A Political Thread

[McTallshort]

It's more the fact that you're both coming across as children.

Yeah but he started it

 

[UlsterRugby2012]

What exactly are you on about check what I said, facts. Do you honestly think I or anyone else with half a brain thinks the Russians pose more danger than Isis to ordinary Brits, I reported facts and a sound argument.
I'd rather the Russians than the Yanks anyway.
Why can you remove my comments are you my Mother, what happened to free speech, I suppose we are allowed to slag off the Russians but not the Muslim extremists, how very sensitive this country is becoming.

You asked who would we rather be invaded by - ISIL or Russia. Not who poses more danger. Using your own words, only one with half a brain would ask that question.

 

[McTallshort]

You asked who would we rather be invaded by - ISIL or Russia. Not who poses more danger. Using your own words, only one with half a brain would ask that question.

If he did mean which poses the biggest danger then I would still say the nuclear power that has invaded 3 countries and is happy to shoot down passenger aircraft is far more dangerous than a group who despite having arms and a safe area to operate have yet to achieve a single attack in the UK. 7/7, Glasgow and Lee Rigby were not ISIS.

 

[Gavin]

Christ I didn't mean to create problems with a simple discussion, some people need to play nice.

In other news I am reading about the Arab Spring and how is was initiated by the West - focusing on Gadhafi and his plan for gold-money which would have ruined the US Dollar

 

[valley commando]

I think the best description for free speech is the following.

You have the right to say what you like it doesn't give you the right to be heard.


Another note there is no free speech law in the UK.

Thats a pity

 

[thechosenfamily]

Quite possibly the most scary thing with the Ukraine is that I now truly believe Tom Clancy was some spawn of Satan

I am fond of the Jack Ryan books and if you have not read it look at "Command Authority" written in 2013, it is frighteningly close to current events.

He has also blamed for the idea for flying aircraft into buildings

 

[McTallshort]

Quite possibly the most scary thing with the Ukraine is that I now truly believe Tom Clancy was some spawn of Satan

I am fond of the Jack Ryan books and if you have not read it look at "Command Authority" written in 2013, it is frighteningly close to current events.

He has also blamed for the idea for flying aircraft into buildings

Yeah a Japanese pilot flew one into the White House killing the President in one of his books.

- - - Updated - - -

Christ I didn't mean to create problems with a simple discussion, some people need to play nice.

In other news I am reading about the Arab Spring and how is was initiated by the West - focusing on Gadhafi and his plan for gold-money which would have ruined the US Dollar

Wouldn't surprise me, I know the BBC totally over stepped the mark during the Iranian elections a few years ago and were rightly ejected.

 

[thechosenfamily]

Yeah a Japanese pilot flew one into the White House killing the President in one of his books.

Yep, Executive Order.

 

[William18]

Let's not forget that Libya was UN approved. I don't think something has to be UN approved to be an example of a worthwhile military procedure but if you can get Russia, China and the US not to veto.... Let's also not forget that Gaddafi was just horrible and most Libyans wanted him out of office. I'm sure the US did benefit out of it but so did the Libyan people and so did everyone else (apart from Gaddafi and his henchmen).

 

[j'nuh]

Clegg won the debate and the Lib Dems have the most reasonable policies.

Come at me.

 

[McTallshort]

Did you bother watching all of it?

 

[j'nuh]

Missed the first 20 minutes but watched the rest. I thought he put across some great political thoughts and policies, whilst being apologetic enough about the past, in particular education, to not let it dominate the discussion on what Lib Dems can offer.

Policy-wise, 8 billion extra into the NHS was the best any of the leaders could bring up on the night (Labour offer 2.5 billion, Conservatives offer "increasing the budget in real terms").

Ed was good too, but I dislike how he/Labour have wilted on immigration in the face of the UKIP surge, and building 200k homes a year by 2020? If it happens, it will be because of an economic boom. No party will be able to deliver that on the strength of policy.

 

[McTallshort]

Missed the first 20 minutes but watched the rest. I thought he put across some great political thoughts and policies, whilst being apologetic enough about the past, in particular education, to not let it dominate the discussion on what Lib Dems can offer.

Policy-wise, 8 billion extra into the NHS was the best any of the leaders could bring up on the night (Labour offer 2.5 billion, Conservatives offer "increasing the budget in real terms").

Ed was good too, but I dislike how he/Labour have wilted on immigration in the face of the UKIP surge, and building 200k homes a year by 2020? If it happens, it will be because of an economic boom. No party will be able to deliver that on the strength of policy.

Cleggs and the lib dems are a busted flush, being junior partners in the coalition has taken its toll and I don't think they will finish in front of UKIP.


Doesn't matter what labour say, I voted for them once but 12 years of overspending and pointless wars have put me off them for good and that Millaband just doesn't cut it at a national leader and they were wrong on immigration it doesn't make you a ukip voter saying that.

The Torys? Well got to say the economy seems ok, Im earning more now that I did before but as a dad of 3 I do worry about how much they are cutting back on education when they should be making the cuts in legal aid.

Who does that leave? UKIP but my wifes Polish so that just wouldn't sit right with me.

Might make my own party....

 

[j'nuh]

Cleggs and the lib dems are a busted flush, being junior partners in the coalition has taken its toll and I don't think they will finish in front of UKIP.

In the context of the political climate, I agree, the Lib Dems made a mistake going into coalition with the Tories and it has diminished their voter base. They will probably repair this damage with time, or by forming a coalition with Labour (which I'm starting to believe is one of the likelier results of the election) and showing well in that arrangement, but either way it will be beyond this election.

Ideologically, in an economic sense, the Lib Dems and Labour really aren't that far apart (see link below). Whilst the details are slightly different, the ideology is the same: close the deficit by raising tax on the richest and anti-tax avoidance, rather than hitting the poorest with further welfare and public sector cuts. The common ground between the parties lends itself to a fairly cosy coalition.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ld-strike-deficit-deal-in-coalition-thinktank

I just prefer the detail of the Lib Dem policies, particularly funding the NHS significantly more than the other parties, and the rent to own scheme they have going on. There is also still a sense of resentment towards Labour for their erosion of civil liberties and the wars fought under the Blair era. Ed has drawn a line under a lot of this, condemning e.g. the Iraq war, I'm just less convinced about the rest of his party.

The Torys? Well got to say the economy seems ok, Im earning more now that I did before but as a dad of 3 I do worry about how much they are cutting back on education when they should be making the cuts in legal aid.

No arguing that the economy is doing well now, especially comparative to other Western nations, and employment is on the up (even ignoring those on zero hour contracts, which account for 30% of new jobs under this administration). I just think the means by which this recovery has come about has been unfair. Rising food bank usage, massive cuts to welfare and the public sector in general. They have pledged a further 12 bn cuts to welfare. There's no way that the poorest and the disabled can come out of a Tory government better off. A recovery which has come about by degrading the lifestyles of the most vulnerable is a crappy recovery to have. Labour/Lib Dems have better means to a similar end.

 

[McTallshort]

For someone that's been on a zero hours contract I really don't see a problem with them. The coalition have gotten rid of the "only work for us' ones and I found them very flexible

 

[j'nuh]

It will vary from contract to contract. At it's best, some workplaces may be stretched enough that those on zero hours get plenty of regular hours. In this case, zero hour contracts basically provides what a regular job would provide, but without any of the job security.

At it's worst, it can lead to financial hardship. When you live from paycheck to paycheck, as the poorest in society often do, and living expenses (accommodation, food, cost of having children etc.) are fairly fixed, a lack of guaranteed income can cause massive issues when your expenses outstrips your income in those weeks you have no hours. There is also that you need to be available and ready to work whenever your employer demands it. With regular hours, you can plan childcare around your hours. Without regular hours, what are you supposed to do when your employer calls you the night before and asks you to be in the next day?

I can see a case for zero hour contracts for students/summer workers, to get a bit of work experience in. But when zero hour contracts are used as a means of replacing actual jobs, that's a massive problem.

 

[McTallshort]

With the greatest of respect you have been listening to the Labour propaganda a bit much.

The contract I was on was basically sub contraction. I was working a 4 on 4 off job at the time and took a zero hours to make up the lack of overtime it was very flexible and I earned some decent money. This whole nightmare scenario about these contracts came ironically during the last Labour government when large firms were putting people zero hours contracts and they were not able to work for anyone else this has now been scrapped.

Also most people live from month to month. Earning for money just means you have a bigger car/mortgage ect you have the same money left come the end of the month

 

[ncurd]

The problem is with zero-hour contracts is your pretty much unable to get a mortgage or any form of finance. I'm not a particular fan of labour laws in this country especially the fact the current government say you need to be working for an employers two years before you can take them to tribunal for wrongful dismissal. I have seen when places let go of people for no good reason under that time giving no job security. Planning to start a family means job security is pretty high up on my list after loosing my previous one just under 2 years ago.

Overall I'm generally centrist liberal which means I vote Lib-Dem unfortunately most people don't understand when you enter a coalition you have to compromise your policies especially as junior partner. however I think they have exerted their influence over Tory's whom I think we would of been far harsher without watching their backs.

I think we'll end up with a coalition of Labor, SNP and Lib-Dem(who will loose a fair few votes but maintain alot of seats most Lib-Dem MP's are well regarded in their constituency's) which after last nights debate I'd pretty happy with. Although I think the Lib-dems will have to boot their leader to achieve it. I can't see a coalition of Conservative/Lib-Dem occuring and they may need UKIP as well and I just can't see UKIP/Lib-Dem working toegther as they dismetrically opposed on Europe.

UKIP well the problem is they honestly believe pulling out the EU is good thing but attract some real looney's for it. Problem is they seam to think it's the crux of every problem and everything will be solved if we pulled out. Sadly there is no magic bullet and I think we benefit more from a multi-cultural society than shutting our doors, that costs money sadly but then everything does.


The one thing that annoys me are useless figure's (UKIP tend to be the worst on this) net migration is 10 times higher than after WW2? So how do I know if that's good/bad thing? what the correlation with population growth in general? It's a complex figure.

Another topic they brought up was health tourism which equates to a whopping 0.14% of the NHS budget....small problem being blow out of proportion surely? The ageing population and retirement age are far bigger issue problem is foreigner's aren't worth many votes whereas the older you are the more likely you are to vote.



Education is also an issue I hate I essentially pay even more tax(and I'm above average earner so pay a fair bit already) due to going to university and studying something that directly led to work (Computer Science) and a decent wage. However people slightly younger than me are having problems finding jobs due to over-saturation of people with degrees and being over qualified for other work. We need a combination of making sure people go to university regardless of background, dropping uni fees but making university about the best and brightest again instead of making them one size fits all. Also make apprenticeships an attractive options the amount they can be paid is criminal for essentially doing a full time job (and whilst learning usually expected to do the work of a full qualified worker) they should be being paid at least minimum wage.

 

[McTallshort]

No apprenticeships pay low at first because you are learning the skill at the cost of the employer. Your wages go up year on year and when you finish you get a well paid skilled job. Your are effectively a student but instead of going to university you learn at a working company and don't forget most apprenticeships are for sub 18 year-olds.

And your tribunal comment is wrong an agency worker took a company I worked for to tribunal and a few years a go a young lady took a hairdresser to tribunal just for not interviewing her.

 

[ncurd]

No apprenticeships pay low at first because you are learning the skill at the cost of the employer. Your wages go up year on year and when you finish you get a well paid skilled job. Your are effectively a student but instead of going to university you learn at a working company and don't forget most apprenticeships are for sub 18 year-olds.

And your tribunal comment is wrong an agency worker took a company I worked for to tribunal and a few years a go a young lady took a hairdresser to tribunal just for not interviewing her.

I don't particularly care if your employers is 'paying' to teach you, your still bloody working.

On tribunal for dismissal I'm completely right https://www.gov.uk/dismissal/what-to-do-if-youre-dismissed

- - - Updated - - -

Also on top of that, you'll note you can only take them to tribunal up to 3 months after the dismissal. So if you reliant on them for a reference for your next job (alot of company's that dismiss will still give a basic reference to keep ex-employee quiet) you have to hope to be employed quickly so you can then sue them from unfair dismissal otherwise your stuck between loosing your reference and loosing alot of money.