it could be up to 37% on the latter. Choosing electric for a higher rate tax payer would mean they have avoided paying over £11,000 in income tax. Perfectly legal. Tax evasion would be not declaring that you have a company car at all, perfectly illegal.

Anyway, Sir Kier is going to sort the benefits system out. Once the inevitable review has been carried out. At some vague point in the future. Like everything else. Only having had 14 years to think about it

You’d be right about the difference one is morally wrong the other criminally wrong
Yep he’s gonna be tougher than the tories cause this is the most left wing government in a centurt

In no way whatsoever

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

Sky Blue Pete said:
You’d be right about the difference one is morally wrong the other criminally wrong
Yep he’s gonna be tougher than the tories cause this is the most left wing government in a centurt

In no way whatsoever

I suspect this government will turn out to be the “worst of both worlds”.

If adhering to the law / rules is morally wrong in the case of tax avoidance, then why can’t the same be said of the freezing of pensions for expats in SOME countries.

fernandopartridge · Dec 5, 2024

Labour has no new ideas at all, all that bluster for more promises of crackdowns

Starmer seeks to relaunch premiership with new promise to crack down on crime

After a rocky start, PM sets out ‘next phase’ covering economic growth, NHS backlogs, energy, and a ‘bobby on every beat’

www.theguardian.com

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

fernandopartridge said:
Labour has no new ideas at all, all that bluster for more promises of crackdowns

Isn’t a relaunch after only 5 months a bit of an embarrassment? They had 14 years to prepare.

Im not sure how they are going to get an additional 13,000 neighbourhood “bobbies” for £100,000,000. Works out at less than £8,000 each. I’m sure they earn more than that. Probably Reevenomics at play. (Fernando - feel free to check my maths!).

A good start on the law and order front would be to actually prosecute the Manchester airport pair!

duffer · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
You aren’t seriously suggesting that this Labour government has displayed outstanding competence so far, surely.

A chancellor appointed with great fanfares about her experience as an economist (a lie), another minister who has committed fraud, acceptance of freebies (clothes and spectacles), bestowing benefits to supporters (train drivers pay rises and subsequent nationalisation of rail companies).

Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.

Or, as The Who put it

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

If you're looking for someone to cheerlead for this government, you won't find it from me.

That said, there is at least a vague semblance of decency and competence.

An old fraud conviction and freebies by this lot (none of which I condone) can't possibly be used to justify the enormous amount of fraud, cronyism, and staggering incompetence exhibited by the Tories.

If you were as outraged by this sort of stuff as you claim, why did you (presumably) keep voting for them and supporting them here?

As for nationalising the railways, from memory even your lot did a bit of that when it finally became obvious that running them for private profit wasn't really working for the customers (shareholders and senior execs did ok though, in fairness, in those cases).

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

duffer said:
If you're looking for someone to cheerlead for this government, you won't find it from me.

That said, there is at least a vague semblance of decency and competence.

An old fraud conviction and freebies by this lot (none of which I condone) can't possibly be used to justify the enormous amount of fraud, cronyism, and staggering incompetence exhibited by the Tories.

If you were as outraged by this sort of stuff as you claim, why did you (presumably) keep voting for them and supporting them here?

As for nationalising the railways, from memory even your lot did a bit of that when it finally became obvious that running them for private profit wasn't really working for the customers (shareholders and senior execs did ok though, in fairness, in those cases).

I’m not justifying anything that the Tories did, or didn't, do.

Im sure people who voted Labour were expecting more than a “vague semblance of decency and competence”.

If you can find a pre election post of me supporting the Tories here then do let me know. I genuinely can’t remember one.
I don’t even think I have specifically supported the Tories since the election. Criticising Starmer et al isn’t supporting the Tories per se.

duffer · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
Isn’t a relaunch after only 5 months a bit of an embarrassment? They had 14 years to prepare.

Im not sure how they are going to get an additional 13,000 neighbourhood “bobbies” for £100,000,000. Works out at less than £8,000 each. I’m sure they earn more than that. Probably Reevenomics at play. (Fernando - feel free to check my maths!).

A good start on the law and order front would be to actually prosecute the Manchester airport pair!

I'm sorry that's rank hypocrisy. The Tories ran the criminal legal system into the ground.

You're endlessly whining about a single case because it's upset you. In the meantime tens of thousands of other people are waiting years for their chance at justice, because under the last 14 years of Conservatives rule the legal system has been starved of funds.

You voted for them, so don't come on here banging on about law and order because of a single case that triggers you personally - I'm afraid you supported the arseholes that fucked it for everyone.

Inside the UK's 'wild west' court system where people may have to wait until 2028 for justice to take place

A Sky News team found crumbling buildings, lawyers almost in open revolt and a judge prepared to speak out at Leicester Crown court.

news.sky.com

duffer · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
I’m not justifying anything that the Tories did, or didn't, do.

Im sure people who voted Labour were expecting more than a “vague semblance of decency and competence”.

If you can find a pre election post of me supporting the Tories here then do let me know. I genuinely can’t remember one.
I don’t even think I have specifically supported the Tories since the election. Criticising Starmer et all isn’t support8ng the Tories per se.

So just to be clear, when you're criticising Starmer, it's not to suggest that people should vote Conservative or even Reform instead?

chiefdave · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
I don’t believe that train drivers deserved the levels of pay rise they got or the amount they are now paid, especially when you compare it with an NHS consultant, nurse - or a bus driver for that matter. Given their resistance to modernisation, I am amazed they aren’t still insisting on having a stoker in the cab with them.

Can we stop with the resistance to modernisation stuff. There's a ton of modernisation agreed to and in progress.

When the previous government was saying they wouldn't agree to further modernisation as part of a pay deal what they really meant was staffing cuts and process changes to reduce safety checks.

Pretty sure most people want to be confident a train is safe when they get on it.

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2024

chiefdave said:
If you dig beyond the Daily Mail article it seems the assessments themselves are a bit of a shambles and instead of properly assessing people they're essentially looking out for key phrases and asking loaded questions designed to get answers which allow them to declare you fit for work.

That then led to people advising on how to handle an assessment and what questions to look out for as traps.

Of course that has led to the next step which is people working out how to game the system and how you can answer the questions to be declared not fit for work even if that isn't the case.

Essentially they need to use properly trained people to run a fit for purpose assessment but of course that would cost a lot more money.

The whole thing winds me right up. Not sure if I mentioned on here before if so apologies but I have a mate who is proper on his arse. Bounced from agency to agency, temporary housing to temporary housing. Had BPD and various health concerns. Can’t hold a job down because of it. Absolutely refuses to try and get any benefits because he’s too proud.

Meanwhile his family are: a former member of P1 gang and long time drug dealer, sister who spat a few kids out post school and has never worked, cousin who used to rob cars and copper cable. All now on disability, decent housing, decent car, comfortable life by comparison for a variety of bad back and depression complaints.

I’m tearing my hair out saying for fucks sake just ask them to coach you and claim because you deserve it more than them and he absolutely refuses.

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2024

chiefdave said:
Can we stop with the resistance to modernisation stuff. There's a ton of modernisation agreed to and in progress.

When the previous government was saying they wouldn't agree to further modernisation as part of a pay deal what they really meant was staffing cuts and process changes to reduce safety checks.

Pretty sure most people want to be confident a train is safe when they get on it.

It’s not about safety though is it if we’re honest? Same as the dock workers in the states. Some unions really don’t help themselves. Automation means fewer workers per output means more productivity means higher wages. Safety concerns are the job of regulators not pay negotiators tbh

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2024

If we ever do an SBT Politics Thread meet up…

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

duffer said:
So just to be clear, when you're criticising Starmer, it's not to suggest that people should vote Conservative or even Reform instead?

I simply can’t abide Starmer. I’m sure other people can make up their own minds,

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

duffer said:
I'm sorry that's rank hypocrisy. The Tories ran the criminal legal system into the ground.

You're endlessly whining about a single case because it's upset you. In the meantime tens of thousands of other people are waiting years for their chance at justice, because under the last 14 years of Conservatives rule the legal system has been starved of funds.

You voted for them, so don't come on here banging on about law and order because of a single case that triggers you personally - I'm afraid you supported the arseholes that fucked it for everyone.

Inside the UK's 'wild west' court system where people may have to wait until 2028 for justice to take place

A Sky News team found crumbling buildings, lawyers almost in open revolt and a judge prepared to speak out at Leicester Crown court.

news.sky.com

It’s the juxtaposition of rapid prosecuting of keyboard warriors and the delay in even charging tha Manchester pair who appear to have assaulted and harmed several police officers. Very interesting article but not really what the issue is in this case.

SBT · Dec 5, 2024

shmmeee said:
If we ever do an SBT Politics Thread meet up…

I'm not watching all of that, but does it least end in a charity boxing match?

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

shmmeee said:
If we ever do an SBT Politics Thread meet up…

Which one is you and which one is me, shmmeee

PVA · Dec 5, 2024

shmmeee said:
If we ever do an SBT Politics Thread meet up…

Not enough mentions of the word cuck.

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

chiefdave said:
Can we stop with the resistance to modernisation stuff. There's a ton of modernisation agreed to and in progress.

When the previous government was saying they wouldn't agree to further modernisation as part of a pay deal what they really meant was staffing cuts and process changes to reduce safety checks.

Pretty sure most people want to be confident a train is safe when they get on it.

A contractual requirement to work the occasional Sunday would probably be helpful.

Does restarting their lunch break because a manager has spoken to them really impact on safety?

Grendel · Dec 5, 2024

Angela Rayner has let herself go

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
Which one is you and which one is me, shmmeee

Im the woke old lady you’re the condescending old man I reckon

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2024

A good explanation of the problem many rationalists like me have with conspiracy theorists in general.

shmmeee · Dec 5, 2024

MalcSB said:
It’s the juxtaposition of rapid prosecuting of keyboard warriors and the delay in even charging tha Manchester pair who appear to have assaulted and harmed several police officers. Very interesting article but not really what the issue is in this case.

There’s not though is there? There’s rapid prosecuting of those inciting ongoing riots. At worst others are getting a visit from the local LGBTQ Relations Officer or whatever for a non crime hate incident.

MalcSB · Dec 5, 2024

shmmeee said:
There’s not though is there? There’s rapid prosecuting of those inciting ongoing riots. At worst others are getting a visit from the local LGBTQ Relations Officer or whatever for a non crime hate incident.

Whilst apologising for my “shorthand” description, it’s still double standards isn’t it, or 2 tier justice. Continued failure to charge, or make a decision to charge, could In itself incite protest.

We will probably have clean energy before those two are charged.

Do you want to discuss boring politics? (26 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

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