Printable View
Seething.Quote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
Not got time tonight I'm watching Liverpool. I'll try and get my manifesto to you before the end of the week :thumbup:
Talking about how much time I have left, I do not take tomorrow as a given and am quite happy when i wake up each morning, i got no expert buddies :biggrin:
Attachment 6547
Well I look forward to thisQuote:
Originally Posted by Heathblue
This isn't school so no copying and try and make it your own work
Have you posted the wrong link here ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
It's the end of the weekQuote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
Get on with it
Was Enoch Powell wrong and/or was he a baddie?
I’ve always been led to believe that he was.
His motives might or might not be questionable, I’m going to listen to some podcasts about him.
It seems as though he was a polyglot and a polymath.
Think the point is that every Labour leader I can remember (that goes back to Harold Wilson) would have balked at being compared to Powell with the possible exception of this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wash DC Blue
He was undoubtedly a very intelligent personQuote:
Originally Posted by Wash DC Blue
But plenty of intelligent people are racists
Starmer going full Enoch seems to have bombed even with Reform voters, according to the latest YouGov polling:Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
https://www.thecanary.co/uk/analysis...dmarsdn8syijsb
How did that get there!Quote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
Listen SonnyQuote:
Originally Posted by Wales-Bales
If you have a thing for lads in workout gear that's fine , it's 2025
But after 9pm please
I haven't forgot, end of week is 23.59 Sunday evening, us Tax Payers don't get as much free time as the CIH massive, a few sherbets in town last night today might be a bit of a washout.Quote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
Clock is tickingQuote:
Originally Posted by Heathblue
Very risky from Starmer and co, particularly as they win with only 23% of the population votes….most people saw through their BS before the election, but it’s certainly almost suicidal how they are going about things. DeludedQuote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
Labour didn't win with 23 percent of the vote , it was higher than that , at least 33 I thinkQuote:
Originally Posted by goats
The Tories often won with a low vote percentage in the past but of course we never heard much about that
It happens when in those days the left vote was split between Labour and liberals
At the last election the reverse happened .....a low ish Labour vote won because the Tories and reform were splitting the right wing vote
At present the Labour vote IS around 23 percent .....10 points down on the election which is very bad news for them
The reform vote has increased to around 28 percent ....and on that they would either win outright or form a coalition because they would win the most seats
I personally thing Labour are dead
That doesn't mean people who are left or middle ground liberal are .....a new party needs to emerge in the same for them way reform has provided a home for right wing voters
A Labour, liberal , green coalition would easily get enough votes to keep the Tories and reform out of government
That's the only future really
Because starmer and the liberals and the rest have to accept that that 20 percent is now lost to reform and by trying to play their game with regard to immigration or crime or tax you are talking to people who are not going to listen to facts or reasonable arguments, these people have been desperate for a right wing party waving union jacks for years and now they have it
I was listening to farage speak today and he's a bullshitter and a salesman but he's got charisma and no other leader in the UK has that at the moment ....certainly not starmer , the liberal boss , that tory woman
Getting rid of starmer by Labour is essential but if they don't then they need to merge with the liberals , greens and the rest or its curtains
I wouldn't vote for Labour again if they carry in with this anti immigrant bullshit.
The UK has always had immigration and we were promised a resetting of our relationship with the EU and wider world after the cluster**** that was 2016 onwards. It hasn't happened and Labour are going for the populist vote rather than good old fashioned social democracy, planning for the long term
Is the winning answer. Blames the immigrants, it's cheap. Bread and circuses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorcus
Do you think Labours policy is zero/negative net-migration??Quote:
Originally Posted by HiVis
I'd love an example of Starmer blaming immigrants for literally anything?Quote:
Originally Posted by HiVis
We have a profit generating sector that relies entirely on shipping people here on min wage to do jobs that none of us in this thread would want to do. We have a literal shit storm coming in terms of welfare spending/non-economically active adults and no real way of solving it. We have a housing crisis. Throw all these things in a pot and tell me how any serious government doesn't focus on getting net migration down and welfare spending down.
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1927299701008744781
In other news, trying to work out what/whether British people think becomes harder by the second. Starmer has terrible approval ratings and labour seem to be at low 20s maybe, yet he beats everyone in the above poll. I don't understand what to make of that. I know historically sitting PMs tend to do better than expected but this baffles me.
You seem to have been sucked in tooQuote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
Instead of getting on with reducing migration starmer has pathetically tried to call back right wing voters who will never support him and his useless home secretary still isn't being specific on numbers of gang master rings they are breaking up
These are the things that will win back moderate voters ....fck the right wing
And his speech just alienates many long term labour voters
Of course with regard to welfare he's employing an SS trained head of DWP in Liz Kendal who does a great job of also pandering to the daily mail voting crew
You don't reduce the welfare bill sensibly by making it harder for genuine claimants....these chronic disabilities don't go away or improve ff sake just because the government makes it increasingly harder to jump through smaller and smaller hoops
There has been a huge backlash against these " reforms " and rightly so
Money should be heavily weighted into improving training opportunities in real work for those with disabilities and crackdowns on fraud in the other direction
Forcing everyone into tighter corners for individually what are meagre meagre amounts of money per person is utterly futile
The welfare bill is the welfare bill ...its always going to be here like the nhs , roads , policing
The cost to the country in terms of health , crime , social cohesion , the economy of not providing a base level is rarely discussed but it's staggering
So sensible and fair welfare and social provision ....which most of us will require at certain points in our lives is vital
This government is bullshitting , it's not doing that , it's scaremongering in order to cut to the bone
Asking someone with a chronic illness like rheumatoid arthritis to attend another assessment.....even after filling in all the relevant forms .....3 years after they did the last one ....is a complete waste of money and resources
If Labour want to cut the welfare bill they could start with that sort of nonsense .....they say that's going to happen but I trust starmer as much as I trust Ian Duncan Smith ......ie not one bit
I think it's an outlier because the only person who is going to win the next election on present evidence is very sadly Nigel FarageQuote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
Since the wins at the recent local elections those who wanted a right wing party to vote for now have one and they are consistently on 28 to 30 percent
Easily enough to either form a coalition with the Tories or govern on their own
It's a shocking indictment of Labour , it was always going to be difficult but they should be polling around 30 percent
Trying to look at them from a distance I don't think any of the current labour government appear to be of any substance and they are led by a lump of wet lettuce
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
Starmer’s Labour tries to tell you it’s “working people” they’re backing. It’s clearly deliberate that they talk specifically about working people. Given so many of their actions so far, it appears they don’t give a flying f*ck about people who, for whatever reason, are unable to work.
Blaming the migrants is succeeding in its intended purpose, masking the inequalities and shortcomings elsewhere. We need significant improvements to funding of education, the health service, national infrastructure. It would be better for us if we documented the migrant when they arrived, gave them a NINO and told they they can stay legally with all the benefits that entails as long as they work. They end end putting more into the system than they take out. After a few years we have a swift process that allows then full leave to stay if they have demonstrated they wish to contribute to our society in a positive way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
The Australian system would work for us, if only our politicians could be so bold.
I was rather hoping this outrageous drivel "those hard working people" would have been left behind with the hapless Tories.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
Firstly, I appreciate you trying to focus on policy.Quote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
Secondly, they are pumping money into skills/opportunity training to help get people who can work, that's literally part of the welfare bill. It's also worth noting that because of the unique situation Britain are in (rising economic inactivity amongst working age people) these cuts still result in an increasing welfare bill, just less than it would have been.
They are also ending reassessments for people who have chronic conditions and will never be able to work.
The bottom line for me (as someone who works with SEND data) is that the average person has no idea what is coming down the road in terms of welfare spending, summed up by:
'The number of people receiving one of the main types of health and disability benefit, Personal Independence Payments (PIP), has also risen rapidly and is becoming unsustainable.
Since the pandemic, the number of working-age people receiving PIP has more than doubled from 15,300 to 35,100 a month. The number of young people (16-24) receiving PIP per month has also skyrocketed from 2,967 to 7,857 a month. Over the next five years, if no action is taken, the number of working age people claiming PIP is expected to increase from 2 million in 2021 to 4.3 million'
And herein lies the uncomfortable truth for anybody of a left leaning perspective, you can't be ideologically attached to a point of view just because it hurts to agree with the other side occasionally and in specific circumstances.
Migration is good, net migration of a million isn't
A proper robust safety net is good, a high percentage of working age adults being on some kind of disability benefit isn't.
That doesn't mean you hate migrants or 'scroungers', it doesn't mean you have been 'sucked in', it means you are being objective and using the information available to you.
What level of net migration would be make things difficult for the country to improve services/outcomes for people who already live here? Number or % of current population.
Same question to you as sludge then. What level of net migration would make it harder to improve services/outcomes for people who already live here?Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
Who decides who has a chronic illness which is not going to improve ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
Well that should of course be the medical profession
But it isn't, it's going to increasingly be the likes of Liz Kendal
If you believe that she and her departments are genuinely going to increase training and opportunities for disabled people then you are deluded , that's all hogwash
Making disabled people fight harder and harder to prove they are ...disabled ..and entitled to support ......is not progressive .......its just about slashing the welfare budget
That's what it's all about , that's the bottom line
Cutting back on fraud is easily dealt with by employing more fraud teams not discriminating against everyone else
This is pathetic and you are just repeating the same old line that's gone before
You have thrown in the usual oh a proper safety net is fine etc etc
The problem here is that someone who is in a wheelchair and has been for 20 years isn't suddenly " ok " this week because they have failed tests which are harder and harder to pass .....ff sake .....
Who are you to support such utter madness ?
This isn't a sensible reform of welfare in the same way starmer crying out about strangers is a sensible policy towards migration
It's no wonder that 15 percent of the labour vote has vanished
You seem to be still clinging on so good luck
The Labour Party have had nearly a year to start facing the questions regarding migrationQuote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
The other day the utterly hopeless Yvette Cooper was nailed to the floor by Victoria Derbyshire for dodging the questions regarding numbers , policies etc
It was embarrassing to watch
If she can't come up with specifics to start to deal with people who want fair and reasonable immigration policy and starmer is acting like Norman Tebbit then it's a waste of time you asking ordinary folk on here isn't it ?
Yeah 33% of the votes cast but I think it was the lowest ever turnout for an election, which is not surprising. Only 23% of the population of the country voted for these idiots, one shitshow to another, different coloured tie or whatever. This country is broken. Meanwhile in Norway ( a country that seemingly cares nothing about net zero) their sovereign wealth fund managed by their government is the biggest in the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
You usually talk sense, Eric - even if I sometimes disagree with the conclusions you draw. But that question is nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
Are you talking economically active or inactive migrants? Migrants who contribute more than they take out or the opposite? Migrants who provide essential public services, or become indispensable to agriculture or the 'hospitality' industry? Migrants who bring skills to the health service or to tech companies? Or migrants who do none of those things?
I don't know what the capacity of the UK is for population growth through inward migration. It is not a simple numbers game. There is clearly pressure on schools, the health service, the transport infrastructure, water and power and other things, but migrants can and do contribute to those services and infrastructure.
If the argument on immigration can be re-directed to economic impacts (pro and con), to the benefits of diversity and moral obligations to families or victims of oppression, to the way we can re-shape our ageing and less productive society and ensure this rich country uses its collective resources to manage progressive and positive changes, then great.
But the argument, the debate, is often around false numbers, cultural conservatism, red top scaremongering and at the fringes outright xenophobia and racism. Starmer has decided to feed that fire - because he is an unprincipled political coward and has no vision or compass.
There have been several low turnouts at electionsQuote:
Originally Posted by goats
The last one was at 60 percent the lowest since 2001 which was 59 percent
You would think with the country not doing well for 14 years under the Tories people would have got out to vote but it didn't happen
I think that showed how crap Starmer was in appealing to the population to back him and he's certainly proving they were wise to doubt him
Interesting to note that they didn't automatically turn to Reform either.
Norway that aims to achieve net zero by 2050; to be carbon neutral by 2030; for all new cars to be zero emission from this year?Quote:
Originally Posted by goats
Many of Norways targets, whilst public, are not set into law - but their 'low emission society' objective is central to their 2017 Climate Change Act. Government policy is to meet the Paris Accords targets and to outperform the EU on carbon and emissions.
This whilst managing the downslope of oil and gas production from the North Sea.
The way they set up and managed their Sovereign Wealth Fund (as I know from watching every episode of The State Of Happiness) put the UK to shame!
The pressure on Starmer from the left is growing as he goes chasing voters drawn to the right!
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...john-mcdonnell
This alongside developments from the Greens and independents to build a broader and deeper grass roots movement, and one that is capable of challenging Labour in elections.
Part of the reason is that they weren't likely to win seats. The same with the Greens and to a lesser extent Lib Dems, Plaid etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by stevo
I think the other thing is that people understandably wanted to give Labour a go. They are now realizing - so far at least - that it doesn't make much difference if you don't solve the core problems at hand.
So I think those two things have changed since the last General Election.
This is a great post Eric and a very reasonable position and it's refreshing to hear from someone talking with professional experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
The situation in several regards since the pandemic is wholly unsustainable. In terms of net immigration its been wholly unsustainable for years before then too. Things need to change and people really need to recognise that or the change will happen anyway and you'll have no influence over it.
I'm the only one in my immediate family who isn't on benefits (dad on disability, mum on housing, kids mum on UC) so this isn't an anti benefit thing at all. Quite the opposite, it's about making one of the most important parts of our civilised society work properly.
I have more professional experience from the housing side, but the situation is absolutely dire. It's really very serious and as you say; migration is good. Migration of half a million a year isn't.
500,000 moved to the UK as part of the windrush generation over a quarter of a century. In the last couple of years that figure was reached in about 9 months.
The way to look at it is that half a million people is a city the size of Bristol. That comes with 300,000 odd dwellings, 40 miles of motorway, 250 parks, 150 odd schools, 200 odd doctors surgeries, 2-3 large hospitals, 50 libraries, 20 train stations and all the rest of it. All these things we need to make living standards what they are.
All of that needs to be provided every single year and that's just to keep treading water and many of us don't want to tread water. It can't be done. It's as simple as that. It cannot be done.
There are costs and benefits to everything but the benefits of migration, which others have outlined and I am happy to endorse, are being rapidly overtaken unfortunately and that's not a good or sustainable position to be in, especially for those who don't already own their own homes.
As things stand, irrespective of Labour or Tories, we are in big trouble. Credit to Starmer, at least he's seen the data and he knows he has to act.
So if your old man is found to be " OK " despite the doctors and everyone else knowing he is disabled ...that's what's going to increasingly happen as the eligibility for the welfare system is tightened .......how is he going to live ?Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesWales
Forget about family or savings
Don't say oh he's so disabled he obviously can't work or its obvious he requires extra living costs , everyone can see that ....
No , it doesn't matter .....he could be left without what helps him to have an existence ....however basic that might be .....
Simply because those that make the law have reduced the amount of people who can access support .....not just financial support .......and clearly playing to your tune will continue to do so ....as you are singing the same song and obviously support that
It's like a turkey voting for Christmas
Maybe you can explain to him and others who are likely to be cut adrift that it's a tough decision but it's been made in the best interests of the " rest " of the country
Maybe it’s easier for them with such a small population over a vast area? Was interesting to see what was said on the Simon reeve documentary the other day by Norwegians, they weren’t bothered by it at all….its quite a fascinating country, far more advanced than us.Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1959
I was working there in 1999 for a while, stupidly turned down a decent job with lots of benefits, one of my biggest regrets looking back.