Gilzeantoscore
Justin Edinburgh
Of course they are a long way from their roots. So what are you complaining about? Is the modern Labour Party too right wing for you Scara?
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Dear oh dear Ed Milliband, what a joke of a man !!!
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
Of course they are a long way from their roots. So what are you complaining about? Is the modern Labour Party too right wing for you Scara?
RomanzoCriminale
David Bentley
oh do try keep up luvvie.....
The modern Labour party isn't about taking what's absolutely required to keep the poor fed, clothed and healthy.Of course they are a long way from their roots. So what are you complaining about? Is the modern Labour Party too right wing for you Scara?
Now it's all about the politics of jealousy. Take from the intelligent and hard working to give to the stupid and workshy. Taking for the sake of taking because it plays well with their union paymasters. Spending for the sake of spending because it creates an army of Labour-voting civil service drones.
The 1945 Labour party wasn't about giving people the bare minimum either. Controversially, they wanted to replace the slums not just with social housing, but social housing with gardens and inside toilets! (and if you think of that time period, that's a ways above what the minimum would have been). They also wanted to build enough for everybody that wanted one, and they did a pretty good job of it.
monkeybarry
Ian Walker
Correct me if im wrong, but wasn't the post war Labour party focused on raising living and social standards (which is easier after such a major war that displaced many people country wide, affected infrastructure and did a lot to destroy pre war class and status barriers) but giving people help to go alongside their work and contribution to society. And not on handouts for the feckless.
We now live in a society where there is quite a disparity, socially and financially, between certain groups - but everyone expects to have the best and that society owes it to them rather than it being a "benefit" of them doing the best they can to contribute to society.
Personally, I have no issue in helping to raise the living standards of people as long as they are doing the best they can (we can't all be "the best") to make society function.
glasgowspur
Dimitar Berbatov
The Tories will win the next election. It's like abba in the 70s, no one ever admitted to liking them, but they sold an awful lot of records.
Sitting on my porcelain throne using Fapatalk
Sitting on my porcelain throne using Fapatalk
Robspur12
John Lacy
The Modern Labour party is where "modern politics" has put it. People are now generally more affluent, home owning and there are less factory workers and more pen pushing types than when the party formed. It cannot be where the old left want it to be because it will not get elected. The 1980s and early 90s elections proved that. So yes it has had to move centre left. But at its core are still strong social values. It's just not being well led currently. The thing about being a leader in modern politics is not about having great policies imo, or having strong convictions or even being particularly competent (David Cameron proves all of these), it's about whether you are seen by the public to have leadership qualities and playing the media well. Dave does Ed does not. Ed has allowed Dave and the odious Osborne to win the economic argument whilst not landing any heavy blows on the NHS reforms.
Last edited:
Richie
Naybet
I think a significant problem is the 'have it now' culture, along with a desire for 'keeping up with the Joneses'. People often talk about how they can't afford to live on benefits, but often the reality is more like they can't afford to live the life they want on benefits.
Many want the big TV, the car, the Sky subscription, the cigarettes and booze etc... and if the can't afford it they blame someone else. Unfortunately this is often not how many people see it, items such as cigarettes aren't seen as luxuries and when they prioritise those items over things like food they claim they can't afford to feed themselves.
Many want the big TV, the car, the Sky subscription, the cigarettes and booze etc... and if the can't afford it they blame someone else. Unfortunately this is often not how many people see it, items such as cigarettes aren't seen as luxuries and when they prioritise those items over things like food they claim they can't afford to feed themselves.
Who is expecting the best? I work in a low wage job, I'm not expecting holidays in Barbados, as nice as that would be!
I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. There seems to me to be a bigger sense of entitlement from SOME of those on middle incomes whose attitude is "Well, I earn £xxxx amount, I pay £xxxx amount of tax, so my life should be VASTLY better than anybody in receipt of any benefits. And I don't think it is VASTLY better, because I read in the paper that ALL BENEFIT CLAIMANTS get given foreign holidays and Rolex watches, simply because they EXPECT them! THESE PEOPLE SHOULD BE PUNISHED TO IMPROVE MY RELATIVE STANDING IN LIFE!"
I don't think that everybody feels that way, but there is something to that sentiment. It's like a perverse version of the 'politics of envy.' Infact, I think this attitude is far more prevalent than the tradtional politics of envy, certainly on the emperor penguin.
People can get stuck in situations, it's not necessarily about being 'feckless' or some bullsh1t cliche. Let's say you're a bloke in your 50's, you hurt your back at work and end up 'on the sick.' After a time, your back feels better, but the job you did have is long gone. You have no qualifications, you've only done unskilled work and, financially, there isn't much between staying where you are (i.e. on the sick) and getting a minimum wage job. And this assumes that, as an unskilled worker in your 50's, with a gap in your employment, that anyone will bother to employ you anyway. There are people like this (and I know some personally) and they get stuck where they are. I don't want them to have a lower standard of living than me, just because I happen to work full-time in a low wage, sh1tty job.
I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. There seems to me to be a bigger sense of entitlement from SOME of those on middle incomes whose attitude is "Well, I earn £xxxx amount, I pay £xxxx amount of tax, so my life should be VASTLY better than anybody in receipt of any benefits. And I don't think it is VASTLY better, because I read in the paper that ALL BENEFIT CLAIMANTS get given foreign holidays and Rolex watches, simply because they EXPECT them! THESE PEOPLE SHOULD BE PUNISHED TO IMPROVE MY RELATIVE STANDING IN LIFE!"
I don't think that everybody feels that way, but there is something to that sentiment. It's like a perverse version of the 'politics of envy.' Infact, I think this attitude is far more prevalent than the tradtional politics of envy, certainly on the emperor penguin.
People can get stuck in situations, it's not necessarily about being 'feckless' or some bullsh1t cliche. Let's say you're a bloke in your 50's, you hurt your back at work and end up 'on the sick.' After a time, your back feels better, but the job you did have is long gone. You have no qualifications, you've only done unskilled work and, financially, there isn't much between staying where you are (i.e. on the sick) and getting a minimum wage job. And this assumes that, as an unskilled worker in your 50's, with a gap in your employment, that anyone will bother to employ you anyway. There are people like this (and I know some personally) and they get stuck where they are. I don't want them to have a lower standard of living than me, just because I happen to work full-time in a low wage, sh1tty job.
The government offers free adult education. Nobody is stuck in their job.Who is expecting the best? I work in a low wage job, I'm not expecting holidays in Barbados, as nice as that would be!
I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. There seems to me to be a bigger sense of entitlement from SOME of those on middle incomes whose attitude is "Well, I earn £xxxx amount, I pay £xxxx amount of tax, so my life should be VASTLY better than anybody in receipt of any benefits. And I don't think it is VASTLY better, because I read in the paper that ALL BENEFIT CLAIMANTS get given foreign holidays and Rolex watches, simply because they EXPECT them! THESE PEOPLE SHOULD BE PUNISHED TO IMPROVE MY RELATIVE STANDING IN LIFE!"
I don't think that everybody feels that way, but there is something to that sentiment. It's like a perverse version of the 'politics of envy.' Infact, I think this attitude is far more prevalent than the tradtional politics of envy, certainly on the emperor penguin.
People can get stuck in situations, it's not necessarily about being 'feckless' or some bullsh1t cliche. Let's say you're a bloke in your 50's, you hurt your back at work and end up 'on the sick.' After a time, your back feels better, but the job you did have is long gone. You have no qualifications, you've only done unskilled work and, financially, there isn't much between staying where you are (i.e. on the sick) and getting a minimum wage job. And this assumes that, as an unskilled worker in your 50's, with a gap in your employment, that anyone will bother to employ you anyway. There are people like this (and I know some personally) and they get stuck where they are. I don't want them to have a lower standard of living than me, just because I happen to work full-time in a low wage, sh1tty job.
Gilzeantoscore
Justin Edinburgh
WTF? This makes no grammatical sense. 'Luvvie'? I'm a teacher, not someone involved in the performing arts. BTW, that is what the term Luvvie originally alluded to. Thought I'd provide that *** bit for your personal edification.
Last edited:
Richie
Naybet
In general I think including those with disabilities in the general benefits debate confuses the issue, however this is an interesting example. I have a lot of sympathy with the kind of person you describe, someone who has maybe been a laborer all his life and now can't continue due to health issues, but I don't think the answer is to consign them to a life on benefits until they start collecting their pension. That's not good for them as a person or the country as a whole.
Unfortunately what you put forward as a sympathetic solution, to allow such a man to have an equal standard of living on benefits as someone who works full time, creates perverse incentives. You're right when you say often someone will be better off staying on the sick rather than going back to work, and that is a national disgrace. Such situations mean a marginal tax rate of over 100%, trapping people in poverty and is something that needs to be rectified. In my opinion it can be done in two ways and the solution is almost certainly some combination of the two, reduce the living standard of those on benefits in comparison to those in work and taper off benefits gradually rather than having cliff edges where benefits are stopped suddenly. Supposedly this is what Universal Credit is going to prevent, I'll believe it when I see it.
Richie
Naybet
Of the three featured people, the only one I feel sorry for is the haunted house woman. You shouldn't have to pay the bedroom tax if you're willing to leave but they don't have anywhere for you to go.
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
You what? There is no free higher education in England any more. You can however take loans from the government to receive higher education...and not pay them back. People from Romania (but predominately people in the UK) are signing up for HE course just to get 11k a year in loans. If you're abroad or earning less than 21k you pay nothing back! The government, or us the tax payer, receive less than 60p back from every pound lent to students! Was this a labour initiative? Nope. The fiasco with student loans, the even bigger mess with private HE colleges, has been the work of this conservative government.
Conservatives and Labour are both lost. Devoid of creativity or the ability to reinvent themselves with any meaning. They don't have any fresh policies and sadly Ministries - the real agents of policy implementation - are not as well run as they should be. Is it any wonder the SNP and UKIP are filling a void?
There's someone who sits directly outside my office who got the start of his accountancy training for free. Some kind of tie in between a local college (with govt funding) and an employment agency.
We've also got 2 apprentices who are getting free education.
Some much needed common sense on immigration from Cameron today.
Don't think it'll be enough for the UKIP mentals though.
Don't think it'll be enough for the UKIP mentals though.
parklane1
Vic Buckingham
And he really means what he says about it :ross: the only reason he came out with that is because his party are losing MP's and voters to UKIP. There is no chance he will get any of that done and those who think he will are being conned.
Sounds like it's been received quite favourably across Europe (and in Germany where it really counts) .
Doesn't look like he'll get much opposition.