The Politics Thread 2019

[jono]

3 hours ago, Highgate said:

Basically a noble objective.  

But I agree with you, it's flawed and I find it hard to believe it could actually world with real people in the real world.  Self interest is such a strong motivation for people, even for those who also feel a responsibility towards a collective good.  To have a system that doesn't cater for that isn't going to prosper in my opinion.  Green leaning social democracies with firmly regulated markets and financial sectors, and an emphasis on progressive tax systems is the way to go for me.

It's always problematic to hear the phrase 'pure communism' or 'pure any ideology' without a clarification of what that person thinks that phrase actually means.  Do people mean Marxism?  which envisioned the eventual complete melting away of state structures, until a stateless collective remains.  Or do people mean Stalinism? the epitome of complete top down dominance and state control over everything?  Or do they mean something in between these two.  Some people think Stalinism was the inevitable corollary of Marxism, other people think it was a complete betrayal of Marxism. Such a wide spectrum of opinion exists even among the most knowledge people on the subject. 

I would say the shadow chancellor, even though I know next to nothing about him, would probably be in the latter school of thought.  A Marxist but not a Stalinist.  Hopefully that's the case ?

I need to do some more reading, I have a dim recollection that it was Trotsky who was the  “purist” in terms of Marxism but fell foul of internal politics in the various factions of the early Soviet Union ? 

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, Paul71 said:

Where do you start drawing the line as to what is acceptable wealth wise?

Someone living on the breadline would think someone with 5 figures saved away is rich, someone with 5 figures thinks someone with 6 is rich, and so on and so on.

That's a good question. I've seen the concept of billionaire described a few different ways but this is a simpole way to look at it

If you got £1 every 10 seconds, you’d be a millionaire within 4 months.

If you got £1 every 10 seconds, you’d have to wait 310 years before you became a billionaire

Now bear in mind that it took Bill Gates (Microsoft) twelve years to become a billionaire. It took Sergey Brin & Larry Page (Google) eight years to become billionaires. It took Jeff Bezos (Amazon) five years to become a billionaire. It took Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook) four years to become a billionaire.

It's an absolutely unnecessary amount of wealth for anyone to have.

According to Forbes, the world’s 10 richest billionaires own $745 billion in combined wealth, which is more than the total goods and services most nations produce on an annual basis...

 

 

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, Paul71 said:

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/local-news/conservative-derbyshire-councillor-suspended-racist-3627195

We really do have some dimwitted people representing our political parties.

The sad thing is that there are a few people on this forum who will read that and agree with him and question what he has said that is wrong.

?

[DarkFruitsRam7]

2 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

That's a good question. I've seen the concept of billionaire described a few different ways but this is a simpole way to look at it

If you got £1 every 10 seconds, you’d be a millionaire within 4 months.

If you got £1 every 10 seconds, you’d have to wait 310 years before you became a billionaire

Now bear in mind that it took Bill Gates (Microsoft) twelve years to become a billionaire. It took Sergey Brin & Larry Page (Google) eight years to become billionaires. It took Jeff Bezos (Amazon) five years to become a billionaire. It took Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook) four years to become a billionaire.

It's an absolutely unnecessary amount of wealth for anyone to have.

According to Forbes, the world’s 10 richest billionaires own $745 billion in combined wealth, which is more than the total goods and services most nations produce on an annual basis...

What do you think about the work Bill Gates does with his money?

[GboroRam]

2 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Question to all NHS experts...
From a total budget of £865b, £162b is to be spent on Health Care in 2020 (just under 20% of the total budget). If we were to increase the amount spent on the NHS, what are you going to spend less on? Bare in mind, we want a budget surplus (currently £18b) to reduce our debt.

Health Care - £162b
Pensions - £161b
Welfare - £126b
Public Services - £118b
Education - £92b
Debt Interest - £52b
Defence - £50b
Transport - £35b
State Protection - £33b
General Government - £17b
 

Can't we increase corporation tax to a level similar to other developed Western nations, and up the tax on people earning 80k or more per year? I'm sure those on 80k annually won't miss a fiver a week too much. 

[AdamRam]

3 hours ago, Paul71 said:

Im not debating that that.  It's tragic that there are issues that need resolving, and despite those who claim all would be perfect if Labour were in power,  my point was simply that corbyn claimed it was 450 pages of proof the nhs was being sold off to the us, yet every expert report i have read states the nhs is mentioned 4 times or so, but there is zero evidence to say that any deal was or will ever be agreed up on.

It's very clear that corbyns claims are at the best exaggerated.

I’m not sure what people’s expectations are of the NHS, it seems that if you even dare to look outside the box to improve the system then you get criticised immediately.
 

Is the current system sustainable, population is growing, people are living longer and therefore the cost of running it is going to dramatically rise year on year. Ideas floated around are to reduce working hours, increase salary bands, extra beds etc....all of which will require considerable funding.
 

Are all of the promises made ever going to be implemented, for me the system is not perfect but is no way near as bad as is being made out. No matter what service it provides there will always be bad examples found of how it operates and it seems the only way that we are allowed to discuss improving it, is by increasing taxes, I say that we will still be discussing the same issues at the next election whoever is in charge.

[AdamRam]

20 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Can't we increase corporation tax to a level similar to other developed Western nations, and up the tax on people earning 80k or more per year? I'm sure those on 80k annually won't miss a fiver a week too much. 

As long as you don’t have to pay anything extra then ?

[G STAR RAM]

4 hours ago, maxjam said:

Its a real pity that little boy is being used to shame the Tories over the NHS.  You really have to question the parents that put him there, took a photo then sent it to the media ☹️

Regardless, lets all agree that the NHS has been increasingly undefunded and overwhelmed whoever has been in government;

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2006/feb/16/health.politics

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209034/The-babies-born-hospital-corridors-Bed-shortage-forces-4-000-mothers-birth-lifts-offices-hospital-toilets.html

https://fullfact.org/health/number-hospital-beds-falling/

Agreed. And only a week after Johnson was criticised for political point scoring following the terror attack.

Politicians are the lowest of the low yet they still seem unable to gauge the public's feelings towards them. 

[Grumpy Git]

There was a plonker on the TV a couple of weeks ago stating Corby was going to "cost him a fortune" as he wasn't wealthy, but he was earning in excess of £80K a year. FFS he's getting paid at least an average of £1,538 a week and he thinks he's hard done by?

Less than 5% of the working population earn more than £80K a year

[Stive Pesley]

33 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

What do you think about the work Bill Gates does with his money?

I'm aware that he does donate a proportion of his wealth via his own foundation program. I think that Bezos and Zuckerberg do similar.

1) it kind of shows how meaningless the wealth becomes when you have so many billions that you can give millions of it away

and 2) it shouldn't really have to come to that. Aggressively avoid tax - but then later down the line donate some money to your own charity? Maybe just pay a fair share of tax and there may not be quite so much charity required?

[Sasha]

Who could vote for Corbyn. Friend of terrorists. 1982. Remember Sefton, cantering back to the barracks, blood pouring from his carotid artery. 3 vets managed to save him. His rider was blown to bits. Corbyn, Mcdonnell love the IRA, Hamas, Hezbollah.  

[Angry Ram]

7 minutes ago, Grumpy Git said:

There was a plonker on the TV a couple of weeks ago stating Corby was going to "cost him a fortune" as he wasn't wealthy, but he was earning in excess of £80K a year. FFS he's getting paid at least an average of £1,538 a week and he thinks he's hard done by?

Less than 5% of the working population earn more than £80K a year

Did he live in London, did he support a family on that amount? Any other income.?

£80k and he covers everything down here.  It could be difficult depending on where he lives. 

[i-Ram]

3 hours ago, Paul71 said:

I have made my opinions clear before that its not just a government issue but a cultural one.  If a and e wasnt full on a weekend evening with drink related incidents or beds taken by people who eat, drink,  smoke too much then maybe poor kids like the one in the article wouldn't be sleeping on the floor.

This. Two of my closest family are in the Ambulance service, and the vast majority of calls and attendances at weekends are because of individuals selfishly (and repeatedly) abusing an essential service.

[i-Ram]

57 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

The sad thing is that there are a few people on this forum who will read that and agree with him and question what he has said that is wrong.

?

Care to share who you are thinking of, or is this just casual shitslinging?

[Grumpy Git]

16 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

Did he live in London, did he support a family on that amount? Any other income.?

£80k and he covers everything down here.  It could be difficult depending on where he lives. 

So you think someone earning £80K could find life "difficult". No wonder you love the Tories.

He was from Manchester. He probably owns a row of ex-council terraces and rents them out at £750/month each?

[Half Fan Half Biscuit]

40 minutes ago, Grumpy Git said:

There was a plonker on the TV a couple of weeks ago stating Corby was going to "cost him a fortune" as he wasn't wealthy, but he was earning in excess of £80K a year. FFS he's getting paid at least an average of £1,538 a week and he thinks he's hard done by?

Less than 5% of the working population earn more than £80K a year

Well that will be less than £1k per week after tax, ni and pension. Still not bad, but it’s the people running their own businesses through limited companies that will pay the greatest extra proportion - eg around £130 a month extra on  just £22k - so Labour’s claim that it’s just the top 5% who will pay more tax is rubbish. 

[Angry Ram]

2 minutes ago, Grumpy Git said:

So you think someone earning £80K could find life "difficult". No wonder you love the Tories.

He was from Manchester. He probably owns a row of ex-council terraces and rents them out at £750/month each?

Would still depend on his circumstances. In theory 80k in Manchester sounds good but.......

[i-Ram]

2 minutes ago, Grumpy Git said:

So you think someone earning £80K could find life "difficult". No wonder you love the Tories.

He was from Manchester. He probably owns a row of ex-council terraces and rents them out at £750/month each?

Top marks would have been awarded if you had suggested that he probably kicks small children lying on A&E waiting room floors.

8/10 - not yet eligible to join Momentum.

[Gritstone Ram]

34 minutes ago, Grumpy Git said:

There was a plonker on the TV a couple of weeks ago stating Corby was going to "cost him a fortune" as he wasn't wealthy, but he was earning in excess of £80K a year. FFS he's getting paid at least an average of £1,538 a week and he thinks he's hard done by?

Less than 5% of the working population earn more than £80K a year

You could have one person earning £85k per year paying approx £26k in tax but a couple whose combined income = £85k potentially pay £12k in tax.

[Rev]

4 hours ago, Paul71 said:

I know my idealistic view won't ever be achieved but i still cannot be convinced that when east mids ambulance had to replace all their fleet with vehicles capable of carrying 50 stone plus people that we will ever have a solution.

Why replace all the fleet for a call out that could only possibly happen on a handful of occasions per year?

Wasteful local government spending right there, Central Waste could do the job at a fraction of the price.