General politics discussion thread

[soretooth]

Hold up, guy who said "nobody voted for cuts." If I recall right, the Tories got the most seats, but not a majority. So some people obviously voted for cuts

I never said nobody voted for cuts, I said the coalition are making cuts that nobody voted for because they weren't in the manifestos.

 

People are never going to vote for cuts to anything to do with them. Yet cuts still have to be made.

Perhaps, but not to the extent they are doing now. From http://falseeconomy.org.uk/cure/the-false-...-to-the-deficit

 

Why the cuts won

[SpursRiot2012]

How in the shit could the Coalition specify with any real conviction what they would cut until they got into power and saw the state of the public finances themselves, though?

[Yoghurt]

I don't want Cameron at all. I made my choice to at least let the coalition exist and support the parts I support [campaigning to stop library closures for example is excellent] like cutting down on public services and nothing jobs and others have made theirs, there isn't a right or wrong answer. I voted Lib Dem because I supported their policies, I don't tactically vote, and I never, ever will.

[soretooth]

How in the shit could the Coalition specify with any real conviction what they would cut until they got into power and saw the state of the public finances themselves, though?

The public finances are, er, public? They knew all the figures and costed them into their pre-election budgets. The whole "we didn't know how bad things were" is a smokescreen. The size of the deficit was revised down immediately following the election. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10136055

[SpursRiot2012]

[Carbomb]

I have, in general, tried to stay out of this thread but one thing that Happ said is actually true:

 

It's a general politics thread, is it not? Not a mutual leftie back-slapping thread?

 

Honestly, that's what this thread has become. Any deviation from the leftist agenda is generally met with sarky replies or actual ridicule.

It's weird, as a Liberal voting person even I feel like a minority on here, admittedly I am more centrist then a lot but it's quite ridiculous.

 

Take solace in the fact in spite of them positive changes for the medium and long term security of the UK are happening. For all the rhetoric, they're on the back foot. And it is a good thing.

 

This is all I will say on this subject: absolute fucking bollocks. I withdrew from this thread because a load of right-wingers showed up to back each other up in their baseless slanging of socialism and to post "sarky replies or actual ridicule" you claim we'd been making, and didn't feel like making myself angry and aging another year. Seeing as I've withdrawn, and Kenny and Bobbins have proportionally posted much less than Happ, Yoghurt, SSB and centrists (I think) in Mikey, Jonathan Ford and Loki, the only left-wingers posting are David and The King Of Swing.

 

You can use language like "leftie back-slapping" as much as you like, but some of the right-wing stuff posted in here has been as obnoxious as you claim the socialists on here have.

Edited February 25, 2011 by Carbomb MA

[SpursRiot2012]

Hold up, Carbomb, I posted in this thread today and breifly yesterday. Otherwise I haven't posted in here for ages. Probably for the same reason you tend not to, I get very frustrated with certain opinions.

[Carbomb]

Hold up, Carbomb, I posted in this thread today and breifly yesterday. Otherwise I haven't posted in here for ages. Probably for the same reason you tend not to, I get very frustrated with certain opinions.

 

Fair enough, I withdraw above opinion on you. I don't object to you holding opposing political opinion to me, as long as you're prepared to back it up as to why you hold those views, rather than constant baiting.

 

Yoghurt, you're the main culprit for that. Apart from going on about how "thank god we're not going back to socialism" or "socialism must be stopped!!!", you've neither answered David's question on what your understanding of socialism is, nor have you elaborated upon the particular "evils" you think are inherent in socialism that we should avoid. I'd respect your opinion more if you'd be so good as to do that, because all you're doing at the moment is coming across as a pot-shotter, and I'm pretty sure I've seen you do a lot better than that in other threads.

[SpursRiot2012]

That's cool.

 

Carbomb, you come from the same area as me. I grew up in social housing with a parent that did nothing but claim benefit. Only recently they booted her off income support and onto job seekers. And she takes it as a personal insult. And I know tons and tons of more people the same way. That Daily Mail stereotype of people pushing out children to get more money actually exists!

[Kenny McBride]

To be fair, SSB, you were a bit of a Daily Mail stereotype yourself there for a while. Do you believe that's all down to your own inherent flaws or were you a product of your environment?

 

I should point out that I don't consider myself a socialist. Capitalism is what we've got and in many ways, it works. But the main parties do not serve the interests of the people. They serve bg business to the exclusion of almost everyone else. I want to see a public infrastructure owned and run by and for the ordinary people, and an economic strategy that enables and encourages full participation by the largest possible number. Unsurprisingly, you could probably call me a distributionist.

[David]

This is all I will say on this subject: absolute fucking bollocks. I withdrew from this thread because a load of right-wingers showed up to back each other up in their baseless slanging of socialism and to post "sarky replies or actual ridicule" you claim we'd been making, and didn't feel like making myself angry and aging another year. Seeing as I've withdrawn, and Kenny and Bobbins have proportionally posted much less than Happ, Yoghurt, SSB and centrists (I think) in Mikey, Jonathan Ford and Loki, the only left-wingers posting are David and The King Of Swing.

 

You can use language like "leftie back-slapping" as much as you like, but some of the right-wing stuff posted in here has been as obnoxious as you claim the socialists on here have.

I agree with that pretty much.

 

As most people could have guessed, we have a situation where the right-wingers see themselves agreeing occasionally with the centrists, which can be said of those who sit to the left as well, whilst the right & left wingers will never agree on anything. Ever.

 

That doesn't surprise me, and I'm quite happy to discuss and argue my point with those who oppose my view ad infinitum. That's what this thread is about. We discuss pertinent issues and debate the finer points that make up those issues.

[Loki]

On the subject of the coalition, I'm in the same boat as a lot of you. I voted Lib Dem, and now I have to live with the coalition, who are doing a lot of things I don't like as you might expect from a mainly Tory government.

 

But let's admit some truths here.

 

- Public spending under Labour had reached truly unsustainable proportions, and there were going to have to be cuts whatever party or parties got into power.

 

- In a coalition, neither Tories nor Lib Dems were going to be able to fulfil all of their manifesto promises, clearly, as they were going to have to compromise with each other to achieve anything. To accuse them of hypocrisy is a bit strong.

 

- Cameron and Clegg are probably ideologically closer to each other than they are to the far reaches of their own parties.

 

The things I DO feel betrayed about are the pathetic way in which the coalition have cosied back up to the banks. I always knew the Tories weren't going to stick the knife into their mates in the banking sector on their own, but I hoped that the Lib Dems would give them a reason to.

 

But more than anything, it's the lack of a vote on PR that has made me lose the faith. The Lib Dems came out of the coalition negotiations with fuck all, as far as I can tell.

[matbro1984]

Pfft. You're all wrong. When I have my Reich you'll see, you'll all see...

 

On a more serious note, this is the General politics discussion thread, not the General politics agreement thread. It is therefore an almost guaranteed outcome that the left-wing and right-wing are going to be butting heads whereas a couple of centrists will agree on the odd point from either side. What I was hoping to see was an occasional bulletproof argument for/against certain issues. Naturally, politics is not that simple, and no argument however logical it is to one person, has caveats in the eyes of others.

 

What would be nice though is if this could be kept to an actual discussion rather than descending into sarcasm and ridicule. This has been happening of both sides of the arguments and is the reason I too have been lurking rather than contributing. In my case, I'm happy to read someone's counterpoints and respond accordingly and concede the caveats with my POV even where that is a strongly held opinion. However I see little point in responding when I am not afforded the same courtesy i.e. said response is a slightly more eloquently worded "no I'm right, you're wrong lolz!!1!!1".

[Kenny McBride]

But let's admit some truths here.

 

Just saying they're "truths" doesn't make it so, Loki.

 

- Public spending under Labour had reached truly unsustainable proportions, and there were going to have to be cuts whatever party or parties got into power.

 

"Truly unsustainable"? With public sector debt lower than the G20 average and the term of most of that debt longer than the G20 average? I've said several times that I'm not against working towards a budget surplus, but you say that as if it's an absolutely unarguable fact. It's not. In fact, all the evidence says that we are (and consistently have been) in a better financial position than most of our peers.

 

- In a coalition, neither Tories nor Lib Dems were going to be able to fulfil all of their manifesto promises, clearly, as they were going to have to compromise with each other to achieve anything. To accuse them of hypocrisy is a bit strong.

 

Trading off one manifesto commitment for another is part of coalition building. I think most people understand that. It's quite different for the Liberal candidates to sign a personal pledge to vote against any rise in tuition fees, then backtrack as soon as they got into power.

 

- Cameron and Clegg are probably ideologically closer to each other than they are to the far reaches of their own parties.

 

True. But two wrongs don't make a right.

 

The things I DO feel betrayed about are the pathetic way in which the coalition have cosied back up to the banks. I always knew the Tories weren't going to stick the knife into their mates in the banking sector on their own, but I hoped that the Lib Dems would give them a reason to.

 

It's as if you believe that ANY of the three major parties have any interest in serving the interests of any constituency other than big business. It's quite cute, really.

 

But more than anything, it's the lack of a vote on PR that has made me lose the faith. The Lib Dems came out of the coalition negotiations with fuck all, as far as I can tell.

 

But there's going to be a referendum, isn't there? Or did I miss something in the last few days?

[Loki]

There's a referendum on AV. That's not the same thing at all. It's your club bragging about how it's going to sign Torres and then coming out with Kevin Phillips and claiming it's a coup.

 

I notice you actually only disagree with one of my "truths" there. 2 out of 3 ain't bad I'll be the first to admit that under Labour, the NHS is as good as I can ever remember it. But it cost an incredible amount of money to get there, and costs an incredible amount of money to sustain it, and practically every policitian or analyst will admit that it can probably be done cheaper and more efficiently. And that's true of every area of the public sector - too many layers of management, too much wasted money (just do some reading up on how much it cost to develop and roll out the NHS' new computer systems for example).

 

Even aside from that, consider this - everyone who works in the public sector is effectively not bringing in money into the economy. If you imagine Britain as a PLC, the public sector is your payroll, your running costs. The private sector is your business, you income generation. When times get tough, you look to bring in new business, and make your business run more efficiently.

 

The private sector has had its recession. I lost my job in Dec 2008 as private companies cut back. Now it's the turn of the public sector. Is it going to be nice? No. But it's necessary. I'm not saying I agree with how the Tories are going about it, indeed I think a lot of the choices ARE ideologically motivated. But to claim it's completely unneccessary is sticking your head in the sand.