The I cant believe it’s not politics thread.

[CosbehFox]

🤢

[Fazzer 7]

1 hour ago, Finnaldo said:

What stands out to you? I’ve not really seen much of her and I can’t tell much difference between her and Braverman except Braverman has more name value. 

She’s more sceptical of the Net Zero policy and is more sympathetic to the burden of cost than most of the others. She’s also firmly in the anti woke camp. To me she comes across as being an all round more genuine and honest person, seemingly not indoctrinated into the Tory political establishment. But in reality doesn’t really stand a chance. 

[weller54]

5 minutes ago, BenTheFox said:

There were some suggestions that Jacob Rees-Mogg was going to run for Tory leader. As horrendous as that sounds, maybe it could have ended up being a positive? SURELY the country would not elect him. 

Wanna bet!!

[BenTheFox]

14 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Labour will table a no confidence motion in Boris Johnson's government later today, seeking to hold the vote on Wednesday, party sources say.

 

Surely too late? Needed to be done at peak drama when there was a chance to win it. 

I don't think it matters whether they win it or not. If they lose then it pins the Tories down to having supported a man who they were pushing to resign only a few days ago. I think it's a smart move. 

[BenTheFox]

Just now, weller54 said:

Wanna bet!!

No. I would however try to leave the planet if it happened. 

[Foxdiamond]

3 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

🤢

This is the soft target that the blue rinse brigade love. 

[Dunge]

8 minutes ago, BenTheFox said:

There were some suggestions that Jacob Rees-Mogg was going to run for Tory leader. As horrendous as that sounds, maybe it could have ended up being a positive? SURELY the country would not elect him. 

He won’t stand. People will start digging around in his finances if he stands.

 

 

57 minutes ago, weller54 said:

 

I’d vote for that.

[Zear0]

15 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

🤢

Fully behind her. Need to really condense the welfare budget by going after the scrounging unemployed whilst keeping the triple lock in place. 

 

[String fellow]

11 hours ago, LVocey said:

I can really see Penny Morduant winning this Tory leadership campaign. Anyone know much about her views/potential policies?

She's one of only two Conservative MPs with the intials PM, the other being Paul Maynard, the Blackpool North MP. That seems to be her main policy for trying to get into No.10. All I know is that pennies are either heads or tails and mordents are either upper or lower! 

[urban.spaceman]

31 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

🤢

42% of the people on Universal Credit are in employment. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/universal-credit-statistics-29-april-2013-to-13-january-2022/universal-credit-statistics-29-april-2013-to-13-january-2022

 

I'm on UC and have a job. I got a text from the government telling me they're sending a £325 one off payment to help with the cost of living crisis.

 

House of Lords members get £300 just for turning up. Yet the vulnerable people are the scroungers.

Edited 12 July 2022 by urban.spaceman

[fox_up_north]

Always been an easy target. I genuinely do wonder how the less well off can continue to vote for them. 

[leicsmac]

51 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

She’s more sceptical of the Net Zero policy and is more sympathetic to the burden of cost than most of the others. She’s also firmly in the anti woke camp. To me she comes across as being an all round more genuine and honest person, seemingly not indoctrinated into the Tory political establishment. But in reality doesn’t really stand a chance. 

Still looking for a valid argument for this that doesn't show a criminal lack of regard for the near future tbh (that is to say, a future that almost every contributor here will have a chance to experience personally).

 

The "anti-woke" viewpoints (viz. going back to treating trans people as circus acts rather than actual human beings) are just the cherry on top, apparently.

[Greg2607]

30 minutes ago, fox_up_north said:

Always been an easy target. I genuinely do wonder how the less well off can continue to vote for them. 

because they've all been indoctrinated to believe that Labour are Rubbish with the economy and will make things worse. 

 

Look at the recent change in UC... they vote to remove the £20 a week and then later on announce help with the cost of living crisis of around £1200..... so essentially, they've just given the money back that they took off of people on UC.  

 

Society was better between 1997 and 2010. or at least, it felt it to me.  All I see currently is division and arguing.   Tories blaming immigrants for "taking our jobs".... well, now that we are at peak employment, guess what, the poorer people in society are still worse off.... the middle classes are now worse off.   guess who aren't worse off??? the top 10%. 

 

how can we be comfortable with a society where there are more foodbanks in the UK than McDonalds.  A Society where our teachers and nurses are using foodbanks, just to be able to feed a family. it's horrendous and the government should be ashamed that they have built this society. 

 

Public services have been absolutely annihilated since 2010.  GP services are non-existent. Libraries closing left right and centre.  Crime spiralling.  No youth services.  Mental health provision horrific. 

 

I got behind the message around "austerity" after 2010 (maybe naively so)  but i genuinely believed that David Cameron was trying to right the ship after the global financial crash... he was a fairly moderate, centre right tory.....   

 

The irony is, that almost all candidates are running on a platform of "fixing the economy"... the flipping economy that they've spent 12 years building!!

 

this lot have lurched so far to the right that they operate purely on ideological grounds and not in the interests of the country as a whole. 

 

Can you imagine a UK society with Priti Patel as the Head of State.... Jesus Christ... 

Edited 12 July 2022 by Greg2607

[Innovindil]

10 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Still looking for a valid argument for this that doesn't show a criminal lack of regard for the near future tbh (that is to say, a future that almost every contributor here will have a chance to experience personally).

 

The "anti-woke" viewpoints (viz. going back to treating trans people as circus acts rather than actual human beings) are just the cherry on top, apparently.

Hasn't he already stated his position? I'm sure I've seen him answer this with something along the lines of its not worth the UK paying obscene amounts of money for essentially making sod all global difference in emissions. 

 

Then some (maybe you?) responded with but the UK can lead the world even though no one really gives a monkeys about us. 

 

Just trying to stop a circular argument. 

[Greg2607]

5 minutes ago, Greg2607 said:

because they've all been indoctrinated to believe that Labour are Rubbish with the economy and will make things worse. 

 

Look at the recent change in UC... they vote to remove the £20 a week and then later on announce help with the cost of living crisis of around £1200..... so essentially, they've just given the money back that they took off of people on UC.  

 

Society was better between 1997 and 2010. or at least, it felt it to me.  All I see currently is division and arguing.   Tories blaming immigrants for "taking our jobs".... well, now that we are at peak employment, guess what, the poorer people in society are still worse off.... the middle classes are now worse off.   guess who aren't worse off??? the top 10%. 

 

how can we be comfortable with a society where there are more foodbanks in the UK than McDonalds.  A Society where our teachers and nurses are using foodbanks, just to be able to feed a family. it's horrendous and the government should be ashamed that they have built this society. 

 

Public services have been absolutely annihilated since 2010.  GP services are non-existent. Libraries closing left right and centre.  Crime spiralling.  No youth services.  Mental health provision horrific. 

 

I got behind the message around "austerity" after 2010 (maybe naively so)  but i genuinely believed that David Cameron was trying to right the ship after the global financial crash... he was a fairly moderate, centre right tory.....   

 

The irony is, that almost all candidates are running on a platform of "fixing the economy"... the flipping economy that they've spent 12 years building!!

 

this lot have lurched so far to the right that they operate purely on ideological grounds and not in the interests of the country as a whole. 

 

Can you imagine a UK society with Priti Patel as the Head of State.... Jesus Christ... 

I realise I may have just climbed on to a soap box... apologies.... turns out i'm more angry than I thought! 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Hasn't he already stated his position? I'm sure I've seen him answer this with something along the lines of its not worth the UK paying obscene amounts of money for essentially making sod all global difference in emissions. 

 

Then some (maybe you?) responded with but the UK can lead the world even though no one really gives a monkeys about us. 

 

Just trying to stop a circular argument. 

Yeah, the argument has been stated - I'm just still looking for one that doesn't show a monumental disregard for near future generations by not seeking to do what needs to be done, even if the rest of the world choose not to follow.

 

Hopefully someone might oblige there.

 

NB. Imagine learning fifty years into the future that the reason you're living in such an incredibly shit world is because enough folks fifty years before (in the UK and worldwide) said "nah, it's not worth it because it won't actually help, no one else will do it too".

[Innovindil]

4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Yeah, the argument has been stated - I'm just still looking for one that doesn't show a monumental disregard for near future generations by not seeking to do what needs to be done, even if the rest of the world choose not to follow.

 

Hopefully someone might oblige there.

 

NB. Imagine learning fifty years into the future that the reason you're living in such an incredibly shit world is because enough folks fifty years before (in the UK and worldwide) said "nah, it's not worth it because it won't actually help, no one else will do it too".

 

Well I dare say you're probably not going to get it. Some people don't think the UK going neutral will save the world when most of the big players, and the smaller but important players like Brazil, seem to be doing little. 

 

Maybe you need to make a better argument as to how the UK, who we've been repeatedly told has little sway on the world stage, can save us all. 

[weller54]

Mogg and Nads backing Truss!!...

One of the main reasons for Nads is that she's a woman 😂

 

[CosbehFox]

3 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

I'd be voting labour if there were to be a GE tomorrow, but I do think that she's right on this subject. 

Out of interest, do you have a personal example you can think of ? 
 

Cos that’s half of my objection to this idea about squashing benefits. I honestly don’t know anyone who fits her description that she’s claiming exists 

[Dunge]

3 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

 

Well I dare say you're probably not going to get it. Some people don't think the UK going neutral will save the world when most of the big players, and the smaller but important players like Brazil, seem to be doing little. 

 

Maybe you need to make a better argument as to how the UK, who we've been repeatedly told has little sway on the world stage, can save us all. 

To be fair, that was my argument. It comes down to the idea that we’re excellently placed in terms of language, history of invention and ingenuity, lack of religious doctrine holding us back, and independence, to lead with investment in science and technology, to make the advancements that both we and the human race need in the fields of energy, biology and sustainability, such that we can then export better, cheaper, cleaner solutions to the world - all the time while becoming the global hub for scientific progress for the future.

[bovril]

1 hour ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

🤢

not sure this is really that popular anymore. Very different from 2015. 

[Foxdiamond]

7 minutes ago, pmcla26 said:

I'd be voting labour if there were to be a GE tomorrow, but I do think that she's right on this subject. 

What I don't like is this easy attack as a primary early doors quest for the leadership. We all know there are spongers but there are lots of tax dodgers as well. Some of them are probably pals of hers.

[Foxdiamond]

11 minutes ago, weller54 said:

Mogg and Nads backing Truss!!...

One of the main reasons for Nads is that she's a woman 😂

 

What a horrible trio

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

 

Well I dare say you're probably not going to get it. Some people don't think the UK going neutral will save the world when most of the big players, and the smaller but important players like Brazil, seem to be doing little. 

 

Maybe you need to make a better argument as to how the UK, who we've been repeatedly told has little sway on the world stage, can save us all. 

Fair enough.

 

My argument is reasonably simple then... the UK, along with everyone else, has to aim for and meet these targets. There's no room for free riders along the established world nations - even ones that contribute so little to the global figure as the UK. This is for two reasons: firstly, even the "small" amount the UK could cont to emit could have a significant effect on global temperatures (unlikely, but possible) and secondly (more importantly) the more one country balks at the idea the more other countries may do so too, with the resultant bad effects.

 

Therefore,  if the UK doesn't do its part, it is highly likely that big trouble will follow.

 

Of course, it may be that the UK does the best it can, other countries don't follow, and the world burns anyway. But if they choose not to take this path, that outcome is much, much more likely.

 

Just as a matter of deductive logic and I dislike the pseudo nihilism being displayed by the argument "well,  what can we do?"

[HighPeakFox]

1 hour ago, String fellow said:

 All I know is that pennies are either heads or tails and mordents are either upper or lower! 

Very niche