| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
It is early days but supply issues are beginning to bite in the construction industry, a few I’ve spoken to are showing concern. The work itself is there but you can’t pull your socks up if you haven’t got any, the gradual drying up of materials will definitely result in the laying off of labour leading to huge blow to the much hoped for post covid recovery.Originally Posted by life on mars
Is that a Brexit problem or a global supply shortage though?
This ain't helping
https://qz.com/1985276/america-is-ru...short-of-wood/
My dear old mum sadly passed now was a lovely , gentle , poor but generous charitable lady , who voted Tory all her life , nastiness never crossed her mind.
Just saying.
She voted for the party that a former Conservative Prime Minister described as the “nasty party” then.
To go back to the original point, there are always exceptions, for example, my mum was a Tory until she was a thirty and then she heard Harold McMillan telling she’d never had it so good and immediately became a Labour voter who became more left wing as she got older, but I’d say that, generally speaking, people become more right wing/selfish as they get older.
why is it selfish? This is something the left continually trot out about conservative voters, but conservatism isn't about self at all - that's a myth peddled by the left who think they are somehow making those on the right feel bad.
Having a party that promotes individual freedoms, actively encourages business and maintains the institutions of society isn't selfish, its going about things a different way.
Your comment is lazy and is akin to saying Labour voters are work shy preferring to receive benefits off the back of those that work.
Left and right are two different approaches to the same problem, none are perfect, on some occasions left wing approaches work, on others right wing approaches do. you'd have to be pretty naive to think only one method is better than the other - if it was, governments all over the world would be adherents to that particular approach.
A few points in reply, your response suggests that what I said rattled your cage a bit, also you’ve spent a decade and more telling us on here that right is right, so it’s hard to reconcile you with being the reasonable man in the middle seeing both sides of the argument. However, although I do associate Conservatism with greed (I’ve always thought there is a dividing line between aspiration and greed, but it can be a thin one) and always will do, I was also making a general point that people tend to get more selfish/self absorbed as they get older - I have to admit I have.
not at all, just passing comment that you repeat this point ad nauseum
and given the majority of those posters on here are myopic left wingers, take a wild guess why that was?
its easier to adopt the opinion that all politicians are self serving wankers, no matter whether they are on the left or right. all are equally bereft of empathy for the common man.
hardly surprising as earning potential diminishes as you get older, and you want stability in old age. The same can be said that a lot of young people are dreamers who believe they can change the world. they may as well believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden
I have gone the other way. I am far more mindful of other people as I get older - and am also more mindful of those who live on the breadline.
Just imagine what life could be like if we rejected the idea of left and right and just worked together to solve problems ....oh!
VERY GOOD POST
On what basis?
Saying 'Having a party that promotes individual freedoms, actively encourages business, and maintains the institutions of society isn't selfish, it's going about things a different way' is completely incorrect. Why? A party can do all those things and still be selfish at the same time. In fact, it could be argued that doing those things are the most selfish of all. It can't be argued that because a party does those things it is good for everyone and the environment. It can (and in my opinion) make things much worse.
Going about things a different way? That really doesn't stack up on any level. If we all tried to use that argument we could justify anything.
And I don't understand the part'akin to saying Labour voters are work-shy preferring to receive benefits off the back of those that work' - the first point argues an ideology the second point is an insult.
I think your frame of reference might be a few years out of date if you are you talking about the Conservative party.
perhaps, but traditional conservatism is about those very things, and whilst the blue corner today may not be a fully paid up member, its about as good as we have hence why some people with conservative values still vote for the blues.
The history in Hartlepool is fascinating as political trends go
1997 > 26k Huge Peter Mandelson Labour win ,only 3 parties standing then Tories with 18k in second place
2004 > 12.7k Labour win
2005 > 18.2k Labour win ( Tories in 3rd place with 4k )
2010 > 16.2k Labour win ( Tories into 2nd with 10.7k)
2015 > 15.1k Labour win ( Tories back to 3rd place with 8.2k , Brexit Party 2nd with 11k )
2017 > 21.8k Labour win ( Tories back into 2nd with 14.3k)
2019 > 15.4k Labour win ( Tories 2nd with 11.8k )
2021 > 15.2k Tory Win ( Labour 2nd with 8.5k )
Where have the voters gone. Combined labour/ Tory votes 1997.. .. 44K; In 2021.... 24K
You're seeing that from your left wing point of view. You think being called a work shy slacker who relies on others for benefits is insulting, but saying someone is selfish and only interested in themselves isn't.
Bizarre.
Both are wrong of course, unless you only see the world in shades of left or right
You can't say 'your left-wing point of view' and then suggest I see the world in shades of left or right. That's called projection.
not its not, its called a point of view.
how many times do you see left wing posters on here refer to the right as evil, nasty, selfish. ditto the right wingers calling the left workshy, scroungers, lazy
neither are true, but you will believe it to be the case if you are firmly entrenched in one camp or the other.
The whole left and right stance originated in 1789 and is subjective, old, and tedious. Something is either true or false. This can't happen under conservatism or any other political dogma/ideology. That's just logic. That's not a point of view.
What you're doing though is exactly the same thing as you're espousing to ridicule. You're doing it to me in every reply, along with a huge dose of assumption and presumption. The internet's so-called argument of 'it's my point of view' is a tired crutch to lean on. A point of view can be totally incorrect, that's how we've ended up with flat-earthers.
If I wrote 'I believe in a positive theory of human flourishing, based upon an ideal of non-coercive consensus building', you'd be closer to my political philosophy.
Yesterday, at 14:45 I posted Just imagine what life could be like if we rejected the idea of left and right and just worked together to solve problems ....oh! followed by a
I'll leave it there. Have a fab day!
apropos of your opening line I will assume you're referring to the Estates General and which side you sat on, however party politics predates that, certainly in the UK, by many years. Walpole was a Whig who opposed Tory policies in the first part of the 18th century. However I agree to a certain extent that something is either true or false, but when you're talking politics you are also talking economics, and as a pseudo science, there are many schools of thought, all of which have merit.The whole left and right stance originated in 1789 and is subjective, old, and tedious. Something is either true or false. This can't happen under conservatism or any other political dogma/ideology. That's just logic. That's not a point of view.
What you're doing though is exactly the same thing as you're espousing to ridicule. You're doing it to me in every reply, along with a huge dose of assumption and presumption. The internet's so-called argument of 'it's my point of view' is a tired crutch to lean on. A point of view can be totally incorrect, that's how we've ended up with flat-earthers.
If I wrote 'I believe in a positive theory of human flourishing, based upon an ideal of non-coercive consensus building', you'd be closer to my political philosophy.
Yesterday, at 14:45 I posted Just imagine what life could be like if we rejected the idea of left and right and just worked together to solve problems ....oh! followed by a
I'll leave it there. Have a fab day!
re: your second para, I disagree.
re: your third para, I agree.
Your final point is also agreed, but until we remove partisan party politics and engage in consensus politics via PR where all voices are heard, it will not happen. the main parties have too much to lose, though given Labour are sliding backwards, they may agree to PR as it may be the only way to keep the Tories out of power.
Politics is horrible really.
I do think that most people want what’s best for society...it’s just been ramped up to such a stage that it’s just toxic.
I’ve certainly contributed to toxicity on here, try my best not to offer a contrarian position or one that will upset someone.
But then suddenly my ire cannot be pacified, I post my opinion in a prickish way....and while I may feel good about it for a short while, I ultimately I regret it.
I think my point here is that nuances, respectful disagreements and finer points are foregone online in favour of a one size “Fitz Hall” my side against yours.
Ultimately, when things are really partisan no one wins.
We are seeing it more and more now and it’s sad.
this is spot on. consensus politics is far better than the partisan crap we are served up daily. Perhaps if we had PR rather than FPTP this would not be the case.
yes I agree with both these posts.
our political system is generating this kind of politics- because that's what it incentivises the politicians to do, blame each other, grandstanding and things that will play out well in the media rather than trying to fix things in the long run.
I can't see it being changed anytime soon though, as too many people who would need to be involved in changing it know where their bread is buttered.
I'd like to see compulsory voting and proportional representation. It's the only way, at present, we can reject the idea of party politics and start electing the best people for society and the environment. In 2012 Gerard Casey wrote, “states are criminal organizations. All states, not just the obviously totalitarian or repressive ones”. I think he has a point.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote