The Politics Thread 2019

[GboroRam]

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

A master stroke? Farage has spent the last year telling us all what a bad deal had been agreed! 

Anyone entering into pacts or tactical voting should hang their head in shame.

No wonder trust in politicians are at an all time low.

Yet we're told on here that it's Labour's fault that Brexit didn't happen, despite the Brexit Party opposing it as a bad deal. So either it's a good deal (which Boris thought it wasn't when May raised it) or it isn't.

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Yet we're told on here that it's Labour's fault that Brexit didn't happen, despite the Brexit Party opposing it as a bad deal. So either it's a good deal (which Boris thought it wasn't when May raised it) or it isn't.

Who says that?

[maxjam]

Okay something thats not to do with the election...

Last weekend I apparently caused a bit of a stir with my SJW comments, saying that had pushed their agenda's to far and were doing more damage than good.  I also said that we've not decided upon certain things yet as a society and that one side of the argument is consistently shut down or called out as [whatever]-phobic, shutting down discussion.  I got asked to reconsider if what I actually said was what I meant, was called out for showing a lack of empathy, and was told that if you have those opinions you should expect to be called ...phobic and challenged on them.  Fair enough I guess.

Article from today's Sky News website;

https://news.sky.com/story/nhs-over-diagnosing-children-having-transgender-treatment-former-staff-warn-11875624

I'm not going to comment on the story as sexuality is against T&Cs but imo its just the latest in a long line of incidents in which discussion has only accurred in one direction and fears of being called out as ...phobic are potentially having very serious consequences to the lives of children. 

Free speech and common sense has to win out eventually otherwise future generations may look back in disgust at the way we allowed ourselves to be manipulated by a tiny vocal minority putting the lives of our most vulnerable at risk through this and other similar scandals. 

[Sith Happens]

Dont understand why people keep mentioning someones 80k salary as though its something dirty, immoral.

 

[DarkFruitsRam7]

1 hour ago, Angry Ram said:

Absolute disaster for this country. We need clear strong leadership at the moment, not a hotch potch of agendas that will not enable the country to move forward. 

How about a comfortable Labour majority?

Of course it's not going to happen. But, hypothetically...

[GboroRam]

3 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

Dont understand why people keep mentioning someones 80k salary as though its something dirty, immoral.

 

It's not. But why not pay your share?

[Sith Happens]

Just now, GboroRam said:

It's not. But why not pay your share?

He does doesn't he? Unless there is something you are accusing him of?

[AdamRam]

36 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

We could recognise that workers actually contribute a lot towards that 80k per year you take home, couldn't we? You talk about the risks you take, but at the end of the day it's the guy at the bottom who has to suck it up and accept what comes.

I was that guy at the bottom, I had to suck it up, I never though, not once looked up that chain and thought I deserve more. I had to move jobs to move up the chain, making sacrifices along the way, I had to work long long hours, I always accepted and still do that people will get paid more than me, I used to go out for a drink with these people and would always make sure I bought a round when it was my turn.
 

It’s very short sighted to think that business are operating the same way as they were 5 years ago, especially retail stores, yet your instant response is to attack the higher salary band.

[GboroRam]

Just now, Paul71 said:

He does doesn't he? Unless there is something you are accusing him of?

He's resisting paying an extra fiver a week. 

The post I quoted said he works unpaid, but he is paid. Can't be both ways, can it?

[Sith Happens]

1 minute ago, GboroRam said:

He's resisting paying an extra fiver a week. 

The post I quoted said he works unpaid, but he is paid. Can't be both ways, can it?

Of course it can, Sorry i may have missed something, i dont earn anywhere near that money but still work hours unpaid. In the past have been closer to that sort of salary and worked lots of unpaid hours.

Its wrong of you, in my opinion, to accuse him of not paying his share. You are accusing him of not wanting to pay 'more than his share' which is a different thing.

 

[GboroRam]

2 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

Of course it can, Sorry i may have missed something, i dont earn anywhere near that money but still work hours unpaid. In the past have been closer to that sort of salary and worked lots of unpaid hours.

Its wrong of you, in my opinion, to accuse him of not paying his share. You are accusing him of not wanting to pay 'more than his share' which is a different thing.

 

I didn't accuse anyone of anything. I said why not pay your share? Didn't say who, or what their share is - it's a general perception of tax burden across the whole country being unfairly weighted on the lower paid and I think it should be shared more towards the higher earners.

[Sith Happens]

2 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I didn't accuse anyone of anything. I said why not pay your share? Didn't say who, or what their share is - it's a general perception of tax burden across the whole country being unfairly weighted on the lower paid and I think it should be shared more towards the higher earners.

Ok sorry, it appeared to be aimed at one poster on this thread.

 

[AdamRam]

14 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

He's resisting paying an extra fiver a week. 

The post I quoted said he works unpaid, but he is paid. Can't be both ways, can it?

I have said that I feel that more than be should contribute to the country’s problem not just me, however you choose to ignore that.
 

Wonder where you get that from ?

[GboroRam]

6 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

I have said that I feel that more than be should contribute to the country’s problem not just me, however you choose to ignore that.
 

Wonder where you get that from ?

Believe I've said I wouldn't oppose it, but it's not an option I can vote for today.

[Stive Pesley]

24 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Okay something thats not to do with the election...

Thank god!

FWIW i don't think it's OK if people didn't report rape gangs for fear of being called racist, and i don't think it's OK that medical staff don't raise questions for fear of being called *phobic - which I think is what you are on about?

So I guess I agree that we need to get to a point where these conversations can happen in an open way without those fears. I don't know how that happens though. I do know that sensationalist media reporting and the social media outrage on BOTH sides don't help us get there

Maybe there needs to be a sort of "amnesty" law where someone can speak as an individual without fear - but within the confines of a strict audience and timescale. It has to be controlled formally somehow - otherwise it just gives the green light to people who might actually BE racist and transphobic to say what they like, when they like, to whoever they like  without accountability

For example, I had to listen to a co-worker a couple of weeks ago complaining about PC culture (which I know you would agree with) - but then he went on to give specific examples which were "when I was at school we could make fun of the gayboys and call them bummers and everyone just laughed about it" and "there was a vietnamese lad started at the school and we used to all pull slitty eyes and talk like chinamen whenever he said anything, and everyone just laughed about it". I'd like to think you can see what is wrong with these examples?

 

[Stive Pesley]

16 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

I'm afraid context is too much of a grey area when it comes to racism. If something is racist for one its racist for all.

I'm confused. So you're saying context shouldn't apply to racist comments? So Jim Davidson doing his "Chalky White" character was racist?. When Richard Pryor would put on a posh white man voice in a sketch. That was racist too? 

16 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

What are your views on some of the things that Dianne Abbot has said?

If you arent aware if any of the things she has said I will post them up later.

I'm not aware of the comments you're on about, but I guess you're saying that she's said somethings about white people that would be considered racist if the comments were made about BAME people by a white person?

 

[Comrade 86]

1 hour ago, TimRam said:

Just cast my vote. Put it this way, our pensions are safe and Len McCluskey will have to put his secondary picketing ideas on hold for a few more years.

Really?

1 hour ago, Angry Ram said:

Absolute disaster for this country. We need clear strong leadership at the moment, not a hotch potch of agendas that will not enable the country to move forward. 

Do you honestly believe that Johnson has a clear and structured vision and can a PM who dodges tricky interviews and changes tack so often really be considered a strong leader? Setting aside my bias for a moment I'll concede that a hung parliament might well not be for the best but is there any real evidence that Bojo will take the country forward? 

27 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

What makes you think he does not also have to suck it up and take what comes? Do you think someone on 80k does not have to bloody earn that? He could possibly work in a less forgiving area of the business where the pressures are huge. Of course we all contribute but it is different ways, each as important but don’t you dare belittle the guy who earns a decent wage and works bloody hard, sometimes on very long unpaid hours. 

Think you're being unfair Angry. I doubt anyone on here at least has a problem with folk earning a good wage, let alone sets out to belittle them. Please correct me if I'm wrong but my sense is that you are a most likely a successful guy but that success was predominantly down to determination and hard work. I can't speak for anyone else but for my part, that's to be admired and I say that sincerely. We've banged heads but I've never viewed you as the enemy. I suspect the point being made is that plenty of people work hard without the financial benefits. Nurses and firemen for example, may not be sending emails late at night but they may not be leaving the job at the door at 5 either. I'm very conscious that I've been lucky financially simply because deal makers are better remunerated than lifesavers. Us lefties don't want to eat the rich (mostly!), we want our nurses to not have to use food banks, least that's my thinking. 

8 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

Dont understand why people keep mentioning someones 80k salary as though its something dirty, immoral.

 

Which people? Nobody has said that Paul, unless I've missed it in which case I apologise but bar the tax dodging billionaires, I've not seen anyone demonised for earning a decent wage.

[maxjam]

4 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Maybe there needs to be a sort of "amnesty" law where someone can speak as an individual without fear - but within the confines of a strict audience and timescale. It has to be controlled formally somehow - otherwise it just gives the green light to people who might actually BE racist and transphobic to say what they like, when they like, to whoever they like  without accountability

I'd agree with this, as I mentioned at the weekend you only have to look at what happened to Sarah Champion of Roger Godsiff for example.  so long as they are not overtly racist as a bear minimum Politicians need to be able to raise difficult subjects without instantly getting fired - it sets a bad example from the very top which ultimately leads to Doctors, Police, Care Workers, etc putting our most vulnerable members of society as risk through fear of being labelled or sacked. 

I know I rant on negatively about the SJW mob on social media but that imo is where it starts, good causes have been hijacked and used to shutdown one side of the argument - the end result in a lot of cases is children end up being hurt and good people have the reputations and/or livelihoods destroyed. 

Without wanting to raise the Tommy Robinson thing again - thats been done to death,  but he is exactly the sort of person you get standing up when good people are to afraid to speak themselves.  IMHO opening up the debate, even if its carefully managed at first will mean that ordinary people have their concerns addressed and people like 'he who should not be mentioned' will once again be resigned to insignificance. 

[Curtains]

Come on Boris  

You can do this  

 

 

[DarkFruitsRam7]

3 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Come on Boris  

You can do this  

Do you genuinely like the bloke? As in the man, regardless of his policies?