The Politics Thread 2019

[Curtains]

4 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

Largely agree about building on flood plains in principle, but thought this was an interesting read on The Guardian site (who are seemingly propping up the ‘left leaning press’ with the mirror despite both being less popular than the sun, mail, times and telegraph)

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/12/flooding-caused-by-poor-management-and-floodplain-building

Essentially it’s not just building on flood plains, that’s probably ok aslong as you keep trees and moorland that help halt the worse of the impact. Once you build, then take out large parts of natural defence then that’s a major factor.

It’s horrible for the people impacted. 
 

I wish them well. 

[AndyinLiverpool]

1 hour ago, Curtains said:

Who gives planning permission for new houses in flood plains. 
 

lots of Labour Councils up North I suspect. 

People have always built on flood plains for reasons too obvious to mention here.

Who gives permission for building near rivers?

The problem is not building on flood plains.

[Curtains]

3 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

People have always built on flood plains for reasons too obvious to mention here.

Who gives permission for building near rivers?

The problem is not building on flood plains.

Just a section from the Guardian article just posted. 
 

“If you are building on a floodplain because there’s no other option at all, you can raise these buildings on stilts and make a space for the water to flow around the building. These technologies exist, but they are expensive and therefore are not popular with developers.”

[ariotofmyown]

3 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

Don't actually agree with that last sentence. There are both left and right wing press, why is one side 'brainwashing' people and not the other?

Oh yes, of course there are a few left wing outlets. But where is the big bucks behind these organisations? Who are the rich individuals and groups are behind the right wing groups?

Who are the evil bodies behind the left wing propaganda? Who are the rich people and groups who benefit from better wealth distribution? 

[i-Ram]

2 hours ago, GboroRam said:

Well, I'm for one seeing an impressive increase in the number of adverts on Facebook from "community" groups telling me how much labour will cost me. 

Strangely I don't get any with the other argument. These campaigns must have cost loads of roubles. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50351821

BBC viewpoint on social media and the election campaign. Quite interesting. 

[Stive Pesley]

15 minutes ago, Curtains said:

It’s horrible for the people impacted. 
 

I wish them well. 

Yeah - we're pretty lucky where I am in that the Our City, Our River project has spent the last 5 years working on the flood defences on this stretch of the river which seem to have worked really well last week.

As we're in the politics thread I'll mention that the works were fundedby the EU's European Regional Development Fund.

Not sure what the future holds for the final planned phases through town, Pride Park and Alvaston. Can someone paint it on the side of a bus just so we know?

[Curtains]

4 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Yeah - we're pretty lucky where I am in that the Our City, Our River project has spent the last 5 years working on the flood defences on this stretch of the river which seem to have worked really well last week.

As we're in the politics thread I'll mention that the works were fundedby the EU's European Regional Development Fund.

Not sure what the future holds for the final planned phases through town, Pride Park and Alvaston. Can someone paint it on the side of a bus just so we know?

Well does it depend on if we are in or out the EU 
 

[Angry Ram]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

According to Wikipedia, you've got:

On the right, you've got the Torygraph and the Times broadsheets, plus tabloids in the Mail, the Express, the Sun and the London Standard. City AM are mentioned but they are nothing I've had any experience of or seen in my life.
On the centre/liberal you've got the Observer, Independent, i, and the Financial Times.
On the left of centre you've got the Guardian and the Mirror.

They list the Morning Star but it's circulation is around 5, so hardly mainstream. They list the Star as largely non political but I think they lean right overall, personally.

With regards to the TV outlets I think we'd agree that Sky are on the right, that ITV are fairly neutral and C4/BBC have at least a liberal bias - many would say left bias but they're hardly on a par with the Morning Star.

Certainly feels like more of the media, particularly print, are right biased.

I certainly would not agree that Sky are on the right. Have you listened to that Burley woman.

I still don't see where brainwashing comes in. You mentioned Facebook in another post.. Most of those social media platforms have a huge left wing bias. You Tube, Twitter are shocking. The problem is Facebook are not held accountable as they are a 'platform', so they just take the money and then no responsibility. Whats to stop the left doing the same on those platforms?

[Angry Ram]

56 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Oh yes, of course there are a few left wing outlets. But where is the big bucks behind these organisations? Who are the rich individuals and groups are behind the right wing groups?

Who are the evil bodies behind the left wing propaganda? Who are the rich people and groups who benefit from better wealth distribution? 

Plenty of big backers of the left.. In the US they have that Soros geezer. He is also sticking his nose into Brexit.

[Angry Ram]

More of a worry... Who let @Curtainsin.. Fess up..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Only joking fella. Welcome to hell.

[Van der MoodHoover]

3 hours ago, Curtains said:

Who gives planning permission for new houses in flood plains. 
 

lots of Labour Councils up North I suspect. 

Plenty of Tory ones in Hampshire too.

Its not a straight red-blue thing. Hampshire county council (bluer than a Chubby Brown standup routine) tells the local boroughs how many more houses they have to build. The boroughs (of mixed colours) grant the various planning applications for sites.

Plenty of flood plains in south Hampshire.....

[maxjam]

3 hours ago, GboroRam said:

According to Wikipedia, you've got:

On the right, you've got the Torygraph and the Times broadsheets, plus tabloids in the Mail, the Express, the Sun and the London Standard. City AM are mentioned but they are nothing I've had any experience of or seen in my life.
On the centre/liberal you've got the Observer, Independent, i, and the Financial Times.
On the left of centre you've got the Guardian and the Mirror.

They list the Morning Star but it's circulation is around 5, so hardly mainstream. They list the Star as largely non political but I think they lean right overall, personally.

With regards to the TV outlets I think we'd agree that Sky are on the right, that ITV are fairly neutral and C4/BBC have at least a liberal bias - many would say left bias but they're hardly on a par with the Morning Star.

Certainly feels like more of the media, particularly print, are right biased.

I think you are broadly correct, however the problem is twofold;  most people generally only buy The Guardian or The Telegraph for example and the opinion pieces they now do alongside or woven into articles.  When news rooms discovered pay per click articles naturally become more biased towards their demographic and more extreme in their content. 

Furthermore 'real' journalism and journalists are being replaced by essentially bloggers that regurgitate existing articles with their own (often heavily biased) opinion and shared on social media chasing those precious clicks.  This forces media companies to publish increasingly biased/reactionary stories and the public to consume and become influenced by them.

The Covington kids in America is the perfect example of this - no one did any real journalism, they all took one editted video as fact, pushed it as far as possible to generate clicks whilst simultaneously trying to score political points from it.  Of course it turns out later that the story is the complete opposite of what was published but they have already collected the money, pushed their (hateful imo) biased opinions and moved onto the next pay-per-click story. 

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 hour ago, Angry Ram said:

More of a worry... Who let @Curtainsin.. Fess up..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Only joking fella. Welcome to hell.

He was drawn in..........

?

[Stive Pesley]

31 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

He was drawn in..........

?

Hopefully he won't get too hung up in all the poles that  @G STAR RAM identifies for us

[GboroRam]

1 hour ago, Angry Ram said:

I certainly would not agree that Sky are on the right. Have you listened to that Burley woman.

I still don't see where brainwashing comes in. You mentioned Facebook in another post.. Most of those social media platforms have a huge left wing bias. You Tube, Twitter are shocking. The problem is Facebook are not held accountable as they are a 'platform', so they just take the money and then no responsibility. Whats to stop the left doing the same on those platforms?

Things like Twitter and FaceBook are driven by users posting and sharing content. That's not an issue for me, left or right.

It's the sponsored content, the stuff that someone is paying to target you based on your views, that I worry about most. Claiming to be community groups of like-minded individuals concerned about something, they are clearly funded pages that are purely political mouthpieces, funded solely to attack the opposition. I know it always happened, for example with groups such as the taxpayers' alliance - nothing to do with an alliance of taxpayers but an old fashioned lobby group.

There seems to be a plethora of funded pages attacking Labour, and I wonder who is paying for it and who pulls the strings. 

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, SchtivePesley said:

Hopefully he won't get too hung up in all the poles that  @G STAR RAM identifies for us

The old ones are always the best...sure you will have no problem in identifying which the old ones are!

[i-Ram]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

Things like Twitter and FaceBook are driven by users posting and sharing content. That's not an issue for me, left or right.

It's the sponsored content, the stuff that someone is paying to target you based on your views, that I worry about most. Claiming to be community groups of like-minded individuals concerned about something, they are clearly funded pages that are purely political mouthpieces, funded solely to attack the opposition. I know it always happened, for example with groups such as the taxpayers' alliance - nothing to do with an alliance of taxpayers but an old fashioned lobby group.

There seems to be a plethora of funded pages attacking Labour, and I wonder who is paying for it and who pulls the strings. 

 

[Curtains]

Noticed GStar is the arbiter ha ha 

[alexxxxx]

4 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

I certainly would not agree that Sky are on the right. Have you listened to that Burley woman.

I still don't see where brainwashing comes in. You mentioned Facebook in another post.. Most of those social media platforms have a huge left wing bias. You Tube, Twitter are shocking. The problem is Facebook are not held accountable as they are a 'platform', so they just take the money and then no responsibility. Whats to stop the left doing the same on those platforms?

I think sky are generally pretty balanced and would say they're less right wing than the bbc these days. 

Faisal Islam who moved to be BBC economics editor was pretty anti brexit and anti government. He seemed to be on TV about 12 hours a day last year. 

K Burley though is just a populist and wouldnt say she's a left winger tbh. Boulton is a bit of an odd one. The rest of them seem pretty fair. 

[Angry Ram]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

Things like Twitter and FaceBook are driven by users posting and sharing content. That's not an issue for me, left or right.

It's the sponsored content, the stuff that someone is paying to target you based on your views, that I worry about most. Claiming to be community groups of like-minded individuals concerned about something, they are clearly funded pages that are purely political mouthpieces, funded solely to attack the opposition. I know it always happened, for example with groups such as the taxpayers' alliance - nothing to do with an alliance of taxpayers but an old fashioned lobby group.

There seems to be a plethora of funded pages attacking Labour, and I wonder who is paying for it and who pulls the strings. 

There is a great documentary on Netflix about these social platforms and how they are manipulated.. I will try and dig it out, well worth a watch.

 

Just found it ? The Great Hack.