• 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

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Rorschach said:
If I was guessing, I would say Starmer will throw McSweeney under the bus in an attempt to save himself. The word is that McSweeney was the driving force behind the decision to bring Mandleson back in from the cold, or at least the story seems plausible anyway. He was also a Mandleson protege, so Starmer might get away with that story for now. Long-term, I don't see a future for Starmer. His political instincts stink, and so he will be removed at some point.
Click to expand...

Labour have never removed a leader before. It's uninstinctive and uncharted for them
 
thfcsteff said:
Bingo!
I consider it one of the greatest strokes of fortune in my life that I realised this as a young teenager and have lived a life appropriate ever since. Had (and still having) an overall amazing time, but not 'stacked with material wealth' at all (although we do have decent pension stuff). But yeah, minimal physical things.
Click to expand...
The Spurs Shop international delivery department might beg to differ :)
 
As long as there is nothing more incriminating in the documents that will soon be released about the vetting of Mandelson (as well as possibly the comms with the US about Mandelson’s appointment) then I think Kier Starmer will survive, but he will be clinging on until the next perceived scandal or backtrack. The vultures are circling and his position is hugely weakened but I don’t believe any potential challenger really wants to do so ahead of the May local elections. Better to come in afterwards on a promise to put things right rather than being the one in charge when it all goes wrong. (And I am not convinced there is anyone with the necessary gravitas to replace him).
I do believe Starmer has had the right intentions and I really wanted him to succeed but he is simply not cut out for frontline politics. Ironically that should work in his favour, being different from the usual careerist politicos, but sadly these days trying to play a straight bat doesn’t cut it. Conversely, I also believe he was willing to turn a bit of a blind eye to the Mandelson- Epstein relationship in order to achieve the necessary outcome of good relations with Trump. So the straight bat is not quite so straight.
As @Rorschach said above, his only potential safety net is jettisoning McSweeney. But that will be no more than a short term solution, (and is dependent on McSweeny - and Mandelson - willingly stepping back and not rocking the boat).
It’s a huge shame because for all the imperfections with Starmer’s government, it is still head and shoulders above what we have had for the previous 14 years.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
As long as there is nothing more incriminating in the documents that will soon be released about the vetting of Mandelson (as well as possibly the comms with the US about Mandelson’s appointment) then I think Kier Starmer will survive, but he will be clinging on until the next perceived scandal or backtrack. The vultures are circling and his position is hugely weakened but I don’t believe any potential challenger really wants to do so ahead of the May local elections. Better to come in afterwards on a promise to put things right rather than being the one in charge when it all goes wrong. (And I am not convinced there is anyone with the necessary gravitas to replace him).
I do believe Starmer has had the right intentions and I really wanted him to succeed but he is simply not cut out for frontline politics. Ironically that should work in his favour, being different from the usual careerist politicos, but sadly these days trying to play a straight bat doesn’t cut it. Conversely, I also believe he was willing to turn a bit of a blind eye to the Mandelson- Epstein relationship in order to achieve the necessary outcome of good relations with Trump. So the straight bat is not quite so straight.
As @Rorschach said above, his only potential safety net is jettisoning McSweeney. But that will be no more than a short term solution, (and is dependent on McSweeny - and Mandelson - willingly stepping back and not rocking the boat).
It’s a huge shame because for all the imperfections with Starmer’s government, it is still head and shoulders above what we have had for the previous 14 years.
Click to expand...
Pick the best of a bad lot. The lesser of two evils. Relative improvement on the last shower. This is and will be the story of Uk politics until you change your voting system. Continually voting against something instead of voting for something is just a downward spiral.
 
Rorschach said:
Pick the best of a bad lot. The lesser of two evils. Relative improvement on the last shower. This is and will be the story of Uk politics until you change your voting system. Continually voting against something instead of voting for something is just a downward spiral.
Click to expand...
Yes it's a huge problem.
I'm already dreading the local elections as I may have to vote against all my instincts by giving a vote to the party most likely to counteract the votes that Reform will be getting.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
As long as there is nothing more incriminating in the documents that will soon be released about the vetting of Mandelson (as well as possibly the comms with the US about Mandelson’s appointment) then I think Kier Starmer will survive, but he will be clinging on until the next perceived scandal or backtrack. The vultures are circling and his position is hugely weakened but I don’t believe any potential challenger really wants to do so ahead of the May local elections. Better to come in afterwards on a promise to put things right rather than being the one in charge when it all goes wrong. (And I am not convinced there is anyone with the necessary gravitas to replace him).
I do believe Starmer has had the right intentions and I really wanted him to succeed but he is simply not cut out for frontline politics. Ironically that should work in his favour, being different from the usual careerist politicos, but sadly these days trying to play a straight bat doesn’t cut it. Conversely, I also believe he was willing to turn a bit of a blind eye to the Mandelson- Epstein relationship in order to achieve the necessary outcome of good relations with Trump. So the straight bat is not quite so straight.
As @Rorschach said above, his only potential safety net is jettisoning McSweeney. But that will be no more than a short term solution, (and is dependent on McSweeny - and Mandelson - willingly stepping back and not rocking the boat).
It’s a huge shame because for all the imperfections with Starmer’s government, it is still head and shoulders above what we have had for the previous 14 years.
Click to expand...

Great post.
 
Rorschach said:
For 1st worlders, capitalism's goal is to convince you that consumption and consumerism will make you happy. The message is relentless. Eventually most people realise that it won't fill the void in their lives. The sooner you learn this lesson, the better your life will be, IMO.

Actually that reminds me of a good line in a Fr John Misty song....
From time to time we all get a bit restless
With no one advertising to us constantly
Click to expand...

I don’t think you are wrong in what you are saying but money and wealth can be viewed in different ways.

Making money can be a sign of achievement. If you get a pay increase at work or if you start a business and it makes a good profit. Those are things that should give anyone pride and the financial reward is almost a recognition of that. It’s the same feeling you would get as a kid if you won player of the season for your football team or got good marks at school.

The other way money can bring happiness is the freedom it can give you. Paying of or not having debts can be a relief and remove stress but also bring you great pride. Paying off my mortgage was a great feeling. Reloading the screen and seeing the balance say $0 still brings a smile to my face.

Being able to be generous as well and give back. If you can pay for your children’s education so they don’t incur debt. If your able to give them a deposit for a home. If your able to leave them an inheritance. Being able to give people you love great experiences. That should bring joy to anyone. As does giving to charity.
 
Last edited:
robp135 said:
Why do you think the majority of people right now don’t feel that way?
Click to expand...

I think the majority do.

But there is a noisy minority who get the attention.

I think politics, and politicians, should be boring, I think its a good thing, that mostly, this government haven't come out and punched us in the face like their predecessors did since 2016. I think thats what most people want, don't fudge with us, look after the economy and don't embarrass us internationally.
 
Baleforce said:
I think the majority do.

But there is a noisy minority who get the attention.

I think politics, and politicians, should be boring, I think its a good thing, that mostly, this government haven't come out and punched us in the face like their predecessors did since 2016. I think thats what most people want, don't fudge with us, look after the economy and don't embarrass us internationally.
Click to expand...

A far right party wouldn’t be leading in the polls with the current leadership potentially in 5th place the majority of people are happy.
 
Baleforce said:
I think the majority do.

But there is a noisy minority who get the attention.

I think politics, and politicians, should be boring, I think its a good thing, that mostly, this government haven't come out and punched us in the face like their predecessors did since 2016. I think thats what most people want, don't fudge with us, look after the economy and don't embarrass us internationally.
Click to expand...
I think a lot of it is fuelled by the newspapers. Their rage baiting is absolutely horrendous.

Its incredible for example how it suddenly out of nowhere turned all women over 50 into TERFs. The propaganda that drove that would have made Goebbels blush
 
robp135 said:
I don’t think you are wrong in what you are saying but money and wealth can be viewed in different ways.

Making money can be a sign of achievement. If you get a pay increase at work or if you start a business and it makes a good profit. Those are things that should give anyone pride and the financial reward is almost a recognition of that. It’s the same feeling you would get as a kid if you won player of the season for your football team or got good marks at school.

The other way money can bring happiness is the freedom it can give you. Paying of or not having debts can be a relief and remove stress but also bring you great pride. Paying off my mortgage was a great feeling. Reloading the screen and seeing the balance say $0 still brings a smile to my face.

Being able to be generous as well and give back. If you can pay for your children’s education so they don’t incur debt. If your able to give them a deposit for a home. If your able to leave them an inheritance. Being able to give people you love great experiences. That should bring joy to anyone. As does giving to charity.
Click to expand...

I agree earning money is a good thing and the more people who can do it help the economy. What I don't agree with are limited bonus schemes where those at the top benefit and other staff in company are not included. Its immoral when Utilities and Service industries that fail to provide proper services consumers pay for and expect give inflated bonuses to executives.
It's not a case of envy as I was a beneficiary of such a scheme and it allowed me to fulfil my financial plans and retire early.
 
Rorschach said:
Well thank you for the compliment.

I dare say you are an exception in this regard, having this epiphany so young. Some never have it. I realised it much later, in my thirties, probably triggered by the passing of my mother. Another lesson I took that day was that time is more important than money, so I quit my high-paying-stressful-as-fudge job soon after, changed career, and have never looked back. I have enough.

I saw someone posting one of Elon's tweets the other day, where he said that '...money doesn't buy you happiness...'. I am delighted this soulless husk is as miserable as fudge, but I doubt he'll take the right lessons from it.
Click to expand...

Great story, good for listening to your core self.
I think some people are wired on the money over time stuff, and that's all good/their prerogative and sensibility. I was always in the time over money category, I'm not sure it was a choice more than had I done it the other way around I think my unhappiness would've been enormous and quite self-destructive. I have to say, I'm delighted with how it's all turned out. Again, amen for not being afraid and actually well done for getting to stuff the coffers whilst you had raw youth on your side and in your system!!!
 
robp135 said:
I don’t think you are wrong in what you are saying but money and wealth can be viewed in different ways.

Making money can be a sign of achievement. If you get a pay increase at work or if you start a business and it makes a good profit. Those are things that should give anyone pride and the financial reward is almost a recognition of that. It’s the same feeling you would get as a kid if you won player of the season for your football team or got good marks at school.

The other way money can bring happiness is the freedom it can give you. Paying of or not having debts can be a relief and remove stress but also bring you great pride. Paying off my mortgage was a great feeling. Reloading the screen and seeing the balance say $0 still brings a smile to my face.

Being able to be generous as well and give back. If you can pay for your children’s education so they don’t incur debt. If your able to give them a deposit for a home. If your able to leave them an inheritance. Being able to give people you love great experiences. That should bring joy to anyone. As does giving to charity.
Click to expand...
I understand this viewpoint Rob, because it is one I shared not that long ago. Getting paid well, climbing the corporate ladder, and using that wealth accumulated to buy loads of stuff. It sounds like the path to happiness. That is what I thought I wanted too for a while, but now I am on a different path.

I am generous too, but with with my time and emotion. I feel free as I am not as tied to deadlines or profit targets. And I am lucky in that I am in good place financially, I understand everyone is not like that, but I have no desire to get rich. None. I could earn double what I do, but it would come with double the hassle. fudge that.

This might come off as unambitious. It is. Let me recommend an old article called 'The medium chill' by David Roberts if you want to get my vibe.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back