UK Politics Thread XI: Boris' Big Bombastic Brexit Bash

[SD_Film Artists]

Do you have a adequate poll to suggest that?
Because 17.4 million votes to leave are not hard leave voters.
Remaining in the UK is the best option for the UK.

I said they will not push for it as hard if we remain.

They voted leave, not remain which is what Labour is trying to pull.

On the same basis, we could describe the bulk of the people who voted remain as preferring a good deal over a hard exit, so the best all round option would be to negotiate a cross party leave agreement that is in the best interest of the UK.

I think it's safe to say that, at least at the time, the people who voted to remain voted to remain. Many people who voted leave however did not want a hard/no deal.

[Dooom35796821595]

They voted leave, not remain which is what Labour is trying to pull.

On the same basis, we could describe the bulk of the people who voted remain as preferring a good deal over a hard exit, so the best all round option would be to negotiate a cross party leave agreement that is in the best interest of the UK.

I think it's safe to say that, at least at the time, the people who voted to remain voted to remain. Many people who voted leave however did not want a hard/no deal.

Which is why negotiating a deal that would achieve the objectives of both sides would be the best outcome for all parties, including the EU. But vocal sects of the remainer group are as vocal as the no deal sects of the leave group, drowning out any reasonable chance of compromise.

[SD_Film Artists]

I think it's safe to say that, at least at the time, the people who voted to remain voted to remain. Many people who voted leave however did not want a hard/no deal.

Which is why negotiating a deal that would achieve the objectives of both sides would be the best outcome for all parties, including the EU. But vocal sects of the remainer group are as vocal as the no deal sects of the leave group, drowning out any reasonable chance of compromise.

What if their objective is to stay in the EU?

[Dooom35796821595]

Which is why negotiating a deal that would achieve the objectives of both sides would be the best outcome for all parties, including the EU. But vocal sects of the remainer group are as vocal as the no deal sects of the leave group, drowning out any reasonable chance of compromise.

What if their objective is to stay in the EU?

What for? The EU has lost support, ignoring the problems with it and pretending it’s some great organisation rather then a stagnant protectionist group is a flawed starting position.

[SD_Film Artists]

What if their objective is to stay in the EU?

What for? The EU has lost support, ignoring the problems with it and pretending it’s some great organisation rather then a stagnant protectionist group is a flawed starting position.

Where has the EU lost support? The domino effect didn't happen, and even far-right parties on the continent are removing ideas of their own Brexit from their manifestos after seeing the tyre fire that Brexit is.

[Dooom35796821595]

What for? The EU has lost support, ignoring the problems with it and pretending it’s some great organisation rather then a stagnant protectionist group is a flawed starting position.

Where has the EU lost support? The domino effect didn't happen, and even far-right parties on the continent are removing ideas of their own Brexit from their manifestos after seeing the tyre fire that Brexit is.

It’s lost support in the UK, as evidenced by the leave vote compared to the 67% remain vote in 75.

[SD_Film Artists]

Where has the EU lost support? The domino effect didn't happen, and even far-right parties on the continent are removing ideas of their own Brexit from their manifestos after seeing the tyre fire that Brexit is.

It’s lost support in the UK, as evidenced by the leave vote compared to the 67% remain vote in 75.

I meant since 2016.

[Dooom35796821595]

It’s lost support in the UK, as evidenced by the leave vote compared to the 67% remain vote in 75.

I meant since 2016.

Why does that matter? Support in the UK declined to the point that people voted to leave, and there is no evidence it has marginally changed, beyond the usual erosion of trust in all UK political parties and leaders.

[Dooom35796821595]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50660212

Oh goody, another Lib Dem ‘apology’

[Ostroeuropa]

Ever notice how we don't have a culture of seeing a member of the british upper classes and thinking "Yeah they're probably a pedo. We need laws to keep them away from schools. Should probably take their kids off them too, just to be safe", but we have people saying that kind of shit about Muslims and terrorism?

You don't get someone noticing someone driving a nice car and hollering that they like to diddle kids and assaulting them like Sikhs put up with?

Despite the fact that the rate of pedos in the upper class is well, well above the rate of terrorists in Islam?

And despite the fact there's a causal mechanism for you to be suspicious of? I.E, to gain access to wealth means to network with people.

You know, a network.

Like a pedophile network that was discovered to be infesting our upper classes.

It's almost like this shit about Muslims isn't based in sense or experience or shit they've actually done, but in a media narrative about them. Which is why you don't get people looking at you dodgy when you're near kids because you're wearing an expensive suit and went to eton, despite the fact that yea, i'd take that bet long before "He's got a beard, probably a terrorist.".

[The Huskar Social Union]

Ever notice how we don't have a culture of seeing a member of the british upper classes and thinking "Yeah they're probably a pedo. We need laws to keep them away from schools. Should probably take their kids off them too, just to be safe", but we have people saying that kind of shit about Muslims and terrorism?

You don't get someone noticing someone driving a nice car and hollering that they like to diddle kids and assaulting them like Sikhs put up with?

Despite the fact that the rate of pedos in the upper class is well, well above the rate of terrorists in Islam?

And despite the fact there's a causal mechanism for you to be suspicious of? I.E, to gain access to wealth means to network with people.

You know, a network.

Like a pedophile network that was discovered to be infesting our upper classes.

So Ostro died today, we dont know what happened, we just know there was no foul play involved and that it occurred 10 seconds after this post. All is well, carry on.

[Hydesland]

Austerity has been the guiding principle of economic policy in the UK since the global financial crisis hit.

That is weird. The is the literal opposite of most places.

Uh no it's not, that's been the case in almost every country hit by the crisis, especially in Europe.

Or it was: austerity isn't really a thing now, neither party is (seriously) proposing austerity right now as far as I'm aware.

[Ostroeuropa]

Ever notice how we don't have a culture of seeing a member of the british upper classes and thinking "Yeah they're probably a pedo. We need laws to keep them away from schools. Should probably take their kids off them too, just to be safe", but we have people saying that kind of shit about Muslims and terrorism?

You don't get someone noticing someone driving a nice car and hollering that they like to diddle kids and assaulting them like Sikhs put up with?

Despite the fact that the rate of pedos in the upper class is well, well above the rate of terrorists in Islam?

And despite the fact there's a causal mechanism for you to be suspicious of? I.E, to gain access to wealth means to network with people.

You know, a network.

Like a pedophile network that was discovered to be infesting our upper classes.

So Ostro died today, we dont know what happened, we just know there was no foul play involved and that it occurred 10 seconds after this post. All is well, carry on.

They don't need to kill anyone these days, just schedule what happens on the television, control the overton window, and gaslight the public while telling them that they need to use their words to resolve things and musn't under any circumstances resort to violence, because that would be wrong.

[Dooom35796821595]

So Ostro died today, we dont know what happened, we just know there was no foul play involved and that it occurred 10 seconds after this post. All is well, carry on.

They don't need to kill anyone these days, just schedule what happens on the television, control the overton window, and gaslight the public while telling them that they need to use their words to resolve things and musn't under any circumstances resort to violence, because that would be wrong.

Said the handful of billionaires to the 140,000 dead people.

Right, just like the 1.2 trillion the Conservatives claim Labour will spend.

Most people can recognise a lie when they hear it.

[Ostroeuropa]

They don't need to kill anyone these days, just schedule what happens on the television, control the overton window, and gaslight the public while telling them that they need to use their words to resolve things and musn't under any circumstances resort to violence, because that would be wrong.

Said the handful of billionaires to the 140,000 dead people.

Right, just like the 1.2 trillion the Conservatives claim Labour will spend.

Most people can recognise a lie when they hear it.

The 140,000 dead people isn't a lie dude. It wasn't stated by a politician. It was by a medical journal based on tracking death rates among populations and so on. It's not a number Labour just plucked out of the air like the Tories and their 1.2 trillion lie.

[Dooom35796821595]

Right, just like the 1.2 trillion the Conservatives claim Labour will spend.

Most people can recognise a lie when they hear it.

The 140,000 dead people isn't a lie dude. It wasn't stated by a politician. It was by a medical journal based on tracking death rates among populations and so on. It's not a number Labour just plucked out of the air like the Tories and their 1.2 trillion lie.

It’s bullshit statistical manipulation with the sole intention of propagating an agenda.

[Ostroeuropa]

The 140,000 dead people isn't a lie dude. It wasn't stated by a politician. It was by a medical journal based on tracking death rates among populations and so on. It's not a number Labour just plucked out of the air like the Tories and their 1.2 trillion lie.

It’s bullshit statistical manipulation with the sole intention of propagating an agenda.

How so? And what agenda? To stop people dying needlessly?

[Souseiseki]

throwback to when i was saying the tory policies were killing people 7 years ago and y'all thought i was crazy

[Hydesland]

As for who the Russians would favour, I'm not sure, but I'm pretty confident that they'd be very pleased with someone who wants to dismantle NATO, blames western expansionism for the Ukraine crisis (rather than Russia) and wants to seek warmer diplomatic ties with Russia (as well as being a lifelong eurosceptic who probably won't campaign against Brexit). I'm sure they'd also be pleased with the chaos candidate determined to take us out of Europe, though they wouldn't be pleased with the rest of his NATO friendly foreign policy. Either is plausible.

[Dooom35796821595]

It’s bullshit statistical manipulation with the sole intention of propagating an agenda.

How so? And what agenda? To stop people dying needlessly?

The agenda that massive state spending will fix everything, and that any cuts to public services are akin to killing people.

[Hydesland]

throwback to when i was saying the tory policies were killing people 7 years ago and y'all thought i was crazy

Sorry but that kind of discourse is still naff, as elegantly put here: https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1 ... 6199094272

[Ostroeuropa]

How so? And what agenda? To stop people dying needlessly?

The agenda that massive state spending will fix everything, and that any cuts to public services are akin to killing people.

If it results in higher mortality, yeah?

Demonstrably higher state spending did not produce the problem of these people dying this early, so...

As for who the Russians would favour, I'm not sure, but I'm pretty confident that they'd be very pleased with someone who wants to dismantle NATO, blames western expansionism for the Ukraine crisis (rather than Russia) and wants to seek warmer diplomatic ties with Russia (as well as being a lifelong eurosceptic who probably won't campaign against Brexit). I'm sure they'd also be pleased with the chaos candidate determined to take us out of Europe, though they wouldn't be pleased with the rest of his NATO friendly foreign policy. Either is plausible.

It's that silly shit where someone doesn't understand the Labour party isn't a dictatorship again, look everybody, look, somebody who doesn't want to acknowledge the difference between a party run by a white person who says silly shit and a party that is founded on the idea only whites can join and actively pursues white supremacist policies. I guess both are the same.

I highly doubt Russian intelligence is as daft as your position here as to think Labour would advance this agenda.

This is the problem;

Any individual member of the Labour party is going to have some wacky shit. But they're reigned in by the wisdom of crowds and the rest of the party into broadly acceptable policies. Their individual wackiness is equated, for some bizarre reason, to the systemic group failings of the conservative party. Despite having no impact on party policy.


It's like having a creationist, an anti-vaxxer, and a scientologist in a room who all understand why the other two are batshit on their wackiness and overrule eachother, but whenever they pick a leader among the three of them (Who is overruled by the other two on their particular quirk), saying they're the same as the opposing group who are all three of those things all the time and never reign eachother in.

It's a very basic failing to understand how political parties work. Again.

I doubt the Russians are as daft as that.

[Ostroeuropa]

throwback to when i was saying the tory policies were killing people 7 years ago and y'all thought i was crazy

Idk if I thought that but if I did, oops.

[Dooom35796821595]

The agenda that massive state spending will fix everything, and that any cuts to public services are akin to killing people.

If it results in higher mortality, yeah?

Demonstrably higher state spending did not produce the problem of these people dying this early, so...

So...the debt is 90% of GDP and growing. And you think throwing money at it will fix things?

If we look at it another way, if our debt wasn’t so high, we’d have a lot more money to spend on important issues like the NHS and defence. But the more massive borrowing that happens just limits the money available in the future, which with an ageing population is going to increase.

[Ostroeuropa]

If it results in higher mortality, yeah?

Demonstrably higher state spending did not produce the problem of these people dying this early, so...

So...the debt is 90% of GDP and growing. And you think throwing money at it will fix things?

If we look at it another way, if our debt wasn’t so high, we’d have a lot more money to spend on important issues like the NHS and defence. But the more massive borrowing that happens just limits the money available in the future, which with an ageing population is going to increase.

Raising taxes and investing in the economy is the solution. I'm also okay with raising the retirement age personally given the expanding lifespans and better quality of life among the elderly that functioning modern healthcare provides. Increasing government revenue by 5% would cover the cost of servicing the debt. Going above 5% means we can reduce it over time.

It's also the case that austerity and means testing often costs more than it saves. The prescription charges for instance costs more to implement than it saves both directly (Administration costs) AND revenue wise (Lost revenue from lost work days is slightly higher for businesses than the cost of paying directly for the medication, so we're poorer and sicker.). Add both together and its no contest. Same for the mandatory rejection of 1/3rd of applicants for PIP given that this just necessitates mandatory reconsiderations and meetings that eventually overturn that decision and result in backpayments in addition to having to pay out for those reconsiderations and meetings.

On the issue of prescription charges, it also costs us more because people don't actually take their medicine if they have to pay for it, and they develop complications. Just one example:

It costs us 20 million pounds a year for IDS.
https://crohnsandcolitis.org.uk/news/ne ... ion-charge