Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Nick]

Just now, Buce said:

 

Oh, sure.

 

Politics and alcohol - what could possibly go wrong?

I was thinking you might like to host the first debate at your house.

[Buce]

Just now, Swan Lesta said:

I was thinking you might like to host the first debate at your house.

 

Think on, bro.

 

I'd just get shit for spiking the nibbles with non-meat products.

[Rogstanley]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Even when people from all sides start calling for more respect you still come out with this shit. It's bad enough reading the absolute garbage and inaccuracies you post about economics (QE is government borrowing waa a classic over Xmas btw) without then insulting people along with it.

 

This thread has been totally ruined and I'm out as well for the foreseeable future.

Where was the insult? Don't tell me you're now offended by the word 'cuck' having used it yourself many times?

 

Can't help but think the attempts to shut down the thread are coming at a convenient time for conservative supporters as there is a general slew of bad news that's certainly easier for them to avoid than deal with.

 

The thread is tame compared to others online but the sides are very entrenched and I think that leads to frustration. Like the articles about the rail industry lately, nobody on the Tory side had anything at all to say. There's a sense (which one or two have openly admitted) that people aren't going to reconsider their opinions no matter the volume or credibility of evidence presented.

 

And that does make the whole thing a bit pointless. But does it really have to have a meaning? It's just a thread on the internet that most of us probably just use as a distraction. No need to take it too seriously. I take issue with Webbo's assertion that I am "deliberately offensive" because I don't think that's true at all but if I have offended anyone then I apologise.

[Webbo]

 

[Carl the Llama]

On the closing the thread issue:  It's politics, there's always going to be strong opinions on either side and with strong opinions often comes strong emotion and regrettable behaviour.  I always try to be level headed when emotive topics are discussed on here but I know the red mist still occasionally descends and I'll word a point with unnecessary bile. Hopefully those of you who've been around for a while will agree that I'm a bit better at being impersonal these days but if that's true it's precisely because of threads like this where I've been able to make the mistakes of being a bit of a prat and (slowly) learn from them.

 

There used to be a time on here when you'd check on the politics thread (or any political thread before it was decided to contain it all in one place) weary in the knowledge that the usual right wing suspects will have made needlessly antagonistic remarks once again (though perhaps I only remember it in such partisan terms because I was the one providing the corresponding behaviour from the other side and as such didn't really notice it), recently though it's certainly seemed to be the case that for any given pointless fight in here there's a more than likely chance it began with one of our left wing posters escalating an otherwise impersonal debate.  Of course some of those antagonistic right-wing posters from days gone by have since become people who I consider to be amongst the most valuable contributors to threads like this and I can see the same becoming true of the 'chief troublemakers' today given some of their content, but for that to happen we need to avoid throwing our toys out the pram.  Besides, we've tried closing the politics thread in the past but it always reappears in some way shape or form, we don't really need to learn the same lesson about focusing it all in one place again, do we?

 

As Swan correctly puts it all we need is a bit more respect on all sides, though of course with emotive issues that's often easier said than done.

 

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

 

What's your point, exactly?  15% seems a healthy level of growth as a standalone fact with no context to it but wages haven't reflected any of this increased productivity (indeed they are unchanged in real terms since 2012) so who's benefiting?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Swan Lesta said:

I was thinking you might like to host the first debate at your house.

I'll happily invite Matt, webbo and strokes to the gulag for refreshments 

33 minutes ago, Webbo said:

 

Nice. Just remind me how things are right now.

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

On the closing the thread issue:  It's politics, there's always going to be strong opinions on either side and with strong opinions often comes strong emotion and regrettable behaviour.  I always try to be level headed when emotive topics are discussed on here but I know the red mist still occasionally descends and I'll word a point with unnecessary bile. Hopefully those of you who've been around for a while will agree that I'm a bit better at being impersonal these days but if that's true it's precisely because of threads like this where I've been able to make the mistakes of being a bit of a prat and (slowly) learn from them.

 

There used to be a time on here when you'd check on the politics thread (or any political thread before it was decided to contain it all in one place) weary in the knowledge that the usual right wing suspects will have made needlessly antagonistic remarks once again (though perhaps I only remember it in such partisan terms because I was the one providing the corresponding behaviour from the other side and as such didn't really notice it), recently though it's certainly seemed to be the case that for any given pointless fight in here there's a more than likely chance it began with one of our left wing posters escalating an otherwise impersonal debate.  Of course some of those antagonistic right-wing posters from days gone by have since become people who I consider to be amongst the most valuable contributors to threads like this and I can see the same becoming true of the 'chief troublemakers' today given some of their content, but for that to happen we need to avoid throwing our toys out the pram.  Besides, we've tried closing the politics thread in the past but it always reappears in some way shape or form, we don't really need to learn the same lesson about focusing it all in one place again, do we?

 

As Swan correctly puts it all we need is a bit more respect on all sides, though of course with emotive issues that's often easier said than done.

This is all fair enough. I suppose I'm one of the trouble makers of the left now but it isn't really intentional most of the time. I just get incredibly frustrated that, no matter how bad the social ill or how dismaying the policy we're discussing, the same two or three people refuse to enter into any criticism of government policy. I just cannot comprehend why you'd put company profits above the lives of our citizens. I end up getting angry. Tbh I think this thread is now pretty bad for me in that I end up getting riled up or spend more time than I should seeking out evidence which will only be dismissed out of hand anyway. 

[Webbo]

33 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

 

 

What's your point, exactly?  15% seems a healthy level of growth as a standalone fact with no context to it but wages haven't reflected any of this increased productivity (indeed they are unchanged in real terms since 2012) so who's benefiting?

Best growth per capita in the EU for an economy that's supposed to be a devastating failure? I just thought it was worth mentioning.

[purpleronnie]

Happens all the time Toddy, people defend their party the same as they do with their football club, you end up going round and round in circles, I'm a leftie but have criticized the left numerous times and even agreed with some right policies.  I don't know why people can't be a bit more broad minded but these days it seems if you're not on the extreme you're the odd one out.  That's why I have distanced myself from politics and discussions on it, although every now and again I like to check in to see if anyone's changed their minds...never happens.

 

 

Oh and UK considering joining the TPP was one of the funniest things I have read recently.

 

I guess you have to explore every possibility (all seem worse than what we had), but it really is a mess at the moment, I guess looking on the Brightside surely things can only get better...ooooh sounds like a song.

 

Edited 3 January 2018 by purpleronnie

[Buce]

 

Jesus, there's some sanctimonious crap coming out today.

 

With the notable exception of Mac, not one of us has the right to play the holier than thou card.

[bovril]

I've probably posted similar before but people seem more bothered about winding up their perceived enemies than actually articulating what they believe in and why they believe in it. It's like the internet has given us free reign to display some outward aggro in a way we couldn't before and and now we're kind of addicted to it. 

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Best growth per capita in the EU for an economy that's supposed to be a devastating failure? I just thought it was worth mentioning.

It's a huge failure if despite having great GDP growth we're still producing stories like this:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uk-workers-have-had-the-worst-wage-growth-in-the-oecd-except-greece-a7773246.html

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

Jesus, there's some sanctimonious crap coming out today.

 

With the notable exception of Mac, not one of us has the right to play the holier than thou card.

Well fvck you too.  

[bovril]

6 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Jesus, there's some sanctimonious crap coming out today.

 

With the notable exception of Mac, not one of us has the right to play the holier than thou card.

Nah, there are plenty of people on here who haven't called anyone a cuck/ quisling/ tory scum etc etc etc. Majority of posters are sound. It's the ones who are most personal who get the most outraged when another poster does it. 

Edited 3 January 2018 by bovril

[Wymsey]

Other senior Leicestershire public servant's salaries

Leicester mayor Sir Peter Soulsby is paid £67,756.

Accounts from 2014/15 showed Leicestershire Police's chief constable Simon Cole's salary was £141,330.

Chief executive of Leicester's Hospitals John Adler's salary in 2016/16 was between £205,000 and £210,000.

Leicestershire County Council chief executive John Sinnot is paid £190,000

Leicester City Council's chief operating officer Andy Keeling is paid £130,000

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/revealed-pay-increases-de-montfort-994366

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Best growth per capita in the EU for an economy that's supposed to be a devastating failure? I just thought it was worth mentioning.

You've mentioned this many, many things. You'll recall that we had the best growth in the G7 until the moment you voted for Brexit. We now have the worst growth in the G7 and EU - including Greece. I just thought it worth mentioning this.

[Buce]

3 minutes ago, bovril said:

Nah, there are plenty of people on here who haven't called anyone a cuck/ quisling/ tory scum etc etc etc. Majority of posters are sound. 

 

There is more than one way to be confrontational.

 

I don't intend singling out individuals but there are plenty of outwardly 'sound' posters who are little more than trolls.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Wymeswold fox said:

Other senior Leicestershire public servant's salaries

Leicester mayor Sir Peter Soulsby is paid £67,756.

Accounts from 2014/15 showed Leicestershire Police's chief constable Simon Cole's salary was £141,330.

Chief executive of Leicester's Hospitals John Adler's salary in 2016/16 was between £205,000 and £210,000.

Leicestershire County Council chief executive John Sinnot is paid £190,000

Leicester City Council's chief operating officer Andy Keeling is paid £130,000

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/revealed-pay-increases-de-montfort-994366

Personally I don't have too much of an issue with figures of £200k for running one of the largest acute trusts in the country. These are complicated organisations with semi-political elements to them. They're clearly going to be the best paid in their organisations. What I have an issue with is salaries in the millions.

[Carl the Llama]

1 hour ago, toddybad said:

You've mentioned this many, many things. You'll recall that we had the best growth in the G7 until the moment you voted for Brexit. We now have the worst growth in the G7 and EU - including Greece. I just thought it worth mentioning this.

Did nobody else have a say in it?

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Did nobody else have a say in it?

Of course, but did he not vote for Brexit?

[Guest]

Sounds like a lovely bloke

 

Windsor council leader calls for removal of homeless before royal wedding

Council’s Tory leader Simon Dudley is demanding police use legal powers to clear the area of homeless people by 19 May

 

St George’s chapel at Windsor Castle, where Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will marry in May. Photograph: Alastair Grant/AP

Harriet Sherwood

Published:15:06 GMT+00:00 Wed 3 January 2018

 Follow Harriet Sherwood

 

The leader of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead – home to Windsor Castle, Eton College and Ascot racecourse – has demanded police use legal powers to clear the area of homeless people before the royal wedding in May.

Simon Dudley, the council’s Conservative leader, wrote to Thames Valley police this week seeking action against “aggressive begging and intimidation” and “bags and detritus” accumulating on the streets.

The letter, seen by the Guardian, follows a series of tweets sent by Dudley while on a skiing holiday in Wyoming over Christmas, in which he referred to “an epidemic of rough sleeping and vagrancy in Windsor” and said “residents have had enough of this exploitation of residents and 6 million tourists pa [per annum]”.

AdvertisementHide

 

He tweeted that he would write to Thames Valley police “asking them to focus on dealing with this before the #RoyalWedding”.

Tens of thousands of wellwishers and tourists are expected to descend on the picturesque town on the banks of the River Thames for the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on 19 May in St George’s chapel at Windsor Castle.

The castle, founded in the 11th century, is one of the royal family’s main residences and where the Queen spends most weekends. It is open to the public, attracting 1.36 million, visitors each year, with a family ticket costing £53.

Dudley’s letter, dated 2 January and addressed to Anthony Stansfield, the police and crime commissioner for Thames Valley, thanks the police for protecting the community and lists the council’s support services for vulnerable residents, including an emergency night shelter, a drug and alcohol support service, and a severe weather emergency protocol.

“Homelessness is completely unacceptable in a compassionate community such as ours,” he says.

However, he goes on to say that the council has evidence that “a large number of adults that are begging in Windsor are not in fact homeless, and if they are homeless they are choosing to reject all support services ... In the case of homelessness amongst this group, it is therefore a voluntary choice.”

Dudley also raised concerns about “the quantities of bags and detritus that those begging are accumulating and leaving on our pavements, at times unattended … this is a significant security concern, especially given the national importance of Windsor.

“Obviously, the level of tourist interest is set to multiply with the Royal Wedding in May 2018, and there are increased concerns from our residents about their safety. The whole situation also presents a beautiful town in a sadly unfavourable light.”

He suggests that Thames Valley police use their powers under existing laws – citing the 1824 Vagrancy Act and the 2014 Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act – “including implementing criminal behaviour orders for the numerous offenders”. The Vagrancy Act criminalises rough sleeping and begging.

Dudley’s letter is copied to Theresa May, who is MP for Maidenhead, and the home secretary, Amber Rudd.

Wisdom Da Costa, an independent councillor, said he disagreed with Dudley’s approach. “I don’t believe banging them [homeless people] up is the right thing to do,” he said. “What we need is a multi-agency approach, and that means putting money behind an effort to get people off the streets and dealing with the issues.”

Prince Harry a breath of fresh air? No, a chip off the old block | Catherine Bennett

Da Costa said homelessness had become “more visible and more persistent” in the town centre over the past year, but said he had not encountered harassment. “I’ve been delighted by the response of hundreds of people in Windsor, who have provided food and blankets, who care about these people and want decent solutions,” he said. Windsor was “a beautiful place, but there is poverty here, areas of deprivation. We are one people and we need to work together.”

Sam White, 18, who has lived in Windsor all his life, said he got to know most of the homeless people in the town centre over the past six months since starting work in the box office of the Theatre Royal. “There are quite a few now. If you walk down the High Street, you might see six or seven, but there are obviously more hidden away,” he said.

“They don’t cause a threat to anyone. I’ve never seen any of them being aggressive. Obviously some have issues like drug addiction, but they’re nice people at the absolutely lowest point in their lives.”

White, who doesn’t give money but buys food and essentials for homeless people, said some did not receive help from the authorities. Some, but not all, asked passing members of the public for cash donations, he said, “but they’ve got nothing”.

He objected to the idea of a police drive to clear people out for the royal wedding, saying: “I’m sure if the council offered homeless people food and shelter for the day, they would agree to take themselves off the streets.”

[lifted*fox]

I hope all the homeless in that area band together and throw shit at the royals during their wedding. 

 

Couldn't give a shit about helping homeless people off the streets all year round but when they're going to un-pretty up the place for the royal wedding they can't wait to use some power to hide them away. 

 

****ing jokers.

[Guest]

Ok so a non-Guardian link. About the nhs crisis.

It talks to select Committee members from the Tories, labour and the lib dems so isn't one sided. Still can't escape the reality of the government's failures but there is discussion about Moe than just this government's failures. Tbh I'm amazed that TM isnt taking the issue more seriously as it is the non-brexit issue  most likely to bring down her government.

 

https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/laurasilver/these-senior-mps-have-accused-theresa-may-of-blocking-moves?__twitter_impression=true

[Carl the Llama]

1 hour ago, toddybad said:

Of course, but did he not vote for Brexit?

Sure, he and 17-odd million others.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Sure, he and 17-odd million others.

Right. And earlier he was holding up comparably alright growth (though most of the world has had terrible growth since 2008) as a wonderful thing. I'm just pointing out that his vote has been for something which has hit that growth hard. Surely this makes sense?