The Politics Thread 2019

[Stive Pesley]

Talking about social media manipulation, just been reading how Boris Johnson's tweets get thousands of retweets & likes within an hour. Yet when you check the accounts doing it it, many have no or very few followers, have never tweeted themselves, and appear to be brand new accounts with no avatar or profile info

We have to ask ourselves who is paying for these bots and why?

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

If you honestly believe that, the emphasis is on you to explain better. 

Not really. The emphasis is on you to read what I write and process the wording, rather than seeing a post by me and translating into something that you want it to say.

I no longer even bother checking what emoji reactions you put to my posts because it has become that predictable and boring.

Back to the post. I do not see any correlation between there being a property for sale in London for £8m and the fact that the welfare system has been exploited for years.

Where is the context?

There are properties on Burton Road in Derby, mainly owned by Asian families, that would probably fetch £2m or £3m, that is 10 or 15 times more than my house is worth, should I have a gripe with these Asian families or applaud them for their hard work enabling them to live in such properties?

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Talking about social media manipulation, just been reading how Boris Johnson's tweets get thousands of retweets & likes within an hour. Yet when you check the accounts doing it it, many have no or very few followers, have never tweeted themselves, and appear to be brand new accounts with no avatar or profile info

We have to ask ourselves who is paying for these bots and why?

Where did you read this? A completely unbiased source with a reputation for unbiased and factually correct information?

[Stive Pesley]

28 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Where did you read this? A completely unbiased source with a reputation for unbiased and factually correct information?

Whilst I have no problem with being called out, you've picked an odd one to get indignant over

It's not exactly difficult to buy followers/likes. Just google it

Then next time you see Boris tweet, watch the like/retweet list and see it with your own eyes like I did

Plus on top of that - it was reported in well known communist rag the erm (checks notes) Daily Telegraph that the Tories were paying people to take to Twitter in support of the party

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/02/24/tories-hire-army-tweeters-take-social-media-fight-labour/

 

And for the record, I'm not suggesting this behaviour is limited to Boris Johnson - it's everywhere, just picked BJ as the Prime Minister (as that's arguably the role we need to have the most trust in)

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Whilst I have no problem with being called out, you've picked an odd one to get indignant over

It's not exactly difficult to buy followers/likes. Just google it

Then next time you see Boris tweet, watch the like/retweet list and see it with your own eyes like I did

Plus on top of that - it was reported in well known communist rag the erm (checks notes) Daily Telegraph that the Tories were paying people to take to Twitter in support of the party

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/02/24/tories-hire-army-tweeters-take-social-media-fight-labour/

 

And for the record, I'm not suggesting this behaviour is limited to Boris Johnson - it's everywhere, just picked BJ as the Prime Minister (as that's arguably the role we need to have the most trust in)

I'm just not really sure what your point is?

We have a new prime minister, who inevitably will attract new followers on Twitter and people are liking his posts?

And...

Likes on Twitter translate into what exactly?

 

[ariotofmyown]

2 hours ago, Spanish said:

called an election which cost her

put David Davies in charge of negotiations then apparently conducted no executive oversight until it was far too late

hardly blameless

Don't get me wrong. I think she was a very poor leader and made loads of mistakes. My point was she was continuously derided for her personality, or her poor leadership skills etc when she was in a hopeless position with Brexit. This was in response to a question of whether I had sympathy for May and the media coverage she received.

Glad she has gone but would rather her than either of the Bullingdon boys.

[GboroRam]

54 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Not really. The emphasis is on you to read what I write and process the wording, rather than seeing a post by me and translating into something that you want it to say.

I no longer even bother checking what emoji reactions you put to my posts because it has become that predictable and boring.

Back to the post. I do not see any correlation between there being a property for sale in London for £8m and the fact that the welfare system has been exploited for years.

Where is the context?

There are properties on Burton Road in Derby, mainly owned by Asian families, that would probably fetch £2m or £3m, that is 10 or 15 times more than my house is worth, should I have a gripe with these Asian families or applaud them for their hard work enabling them to live in such properties?

The context is that the imbalance in capitalist society sees disabled people committing suicide because they don't have enough to exist on, and other people own properties that could fund lives hundreds of times over. Defending the status quo is quite absurd, but you're having a good go. 

And as for reading comprehension, I raised the question of imbalance between the haves and the have nots. You seemed to not see a correlation but I'm sure most people will be able to. Probably better if you don't question my comprehension. 

As for the laugh emojis, I genuinely think your defense of the indefensible is funny. 

[ariotofmyown]

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

On a day to day basis where do you come across tax dodging/avoidance?

Contractors at work who are paid crazy amounts of money but nearly always have set up their own businesses to massively reduce their tax bill. All entirely legal of course. For now.

The other type are people who live near me who have their own businesses, many of whom must be avoiding tax due to cash in hand or zero advertising. None of these people I would say are well off.

[ariotofmyown]

1 hour ago, Norman said:

Considering 40 percent of people in work in this country don't pay tax, i would suggest he knows and lives in a very middle class area full of tax evasion?

Tax evasion/avoidance happens in all areas I imagine. Posh areas hide money in the Caymans. Poorer areas do cash in hand work.

Definitely more of the latter where I live. I guess it would defined as middle class now due to the house prices as commutable to London.

Both types of tax avoiders are usually Tory though.

[GboroRam]

14 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Tax evasion/avoidance happens in all areas I imagine. Posh areas hide money in the Caymans. Poorer areas do cash in hand work.

Definitely more of the latter where I live. I guess it would defined as middle class now due to the house prices as commutable to London.

Both types of tax avoiders are usually Tory though.

It kind of doesn't matter. Legal or not, doesn't make it acceptable. We don't have to roll over and say, fair enough, he earned that £10m tax free bonus this year. Anyway, string that bloke up, he works on the side and doesn't declare it. 

Can't we say neither is acceptable? 

Do we have to fight solely for the crumbs? 

Capitalism is destroying the planet because we don't even want to contemplate changing anything, because someone stands to lose money if we do. And that's the madness. We can't let business decide to save the planet because they will choose profit every time. Because if they don't, another business will. 

And in case anyone isn't understanding the link, money is the driving force behind everything I've mentioned. And it's an abstract construct which is killing us. 

[i-Ram]

9 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

It kind of doesn't matter. Legal or not, doesn't make it acceptable. We don't have to roll over and say, fair enough, he earned that £10m tax free bonus this year. Anyway, string that bloke up, he works on the side and doesn't declare it. 

Can't we say neither is acceptable? 

Do we have to fight solely for the crumbs? 

Capitalism is destroying the planet because we don't even want to contemplate changing anything, because someone stands to lose money if we do. And that's the madness. We can't let business decide to save the planet because they will choose profit every time. Because if they don't, another business will. 

And in case anyone isn't understanding the link, money is the driving force behind everything I've mentioned. And it's an abstract construct which is killing us. 

I don’t think any abstract construct is killing me, but the monthly mortgage repayment on that new £8m pad I bought in a London surely will.

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

The context is that the imbalance in capitalist society sees disabled people committing suicide because they don't have enough to exist on, and other people own properties that could fund lives hundreds of times over. Defending the status quo is quite absurd, but you're having a good go. 

And as for reading comprehension, I raised the question of imbalance between the haves and the have nots. You seemed to not see a correlation but I'm sure most people will be able to. Probably better if you don't question my comprehension. 

As for the laugh emojis, I genuinely think your defense of the indefensible is funny. 

There are probably well off people that commit suicide too due to the pressure they are under at work to finance their lifestyle. 

I'm not sure why people working hard and living lavish styles to reward themselves is indefensible. 

[Uptherams]

48 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

It kind of doesn't matter. Legal or not, doesn't make it acceptable. We don't have to roll over and say, fair enough, he earned that £10m tax free bonus this year. Anyway, string that bloke up, he works on the side and doesn't declare it. 

Can't we say neither is acceptable? 

Do we have to fight solely for the crumbs? 

Capitalism is destroying the planet because we don't even want to contemplate changing anything, because someone stands to lose money if we do. And that's the madness. We can't let business decide to save the planet because they will choose profit every time. Because if they don't, another business will. 

And in case anyone isn't understanding the link, money is the driving force behind everything I've mentioned. And it's an abstract construct which is killing us. 

What are your views on basic income? 

[Comrade 86]

1 hour ago, Uptherams said:

What are your views on basic income? 

That it's inevitable but that this country will be one of the last in Western Europe to roll it out, it will be a hideously inadequate allowance when they do, poverty and feelings of hopelessness and injustice will result in steep rises in crime and half the country will still blame the poor.

*sorry to butt in! 

[ariotofmyown]

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

There are probably well off people that commit suicide too due to the pressure they are under at work to finance their lifestyle. 

I'm not sure why people working hard and living lavish styles to reward themselves is indefensible. 

You should work harder, then you would be able to live in those 2 million pound houses on Burton Road that them Asians live in. If you work 10 to 15 times harder, you should be able to afford one. I think that is how it works right?

Actually, don't bother. Working that hard will make you suicidal. Stick to been a slacker and dream about been those lucky homeless guys with no work pressures. Or a lazy disabled person who can't be bothered/is unable to work but who are given free wonga so they can eat. Sometimes. 

[G STAR RAM]

15 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

You should work harder, then you would be able to live in those 2 million pound houses on Burton Road that them Asians live in. If you work 10 to 15 times harder, you should be able to afford one. I think that is how it works right?

Actually, don't bother. Working that hard will make you suicidal. Stick to been a slacker and dream about been those lucky homeless guys with no work pressures. Or a lazy disabled person who can't be bothered/is unable to work but who are given free wonga so they can eat. Sometimes. 

No that's not how it works.

But I'm sure there are correlations between how much people earn and what they have had to do to be earning such a wage.

I see very little connection between people earning high wages and others receiving insufficient benefits.

[SillyBilly]

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

There are probably well off people that commit suicide too due to the pressure they are under at work to finance their lifestyle. 

I'm not sure why people working hard and living lavish styles to reward themselves is indefensible. 

This. I run a small business and it is by far the hardest job I have ever done. Hands down, no contest. And I've had some high profile gigs so I know stress very well unfortunately. I work 6 days a week (sometimes 7), don't sleep and never switch off, ever. I took my first holiday in 3 years this year and that was self-prescribed for the company's benefit given I was becoming of little use to it while constantly wired. And I was ill for the first time in a decade for the whole duration of it which I am convinced was a cortisol crash or something to that effect. I'd certainly not being putting myself through this to earn an average wage. Even when I first moved down to the SE years ago, and consequently began earning a SE salary (which doesn;t pay a lifestyle, that I can tell you), pay rises weren't much to celebrate once the gov took their share: 12% National Insurance, 9% student loan, 40% income tax and a small personal pension contribution to boot. Suddently one becomes quite interested in economics when you're taking home c. £3.50 for every extra £10.00 earned. And BJ gets lambasted by the green with envy brigade at the suggestion of a tax cut that ultimately gives something back to the squeezed middle...

[Stive Pesley]

9 minutes ago, SillyBilly said:

This. I run a small business and it is by far the hardest job I have ever done. Hands down, no contest. And I've had some high profile gigs so I know stress very well unfortunately. I work 6 days a week (sometimes 7), don't sleep and never switch off, ever. I took my first holiday in 3 years this year and that was self-prescribed for the company's benefit given I was becoming of little use to it while constantly wired. And I was ill for the first time in a decade for the whole duration of it which I am convinced was a cortisol crash or something to that effect. I'd certainly not being putting myself through this to earn an average wage. Even when I first moved down to the SE years ago, and consequently began earning a SE salary (which doesn;t pay a lifestyle, that I can tell you), pay rises weren't much to celebrate once the gov took their share: 12% National Insurance, 9% student loan, 40% income tax and a small personal pension contribution to boot. Suddently one becomes quite interested in economics when you're taking home c. £3.50 for every extra £10.00 earned. 

Sorry that you seem  to be working yourself into an early grave for a life you don't appear (from your description) to be enjoying.

That in itself probably tells us where society is at.

And also - you're description of the tax system neglects to mention that it's £3.50 for every £10 earned over £50k - is £50k not enough to live on comfortably??

2 years ago I was earning enough through overtime and overwork to start paying 40% tax and it made me miserable and ill. I'm much happier since I stopped doing that and got my life back. I didn't really need that extra money - it just felt like I should be earning as much as possible because of societal pressure. I learned a hard lesson - money is not what brings happiness. I guess some people never work that out

[Comrade 86]

23 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

No that's not how it works.

But I'm sure there are correlations between how much people earn and what they have had to do to be earning such a wage.

I see very little connection between people earning high wages and others receiving insufficient benefits.

Do you see a correlation between said high-earners receiving additional tax breaks and there being insufficient funding for those who have nothing then? The state pension for instance - some will have to work until they are 75 under new proposals. Is it fair that an unskilled worker who works for 55 years and barely scrapes by in anyof them, then receives a paltry £90 a week to help them survive through what's left of their retirement? Do you think it is fair that the founder of Amazon is the world's first trillionaire while the bulk of his employees barely receive minimum wage and have to ask permission to leave packing lines for toilet breaks. Do you even acknowledge that wealth distribution divides grow greater by the day and that some of those hurting worst as a consequence, are also those most in need?

Where you are concerned, I do sometimes wonder just what is it that you actually do believe in, because other than an unrelenting resentment towards certain elements of our society, it's very hard to fathom any of your thought processes. Certainly you seem embittered and let down but you typically express that in terms of how others are not, rather than your own personal experiences. 

[Comrade 86]

29 minutes ago, SillyBilly said:

This. I run a small business and it is by far the hardest job I have ever done. Hands down, no contest. And I've had some high profile gigs so I know stress very well unfortunately. I work 6 days a week (sometimes 7), don't sleep and never switch off, ever. I took my first holiday in 3 years this year and that was self-prescribed for the company's benefit given I was becoming of little use to it while constantly wired. And I was ill for the first time in a decade for the whole duration of it which I am convinced was a cortisol crash or something to that effect. I'd certainly not being putting myself through this to earn an average wage. Even when I first moved down to the SE years ago, and consequently began earning a SE salary (which doesn;t pay a lifestyle, that I can tell you), pay rises weren't much to celebrate once the gov took their share: 12% National Insurance, 9% student loan, 40% income tax and a small personal pension contribution to boot. Suddently one becomes quite interested in economics when you're taking home c. £3.50 for every extra £10.00 earned. And BJ gets lambasted by the green with envy brigade at the suggestion of a tax cut that ultimately gives something back to the squeezed middle...

A good and fair post right up to the last sentence which seems a rather bitter notion. Perhaps the 'green with envy brigade' you choose to demean are actually nothing of the sort. Indeed perhaps most belong to the 'squeezed middle' too or do you suppose that the likes of myself have never had to struggle, never shared any of the discomfort you describe?What gives you the right to make such assumptions just because you find your life less than you would have it be?

Like so many, you assume too much about those whose opinions you do not share and I'd wager that many of those you have chosen to deride are simply not so broken that they don't recognise that irrespective of their own personal circumstances, good, bad and everything in between, that there remain many who are far, far worse off.

I have shared some of your experiences and I fully comprehend your troubles but the difference is that my ire is not directed at those who point out the obvious imbalances, but at the government who bring about those imbalances in the first place.

Perhaps yours should be too?