Not The Politics Thread.

[Footballwipe]

4 minutes ago, String fellow said:

There's also plenty of vitriol and hated expressed towards the 'more elderl'y' from 'the youth and disadvantaged'. What the latter tend to forget is that they themselves will eventually become elderly, assuming that Covid-19 doesn't get them first. 

Of course there is, because it's all being manufactured. The housing argument is a perfect embodiment of this.

 

You've got young people spouting that oldies are living alone in massive houses taking up empty rooms, sitting on huge nesteggs and who had to work 4 hour days whenever they felt like it to afford a home.

 

You've got older people who think that with a bit of stiff upper lip British spirit, less laziness and by not buying a mobile phone or big TV they can save up and buy themselves a property to get on the ladder.

 

This pits both against each other. The young are insulting the old and the old are insulting the young. In reality it's a bit in between. Some older people broke their figurative backs to afford a house, to keep a house during high % rates and are reaping the reward. Other older people just fluked out and some older people never came close to owning their own house due to their circumstances. 

 

Some younger people fritter away their money and as a result they'll never own their own house, but equally some young people are stuck in rent traps, low paying jobs or just are in the wrong circumstance to ever dream of affording their own home, whilst a lot of other young people have their dream house and are paying a mortgage, either with help from family and/or hard work and saving.

 

Problem is, it's all ensconced and encapsulated in the extremes. You'll just see the OLDIES ARE LUCKY WE HAVE IT BAD, or the YOUNG PEOPLE NEED TO SACRIFICE IT'S NOT THAT HARD narrative, and this deepens the narrative.

[Sampson]

I do think the current political division is more about age than class like it was in the 70s and 80s. I don't think I ever remember a time where there was such a generational divide, whereas I don't see the class divide now as big as it was in the 70s and 80s, as now I think a lot of the worst paid jobs with the worst hours and security are white-collar jobs in call centres and data entry rather than the traditional blue-collar jobs.

I also remember seeing a video recently talking about a PaxAmerica poll recently also saying that the "Millennial" generation aren't getting more right-wing as they go through their teens, 20s and 30s like the stereotype of past generations suggests. And that the questions suggested that was because of home ownership and that it suggests maybe we become more right-wing as we own homes rather than as we get older?

Not sure. I always considered myself quite centrist and classic liberal and generally believing in the free-market. But now I've got grown-up kids and seen them genuinely get a good education, work hard and still struggle with rents and with this pandemic and brexit, I do find myself slowly changing my mind on these things and start to see some of the excesses of capitalism.  

Yougov seems to suggest that around 39 is the age where the majority of Labour voters/Remainers under that seemed to move to Conservative/Brexiteers over that. And I think things like traditional newspaper and tv news and media obviously will have less and less sway and social media and the online media will have more and more of a sway, as the people who grew up on the internet become more and more of the voting majority. So maybe this point generally will continue to get older and when this generation reach their 40s and 50s they will still want greater state control of the economy and European integration.

So maybe this age will gradually go up and the country will genuinely start shifting to the left and towards European integration? I don't know, I've heard these things before and then people do inevitably become more likely to vote Tory as they grown old (hey, I saw an interview recently when John Lydon was praising Boris, Trump and Farage and I never thought I'd see that when I was a kid and John Lydon was supposed to represent the idealism and anti-establishment of a new generation), but the technological shift and the shift in how people get their news is definitely a new factor that changes things.

Edited 9 September 2021 by Sampson

[Claridge]

As you get older you experience more people who don,t much effort into working or bettering themselves. Makes people resent the benefit system abuse, which labour seem to defend a lot. Maybe a little unfairly, but they do seem to have given up on the traditional working class type values in favour of middle class public sector workers

[ealingfox]

33 minutes ago, Claridge said:

As you get older you experience more people who don,t much effort into working or bettering themselves. Makes people resent the benefit system abuse, which labour seem to defend a lot. Maybe a little unfairly, but they do seem to have given up on the traditional working class type values in favour of middle class public sector workers

 

Have you got any examples of Labour defending benefit fraud? I'd be interested to see that.

[Claridge]

1 hour ago, ealingfox said:

 

Have you got any examples of Labour defending benefit fraud? I'd be interested to see that.

Worded that wrong, people know people who abuse the system and people perceive labour to be on their side. Banging on about lgbt, blm etc… does them no favours with the traditional working class either labour is the party of the chattering middle classes now, 

[Carl the Llama]

5 hours ago, Sampson said:

I do think the current political division is more about age than class like it was in the 70s and 80s. I don't think I ever remember a time where there was such a generational divide, whereas I don't see the class divide now as big as it was in the 70s and 80s, as now I think a lot of the worst paid jobs with the worst hours and security are white-collar jobs in call centres and data entry rather than the traditional blue-collar jobs.

I also remember seeing a video recently talking about a PaxAmerica poll recently also saying that the "Millennial" generation aren't getting more right-wing as they go through their teens, 20s and 30s like the stereotype of past generations suggests. And that the questions suggested that was because of home ownership and that it suggests maybe we become more right-wing as we own homes rather than as we get older?

Not sure. I always considered myself quite centrist and classic liberal and generally believing in the free-market. But now I've got grown-up kids and seen them genuinely get a good education, work hard and still struggle with rents and with this pandemic and brexit, I do find myself slowly changing my mind on these things and start to see some of the excesses of capitalism.  

Yougov seems to suggest that around 39 is the age where the majority of Labour voters/Remainers under that seemed to move to Conservative/Brexiteers over that. And I think things like traditional newspaper and tv news and media obviously will have less and less sway and social media and the online media will have more and more of a sway, as the people who grew up on the internet become more and more of the voting majority. So maybe this point generally will continue to get older and when this generation reach their 40s and 50s they will still want greater state control of the economy and European integration.

So maybe this age will gradually go up and the country will genuinely start shifting to the left and towards European integration? I don't know, I've heard these things before and then people do inevitably become more likely to vote Tory as they grown old (hey, I saw an interview recently when John Lydon was praising Boris, Trump and Farage and I never thought I'd see that when I was a kid and John Lydon was supposed to represent the idealism and anti-establishment of a new generation), but the technological shift and the shift in how people get their news is definitely a new factor that changes things.

There's something to the housing idea imo.  Don't know anyone around my age who owns their own home and didn't get a leg up from mum & dad, and I don't know any Tory voters my age from outside of that group (granted I'm still an age where my peers are typically left wing and I'm not familiar with the voting habits of everyone I know either so take heavy doses of salt). 

[bovril]

5 hours ago, String fellow said:

What the latter tend to forget is that they themselves will eventually become elderly, assuming that Covid-19 doesn't get them first. 

Hopefully Covid doesn't get me, and I don't grow up to be a selfish ****. 

[Sampson]

1 hour ago, Claridge said:

Worded that wrong, people know people who abuse the system and people perceive labour to be on their side. Banging on about lgbt, blm etc… does them no favours with the traditional working class either labour is the party of the chattering middle classes now, 

So the working classes don't care about the rights of ethnic minorities and LGBT people? Can you expand on what you're saying here? As I'm not 100% on what you're trying to say in this post. I'm sure I wrong, but to me it comes across a little as "working class people are more racist and homophobic than middle class people, so Labour shouldn't bother with helping vulnerable minorities if they want the votes of the working class"?

[Claridge]

4 minutes ago, Sampson said:

So the working classes don't care about the rights of ethnic minorities and LGBT people? Can you expand on what you're saying here? As I'm not 100% on what you're trying to say in this post. I'm sure I wrong, but to me it comes across a little as "working class people are more racist and homophobic than middle class people, so Labour shouldn't bother with helping vulnerable minorities if they want the votes of the working class"?

What I’m trying to say is that the working class feel that labour is pre occupied with minority groups rather than them. Massive generalisations I know , but the voting evidence seems to point to this. Im not saying what labour should or should do, just what I think is their problem is with regards to getting re- elected

[ealingfox]

11 minutes ago, Claridge said:

What I’m trying to say is that the working class feel that labour is pre occupied with minority groups rather than them. Massive generalisations I know , but the voting evidence seems to point to this. Im not saying what labour should or should do, just what I think is their problem is with regards to getting re- elected

 

Working class people from minority backgrounds don't seem to have any issue with voting for Labour.

[UpTheLeagueFox]

8 hours ago, Innovindil said:

Where's @UpTheLeagueFox with the latest poll data when he's needed. 

Sorry, flew back from holiday today so a bit late with the happy news for the majority on here...

 

 

Labour's first poll lead since January.

[Lionator]

Maybe it’s time for some Labour sensible but progressive economic policies as it’s clear this is where they can gain a lot of votes. Don’t think they have a chance if they make stuff about culture. 

[ozleicester]

8 years ago Australia began refugee boat turn backs..or, if you got through, you were locked in prison.

They are STILL THERE
 

[CosbehFox]

17 hours ago, Innovindil said:

Where's @UpTheLeagueFox with the latest poll data when he's needed. 

I’ll help 

 

All it really shows is how the modern electorate constantly change their mind and it’s when only something directly affects them that they change - individualism 

Edited 10 September 2021 by Cardiff_Fox

[CosbehFox]

10 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

There's something to the housing idea imo.  Don't know anyone around my age who owns their own home and didn't get a leg up from mum & dad, and I don't know any Tory voters my age from outside of that group (granted I'm still an age where my peers are typically left wing and I'm not familiar with the voting habits of everyone I know either so take heavy doses of salt). 

Said before here, one of Labour’s biggest potential tools is a realistic housing plan. 
 

The reality is that it takes destroying a system that an awful lot of MPs including non Tory successfully make money from by owning second homes 

[Strokes]

27 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Said before here, one of Labour’s biggest potential tools is a realistic housing plan. 
 

The reality is that it takes destroying a system that an awful lot of MPs including non Tory successfully make money from by owning second homes 

It’s a tricky one though, how do you make things that lots of people have as an asset and mortgaged up to the hilt on, suddenly affordable?

As much as I’d want to vote for a plan that helps the younger generation onto the property ladder, I won’t vote to make myself significantly worse off.

[HighPeakFox]

We'll only get a change of government when the filthy press decide they want to promote that notion. Not necessarily meaning any of you on here, but there are plenty enough suggestible voters out there who will only vote for the 'winning' team once they've had it highlighted to them as a good idea. 

 

I realise that this will be seen as a deeply sceptical point of view, but as I've always said about the tabloids, if it didn't work, they wouldn't do it.

[Bellend Sebastian]

3 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

We'll only get a change of government when the filthy press decide they want to promote that notion. Not necessarily meaning any of you on here, but there are plenty enough suggestible voters out there who will only vote for the 'winning' team once they've had it highlighted to them as a good idea. 

 

I realise that this will be seen as a deeply sceptical point of view, but as I've always said about the tabloids, if it didn't work, they wouldn't do it.

I decided a while back that trying to talk to people about political matters because views are so entrenched now it's not worth the effort of arguing about anything.

 

Getting people to think about where they get their information from, and to reflect on whether it's reliable, impartial and what the motivations of those supplying it might be is possibly a bit more productive.

 

If anyone has the energy to campaign for something, campaign for media reform, I think that ultimately that's in the majority's interests

 

Edited 10 September 2021 by Bellend Sebastian

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

I decided a while back that trying to talk to people about political matters because views are so entrenched now it's not worth the effort of arguing about anything.

 

Getting people to think about where they get their information from, and to reflect on whether it's reliable, impartial and what the motivations of those supplying it might be is possibly a bit more productive.

 

If anyone has the energy to campaign for something, campaign for media reform, I think that ultimately that's in the majority's interests

 

That's pretty accurate, yeah.

 

I'd only add that as a science communicator scientific fact becoming politicised in the way it has done in recent times and the way described above flat out terrifies me, as its possible consequences are truly dire.

[Carl the Llama]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

That's pretty accurate, yeah.

 

I'd only add that as a science communicator scientific fact becoming politicised in the way it has done in recent times and the way described above flat out terrifies me, as its possible consequences are truly dire.

Booo project fear.

[leicsmac]

56 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Booo project fear.

Gamblers Ruin Fallacy is pretty damn terrible, yes.

[Sampson]

7 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Said before here, one of Labour’s biggest potential tools is a realistic housing plan. 
 

The reality is that it takes destroying a system that an awful lot of MPs including non Tory successfully make money from by owning second homes 

I don't know if you've ever watched the youtube channel TLDR News before, but he's quite good with things like that. He did two videos recently on why the Tories might win or lose the next election and one of the big points was the housing crisis. He said the Tories are really in a no-win situation as the best way to solve the housing crisis is to build on the green belt and to bring housing prices down, which would turn away their traditional voters. 

You could argue Labour already have all the under 35s vote and that offering to build houses would not gain them many more votes in that area and only stop the middle-aged voter switching over. There's an argument I think that the best thing for Labour to do is actually steer clear of engaging in the housing crisis and let the Tories hang themselves amongst their traditional middle-aged, home county voter on the issue?

These were the 2 videos by the way. Both well worth a watch.
 

 

[Buce]

 

This is why I believe we are doomed to climate  failure, @leicsmac: the ones with the power to change things at a national level have all got their snouts in the trough.

 

UK ministers ‘met fossil fuel firms nine times as often as clean energy ones’

UK government ministers have held private meetings with fossil fuel and biomass energy producers roughly nine times as often as they met companies involved in clean energy production, despite the increasing urgency of meeting the government’s climate targets.

Analysis by DeSmog, the environmental investigation group, of publicly available data shows that ministers from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (Beis) held 63 private meetings – with one company present, along with ministers and advisers – with fossil fuel and biomass energy producers between 22 July 2019 and 18 March 2021.

 

Ministers, including the business secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng, and his junior ministers held only seven private meetings with renewable energy generators over the same period.

The lack of meetings came despite the prime minister declaring a push for offshore wind power last October, as a core part of his “10-point plan” for reaching net zero emissions.

As well as the small private meetings, ministers also attended hundreds of other larger group meetings with fossil fuel companies and their representatives. Fossil fuel producers were present at 309 of these, compared with 60 for renewable energy generators.

Ministers had fossil fuel-related meetings at least 473 times, but renewables-related meetings only 317 times over the period, according to the DeSmog analysis. Shell and BP were present at ministerial meetings 57 and 58 times respectively over the period.

Connor Schwartz, the climate lead at Friends of the Earth, said the disparity showed ministers’ attention was not focused on the low-carbon transformation required in the UK, and sent a poor signal ahead of vital UN climate talks, Cop26, to be held in Glasgow this November.

“You can tell a lot about a government based on the company it keeps – this volume of meetings with the fossil fuel industry shows where priorities and loyalties lie,” he said.

“As we head into the Glasgow climate talks, this government needs to end UK support for damaging fossil fuels, not entertain the [fossil fuel] industry by filling their diaries with this number of meetings, and to the exclusion of the renewable sector.”

A government spokesperson said: “These claims are ludicrous. We make no apology for meeting major energy suppliers and employers during a global pandemic, but these figures are a highly selective and small snapshot of private meetings which misrepresent our wider engagement and priorities.

“In this year alone, we’ve secured record investment in wind power totalling £450m which has created and secured 2,400 jobs. In addition, we have published a world-leading hydrogen strategy, launched a new UK emissions trading scheme, committed to end coal power by 2024 and pledged £1bn in funding to support the development of carbon capture.”

The revelations come amid increasing concern over the government’s lack of detailed plans to meet the long-term target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and the interim targets of a 68% reduction by 2030 and 78% by 2035.

The near-term targets are a particular focus as the UK prepares to host Cop26, to which all nations will be asked to come with not only stringent carbon-cutting targets – of which the UK’s is one of the most ambitious – but also credible plans on how to meet such goals.

MPs, industry, green groups and the government’s statutory advisers, the Committee on Climate Change, have raised concerns that the government’s policies and measures will not produce the emissions cuts needed to meet the targets.

Beis meetings with the energy industry also show a strong interest in biomass power, by which energy is generated from burning wood in place of fossil fuels. The practice is condemned by many green groups because it can involve tearing down forests to feed into power station boilers – a practice proponents proclaim is carbon-neutral over time, as the trees are regrown, but which detractors points out creates emissions now while the carbon uptake of trees takes place over decades. There are also concerns over the impact of biomass on wildlife and woodland biodiversity, when used at a large scale, and its potential for air pollution.

Drax used to operate one of Europe’s biggest coal-fired power stations, but has converted to be one of the biggest consumers of wood for burning, much of it imported from Canada, where campaigners are increasingly concerned about biomass production. Drax met ministers on 31 occasions over the period surveyed, including a site visit by Kwarteng to the company’s main power station in Yorkshire.

A Drax spokesperson said: “Drax was the first in the world to capture carbon from a 100% biomass feedstock in early 2019 by using the vital negative emissions technology Beccs [bioenergy with carbon capture and storage] and this understandably attracted interest from businesses, governments and other organisations globally.

“The UK government is one of the many organisations we’ve met with since then to discuss the exciting work we’re doing to deploy Beccs, removing millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, whilst creating thousands of jobs and clean growth in the north.”

As well as meetings with Kwarteng and his junior ministers, including Anne-Marie Trevelyan, the overall schedule of Beis meetings also included meetings held by Alok Sharma, now the cabinet minister in charge of the Cop26 talks, in his previous role as business secretary, and a handful with Greg Clark, who was business secretary under Theresa May.

 

 

[leicsmac]

13 hours ago, Buce said:

 

This is why I believe we are doomed to climate  failure, @leicsmac: the ones with the power to change things at a national level have all got their snouts in the trough.

 

UK ministers ‘met fossil fuel firms nine times as often as clean energy ones’

UK government ministers have held private meetings with fossil fuel and biomass energy producers roughly nine times as often as they met companies involved in clean energy production, despite the increasing urgency of meeting the government’s climate targets.

Analysis by DeSmog, the environmental investigation group, of publicly available data shows that ministers from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (Beis) held 63 private meetings – with one company present, along with ministers and advisers – with fossil fuel and biomass energy producers between 22 July 2019 and 18 March 2021.

 

Ministers, including the business secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng, and his junior ministers held only seven private meetings with renewable energy generators over the same period.

The lack of meetings came despite the prime minister declaring a push for offshore wind power last October, as a core part of his “10-point plan” for reaching net zero emissions.

As well as the small private meetings, ministers also attended hundreds of other larger group meetings with fossil fuel companies and their representatives. Fossil fuel producers were present at 309 of these, compared with 60 for renewable energy generators.

Ministers had fossil fuel-related meetings at least 473 times, but renewables-related meetings only 317 times over the period, according to the DeSmog analysis. Shell and BP were present at ministerial meetings 57 and 58 times respectively over the period.

Connor Schwartz, the climate lead at Friends of the Earth, said the disparity showed ministers’ attention was not focused on the low-carbon transformation required in the UK, and sent a poor signal ahead of vital UN climate talks, Cop26, to be held in Glasgow this November.

“You can tell a lot about a government based on the company it keeps – this volume of meetings with the fossil fuel industry shows where priorities and loyalties lie,” he said.

“As we head into the Glasgow climate talks, this government needs to end UK support for damaging fossil fuels, not entertain the [fossil fuel] industry by filling their diaries with this number of meetings, and to the exclusion of the renewable sector.”

A government spokesperson said: “These claims are ludicrous. We make no apology for meeting major energy suppliers and employers during a global pandemic, but these figures are a highly selective and small snapshot of private meetings which misrepresent our wider engagement and priorities.

“In this year alone, we’ve secured record investment in wind power totalling £450m which has created and secured 2,400 jobs. In addition, we have published a world-leading hydrogen strategy, launched a new UK emissions trading scheme, committed to end coal power by 2024 and pledged £1bn in funding to support the development of carbon capture.”

The revelations come amid increasing concern over the government’s lack of detailed plans to meet the long-term target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and the interim targets of a 68% reduction by 2030 and 78% by 2035.

The near-term targets are a particular focus as the UK prepares to host Cop26, to which all nations will be asked to come with not only stringent carbon-cutting targets – of which the UK’s is one of the most ambitious – but also credible plans on how to meet such goals.

MPs, industry, green groups and the government’s statutory advisers, the Committee on Climate Change, have raised concerns that the government’s policies and measures will not produce the emissions cuts needed to meet the targets.

Beis meetings with the energy industry also show a strong interest in biomass power, by which energy is generated from burning wood in place of fossil fuels. The practice is condemned by many green groups because it can involve tearing down forests to feed into power station boilers – a practice proponents proclaim is carbon-neutral over time, as the trees are regrown, but which detractors points out creates emissions now while the carbon uptake of trees takes place over decades. There are also concerns over the impact of biomass on wildlife and woodland biodiversity, when used at a large scale, and its potential for air pollution.

Drax used to operate one of Europe’s biggest coal-fired power stations, but has converted to be one of the biggest consumers of wood for burning, much of it imported from Canada, where campaigners are increasingly concerned about biomass production. Drax met ministers on 31 occasions over the period surveyed, including a site visit by Kwarteng to the company’s main power station in Yorkshire.

A Drax spokesperson said: “Drax was the first in the world to capture carbon from a 100% biomass feedstock in early 2019 by using the vital negative emissions technology Beccs [bioenergy with carbon capture and storage] and this understandably attracted interest from businesses, governments and other organisations globally.

“The UK government is one of the many organisations we’ve met with since then to discuss the exciting work we’re doing to deploy Beccs, removing millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, whilst creating thousands of jobs and clean growth in the north.”

As well as meetings with Kwarteng and his junior ministers, including Anne-Marie Trevelyan, the overall schedule of Beis meetings also included meetings held by Alok Sharma, now the cabinet minister in charge of the Cop26 talks, in his previous role as business secretary, and a handful with Greg Clark, who was business secretary under Theresa May.

 

 

I think it's perfectly possible that we are doomed to failure on this matter, yes - but I also think that the cause is worth working for and fighting for until it claims me and everything else.

[StanSP]

Good person to have in government...