Do you want to discuss boring politics? (24 Viewers)

Skybluekyle

Well-Known Member
From the same woman who said Chris Kaba was a fine young man.



How have we got so many idiots representing us? This whole thing on reparations is utterly ridiculous.

I consider myself left of centre, but this is just unadulterated bollocks, to be honest. Slavery is literally a human problem, it's only been in the last few hundred years, spearheaded by the United Kingdom, that it is now seen as abhorrent and wrong, through the good work of early abolitionists such as Granville Sharpe, Thomas Clarkson and the Quakers. To maintain balance, the Industrial Revolution also allayed economic concerns as the industry of slavery became less important.

The Transatlantic Slave Trade, and colonialism, is a stain on our collective history, a history we all owe a debt to (figuratively, not financially), but the narrative that it was simply a "white" problem is so ahistorical. I am not saying raids did not happen, but slave traders operated in a lot of these countries calling foul that sold slaves to Europeans. I am not saying I would have any issues if the UK did offer a formal apology, but where do we draw the line on who apologises for what and when, as currently it seems pretty arbitrary?
 

Mcbean

Well-Known Member
I consider myself left of centre, but this is just unadulterated bollocks, to be honest. Slavery is literally a human problem, it's only been in the last few hundred years, spearheaded by the United Kingdom, that it is now seen as abhorrent and wrong, through the good work of early abolitionists such as Granville Sharpe, Thomas Clarkson and the Quakers. To maintain balance, the Industrial Revolution also allayed economic concerns as the industry of slavery became less important.

The Transatlantic Slave Trade, and colonialism, is a stain on our collective history, a history we all owe a debt to (figuratively, not financially), but the narrative that it was simply a "white" problem is so ahistorical. I am not saying raids did not happen, but slave traders operated in a lot of these countries calling foul that sold slaves to Europeans. I am not saying I would have any issues if the UK did offer a formal apology, but where do we draw the line on who apologises for what and when, as currently it seems pretty arbitrary?
And William Wilberforce 😮
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
I consider myself left of centre, but this is just unadulterated bollocks, to be honest. Slavery is literally a human problem, it's only been in the last few hundred years, spearheaded by the United Kingdom, that it is now seen as abhorrent and wrong, through the good work of early abolitionists such as Granville Sharpe, Thomas Clarkson and the Quakers. To maintain balance, the Industrial Revolution also allayed economic concerns as the industry of slavery became less important.

The Transatlantic Slave Trade, and colonialism, is a stain on our collective history, a history we all owe a debt to (figuratively, not financially), but the narrative that it was simply a "white" problem is so ahistorical. I am not saying raids did not happen, but slave traders operated in a lot of these countries calling foul that sold slaves to Europeans. I am not saying I would have any issues if the UK did offer a formal apology, but where do we draw the line on who apologises for what and when, as currently it seems pretty arbitrary?
I'm a lefty too and I think it's too far. Slavery was a massive stain on the world but for people who themselves have never been slaves to claim compensation for people many never even knew seems a bit much. Let's say someone wants to claim compensation for their great grandfather being a slave, but it is then found out that said GGF was responsible for a heinous crime. Should the descendent be held responsible for those crimes and be subject to civil and criminal recompense? Surely if you can claim the benefits that person was denied you must also be liable for the things they did wrong. And that is not how the legal principle works. And where might it stop? Could we claim reparations from the Vikings for the medieval pillaging?

Secondly, compensation was paid to some extent. Unfortunately it was paid to the wrong people - the slave holders. I suggest that those people and institutions be hounded to return said compensation to those who should have rightfully received it.

And I'd also point out that one of the earliest known civilisations that had slavery and dealt slaves around their empire and the known world was Egypt. There was also slavery in the Ottoman empire predating the slave trade from Elizabethan times. So it's not just a 'white man' problem. Basically anywhere you find a civilisation/empire of some kind, you will find forced labour and slavery from places they have conquered.
 

Ashdown

Well-Known Member
Ooh lets punish the general public of the UK 250 years or so after slavery was abolished. …..The great majority never actually benefited either, in fact for many years later ordinary Brits were nothing much more than slaves to the wealthy classes.
And to whom should these reparations be made ?? Some fat cat politicians ?
Stick it up your arse You grabbing cunts !
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
As an empire we stole money materials and human beings
Our historic heritage and position in the world is in the back of this theft.
I think that position is incontrovertible. No?
So the only question is what to do about it?
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
As an empire we stole money materials and human beings
Our historic heritage and position in the world is in the back of this theft.
I think that position is incontrovertible. No?
So the only question is what to do about it?

where does it end? We also brought advances. We also protected against other empires looking to do the same thing.

And the tax payers paying any reparations were mostly peasants under the same system.

Do the Canada and the US get reparations or just countries that aren’t doing well economically now? It’s just grievance nonsense that tries to make all white peoples responsible for the sins of the fathers.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
where does it end? We also brought advances. We also protected against other empires looking to do the same thing.

And the tax payers paying any reparations were mostly peasants under the same system.

Do the Canada and the US get reparations or just countries that aren’t doing well economically now? It’s just grievance nonsense that tries to make all white peoples responsible for the sins of the fathers.
What is?
I kept my comments general to see if there was common ground before moving on to solutions
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
As an empire we stole money materials and human beings
Our historic heritage and position in the world is in the back of this theft.
I think that position is incontrovertible. No?
So the only question is what to do about it?
Yes, as did many countries in a totally different culture and environment.
Not really, the product of the Industrial Revolution will have had more impact.
No.
Nothing, As shmmeee says we also brought advances.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
What is?
I kept my comments general to see if there was common ground before moving on to solutions

The idea of reparations for slavery or colonialism generally. Do we get reparations for the corn laws or how a king treated our ancestors? The general idea that people today owe you for the actions of a government their ancestors didn’t even have full suffrage to elect just seems ridiculous to me.
 

Marty

Well-Known Member
The whole idea is completely stupid suggested by grifters and weirdos who feel guilty about being white.

Anyway, would I be exempt from paying being a descendant of Polish refugees and would I be entitled to anything from the krauts?
 

Skybluekyle

Well-Known Member
As an empire we stole money materials and human beings
Our historic heritage and position in the world is in the back of this theft.
I think that position is incontrovertible. No?
So the only question is what to do about it?
I would say it's an overstated position. The UK's wealth and economic expansion was off the back of innovation, productivity of the labour force of the time and trade, whilst using the world's largest Navy to protect shipping.

Colonialism definitely had a large role to play, that is incontrovertible, agreed, slavery on the other hand is heavily disputed from an economic standpoint. Even after the loss of the Thirteen Colonies, both sides worked hard to thrash out a deal to promote and protect trade, and the middle-class on both sides already sought a so-called "special relationship".

There is a reason why so many former colonies are so prosperous now, and that is the legacy of freeports, with the removing of the racially biased forms of government set up during the days of Empire. The legacy of the British Empire is controversial, but there are many positives.
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Labour apparently to announce five new freeports

This is post Brexit Tory policy that tries to skirt around the self-inflicted trade barriers post brexit. That Labour has no serious alternative to this is really telling of how devoid of ideas they are. They are fundamentally wedded to the same economic orthodoxy as the Conservative party.
Keir Starmer said the freeports being announced next week would “have this government’s stamp on them” despite being a policy inherited from the Tories.

:ROFLMAO:
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Labour apparently to announce five new freeports

This is post Brexit Tory policy that tries to skirt around the self-inflicted trade barriers post brexit. That Labour has no serious alternative to this is really telling of how devoid of ideas they are. They are fundamentally wedded to the same economic orthodoxy as the Conservative party.


:ROFLMAO:
Freeports are good idea, I have no problem with them at all. If they’re expanding the program you’d hope the previously announced Freeport’s are doing well.

They’re not trying to skirt around post-Brexit rules in the way you think. You still need to perform the customs declarations when you either import the goods into the UK or re-export to a third country.
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Freeports are good idea, I have no problem with them at all. If they’re expanding the program you’d hope the previously announced Freeport’s are doing well.

They’re not trying to skirt around post-Brexit rules in the way you think. You still need to perform the customs declarations when you either import the goods into the UK or re-export to a third country.
Is there any evidence that they are?

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

OffenhamSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
What's the deal with the pensions? Are they planning to start taking some from my employers contribution?
There is talk of them abolishing the "salary sacrifice" for pension contributions, which will increase the amount of tax we pay and employer NI contributions.
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Is there any evidence that they are?

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
It’s not something I’ve looked into personally. With these initiatives, they’re not necessarily things that will bring in overnight benefits. You need businesses to set up at these sites and to go live operationally.

Similar to infrastructure spending and/or planning reform. The benefits tend to be more long term.

100% agree on your point on Labour’s lack of vision for the country btw. Their pitch going into the election was ‘we’re not the tories’ and they’ll just do things better. Well, we’re however long into this parliament and it’s not looking great.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
It’s not something I’ve looked into personally. With these initiatives, they’re not necessarily things that will bring in overnight benefits. You need businesses to set up at these sites and to go live operationally.

Similar to infrastructure spending and/or planning reform. The benefits tend to be more long term.

100% agree on your point on Labour’s lack of vision for the country btw. Their pitch going into the election was ‘we’re not the tories’ and they’ll just do things better. Well, we’re however long into this parliament and it’s not looking great.
Not defending them but they haven’t got a chance

Brexit
Johnson
Truss
Sunak

saw for the political class for a generation
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
Not defending them but they haven’t got a chance

Brexit
Johnson
Truss
Sunak

saw for the political class for a generation
When you put it like that I find it quite confusing that as a nation we've decided to defend Ukraine, have to be honest,Boris a double agent, I'd have had him down as the other side,does any of this weaken Europe in anyway?
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Not defending them but they haven’t got a chance

Brexit
Johnson
Truss
Sunak

saw for the political class for a generation

Who hasn’t got a chance? I assume you mean Labour so will respond in kind.

I really dislike it when a new government blames all the ills of their programme on the previous regime. Hated it when Cameron and Osborne spent 2010 blaming the weather on the previous Labour government

To sum up the Labour Party and incumbent government, they will say something like ‘we won’t tax working people’ in one sentence and be unable to define what that means when pressed upon it in the next sentence. Recently, Starmer said a working person who ‘earns their living… relies on public services… and doesn’t have the money to write cheques in an emergency’. What does that even mean? Each of those 3 themes are

The Tories deserved to be kicked out of government. The incoming lot don’t really have a clear vision and programme for government which is one of the reasons they blundered so many times in 100-150 days?

Take Reeves as chancellor, has justified cutting winter fuel allowance because of this ‘black hole’ in public finances which was 1) publicly available and 2) the figure of this ‘black hole’ changes on a weekly basis and 3) is ‘re-defining’ public debt to free up and presumably allow this black hole to be widened by another £50bn?!

When Blair won office in 1997, his government had a clear vision and policy programme. For better or worse. Keir Starmer’s Labour has wasted a lot of political capital early in this parliament and his approval rating in the toilet.
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
Who hasn’t got a chance? I assume you mean Labour so will respond in kind.

I really dislike it when a new government blames all the ills of their programme on the previous regime. Hated it when Cameron and Osborne spent 2010 blaming the weather on the previous Labour government

To sum up the Labour Party and incumbent government, they will say something like ‘we won’t tax working people’ in one sentence and be unable to define what that means when pressed upon it in the next sentence. Recently, Starmer said a working person who ‘earns their living… relies on public services… and doesn’t have the money to write cheques in an emergency’. What does that even mean? Each of those 3 themes are

The Tories deserved to be kicked out of government. The incoming lot don’t really have a clear vision and programme for government which is one of the reasons they blundered so many times in 100-150 days?

Take Reeves as chancellor, has justified cutting winter fuel allowance because of this ‘black hole’ in public finances which was 1) publicly available and 2) the figure of this ‘black hole’ changes on a weekly basis and 3) is ‘re-defining’ public debt to free up and presumably allow this black hole to be widened by another £50bn?!

When Blair won office in 1997, his government had a clear vision and policy programme. For better or worse. Keir Starmer’s Labour has wasted a lot of political capital early in this parliament and his approval rating in the toilet.
Who's agenda are the carrying out then?

The market and who are they?
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
It’s not something I’ve looked into personally. With these initiatives, they’re not necessarily things that will bring in overnight benefits. You need businesses to set up at these sites and to go live operationally.

Similar to infrastructure spending and/or planning reform. The benefits tend to be more long term.

100% agree on your point on Labour’s lack of vision for the country btw. Their pitch going into the election was ‘we’re not the tories’ and they’ll just do things better. Well, we’re however long into this parliament and it’s not looking great.

The first budget is next week. We’re basically none of the way into this parliament. Even this freeport policy is a Tory hangover.
 

Nick

Administrator
Employers national insurance going up too apparently.

Really going to town.

Shit for small businesses.
 
Last edited:

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
Who hasn’t got a chance? I assume you mean Labour so will respond in kind.

I really dislike it when a new government blames all the ills of their programme on the previous regime. Hated it when Cameron and Osborne spent 2010 blaming the weather on the previous Labour government

To sum up the Labour Party and incumbent government, they will say something like ‘we won’t tax working people’ in one sentence and be unable to define what that means when pressed upon it in the next sentence. Recently, Starmer said a working person who ‘earns their living… relies on public services… and doesn’t have the money to write cheques in an emergency’. What does that even mean? Each of those 3 themes are

The Tories deserved to be kicked out of government. The incoming lot don’t really have a clear vision and programme for government which is one of the reasons they blundered so many times in 100-150 days?

Take Reeves as chancellor, has justified cutting winter fuel allowance because of this ‘black hole’ in public finances which was 1) publicly available and 2) the figure of this ‘black hole’ changes on a weekly basis and 3) is ‘re-defining’ public debt to free up and presumably allow this black hole to be widened by another £50bn?!

When Blair won office in 1997, his government had a clear vision and policy programme. For better or worse. Keir Starmer’s Labour has wasted a lot of political capital early in this parliament and his approval rating in the toilet.
Be fair, they have only had 14 years to think about things.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Who hasn’t got a chance? I assume you mean Labour so will respond in kind.

I really dislike it when a new government blames all the ills of their programme on the previous regime. Hated it when Cameron and Osborne spent 2010 blaming the weather on the previous Labour government

To sum up the Labour Party and incumbent government, they will say something like ‘we won’t tax working people’ in one sentence and be unable to define what that means when pressed upon it in the next sentence. Recently, Starmer said a working person who ‘earns their living… relies on public services… and doesn’t have the money to write cheques in an emergency’. What does that even mean? Each of those 3 themes are

The Tories deserved to be kicked out of government. The incoming lot don’t really have a clear vision and programme for government which is one of the reasons they blundered so many times in 100-150 days?

Take Reeves as chancellor, has justified cutting winter fuel allowance because of this ‘black hole’ in public finances which was 1) publicly available and 2) the figure of this ‘black hole’ changes on a weekly basis and 3) is ‘re-defining’ public debt to free up and presumably allow this black hole to be widened by another £50bn?!

When Blair won office in 1997, his government had a clear vision and policy programme. For better or worse. Keir Starmer’s Labour has wasted a lot of political capital early in this parliament and his approval rating in the toilet.
Hence why I say they didn’t have a chance
The knives were out before day 1 and the narrative if they’re all the same (other than the reform grifters of course ffs) was nailed in the public discourse

That said the bullshit of public finance hole is embarrassing and the mess of removing the £300 winter fuel payment from pensioners that don’t need it is an mitigated disaster on the level of brown removing the 10p rate
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Hence why I say they didn’t have a chance
The knives were out before day 1 and the narrative if they’re all the same (other than the reform grifters of course ffs) was nailed in the public discourse

That said the bullshit of public finance hole is embarrassing and the mess of removing the £300 winter fuel payment from pensioners that don’t need it is an mitigated disaster on the level of brown removing the 10p rate

First few months were always going to be tough. They’ve had more traps laid than normal and seemingly the press has gone full mental desperate for scandals where there are none.

None of this will matter in five years, just whether they deliver or not. If we’re doing this centre left stuff I’d love to see Bidens manufacturing on shoring strategy adapted for here, but if Trump wins I can see the theory that cracking down on immigration and improving the economy will win back working class support as being thrown in the bin.

My worry with Starmer is he’s too process driven and too much of a believer in the status quo and that what’s gone wrong is a short term departure from that. I think Johnson and the like are the symptom of a country in decline not the cause of it.

We’ll find out next week I guess.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top