Eh watch this be turned around in the tories favour like it was their idea all along. I mean it's a positive still but I fear it'll be used as an excuse them by doing the bare minimum
UK General Election 2017 |OT2| No Government is better than a bad Government
- Thread starter Jezbollah
- Start date
- Status
Eh watch this be turned around in the tories favour like it was their idea all along. I mean it's a positive still but I fear it'll be used as an excuse them by doing the bare minimum
Theonik
Member
No. I meant using said humanitarian crisis to criticise Corbyn. Press does it too.
I don't mean to generalise and obviously there is exemptions but actually attitudes of unionist especially during the indyref can be quite enlightening. Some people fail to understand that the stability of the union is prerequisite on mutual respect and understanding of how we are better off working together and instead like to blame nationalists for trying to break up the union as if they don't even deserve the right to be heard. You even see that attitude here on GAF on occasion!
The Friendly Monster
Member
I see, I don't follow the UK press closely and was quite shocked when I heard his statement and the PM's response.
thanks, magic money tree.
That's fucking rich of May considering the way her party is going on about all the trade deals we will make outside the EU
Indeed. But Blair still holds some of the blame if we are talking about the social housing problem. Theresa May's point stands.
And people are finally wising up to that:
For the first time since the crash, Britain favours more tax and spend
Dirtyshubb
Member
While i can definitely see your point, i do still think using a previous Labour government as an excuse misses the point.
Did the previous Labour government do shitty and terrible things? For sure.
Does that absolve the Tories from any blame? Absolutely not.
At the end of the day the Tories have been in power for 7 years, trying to defend yourself from attack by saying "Yeah well Labour did it too" doesn't work or dilute the countless shitty things they are responsible for.
I forget, the Tories are only responsible for the good things, everything bad is done to Labour, the EU and immigrants. How could i forget.
Dirtyshubb
Member
*Double post, crap*
Realising that for most people they probably mean "Those rich fuckers and fucker companies need to actually pay their tax" but the government will instead come out and say "More tax for the bottom 95%".
The most depressing thing seeing that opinion poll?
Realising that for most people they probably mean "Those rich fuckers and fucker companies need to actually pay their tax" but the government will instead come out and say "More tax for the bottom 95%".
HazySaiyan
Banned
I hope the population at large start to see how unnecessary austerity really is. It's pure ideology, and an abhorrent one at that.
Spuck-uk
Banned
OverBlood 3
Banned
Dirtyshubb
Member
Not according to Conservatives, they believe in trickle down economics and any potential rise on corporate or rich person tax will drive them abroad and we will lose all that money that isnt being circulated.Corbyns labour have it the right way round
Spuck-uk
Banned
I think they already are starting to see, I think it was a huge factor in the GE upset.
Miles Quaritch
Member
I'd worry about quality at that price. How are they?
I usually buy a couple of salmon fillets for about £6, that's fresh though.
It's frozen, but pretty good. The tuna in particular is great for the price, and the cod is great for a soup or similar
Huw_Dawson
Member
Point of order: ending the public sector pay cap was also LD policy - it is a win for both parties. In fact it'd also be a bit of a win for Lucas, I think?
Looking over the new government's spending commitments so far, it does seem like Osbourne-style austerity is being thrown out and some new moderate position is replacing it.
Spuck-uk
Banned
They're actually pretty good.
The real pro buy is getting a load of tilapia if you're making fish stew/curry/stirfry. Cheap as hell, incredibly sustainable.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
lmao dude this is not a liberal democrat win
Huw_Dawson
Member
It's a victory for everyone that campaigned to end the freeze - Labour, LDs, I think the Greens (Plaid+SNP have that issue devolved but still were on board with it IIRC).
Let's be cheerful together.
He was talking to Sinn Fein, at the same time that Margaret Thatcher and the rest of the government were.
So unless you've got some empirical evidence to prove otherwise I'm not sure what you're blanket statements mean.
JonnyDBrit
Member
At the very least, it's interesting we're now sort of at a point where a major strategy for left leaning parties is to basically win without winning. The numbers still don't entirely favour them if matters actually did go to a vote, without the help of a Tory rebellion, but there's now a swathe of stuff where the government, if the questions were asked, do not want to be seen giving the wrong answer on.
So ask away, Corbyn.
So ask away, Corbyn.
Audioboxer
Member
I actually have more empathy for Unionists who base their feelings on emotions/romanticising what the UK is/has been for hundreds of years (we've gone through Wars together/this is all we know/etc), rather than what you refer to as some who demand allegiance. That's the kind of arrogant little Britiain attitudes that have embarrassed the UK for a while when both our MPs and citizens talk about things like the EU, or how we're a mini-America or how big a dick Britiain has. It's like small man syndrome on steroids. Instead of being happy with what we have and working within our means, we have to try and present ourselves as the best at everything, the smartest, the strongest and a force to be reckoned with (we have Nukes we cannot afford... Hooo Haaa!). Hence why some English MPs do attempt to bully the smaller nations within the Union as that attitude transfers from talking about the UK as a whole, to demanding the little nations fall in-line.
Some of that being rather funny around Brexit where they shouted about leaving the EU and becoming independent (take back control!!!), but turned right around and said to Scots who support independence don't you dare, you can't survive without us. Take that option off the table you little cretins!
That aside, I accept it's a very complex, messy and emotional debate. Where you do get a lot of unrest is having to be ruled by a Conservative party which in it's more recent generational forms has wrecked and mismanaged the UK (as did Labour before them, I'm not a Labour fanboy unable to criticise what Labour have done in recent years). That pushes people to feel enough is enough. Corbyn and the recent Labour manifesto for some Scots was probably the closest thing we've seen to some of what we have/get proposed with up here, and then our Unionist voters went and favoured the Conservatives... That was madness. Corbyn or no Corbyn, I expected more Scots to realise the meaning of voting for more than one policy. The irony there Labour IS a pro-Union vote in Scotland. I know we wiped out Labour in 2015 but that was because they were being a bit Tory-lite. Corbyn's way of doing things and manifesto is more similar to what the SNP propose, but with the pro-Union bulletpoint added.
And I'm sorry it pisses off Unionists indyref2 came back so quickly, but like it or not it IS because of Brexit. We did vote remain up here and if it were Scotland/Wales and NI taking England out of the EU as part of our Union you can damn well bet there would be English people at least EXPLORING the idea of leaving the Union to stay in the EU and let the rest of us go off and wreck our economies further. Not that that could happen though, with the tiny populations of the rest of the Union versus England. It's to make an illustrative point for anyone who has that fierce angry demand inside them that the rest of the countries in the UK should forever swear allegiance to the UK no matter what. Relationships can get rocky and sometimes breakups do happen when serious changes get imposed. That's life.
A Labour government under Corbyn is probably the first non-SNP party setup I could potentially get behind. Sadly Corbyz is old and his chance is probably gone now (unless we do get another quick election), and we'll have to wait and see if it's yet again another Tory-lite leader Labour install next time around. Corbyn and his manifesto is too left wing! .... Yeah, sure, okay.
Getting austerity to ease up a little is as much of a win as could be expected given polling at the start of the year.
If you want to look at how the GE has caused the Tories to react, look no further than my MP, that opportunistic git John Redwood, who wrote that it was time to end austerity the week after the vote.
Huw_Dawson
Member
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/27/reduce-the-voting-age-to-16-across-the-uk?CMP=fb_gu
I'd love this to happen. 16 and 17 year olds should absolutely be given the vote.
I'd love this to happen. 16 and 17 year olds should absolutely be given the vote.
Sadly I don't see this happening, it has no benefit to the conservatives, the young will 80% votes other parties
Audioboxer
Member
One of the SNP MP's asked May that directly in the commons the other week and she explicitly said we have different views and it won't be happening.
The Tories are petrified of youth having a vote and of course have disdain for them because "dumb kids don't understand the finer points to austerity". Some kids going through school with Modern Studies/politics education probably know more than your average middle aged voter....
Camp Freddie
Member
Yup, my shop wander involves Iceland, Wilkos, Lidl, 99p Store, greengrocers then Waitrose for the last few bits and pieces, a cake and a free coffee
It's the only way to keep the costs down.
I used to buy my kids a sandwich from a little Waitrose store when I was shopping.
Unfortunately this led to my kids loudly complaining, "Can we go to Waitrose now?" whenever I took them to town.
Everyone must have though we were the most middle-class family in the country.
That Waitrose doesn't exist anymore. I think it was in danger of bankrupting the entire company when they had a tiny supermarket in the middle of the city centre and you run a nationwide offer of "free coffee for loyalty card holders, no purchase required".
I'd go in and there'd be two dozen people queuing for coffee and no queue at all at the regular tills.
Real Job title for that should read.
"Lucifer campaign Manager Enlgand
For Tory campaign headquaters
Salary. 1 Soul.
The Tory party is looking for a number of people to appoint as campaign managers for Lucifers next run as prime minister. A successful campaign manager must be willing to sell their soul and self respect to oil the machine of evil. They must also be high skilled at lying, fiddling campaign funds and creating a seat of skulls from the poor. The right person must be able to quickly adapt to whatever new idea the daily mail wants and is able to perform a series of u-turns if so wished. The role will also require the person to meet plebs. Previous experience working at the Sun would be advantageous although a soul is required."
I think that is to young to vote for stuff.
If anything i am of the firm belief that the voting age should be raised to 21 and be made mandatory for all even if it means you turning up and spoiling your own vote. Along with proportional representation.
Labour gets a membership surge after the election and the Conservatives hire in people
21? That's crazy. 18 is effectively the age where you're a fully fledged adult (except where the minimum wage in concerned, sadly), so it makes sense that an age boundary should be placed there, at a minimum. Once you start increasing the age, you enter the uncomfortable scenario where you're effectively a legal adult, without representation.
I wonder how that works. Rarely meet a Tory MP who'd talk to anyone earning under £40k
Audioboxer
Member
Care to express further as to why? You're probably going to get piled on for that, considering everything you can do at 16, let alone 18, so is it just voting you want at 21 or do you feel other adult responsibilities should get bumped?
http://www.themix.org.uk/crime-and-safety/your-rights/what-age-can-i-9102.html
And then the UK would stand out as one of the few places not at 18
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_age
Eyes can roll at Scotland going down to 16, but you've got an uphill battle to convince widespread thought the UK should go up to 21.
Theonik
Member
I refuse to talk to anyone making less than 90 tbh.
Sodding_Gamer
Member
Why? What is your reason for being against young people at age 16 to vote?
There is no cut off from the other end of the spectrum? Is it ok for my grandad who is barely with it able to vote when he doesn't have long on this planet anyway? Yes, and who has more to gain and lose from said vote? The younger population.
I'm not talking about my 'actual' grandad, just hypothetical, but if you think 16 is too young from an educational point of view, then there is an argument to be made for people who are far too old, who have less at stake because of how long they have left to see any impact on society, from said vote.
To be clear I'm not saying that should happen, just going by your argument of wanting the voting age to increase.
Remember that MP for South-East Cornwall who said she was "really pleased" that there were food banks in her constituency during a hustings, got booed/heckled by the audience, and then threatened to phone the police and throw out a woman in the crowd?
Now I don't condone any of the stuff she mentioned here, but maybe she should have a think about why she got such a reaction instead of bringing up some half-arsed point about intimidation putting off good people from becoming MPs just so she can play the martyr.
https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/880068796261773312
Now I don't condone any of the stuff she mentioned here, but maybe she should have a think about why she got such a reaction instead of bringing up some half-arsed point about intimidation putting off good people from becoming MPs just so she can play the martyr.
https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/880068796261773312
Looking at the stats and facts here, it'd be hard to convince me to lower the traditional voting age to 16. It's difficult to measure maturity, so that's going by the fact that a lot of the responsibilities require parental consent. However, I feel like we should definitely do what Scotland did for their Independence Referendum, and lower it to 16 for referenda, or at least require some semblance of a super-majority.
Yeah, basically and I would say the kids are likely in education, surrounded by educators, quite open and passionate and willing to discuss different views etc. Getting them interested in politics at 16 and how it effects their life is ideal. It's another aspect of schooling that needs discussed along with other life skills like what is fake news, money, tax etc. that would help set young adults into the bigger world better. That's what the Tories and others are afraid of.
Audioboxer
Member
Political satire, disagreement and calling someone a cunt is one thing, but you cannot start doing things said in that video if they're true. Here's your proof, no matter how angry you are, if you cannot control your own behaviour all it will do is make martyrs out of people and deflect from whatever original point you were trying to make. It's why political violence/threats and direct aggravated attacks do not lead to anything productive. Other than you potentially getting in legal trouble, and whoever you do it to, no matter how nasty they might be, having justified reason to call you out and/or take legal action themselves.
People need to learn to control their emotions better when they take it to the levels of some of what is in that video. Protest, generalised comment and sending letters to MPs/parliament/etc is fine, but do not start intimidating/threatening or worse. As bad as the UK can be it is some form of a democracy and we can get change implemented by voting/protesting/campaigning. There is parts of the system that might be unfair/needing debated, but we can attempt to fight for that through debate/protest/campaigning, not pissing on peoples doors and directly targetting their home. That is not acceptable.
I get that, I accept not wanting to go lower than 18 to be a reasonable position to take. I don't really see wanting to raise it to 21 as reasonable, though.
Oh yeah, I agree with you there. (You may have mixed up my stance with the 21+ guy, because I quoted you for the information link.)
It is a tricky question though, where you put the voting age. You of course have to ask yourself how mature you think someone should be before being able to vote, and then have to use some kind of statistical method to determine where you have an acceptable fraction of people hitting that maturity requirement, while having some kind of upper limit representing legal maturity. And then there should be some kind of bypass mechanism - for example, if you're 17 and at university, you should probably be able to vote. (The uni has already deemed you as mature enough to study, for example.)
Audioboxer
Member
No no, I understand your point clearly. I'm just adding I agree with you. I think sticking by 18 is a fair position to take (even if I support 16~17 having a chance), but I cannot stretch to 21. I was adding for that poster to know most of the world settles on 18, and the UK would actually be an anomaly to switch to 21.
EdwardTivrusky
Member
Yeah, they used to have the cups by the coffee machine then they realised people were wandering in off the street, making a free coffee and wandering out. Then they moved the cups to behind the tills and now the cups are behind the tills and you have to buy something too.
Apparently the Waitrose free coffee is causing carnage amongst the local coffee shops as the little old ladies now grab a coffee and cake from 'trose instead of sitting in coffee shops all day.
- Status