Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Lionator

The I cant believe it’s not politics thread.

By Lionator, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Fazzer 7

Fazzer 7

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I suspect it's purely down to ideology - the Hard Right wanting a leader who says what they want to hear, just like the Hard Left did with Corbyn.

 

She has consistently called for tax cuts, a small state, cuts in public spending, privatisation, deregulation, free market competition etc. That's in tune with perceived Thatcherite ideology (though Maggie could be pragmatic at times).

 

Whereas, in the eyes of the Hard Right, Sunak blotted his ideological copybook by spending all that public money during Covid. I presume they don't trust Mordaunt to apply Hard Right ideology either as she seems to be a bit more of a free thinker (though poor in the 1st debate) and hasn't entirely followed the party line on transgender issues, despite being a Brexiteer in 2016 (unlike Truss) and a laissez-faire type, too.

 

Of the 3 who seem to have a chance of winning, I reckon Truss would be the worst choice for the country - but probably the best choice for Labour, electorally. Christ, she makes Starmer seem charismatic! :D

 

I reckon Labour, Lib Dems & SNP will be crossing their fingers hoping Truss wins - but for the sake of the country I hope she doesn't.

At the moment, Sunak seems the most competent of a rotten bunch, though Mordaunt might grow into the job - and might be a harder electoral opponent for Starmer eventually. 

She’s bledy awful and that’s coming from an ardent Tory. According to practically everyone we’ll get trounced in 24. I’d throw Kemi or Tom in, take a chance there’s nothing to lose. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nalis

Nalis

Posted
Posted
On 15/07/2022 at 11:27, Alf Bentley said:

 

Sorry if my reply was over-personal in tone. I didn't assume you were only moaning about your own conditions. But I assumed from the "vast majority of us" sentence that you were including yourself in that majority who, by implication, were getting a much worse deal than the RMT would get by needlessly striking.

 

Incidentally, although I support the idea of trade unionism, I'm not mindlessly uncritical of unions. I've been a union member in the past. Sometimes they were well-run and effective, sometimes they were useless or had harmful political agendas (Trotskyites seeking confrontation to foment revolutionary consciousness etc.!). I've heard nothing from the RMT that sounds unreasonable - and, as a service user, think more questions should be asked of train companies and their bosses as to why we have some of the worst, most over-priced trains in Europe while they often make large profits and executive bonuses. Similar questions should be asked of the Govt, but we know a lot of it is laissez-faire ideology with them.

 

I take your second point about pay being much lower than average in some industries and much higher in others. But the figures quoted are medians, not means, so they're the figures slap bang in the middle, not an average distorted upwards by high pay in particular industries. A more valid point would be that they are short-term figures. Typically, workers in the private sector were harder hit by the pandemic than those in the public sector.....but stats over a longer timespan (5 yrs, 12 yrs, whatever) would show public sector workers doing worse.

 

Your first point begs the question: "what is the right option?" The RMT have clearly tried negotiating with employers and lobbying govt. What alternatives do they have, aside from capitulating and accepting an offer of a large real-terms pay cut, significant redundancies and mechanization/automation introduced on terms they deem harmful?

 

 

Hindsight and emotional is a wonderful thing and I was probably too emotional in my original post rather than rational.

 

You know what, I cant even counter you as you are spot on.

 

Anyway, I'm still frustrated by the strikes though thats just how I feel, I guess human nature is to react with emotions rather than rationality you have rightly portrayed.

 

Peace and love man (not in a patronising way).

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alf Bentley

Alf Bentley

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Hindsight and emotional is a wonderful thing and I was probably too emotional in my original post rather than rational.

 

You know what, I cant even counter you as you are spot on.

 

Anyway, I'm still frustrated by the strikes though thats just how I feel, I guess human nature is to react with emotions rather than rationality you have rightly portrayed.

 

Peace and love man (not in a patronising way).

 

Well said, sir!

I'm frustrated with the strikes myself from a personal perspective as they've disrupted a trip away with my daughter.

 

I used to be an emotionally turbulent bloke (still am deep down) but it got me into too much trouble of all sorts. So my ultra-rational side became dominant.....often useful, but not always a good thing.

 

Peace and love to you, too. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
weller54

weller54

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Fazzer 7 said:

She’s bledy awful and that’s coming from an ardent Tory. According to practically everyone we’ll get trounced in 24. I’d throw Kemi or Tom in, take a chance there’s nothing to lose. 

Hopefully they both can't swim!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
weller54

weller54

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
7 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

I'm not sure what Liz Truss' opinions on Europe were around June 2016. Can anyone oblige?

She was utterly gobsmacked that we'd qualified for the next seasons champions league and that we wouldn't make it out of the group stages.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
weller54

weller54

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

Tugenhat speaks very well, I'll give him that.  Comes across as competent.  Said some good things on this morning's show.  Shame he's in last place.  

Talks too quickly!..

Mordaunt came over better IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
1 minute ago, Lionator said:

Looks likely Truss’s flagship policy will be to ‘destalinise’ housing in this country. Apparently there’s too much social housing in this country and not enough private investors building new homes. 

Yes, because such private investors are always driven to offering houses to those that need them rather than the highest bidder.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Foxdiamond

Foxdiamond

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
6 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Looks likely Truss’s flagship policy will be to ‘destalinise’ housing in this country. Apparently there’s too much social housing in this country and not enough private investors building new homes. 

What disaster she will be if elected.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lionator

Lionator

Posted
  • Author
Posted

To be fair one of the only ways the Tories could lose some Leicestershire seats would be to encourage more house building. People where my family live are absolutely sick of it. The local facilities aren’t equipped to deal with the influx either. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
z-layrex

z-layrex

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Lionator said:

To be fair one of the only ways the Tories could lose some Leicestershire seats would be to encourage more house building. People where my family live are absolutely sick of it. The local facilities aren’t equipped to deal with the influx either. 

It's even worse down here. Soulless, ugly, orange, cheap shit new builds being built on every beautiful green plot they possibly can, with no regards for infrastructure or traffic.

 

The road leading from our neighbourhood is already fu**ed and they're building 68 new homes just off it with only that road to access and exit from.

 

And why do they ALL have to look like this:

 

See the source image

Edited by z-layrex
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
StanSP

StanSP

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, z-layrex said:

It's even worse down here. Soulless, ugly, orange, cheap shit new builds being built on every beautiful green plot they possibly can, with no regards for infrastructure or traffic.

 

The road leading from our neighbourhood is already fu**ed and they're building 68 new homes just off it with only that road to access and exit from.

 

And why do they ALL have to look like this:

 

See the source image

How should they look? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Unabomber

Unabomber

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

Is it true that houses are on average becoming smaller in square feet. Gardens also smaller. 

Hmm I’m not sure to be honest it all depends on the development and the location. The location and site plan will dictate the house types plotted. Some locations are aimed at first time buyers where the houses will be smaller so that they can cram as many on. More exclusive sites will build larger house types. You can find out the square footage of any new build before buying anyway and compare with second hand homes. I was talking more from a quality side, NHBC check so many stages now and are so strict that it is rare that a new build is not of a high standard. The new part L changes come in to play soon too and these will only enhance the thermal performance and spec of new houses. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...