Support NeoGAF

[Bumhead]

Any sensible remainers will already be making plans to leave the country. Why would you want to stay in a country where the majority of the voting public is racist/bigoted and generally okay with voting for racist rhetoric.

All fine and well to say let's come together, who were the motherfuckers out there using Nazi propaganda to win the referendum?

So no, let's not get on with it. Let's look at why people voted for Brexit, what voting tactics were used, what people felt comfortable endorsing and hopefully after all of that, the sane people will say fuck this miserable country, fuck the racist cunts, I'll move to mainland Europe where mine and my families future is more secure in the short, medium and long term.

I'm only a passing reader of this and other Brexit related threads, but you are consistently one of the most childish contributors to this overall discussion.

That you think upping sticks to leave and set up life in another country is such a simple reality for 48% of the electorate that you think "any sensible remainers will already be making plans to leave", says to me that you're not actually in that sort of situation and don't know what you're talking about.

Props to you (and others) for the continual trivialisation of actual Nazi history and widespread shouting down people for being racist, too.

The level of discourse on Brexit from posts like yours above is about as gutter level as it is on the opposite side. It's absolutely pathetic.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

You get taxed on rental income on that second home anyway. But seriously though. Crab is right.

Aye, and stamp duty is more on second homes etc etc. I'm just saying that these are good things imo. First time buyers and single property owners should have as much help as we can give them. Second home ownership should be severely discouraged.

Edit:

Regarding this inheritance tax thing, I'll just say that the "accumulation of wealth" that it was originally aimed to curtail should not include people who save us their whole life to buy a relatively average property, who live there, die there, and want their kids to have it. That money was already taxed 'on the way up' - every penny earned to pay for it.

 

[Rodelero]

Regarding this inheritance tax thing, I'll just say that the "accumulation of wealth" that it was originally aimed to curtail should not include people who save us their whole life to buy a relatively average property, who live there, die there, and want their kids to have it. That money was already taxed 'on the way up' - every penny earned to pay for it.

Don't you think that this just entrenches a level of social immobility?

 

[*Splinter]

Props to you (and others) for the continual trivialisation of actual Nazi history and widespread shouting down people for being racist, too.

His claim that Nazi propaganda was used is kind of true though?

I don't think it's a trivialisation to point out similarities between current and historical events - else what is even in the point in learning history?

 

[Snowman]

Regarding this inheritance tax thing, I'll just say that the "accumulation of wealth" that it was originally aimed to curtail should not include people who save us their whole life to buy a relatively average property, who live there, die there, and want their kids to have it. That money was already taxed 'on the way up' - every penny earned to pay for it.

At the same time, the children of a family who could afford to save for a house are already much "better off" than the children of a family who can't, why should the children of the better off family also get a house left to them on top of that?

 

[Blueingreen]

Jesus Christ, you really​ just tried to pull the coloured people voted for Brexit so it couldn't have been​ a racist/bigoted campaign/vote card.

I was illustrating the fact that reducing the Brexit issue to something as contrasting as race issue only undermines how complicated the issue was and in turn only exemplifies how the left completely missed the mark. It wasn't just right wing Britain First working class midland neanderthals that voted leave, there were minorities, young people, old people, rich, poor, right wingers and even left wingers that voted leave. For fuck sake our last and current Torie prime ministers Dodgy Dave and Teresa Mayhem were remain supporters think about that, whereas man of the people the socialist last hope Jeremy Corbyn was rumoured to have been a leave supporter.

It's unfortunate that immigration and xenophobia had to have been dragged into the centre as the underlying arguments for both sides were compelling enough, at the end of the day Remain failed as too much time, energy and focus was spent convincing cities that already had their minds made up, these people honestly thought handing out Vote In leaflets in neighbourhoods as left leaning, gentrified and hipster as Dalston, Stoke Newington, Shoreditch, Brixton, Ladbroke Grove(I saw this shit with my own eyes)was going to have any sway in the vote. But I'm over that I see where we went wrong, I know who we ignored and it's clear where we failed.

The rest is trash, but I do find it interesting that you label anyone who can relocate as 'Champagne swigging Hampstead elite'

I was adressing this ignorant comment

Any sensible remainers will already be making plans to leave the country.

Most people in the U.K who emigrate to other countries are more than likely higher on the economic ladder than an Alfie Moon or a Frank Ghallager, I mean you would have to be if Australia/ USA were your top destinations as they are statistically, moving to these nations isn't exactly cheap. But then that doesn't change the fact that out of the 60 million that live in this country less than 300'000 emigrate that number drops to 200'000 when you count British nationals, further adding that relocation isn't an option for the overwhelming majority of people that live in this country. Are you really calling for the 17 million voters that voted remain to pack their bags and relocate abroad all because you didn't get what you want for christmas, is that a realistic option in your world?

and the racists and bigots who voted leave as 'good natured folk...'

BULLSHIT I was referring to this disgusting immature rhetoric that's echoed in so many liberal boards calling for the complete pain suffering and anguish of everyone living in this nation as if those millions of good natured hardworking folk who voted remain would be completely impervious, juvenile.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

If any international GAF want to ask what an old leave voter is like, this is probably a good example

https://twitter.com/AngrySalmond/status/859716281079132160

Also a Freudian Scottish Independence slip "I'm proud they'll be coming out of Britain...."

I'LL BE VOTING FOR THERESA MAY!

It does go to show you though Labour voters swinging to Conservative because Brexit is of the utmost importance. The Euro hate is strong. Not sure I'd call him a fucking idiot, bit harsh, but man, the comments on that Tweet are true

The equivalent of Obama-Trump, essentially. A pathetic bunch.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Don't you think that this just entrenches a level of social immobility?

No, what I'm describing is social mobility. The next generation starts off in a better position than the previous one. It's pretty much what all parents are after.

 

[Rodelero]

No, what I'm describing is social mobility. The next generation starts off in a better position than the previous one. It's pretty much what all parents are after.

With all respect, that is one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read. Allowing people to inherit all that their parents had helps the children of rich parents be rich and, on a relative level, ensures the children of poor parents stay poor. It is the precise opposite of social mobility because, at the very least, it creates a situation where the children of the rich will be rich. It then tends to have the effect of making the rest poorer because we either have less tax to be used on benefits, services, education, or we have to find that money elsewhere, no doubt from people that are still alive.

 

[Snowman]

No, what I'm describing is social mobility. The next generation starts off in a better position than the previous one. It's pretty much what all parents are after.

You're talking about a very slow, generational kind of social mobility.

Why should the kids whose parents didn't work hard, be in a worse position?

 

[Huw_Dawson]

There will always be an element of rich kids vs poor kids in society. It is the nature of humans to raise cash to give their kids better lives.

The state should pick up the slack to beat that, though. The state should move heaven and earth to make a poor child have the same opportunities as a rich child.

 

[*Splinter]

It's unfortunate that immigration and xenophobia had to have been dragged into the centre as the underlying arguments for both sides were compelling enough, at the end of the day Remain failed as too much time, energy and focus was spent convincing cities that already had their minds made up, these people honestly thought handing out Vote In leaflets in neighbourhoods as left leaning, gentrified and hipster as Dalston, Stoke Newington, Shoreditch, Brixton, Ladbroke Grove(I saw this shit with my own eyes)was going to have any sway in the vote. But I'm over that I see where we went wrong, I know who we ignored and it's clear where we failed.

You think Remain lost because they handed out leaflets in the wrong areas?

This is not the US election, that argument makes no sense when every vote is of equal worth. Convincing the "safe" supporters to get out and vote is just as important as campaigning in areas more likely to vote Leave, and leaflet campaigns in the few areas you mentioned are from the be-all end-all of the Remain campaign.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Leave won because it made a more compelling argument to a majority of voters and was able to discredit the opposing argument somewhat. The issue is that Leave played on nationalism and ignorance to build its majority. The fact that you have Leave voters believing Tim Farron thinks he's racist is a good example of how warped perceptions are.

(If he'd done that schpiel at other prominent Remainers he would not have looked like an idiot. Farron, however, is from a Leave area and a poor background.)

...


A HA HA HA HA HA

ITV is going through with a TV debate regardless of May and Corbyn. 18th May, primetime slot. Potential of two empty chairs. This should be fun.

 

[Hazzuh]

Quickly checking what would happen if Labour got the same share of the vote as 2015 but the Tories got all of their 2015 vote and 2/3rds of the 2015 UKIP vote, I think the Tories would almost certainly gain 40ish seats from Labour and that is probably a fairly low estimate. That seems to me to be a best case scenario for Labour.

 

[Acorn]

Leave won because it made a more compelling argument to a majority of voters and was able to discredit the opposing argument somewhat. The issue is that Leave played on nationalism and ignorance to build its majority. The fact that you have Leave voters believing Tim Farron thinks he's racist is a good example of how warped perceptions are.

(If he'd done that schpiel at other prominent Remainers he would not have looked like an idiot. Farron, however, is from a Leave area and a poor background.)

...


A HA HA HA HA HA

ITV is going through with a TV debate regardless of May and Corbyn. 18th May, primetime slot. Potential of two empty chairs. This should be fun.

Corbyn continues to be incredibly bad at a job he's done for nearly 40 years.
Fucking idiot...

 

[nekkid]

Leave won because it made a more compelling argument to a majority of voters and was able to discredit the opposing argument somewhat. The issue is that Leave played on nationalism and ignorance to build its majority. The fact that you have Leave voters believing Tim Farron thinks he's racist is a good example of how warped perceptions are.

(If he'd done that schpiel at other prominent Remainers he would not have looked like an idiot. Farron, however, is from a Leave area and a poor background.)

Leave won because it's hard to argue in favour of the status quo when many people are not happy with the status quo, regardless of how much worse a change would be.

 

[PJV3]

Corbyn continues to be incredibly bad at a job he's done for nearly 40 years.
Fucking idiot...

If they could cooperate to attack the government then it's worth it, otherwise it's just the opposition attacking each other, a nice result for May, and nothing gained for the rest of us.

I was up for Corbyn doing it but people are right that he will become the big target and probably the headlines as May gets forgotten about.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

If they could cooperate to attack the government then it's worth it, otherwise it's just the opposition attacking each other, a nice result for May, and nothing gained for the rest of us.

My hunch is that it'll be a UKIP bashing contest.

A leaders debate without Corbyn and May is three generally somewhat centre ground Remain parties, the Greens as the more radical left Remain party and exactly one Leave party, UKIP, who are lead by an extremely shifty man.

 

[Meadows]

Before people start seeing any kind of real Labour comeback - here is the poll of polls.

Biggest takeaways:

- Huge upsurge in Tory support that has now levelled off. They will win this election comfortably.

- Labour not doing as badly as many thought, but they will still lose pretty badly.

- UKIP have fallen off a cliff. They are still falling. I think they'll end up with around 7% of the vote.

- The Lib Dems have really failed to make any impact. They are still unknown so I expect them to get more votes as the campaign goes and as their referendum pledge gains traction but they haven't done as well as many would have thought.

- Greens remain a fringe party and the lack of a debate, as well as a weird leadership structure, will hurt them further.

Predictions:

Con - 42%
Labour - 30%
Lib Dem - 10%
UKIP - 7%
Green - 3%
Others - remaining%

 

[Dougald]

But will they actually empty chair Corbyn/May, or just make it look like a debate between all the small parties?

Labour really, really ought to show up for this.

 

[Kotetsu534]

I think the inheritance tax is a poor way of trying to tax wealth, full stop. The very wealthy can take advantage of any number of methods to dodge it (gifts made 7+ years before date of death escaping it, for example). George Osborne and his children are never going to pay IHT on their fortune. It's easily portrayed negatively - 'death tax!', and can have many unfortunate circumstances where property is taxed twice in quick succession (e.g. 95 year old mother dies, leaves legacy to 70 year old man, taxed at 40%, he dies two years later with no spouse, property is again subject to IHT). Pursuing a Land Value Tax is a much better road to go down.

Excellent piece from George Monbiot on this subject here: http://www.monbiot.com/2013/01/21/a-telling-silence/

Telling quote to throw in the face of any Tory who rubbishes the idea: ”Roads are made, streets are made, services are improved, electric light turns night into day, water is brought from reservoirs a hundred miles off in the mountains – and all the while the landlord sits still. Every one of those improvements is effected by the labor and cost of other people and the taxpayers. To not one of those improvements does the land monopolist, as a land monopolist, contribute, and yet by every one of them the value of his land is enhanced. He renders no service to the community, he contributes nothing to the general welfare, he contributes nothing to the process from which his own enrichment is derived. ... the unearned increment on the land is reaped by the land monopolist in exact proportion, not to the service, but to the disservice done." - Winston Churchill

It has, incidentally, been sad to observe the SNP government in Scotland singularly fail to reband (or scrap, as was their manifesto commitment in 2011) the Council Tax - last done in 1991. They did at least get a deal with the Greens to bump up the upper bands a bit this year, with the increase hypothecated towards educations spending.

And I see some are tempted by the American road of widely castigating those who backed Brexit as variously fascists, xenophobes or racists. Apart from how nasty and wrong these attacks are, they're also self-destructive - attacking people who are naturally inclined towards your own side of the aisle in an FPTP system which demands 'broad church' parties for success is electoral suicide. (And don't mischaracterise me as advising the left to reach out to the BNP - 52% of the country are not frothing racists.) Yet these tirades reveal the truth - the real divide in our politics is no longer left v right but nationalist v globalist.

See Thomas Frank:

But the media and political establishments, I suspect, will have none of it. They may hate Donald Trump, but they hate economic populism much more. If history is a guide, they will embrace any sophistry to ensure that the Democrats do not take the steps required to broaden their appeal to working-class voters. They will remind everyone that Clinton didn't really lose. Alternately, they will blame Sanders for her loss. They will decide that working-class people cannot be reasoned with and so it is pointless to try. They will declare – are already declaring – that any Democratic effort to win over working-class voters is a capitulation to racism. Better to lose future elections than to compete for the votes of those who spurned their beloved Clinton.

Or James Bartholomew and Nick Cohen for a focus on the UK (who put more emphasis on social class here than I would). Or Glenn Greenwald, or, for a more environmentally-focussed take, and some quietly haunting writing, Paul Kingsnorth.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

A HA HA HA HA HA

ITV is going through with a TV debate regardless of May and Corbyn. 18th May, primetime slot. Potential of two empty chairs. This should be fun.

Props to ITV, but no-one will be watching. Lib Dems vs Greens vs UKIP - not exactly a blockbuster.

And yes, you could invite Plaid Cymru or the SNP, but how would that actually function? Neither of those parties can claim to speak for the UK as a whole - and given the absence of the Conservatives and Labour, they only have the Lib Dems to debate on Welsh or Scottish issues!

Labour really, really ought to show up for this.

I agree. People can say Corbyn will be a target, but that's going to happen anyway, given the Lib Dems, Greens and UKIP are all gunning for Labour voters. Also worth noting that Corbyn is actually not bad in debates - plus it gives him a chance, on live TV, to actually let people know where Labour stand on various issues. Right now, voters are clueless on Labour policy, and I can't blame them - but this is the opportunity to set them straight. I'd argue that Labour will also come out fairly well from this with Brexit voters, given they'll be pitted against Farron and whoever the Greens put up. It's also an opportunity to show people that Corbyn isn't an absolute loon - show some statesmanship. Yes, it's high risk, but they badly need the reward.

But alas, I fucking doubt it.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Before people start seeing any kind of real Labour comeback - here is the poll of polls.

This uses a rolling average, though - if you look at the end-point of each line, you'll notice it isn't at the mean of the data points for that date. If Labour has risen, that won't reflect it until about this Friday.

Still small in the grand scheme of things, though.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

You're talking about a very slow, generational kind of social mobility.

Why should the kids whose parents didn't work hard, be in a worse position?

If your parents didn't work hard, that's your parents fault. Personal responsibility exists. People's choices have consequences.

Some people may be in favour of a generational 'reset', but I don't think most people are, not in the UK. It does boil down to your basic sense of fairness I suppose.

 

[WhatNXt]

Before people start seeing any kind of real Labour comeback - here is the poll of polls.

If people are to believe the polls this time around, this puts in to stark relief the hope for some that the Lib Dems stand a chance of becoming the official opposition, no?

I personally think things are going to narrow between Labour and the Conservatives in the coming weeks if the public begins to see it as a traditional red vs blue race, but with much higher stakes. The spending philosophies are different, the public service philosophies are different, they differ in how hard or not hard Brexit and the negotiating line should be... there are plenty of things for the public to polarize on.

 

[Theonik]

ITV is going through with a TV debate regardless of May and Corbyn. 18th May, primetime slot. Potential of two empty chairs. This should be fun.

If Corbyn was clever he'd exploit May's unwillingness to show herself to his advantage.
"How does May expect to negotiate the best for this country if she can't even face her own people" Press should also be twisting the knife with her forbidding filming.

 

[Little Old Man]

If any international GAF want to ask what an old leave voter is like, this is probably a good example

https://twitter.com/AngrySalmond/status/859716281079132160

Also a Freudian Scottish Independence slip "I'm proud they'll be coming out of Britain...."

I'LL BE VOTING FOR THERESA MAY!

It does go to show you though Labour voters swinging to Conservative because Brexit is of the utmost importance. The Euro hate is strong. Not sure I'd call him a fucking idiot, bit harsh, but man, the comments on that Tweet are true

The end of the video:

"BECAUSE THERESA MAY'S A STRONG LEADER!"

May needs to keep rabbiting strong and stable line. It works (thanks to vast swathes of the public not being willing to put any thought or time into their voting choices), but also, because this guy didn't say stable. Plus she can't risk talking openly with voters, as she couldn't talk herself out of doing a coffee run, let alone against any competent debating opponent.

If Corbyn was clever he'd exploit May's unwillingness to show herself to his advantage.
"How does May expect to negotiate the best for this country if she can't even face her own people" Press should also be twisting the knife with her forbidding filming.

But for that to happen, Corbyn would have to genuinely care about winning the election, and not be largely satisfied with just returning a protest party in Westminster. He's missed too many open goals so far for me to believe he truly wants to push to get into power.

 

[Goodlife]

If Corbyn was clever he'd exploit May's unwillingness to show herself to his advantage.
"How does May expect to negotiate the best for this country if she can't even face her own people" Press should also be twisting the knife with her forbidding filming.

Corbyn will just spend his time being attacked by everyone and not being able to get any meaningful shots in at May.
It's a waste of his time

 

[Hazzuh]

Remarkable charts from the IFS:

 

[Snowman]

If your parents didn't work hard, that's your parents fault. Personal responsibility exists. People's choices have consequences.

Some people may be in favour of a generational 'reset', but I don't think most people are, not in the UK. It does boil down to your basic sense of fairness I suppose.

Yes but it wouldn't be my fault. Personal responsibility is not paying for the acts of your parents.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

If Corbyn was clever he'd exploit May's unwillingness to show herself to his advantage.
"How does May expect to negotiate the best for this country if she can't even face her own people" Press should also be twisting the knife with her forbidding filming.

Alone he gets kicked in the teeth by Farron. If May is around he has to divert his attention.

And personally I'd like an English leader's debate of 5 parties - Con LD Lab UKIP GRN - but such is the way of things. Plaid and the SNP distracting the debate for English voters is not really a big deal and their voices are relevant.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

If people are to believe the polls this time around, this puts in to stark relief the hope for some that the Lib Dems stand a chance of becoming the official opposition, no?

I personally think things are going to narrow between Labour and the Conservatives in the coming weeks if the public begins to see it as a traditional red vs blue race, but with much higher stakes. The spending philosophies are different, the public service philosophies are different, they differ in how hard or not hard Brexit and the negotiating line should be... there are plenty of things for the public to polarize on.

I don't think that even Farron believes the Lib Dems will actually end up with more seats or votes than either Labour or Conservatives - but if something akin to 2010 does happen... if the local elections went exceedingly well and that does prompt an upswing... if people do care about electoral fraud, and it is revealed before the election... then there'll be no better attack than Tim Farron saying he doesn't believe in his own party.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

For all these all these "Tory lead slashed" headlines, it looks like it's only coming from an increase in Labour votes, not a decrease in Conservative votes. And the increase in Labour votes is only to whereabouts they should be (didn't people use to talk about the 'floor' on Labour being 30%?).

Yes but it wouldn't be my fault. Personal responsibility is not paying for the acts of your parents.

Sure, I'm just saying if you're not happy with your lot, maybe your ire should be directed there instead of elsewhere.

 

[kmag]

Remarkable charts from the IFS:

Theyrenotgoingtoeatus.jpg

 

[Audioboxer]

The equivalent of Obama-Trump, essentially. A pathetic bunch.

True. As much as US/British politics are two separate entities, some of the ways in which voters are behaving and have been deceived are almost identical. I don't know if the American political divide is as often referred to as young voters vs old? It seems to be more around racial/class identity, than age. You rarely see anything in the UK as white people vs black, but then again the rhetoric around immigration and Brexit pushed us closer to identity/racial divides than anything that has come before.

A lot of political decisions in the UK of recent times ends up as young/middle aged voters combatting the older voters/pensioners.

In saying that a massive fucking issue for the youth is turnout. So many young voters chuck their votes away, probably more interested playing video games or going out drinking than spending 15-25 mins going and voting. Or some just aren't politically turned on, which isn't always their fault at younger ages.

The joke in Scotland for the 2014 ref was the Tories/Labour getting buses to old folks homes to wheel everyone and anyone they could to the polling stations.

Which is good in one sense because if you're ill of health and need help, it should be there. However, if you combine project fear, the MSM and threats aimed at pensions, the older generations can leave some younger minds pretty deflated around big decisions. It's somewhat understandable, even if crude, some view it as "my life is fully ahead of me, you're one foot in the grave". The argument is never to suggest old people get penalised (I've seen that on GAF and it is disgusting, everyone capable has a right to vote), but that the youth needs to be stimulated and encouraged to go and vote. Not just retweet viral shit on Twitter and say cba voting this year.

It's why people who say "no point in voting" really rustle my jimmies. It's an apathetic virus that isn't just about you, but it spreads from you to many others.

LOL it's fucking pointless talking to these people. It's a bit like trying to reason with Flat-Earthers, you can point out the fallacies repeatedly but it matters little in the end. Or just like the pro-Trump camp, regardless of what happens, the approval rating is always 100%. These people have formed their opinions for some particular reason and aren't interested in being shown they are wrong or acknowledging anything that proves them wrong.

The only way they will learn is through suffering and hardship when the economic reality of leaving the single market bites them in a few years' time. Right now they can proudly beat their chest and indulge in their delusions, but when the reverse funnelling* effect of GDP shrinkage starts affecting everything from jobs to finances to that sour taste in their mouths from suckling the shrivelled teat of the state, that's when they'll learn....

Spoiler

it's time to blame someone else!

As I started musing about above, the mid to long term effects are often felt most by the younger voters, or those trying to start out in a career. However, while Brexit isn't strictly about the NHS, a long-term Tory reign will be. Older generations might start disliking that privatisation as the age of living creeps up and more older people need full-time care/operations.

Older voters may well start to see their kids suffer, though, but even Malcom gave zero fucks about that in the video.

 

[w1ck3dn1nj4]

If any international GAF want to ask what an old leave voter is like, this is probably a good example

https://twitter.com/AngrySalmond/status/859716281079132160

Also a Freudian Scottish Independence slip "I'm proud they'll be coming out of Britain...."

I'LL BE VOTING FOR THERESA MAY!

It does go to show you though Labour voters swinging to Conservative because Brexit is of the utmost importance. The Euro hate is strong. Not sure I'd call him a fucking idiot, bit harsh, but man, the comments on that Tweet are true

LOL it’s fucking pointless talking to these people. It’s a bit like trying to reason with Flat-Earthers, you can point out the fallacies repeatedly but it matters little in the end. Or just like the pro-Trump camp, regardless of what happens, the approval rating is always 100%. These people have formed their opinions for some particular reason and aren’t interested in being shown they are wrong or acknowledging anything that proves them wrong.

The only way they will learn is through suffering and hardship when the economic reality of leaving the single market bites them in a few years’ time. Right now they can proudly beat their chest and indulge in their delusions, but when the reverse funnelling* effect of GDP shrinkage starts affecting everything from jobs to finances to that sour taste in their mouths from suckling the shrivelled teat of the state, that’s when they’ll learn….

Spoiler

it’s time to blame someone else!

 

[Goodlife]

Wonder what could happen if we ever implemented online voting....

 

[Miles Quaritch]

I'm only a passing reader of this and other Brexit related threads, but you are consistently one of the most childish contributors to this overall discussion.

That you think upping sticks to leave and set up life in another country is such a simple reality for 48% of the electorate that you think "any sensible remainers will already be making plans to leave", says to me that you're not actually in that sort of situation and don't know what you're talking about.

Props to you (and others) for the continual trivialisation of actual Nazi history and widespread shouting down people for being racist, too.

The level of discourse on Brexit from posts like yours above is about as gutter level as it is on the opposite side. It's absolutely pathetic.

Continue to be a passing reader if you're trying to suggest that Nazi propaganda wasn't used during the referendum and that a very large percentage of the leave vote wasn't driven by racism.

And yes, it is simple for those who are educated and don't have any ties. Sucks for those who have families, maybe the racist leavers who were happy to support Nazi propaganda can reassure them that things will be okay and that some short term hardship is what's needed for their family so they don't have to fear the 'other' any more.

 

[Rodelero]

If your parents didn't work hard, that's your parents fault. Personal responsibility exists. People's choices have consequences.

I try quite hard to understand where you're coming from, but I just can't, to be honest.

1) You are already at an enormous disadvantage if you are born into poverty. Why would you want to exacerbate that unnecessarily?

2) There are an incredible number of reasons why a family can be poor that have nothing to do with whether or not they work hard. What if someone in the family is gravely ill and has to be taken care of? What if, frankly, they're just not that educated and can't find well paid work? What if someone's parents are taken from them at an early age? What if someone has terrible parents that don't love them enough to help them financially?

3) You may of course have wealthy parents that didn't work hard. They might have won the lottery. They might have inherited money from their parents.

Your viewpoint comes across as one of naive and callous, either way, I just don't get it. The only way I could imagine someone feeling this way is if they stood to inherit a fortune, frankly, and wanted to justify it to themselves. Not saying that is your situation, but, I really to struggle anyone else's motivation to feel this way.

 

[Dougald]

I agree. People can say Corbyn will be a target, but that's going to happen anyway, given the Lib Dems, Greens and UKIP are all gunning for Labour voters. Also worth noting that Corbyn is actually not bad in debates - plus it gives him a chance, on live TV, to actually let people know where Labour stand on various issues. Right now, voters are clueless on Labour policy, and I can't blame them - but this is the opportunity to set them straight. I'd argue that Labour will also come out fairly well from this with Brexit voters, given they'll be pitted against Farron and whoever the Greens put up. It's also an opportunity to show people that Corbyn isn't an absolute loon - show some statesmanship. Yes, it's high risk, but they badly need the reward.

But alas, I fucking doubt it.

May knows she can only lose by showing up to a debate. Corbyn on the other hand can definitely gain by playing the "May didn't debate" card. By not showing up he's legitimising her absence

As it stands, if ITV don't empty chair Labour and the Conservatives, it's a bit of a pointless exercise showing the parties getting the bottom 25% of votes debating

 

[Audioboxer]

Wonder what could happen if we ever implemented online voting....

Logistically it could be a bit of a nightmare. Postal votes are supposed to be there to help busy/travelling people.

It may well come one day, and I'm sure it's constantly thought about as a way to try and tackle low turnouts from youth/young adults.

There can be the "fun" of waiting up all night as votes are counted too, unless you stay awake all night for indyref, and then stay awake all night for Brexit. Can't describe that soul crushing feeling of no sleep mixed with shit, my ideas for the future of the country lost.

The GE in 2015 for Scotland was quite good (in-line with my voting interests), but it was still depressing for the country overall (Tory win). This GE will be even worse, probably Tory gains in Scotland and business as usual across the rUK. If I'm not working I don't even know if I'll stay up for it.

 

[Go_Ly_Dow]

I was waiting for the tram today (in Japan) and was pondering how public transport services here stack up to the services back in the UK. The charge is 120 yen (like 90p) and that's a flatrate coverage across the entire city (with the longest route taking 1 hour 15 minutes.

Back in the UK my daily commute to work would set me back £6 fucking 70p because it's run by Stagecoach.

Privatized public transport services, another great thing to thank our strong and stable Conservative Government for.

 

[Go_Ly_Dow]

Wonder what could happen if we ever implemented online voting....

We won't be getting that under the Tories.

1. Nanny May
2. They know it would damage them.

 

[WhatNXt]

Alone he gets kicked in the teeth by Farron. If May is around he has to divert his attention.

May knows she can only lose by showing up to a debate. Corbyn on the other hand can definitely gain by playing the "May didn't debate" card. By not showing up he's legitimising her absence

As it stands, if ITV don't empty chair Labour and the Conservatives, it's a bit of a pointless exercise showing the parties getting the bottom 25% of votes debating

Agreed. His advisors should be telling him to take part. But I do understand why they might not.

It's an image thing. Debates pose risk and opportunity for all of them.

If they debate without May, she could appear cocky and aloof, afraid of scrutiny. Or she could spin it as getting on with the business of government and negotiations, with the pitiful little band on TV (spoken in my best Emperor Palpatine voice) not being worth her time. I think it's more likely that the media would haul her over the coals for not playing along. They like election drama.

If Corbyn joins debates without May present, it gives the impression that this is a three, four or five horse race instead of a two horse one, which is potentially dangerous. He can become a punching bag for media commentators, and the likes of Farron, Sturgeon, Lucas and Nutall - because he has been the one most visibly attacked already in the media. People are already familiar with areas of policy where he is weak. He'd be hit on Trident, on spending, on his pacifist status. Farron would attack Labour's instability in opposition (despite not doing much good themselves), and reiterate his do-over / final-vote offer on Brexit, while UKIP - if there - would suggest he offers a weaker Brexit. It would be a debate of majority progressives, and the risk is that it splits the progressive vote or boosts the working class vote with the far right. Labour have so far ruled out coalition and the tactical removing of candidates... so the Greens might even attack him! I assume that is Labour's position because they want to win as many seats as possible and stave off the "coalition of chaos" attack-line. Corbyn should consider debating with them though, as they do share a lot of similar concerns with Conservative governance, and he does have the composure needed to stand principled in the face of attacks. I suspect if he performed well it would benefit Labour greatly. One of the biggest compliments and criticisms I can give Labour and Jeremy Corbyn, is that aides like Seamus Milne - are no Alastair Campbell. You have to imagine he would be taking advantage of May's reticence at the moment.

In almost any election, I think the electorate like to hear how a choice can make their lives better. There's a strange lack of that at the moment, with the Conservatives falling over themselves to offer a 'strong and stable', less-shit deal. The messaging definitely isn't as strong as it was in 2010 or 2015. It feels like a climate and an opportunity to make Trump-like shockwaves if only a candidate had it in them to rise to the challenge.

 

[Dougald]

I was waiting for the tram today (in Japan) and was pondering how public transport services here stack up to the services back in the UK. The charge is 120 yen (like 90p) and that's a flatrate coverage across the entire city (with the longest route taking 1 hour 15 minutes.

Back in the UK my daily commute to work would set me back £6 fucking 70p because it's run by Stagecoach.

Privatized public transport services, another great thing to thank our strong and stable Conservative Government for.

Aren't all the trains in Japan privatized, though?

Of course, in Japan they didn't just privatize all the profitable bits and leave the rest to the taxpayer.

In almost any election, I think the electorate like to hear how a choice can make their lives better. There's a strange lack of that at the moment, with the Conservatives falling over themselves to offer a 'strong and stable', less-shit deal. The messaging definitely isn't as strong as it was in 2010 or 2015. It feels like a climate and an opportunity to make Trump-like shockwaves if only a candidate had it in them to rise to the challenge.

I think this is even more true now. If Brexit and Trump show anything, its that many people in the west are dissatisfied with their lives, and will reach out for any option which promises to make things better, no matter what that may be

 

[travisbickle]

I like how we have someone saying Britain's liberal within the same pages as discussion in favour of inherited wealth and a campaign poster by the most popular political party chastising the idea of not dropping bombs on people.

Britain is "economically liberal" as in willing to maintain a free market capitalist society and capital assets, but it is not liberal as in trying to achieve equality and equal opportunity.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

I try quite hard to understand where you're coming from, but I just can't, to be honest.

1) You are already at an enormous disadvantage if you are born into poverty. Why would you want to exacerbate that unnecessarily?

2) There are an incredible number of reasons why a family can be poor that have nothing to do with whether or not they work hard. What if someone in the family is gravely ill and has to be taken care of? What if, frankly, they're just not that educated and can't find well paid work? What if someone's parents are taken from them at an early age? What if someone has terrible parents that don't love them enough to help them financially?

3) You may of course have wealthy parents that didn't work hard. They might have won the lottery. They might have inherited money from their parents.

Your viewpoint comes across as one of naive and callous, either way, I just don't get it. The only way I could imagine someone feeling this way is if they stood to inherit a fortune, frankly, and wanted to justify it to themselves. Not saying that is your situation, but, I really to struggle anyone else's motivation to feel this way.

Lots of questions in here. I don't really want to do some massive list reply of my answers but I'll say a few things.

Just being born in the UK gives you a lot of opportunities to do well in life, and I believe that there's a decent correlation between hard work and reward. Sure, some people have a leg up on others, that's always going to be the case, and there's lots of factors that affect how easy it's going to be for you (some are just naturally talented).

I don't think you can legislate for people winning the lottery! They're obviously going to be the exception.

I find it funny how me being in line for a big inheritance is the only possible reason you can think of for not liking a low-threshold inheritance tax. How about this one: I'd like to earn my own fortune and leave that to my kids?

 

[Rodelero]

Lots of questions in here. I don't really want to do some massive list reply of my answers but I'll say a few things.

Just being born in the UK gives you a lot of opportunities to do well in life, and I believe that there's a decent correlation between hard work and reward. Sure, some people have a leg up on others, that's always going to be the case, and there's lots of factors that affect how easy it's going to be for you (some are just naturally talented).

While there is, obviously, correlation between how hard you work and how well you do, I think you overestimate it. It certainly doesn't register all that high in terms of the characteristics and attributes which will help you be wealthy in my opinion. Talent helps, effort helps, but I would bet you a great deal of money that the wealth of your parents is a better indicator of how wealthy you will be than how talented you are, or how hard you work.

I find it funny how me being in line for a big inheritance is the only possible reason you can think of for not liking a low-threshold inheritance tax. How about this one: I'd like to earn my own fortune and leave that to my kids?

Indeed, I made an error. There are two obvious reasons for why someone would be in favour of low inheritance tax. One, is as I suggested, they believe that they themselves would be able to take advantage. The other is if they feel their children can benefit, which seems to be your motivator. Of course, for the wealthy, both things tend to be true. They are individually benefitted by low inheritance tax and so are their children.

The really sad thing is that a lot of people manage to convince themselves they'll be better off with low inheritance tax when, in fact, they won't. Far too many people are far, far too optimistic about their financial future, which leads to so much of the Conservative vote in the UK and the Republican vote in the US.

 

[Jackpot]

If your parents didn't work hard, that's your parents fault. Personal responsibility exists. People's choices have consequences.

But in the context to trying to increase social mobility which the discussion was about, surely engraining "if you're parents are poor you will stay poor" into the system is the worst thing you can do?

 

[Peccavi]

Sure, I'm just saying if you're not happy with your lot, maybe your ire should be directed there instead of elsewhere.

Yes, don't blame the people who have been stacking the system in their favor for generations, blame your dirty parents for not being born into money.