Jump to content
the_saurus

The politics thread

Recommended Posts

This choices at this election are as palatable as slightly warmed shit.

The Tories have spent the last 3-years single handedly fucking up Brexit. They have put imploding as a party above trying to achieve a national consensus. They have shown themselves to be economically incompetent by being able to find the magic money tree at convenient moments, such as bribing the DUP. They have shown they are incapable of getting Brexit done.

Labour have spent the last 3-years ignoring the national interest and focusing on Jeremy Corbyn's interests. They don't appear to have any cohesive policies, other than taking the country back to a 1970s socialist paradise. They have shown they are incapable of even deciding what to do.

The Lib Dems want to bolster democracy by ignoring the biggest democratic exercise in the UK. Not sure if they have any policies beyond revoking article 50.

Brexit have decided that all 52% of those who voted to leave wanted a hard Brexit and are happy to go with no deal in spite of the damage and chaos it will cause to the country and people’s lives. Fair play to Farage, as he has been pretty consistent for the past 20-years.

Whatever happens it is going to be the same self-serving cunts who don't give a fuck about the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amid the Brexit nonsense, does anyone venture out of their house and see a shit ton of homeless people in every city? 

Hear the usual empty promises to improve services and invest despite cutting funding so much that nothing functions anymore? - Back to the amount of homeless people thanks to the state of housing, mental health services etc. 

I mention homeless people because that's always just the tip of the iceberg.  The more of those, the more you know there countless other people on their arses. 

Disabled people having their money cut off 100% time and having to appeal to get it back.  That's all the evidence you need about this lot. 

Working people having to use food banks just to survive.

20,000 coppers gone so if somebody commits a crime against you nothing will be done.

The NHS will probably go, and right wingers will cry with joy because they won't have to pay for their healthcare twice, while also not noticing that they didn't get a tax cut for the NHS going and ended up having to pay more for their healthcare because extra competition didn't work.

Fire stations cut everywhere, building burns down thanks to not being up to spec, fire service gets the blame. 

And people want to vote for more of this and worse - cause Strong and Stable and Brexit. 

It won't end well, but then, what can you do when your population keeps voting to make things worse for themselves?

Corbyn is a shocker but I honestly think four or five years of him to redress the balance is needed.  Then hoof him out again.  As none of the bastards can do what's best for us I'd rotate them every five years to limit the amount of damage they can do.

Edited by Charlie Cheswick
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no one from this shower of shit that you'd vote into office with any sort of confidence, Chaz. Manifesto's that promise so much, yet deliver so little once in power.

 My view is that not one of them are worth the walk to the polling station.

You mention the homeless in Nottingham Chaz. Homeless people dying on the streets of Nottingham, yet a recent report says there were over 4000 unoccupied houses in Notingham last year, and over a 1000 of them unoccupied for 6 months or more. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/nottingham-residents-shame-more-4000-3450452. It's a disgrace that any Council can allow this to happen.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are those empty homes private properties? Do the council have any remit to state ownership of them? With their budgets being slashed by the Conservatives do they have the money available?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the election, unfortunately it’ll be a single policy campaign based solely around Brexit. Other important matters such as healthcare, policing, education etc will be booted to the gutter and whoever wins the public’s confidence regarding how best to proceed with Brexit will win. Unfortunately I can’t see anything but a win for the Conservatives as despite how absolutely fucking wank they are people still vote for them. I hope I’m wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dane B said:

There is no one from this shower of shit that you'd vote into office with any sort of confidence, Chaz. Manifesto's that promise so much, yet deliver so little once in power.

 My view is that not one of them are worth the walk to the polling station.

You mention the homeless in Nottingham Chaz. Homeless people dying on the streets of Nottingham, yet a recent report says there were over 4000 unoccupied houses in Notingham last year, and over a 1000 of them unoccupied for 6 months or more. https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/nottingham-residents-shame-more-4000-3450452. It's a disgrace that any Council can allow this to happen.

 

A couple of points on this, those won't be council houses and the other the council will have fuck all money to play with considering the constraints they'll be working under and so will struggle to build any new council houses. 

The other, when the big council housing sell off happened, those sold houses should have been replaced with new council housing. 

In fact a third point, Nottingham Council aren't those responsible for slashing budgets to mental health support either.

This is a central government caused problem, it's a disgrace, in fact, it's a bigger disgrace that no fucker is holding them accountable for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Charlie Cheswick said:

Disabled people having their money cut off 100% time and having to appeal to get it back.  That's all the evidence you need about this lot. 

Why do you think this government have to resort to draconian measures to identify whether an applicant is viable for disability benefit? Here is a statistic on why.

In the 1980's 1.4 million people received the disability benefit. In 2003 under Tony Blair's government this figure rose to 2.8 million - DLA etc. Now 4.2 million people receive one or more disability benefits - PIP Personal Independent Payment, Carer's allowance and Employment Support Assistance. Understandably this causes abject misery and poverty to a small minority but how many of those receiving disability benefit exaggerate or falsify their claims? If you believe it is just this 'callous' government which resorts to dubious practises maybe you should read about when Tony Blair came into power and systematically attempted to also change the disability welfare system. It's a double edged sword.

7 hours ago, Charlie Cheswick said:

The NHS will probably go, and right wingers will cry with joy because they won't have to pay for their healthcare twice, while also not noticing that they didn't get a tax cut for the NHS going and ended up having to pay more for their healthcare because extra competition didn't work.

 Do you honestly believe this ideological rhetoric spouted by Jeremy Corbyn? The vast majority of Conservatives and the opposition would oppose any attempt to privatise the NHS. Why? Simply because it's a vote loser. Many Conservatives hold dear the NHS, especially as they've worked for the institution (5 are ex-Doctors) or family members have used the system for urgent, palliative or emergency care. What about privatisation by the backdoor? PFI - Private Funding Initiative is probably the best example why the Conservatives and Labour have pulled back on using private equity and funding to build infrastructure.      

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Charlie Cheswick said:

Hear the usual empty promises to improve services and invest despite cutting funding so much that nothing functions anymore? - Back to the amount of homeless people thanks to the state of housing, mental health services etc. 

I mention homeless people because that's always just the tip of the iceberg.  The more of those, the more you know there countless other people on their arses. 

Yes I've seen and spoken to many of the 'Homeless' without shelter, on the street and sofa surfing it is not the national government fault but rather the antiquated housing system, and how the local Council ineffectively run the process and prioritise applicants. The vast majority of 'homeless' Men and lesser extent Women fall foul to administrative errors, poor communication between departments, and prioritising towards families over single people due to the antiquated points system. The problem is that once you've slipped through the system, it is difficult to find the appropriate help as the Councils have cut support whilst retaining the management.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, nemesiz said:

Why do you think this government have to resort to draconian measures to identify whether an applicant is viable for disability benefit? Here is a statistic on why.

In the 1980's 1.4 million people received the disability benefit. In 2003 under Tony Blair's government this figure rose to 2.8 million - DLA etc. Now 4.2 million people receive one or more disability benefits - PIP Personal Independent Payment, Carer's allowance and Employment Support Assistance. Understandably this causes abject misery and poverty to a small minority but how many of those receiving disability benefit exaggerate or falsify their claims? If you believe it is just this 'callous' government which resorts to dubious practises maybe you should read about when Tony Blair came into power and systematically attempted to also change the disability welfare system. It's a double edged sword.    

 

It isn't about Daily Mail led dogma at all.  It's about Tony Blair.  Sweet Baby Jesus. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, nemesiz said:

Yes I've seen and spoken to many of the 'Homeless' without shelter, on the street and sofa surfing it is not the national government fault but rather the antiquated housing system, and how the local Council ineffectively run the process and prioritise applicants. The vast majority of 'homeless' Men and lesser extent Women fall foul to administrative errors, poor communication between departments, and prioritising towards families over single people due to the antiquated points system. The problem is that once you've slipped through the system, it is difficult to find the appropriate help as the Councils have cut support whilst retaining the management.    

 

Nothing to do with the great council house sell off and them not being rebuilt? 

Or the idea that housing was investment rather than a home?

Nothing to do with the lack of mental health services?

Or how easy it is to fall through the net if you suddenly lose your job?

Tories are fucked in the head.  Your lot need to stop talking in riddles and just own it.  That way things can improve.

I'm surprised you didn't bring Blair into this seeing as he played the biggest part in point 2.

Edited by Charlie Cheswick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Charlie Cheswick said:

 

Nothing to do with the great council house sell off and them not being rebuilt? 

Or the idea that housing was investment rather than a home?

Nothing to do with the lack of mental health services?

Or how easy it is to fall through the net if you suddenly lose your job?

Tories are fucked in the head.  Your lot need to stop talking in riddles and just own it.  That way things can improve.

I'm surprised you didn't bring Blair into this seeing as he played the biggest part in point 2.

CC you've moved the 'goal posts' to discuss your viewpoints, so to explain or validate my argument (from the older post) would take substantial time. There was the reason why I cherry picked your initial comment as many of the topics are complex, and in truth many don't have answers except without plowing an endless pit of money and decorum of intelligence, commonsense, far sight and planning.

I'll take your first point. The 'Great Council Housing sell-off' is in fact a lazy misnomer that doesn't explain the reason for homelessness or critical shortage of housing. There is a shortage of cheap affordable public housing, or affordable rented accommodation which is perceived by many due to the council owned houses being sold-off. Whilst there is direct correlation, it doesn't actually explain why or go deeply into a subject that is affecting the huge proportion of the population. Unfortunately this subject is agenda driven, especially by the liberals without understanding that the critical factor that has impacted on the housing shortage is POPULATION increase, Demographic change, personal choice, foreign investment and over-inflated market. 

When Margaret Thatcher encouraged people to buy their Council Housing, those that could afford the opportunity took that chance. The housing stock still does exist, except now in private hands. So those ex-council tenants who prior would technically require public housing now are not on that list. Unfortunately in the last Forty years the population has risen from 56 (1984) to 66 million (2018) people in this country (excluding temporary, and illegal migration). The problem is what we're seeing is Council or Association stock is unsuitable for the changing population and demographics. Many 'Council' houses were build for the traditional family with two bedrooms, unfortunately what we're seeing is larger families but also huge rise in single parent families and individual people. Also what were seeing is an unprecedented amount of migration from North to South and pressure from EU citizen that require accommodation.

Why isn't Council houses being built? They were , and still are but with a changing economic climate and demographic pressure there is nowhere enough being built to satisfy demand. Unfortunately what we're seeing is a shift by local Councils, and Government to encourage building of 'affordable' private housing over publicly owned accommodation. Worryingly there is correlation or link with many Council's transferring ownership of their housing stock to 'charitable' Associations, and so shift away in policy to build publicly run, owned affordable housing. This happened in my area.

(Sorry I can't answer further but don't have the time. As I've said this subject is contentious, and requires a monumental time to actually write a satisfactory reply).   

 

 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, nemesiz said:

(Sorry I can't answer further but don't have the time. As I've said this subject is contentious, and requires a monumental time to actually write a satisfactory reply).  

  

Is it really that complex? It is ultimately a case of supply and demand: Less council houses (decreased supply) and increased population (increased demand). 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nemesiz said:

CC you've moved the 'goal posts' to discuss your viewpoints, so to explain or validate my argument (from the older post) would take substantial time. There was the reason why I cherry picked your initial comment as many of the topics are complex, and in truth many don't have answers except without plowing an endless pit of money and decorum of intelligence, commonsense, far sight and planning.

I'll take your first point. The 'Great Council Housing sell-off' is in fact a lazy misnomer that doesn't explain the reason for homelessness or critical shortage of housing. There is a shortage of cheap affordable public housing, or affordable rented accommodation which is perceived by many due to the council owned houses being sold-off. Whilst there is direct correlation, it doesn't actually explain why or go deeply into a subject that is affecting the huge proportion of the population. Unfortunately this subject is agenda driven, especially by the liberals without understanding that the critical factor that has impacted on the housing shortage is POPULATION increase, Demographic change, personal choice, foreign investment and over-inflated market. 

When Margaret Thatcher encouraged people to buy their Council Housing, those that could afford the opportunity took that chance. The housing stock still does exist, except now in private hands. So those ex-council tenants who prior would technically require public housing now are not on that list. Unfortunately in the last Forty years the population has risen from 56 (1984) to 66 million (2018) people in this country (excluding temporary, and illegal migration). The problem is what we're seeing is Council or Association stock is unsuitable for the changing population and demographics. Many 'Council' houses were build for the traditional family with two bedrooms, unfortunately what we're seeing is larger families but also huge rise in single parent families and individual people. Also what were seeing is an unprecedented amount of migration from North to South and pressure from EU citizen that require accommodation.

Why isn't Council houses being built? They were , and still are but with a changing economic climate and demographic pressure there is nowhere enough being built to satisfy demand. Unfortunately what we're seeing is a shift by local Councils, and Government to encourage building of 'affordable' private housing over publicly owned accommodation. Worryingly there is correlation or link with many Council's transferring ownership of their housing stock to 'charitable' Associations, and so shift away in policy to build publicly run, owned affordable housing. This happened in my area.

(Sorry I can't answer further but don't have the time. As I've said this subject is contentious, and requires a monumental time to actually write a satisfactory reply).   

 

 

  

 

Thank God.  You're a forum equivalent of a filibusterer. 

Like I said, the problem is threefold, cuts to mental health services, the council house sell off and them not being replaced, along with the idea that homes are for investment rather than living in.  Cut it down and cut the shit out, and there it is.  Your lot and Blair between them have created this mess and it doesn't matter how many words you put down to deflect from the truth, it is what it is.

Affordable housing isn't there because it's been mismanaged for decades, the mental health services aren't there because the shit houses have cut them to render them useless, mixed together you've got increased homelessness. 

Edited by Charlie Cheswick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not voting for the Tories, Labour, or the Brexit party. Taxation without representation. Is that broccoli man in the running?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Charlie Cheswick said:

You've got my vote.

Moi? Thanks Charlie.

I'm bringing in a new law.....if you don't reverse park into a space, it's an automatic three points. Sick of watching dribblers try to reverse out of a space they've gone in forwards to.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the system works:

We're told that tax cuts for the best off and corporations will boost the economy and we'll all win...

 

Evidence A: Less money in the coffers = equals those not at the top being worse off.

https://www.ft.com/content/30238556-2322-11e9-8ce6-5db4543da632

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/boris-johnson/news/106838/boris-johnsons-tax-cuts-plan

Evidence B: Richest family on Earth get richer, not all down to us admittedly, it's a world wide scam.

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/richest-families-in-the-world/?srnd=premium&fbclid=IwAR2Nns_DRxEydzDjO1UUwT_gQ-PdWoXsOg2866WigBOgvRnLQGwiwIcmK6c

Evidence C. Staff working for one of the companies owned by the richest family on Earth told to sign new contract or fuck off.

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-10-29/asda-workers-told-to-sign-new-contract-or-be-out-of-a-job-by-sunday/

 

No matter what your thoughts on the choices in opposition, these crooks deserve to be run out of town, preferably with burning pitchforks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a leaflet through from the Lib Dems telling me that the only way to beat the Tories in my area was to tactically vote.  It said the only option was to vote Lib Dems based on their previous performance.  I'm yet to get a leaflet from the other shits but I'm guessing this will be far and away the funniest.

2017 Rushcliffe election results

https://electionresults.parliament.uk/election/2017-06-08/Results/Location/Constituency/Rushcliffe

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Labour's position is now that they'll campaign for a second referendum, try to negotiate another deal and depending on the content of that deal may possibly campaign to leave at a second referendum.....??

Has anyone ever drank Turkish coffee? The type that has the consistency of mud? Because Labour's Brexit position is about as clear as a cup of that stuff.

At a time when the public are clamouring for clarity over Brexit one way or the other, this policy is remarkable in both it's lack of clarity and in that it will almost certainly alienate both remain and leave voters. An own goal of a policy of there ever was one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, H-Block said:

So Labour's position is now that they'll campaign for a second referendum, try to negotiate another deal and depending on the content of that deal may possibly campaign to leave at a second referendum.....??

Has anyone ever drank Turkish coffee? The type that has the consistency of mud? Because Labour's Brexit position is about as clear as a cup of that stuff.

At a time when the public are clamouring for clarity over Brexit one way or the other, this policy is remarkable in both it's lack of clarity and in that it will almost certainly alienate both remain and leave voters. An own goal of a policy of there ever was one.

I think Labour’s problem is they’re fighting a civil war and desperately trying to pretend it’s not a thing and give the impression of a party with coherent policy.  Trouble is there’s that much pressure in there it breaks out somewhere. They’re trying to pretend they don’t have conflicting policy on Brexit amongst their front benchers , most of whom seem to want to remain but their voting base outside of the Islington set are mostly leavers. Corbyn seems to be the leader but not in control, yet none of his opponents have either the balls or the backing to come at him.

They’re not alone in their Brexit incoherence though and this has exposed the mess our politicians have made of it. Only the LibDems have the balls to say what they really propose with Brexit despite it being suicidal. Most MPs that talk about a people’s vote simply want to drown it but daren’t say that so they talk about second referendums and avoiding no deal through the law but that’s like voting against gravity. The withdrawal agreement isn’t and never was permanent it was simply the agreement that got us over the line which would then lead to negotiations about a future relationship. Trouble is our MPs are such halfwits it only entered the head of some of them.

theyre a bloody shambles, the lot them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, H-Block said:

So Labour's position is now that they'll campaign for a second referendum, try to negotiate another deal and depending on the content of that deal may possibly campaign to leave at a second referendum.....??

Has anyone ever drank Turkish coffee? The type that has the consistency of mud? Because Labour's Brexit position is about as clear as a cup of that stuff.

At a time when the public are clamouring for clarity over Brexit one way or the other, this policy is remarkable in both it's lack of clarity and in that it will almost certainly alienate both remain and leave voters. An own goal of a policy of there ever was one.

https://newsthump.com/2019/11/01/labour-manifesto-will-be-a-choose-your-own-adventure-book/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, leather said:

I think Labour’s problem is they’re fighting a civil war and desperately trying to pretend it’s not a thing and give the impression of a party with coherent policy.  Trouble is there’s that much pressure in there it breaks out somewhere. They’re trying to pretend they don’t have conflicting policy on Brexit amongst their front benchers , most of whom seem to want to remain but their voting base outside of the Islington set are mostly leavers. Corbyn seems to be the leader but not in control, yet none of his opponents have either the balls or the backing to come at him.

They’re not alone in their Brexit incoherence though and this has exposed the mess our politicians have made of it. Only the LibDems have the balls to say what they really propose with Brexit despite it being suicidal. Most MPs that talk about a people’s vote simply want to drown it but daren’t say that so they talk about second referendums and avoiding no deal through the law but that’s like voting against gravity. The withdrawal agreement isn’t and never was permanent it was simply the agreement that got us over the line which would then lead to negotiations about a future relationship. Trouble is our MPs are such halfwits it only entered the head of some of them.

theyre a bloody shambles, the lot them.

If you look at the Pro-leave Labour MP Supporters - Kate Hoey, Caroline Flint, John Mann even Frank Field all are highly experienced moderates that justifiably listen to their constituents wishes. Instead of automatically adhering to the Whip, have voted to leave. Whilst many ardent Labour, Momentum and Union supporters believe this to be sacrilege and detrimental to the Labour's leadership they've publicly explained their reasoning and backing of the initial referendum result. It is those traditional MP's with experience, their own mind-set and ability to listen to all arguments that could solidify the mainstream support and could provide the impetus for a landslide victory for Labour. Unfortunately John Mann is now in the House of Lords, Kate Hoey is retiring and Frank Fields is probably too old. Caroline Flint could be a reasonable choice, but with Corbyn and Momentum selecting the Labour candidates it would be highly unlikely she or any moderate would get chosen without an open revolt.     

Edited by nemesiz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll vote Green or Lib Dem most likely - not that it matters. I live in one of the safest Labour seats in the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
  • Live championship table

  • Championship Live Scores

    Fctables
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.