Off Topic Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
One of yer Norvern Saints said:
Good on you for getting away from the Trump theme. Interesting to read after our friend Osvaldoramo raised the hoary old critique of the left by citing 'politics of envy.' Piers Morgan tried to throw this one at Wes Streeting last Thursday because Labour has had the temertity to suggest that people buying a service - private education - should pay VAT on this.

My politics, and I know that of thousands of long time Labour voters, isn't driven by 'politics of envy' but politics of justice. Despite Thatcher's claim, we do operate within a society and societies are complex organisations that need to be maintained. You can be a rich industrialist, but if: your workers can't get health care; the young aren't well educated; our transport infrastructure is not fit for purpose then you'll struggle and the economy suffers affecting all. Disproportianely it affects the most vulnerable, of course. The scandal of homes in Blackpool raised by San Tejon is a direct consequence of the insanity of 'contracting out' services that should be run by Government at both national and local level. Instead, there is profiteering on the backs of the most vulnerable.
Click to expand...

I think it’s an example of corruption and everything wrong with how things are currently done. I wouldn’t say that conclusively proves nationalisation is the correct answer.

As with everything, there are pros & cons with all options and the truth is somewhere in the middle. At this point nationalising things seems to be an answer due to the insane corruption rampant in almost all areas.

Unfortunately nationalisation leads to its own set of problems (waste, inefficiency, bureaucracy, etc.). But at this point even I can understand why people are crying out for it. Things are so obviously broken right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: One of yer Norvern Saints
One of yer Norvern Saints said:
Good on you for getting away from the Trump theme. Interesting to read after our friend Osvaldoramo raised the hoary old critique of the left by citing 'politics of envy.' Piers Morgan tried to throw this one at Wes Streeting last Thursday because Labour has had the temerity to suggest that people buying a service - private education - should pay VAT on this.

My politics, and I know that of thousands of long time Labour voters, isn't driven by 'politics of envy' but politics of justice. Despite Thatcher's claim, we do operate within a society and societies are complex organisations that need to be maintained. You can be a rich industrialist, but if: your workers can't get health care; the young aren't well educated; our transport infrastructure is not fit for purpose then you'll struggle and the economy suffers affecting all. Disproportionately it affects the most vulnerable, of course. The scandal of homes in Blackpool raised by San Tejon is a direct consequence of the insanity of 'contracting out' services that should be run by Government at both national and local level. Instead, there is profiteering on the backs of the most vulnerable.
Click to expand...
Contracting out = privatisation = injustice. Tax on profits in the country they're made. HMRC funding to collar the dodgers pays for itself in spades.

Could this be one of main reason for the strong brexit campaign? "Tax avoidance: multinationals to pay taxes where profits are made" https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topi...nationals-to-pay-taxes-where-profits-are-made
 
  • Like
Reactions: San Tejón
Puck said:
I agree Trump is by no means innocent on the legal front. I didn't like all the "Lock her up" stuff back in 2016. The point is that what's happening now threatens to make this an established part of political life in the US. People wonder why our politicians are so awful. Well I'd say this sort of thing is likely why. It's an appalling life to live and in my opinion you'd have to have something wrong with you to want to be part of it.



Are they being complacent? You tell me. What is the specific threat he poses? How would or could he aim to "destroy democracy"? How would he achieve these anti-democratic aims he supposedly has? Because, to look at the one specific thing you've mentioned, he'd need to amend the constitution to allow him to serve more than two terms as president and the chances of him being able to amend the constitution are basically zero.
Click to expand...
See Schad’s answer
 
What happened to simple dignity?

I fought a good fight but I was beaten fair and square. I hope Biden has a successful tenure as President as I care about this country. Please, accept the result and get on with your lives.

But Trump has less dignity than a pre-schooler who wants another kid’s toy…
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChilcoSaint and Archers Road
StJabbo1 said:
Contracting out = privatisation = injustice. Tax on profits in the country they're made. HMRC funding to collar the dodgers pays for itself in spades.

Could this be one of main reason for the strong brexit campaign? "Tax avoidance: multinationals to pay taxes where profits are made" https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topi...nationals-to-pay-taxes-where-profits-are-made
Click to expand...
I totally support that, and have done for quite a few years.
I think it’s only right that a company operating, for example, in the UK that is supplying goods or services to people living in the UK absolutely should pay their taxes in the UK.
 
This should be the subject of a judicial inquiry. A report by the Institute for Government into public appointments in August 2022 found there was a “perception of excessive politicisation” during Johnson’s prime ministership.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...sing-state-by-granting-public-roles-to-allies

"Tory donor Richard Sharp was appointed chair of the BBC in early 2021, but resigned in April last year after breaking rules over dealings with Johnson before his appointment to the role. He had failed to disclose the role he played in helping Johnson secure an £800,000 loan."

"Johnson also faced controversy over an attempt by the former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre to become the chair of the media regulator Ofcom. Dacre was widely reported to be Johnson’s favoured candidate, but his application was rejected by the interview panel and he later pulled out of the running when ministers decided to rerun the hiring process."
 
Robert Largan, a Tory MP, is trying to deceive people into thinking that he is standing for Labour.
I read, this morning, that links actually take people to his Tory website.
Derbyshire Police have opened an incident report to investigate.

You must log in or register to see images
 
  • Like
Reactions: shoot_spiderman and ......loading......
San Tejón said:
Robert Largan, a Tory MP, is trying to deceive people into thinking that he is standing for Labour.
I read, this morning, that links actually take people to his Tory website.
Derbyshire Police have opened an incident report to investigate.

You must log in or register to see images
Click to expand...
This is amazing
 
Osvaldorama said:
Schads answers as usual are just regurgitating left wing propaganda
Click to expand...

Schad's answer is taken from having watched the January 6 hearings, in addition to the indictments in DC, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Arizona, and the memos the conspirators wrote, because they took notes on a criminal conspiracy.

The plan -- as confirmed by Trump's lawyers, Jenna Ellis and Ken Chesebro, among others -- was to recruit slates of fake electoral college electors from several states, present those to Mike Pence on January 6th, and Pence would either accept the fake electors outright or bounce the question back to Republican-controlled legislatures in some of those states, with the expectation being that state Republicans would overturn the election on their behalf.

Pence refused to do this, because it was madness, which is why the January 6 rally involved people erecting a gallows and chanting "hang Mike Pence": Trump and friends were attempting to intimidate him into cooperating. When that failed, Trump directed his supporters to march on the Capitol: the plan, such that it was, appears to have been to force Pence to flee, at which point Chuck Grassley (as Senate president pro tem) would assume his duties, as they believed Grassley would be more amenable. Pence refused to evacuate, and the reaction from most Republicans in Congress to the riot was strong condemnation, so the plot fizzled.

Again: a really, really stupid plan, but the fact that Trump is too stupid to overturn democracy despite his concerted efforts is not a mark in his favour.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saints_Alive, shoot_spiderman, thereisonlyoneno7 and 2 others
shoot_spiderman said:
See Schad’s answer
Click to expand...
  1. See my answer. There was essentially no threat of Trump illegitimately overturning the 2020 election result.
  2. I was asking about the present and the future, not the past. If Trump is elected this year how does he "threaten democracy"? The answer is that he doesn't.
 
Puck said:
  1. See my answer. There was essentially no threat of Trump illegitimately overturning the 2020 election result.
  2. I was asking about the present and the future, not the past. If Trump is elected this year how does he "threaten democracy"? The answer is that he doesn't.
Click to expand...

They spent months attempting to overturn the 2020 election result. They had a detailed plan with dozens of conspirators, culminating in the storming of the Capitol. A bunch of right wing militias also brought large stockpiles of weapons, and a number of them had plans and equipment (zip-tie handcuffs, etc) to kidnap lawmakers.

What prevented Trump's plan from succeeding is that there were enough people along the way to say no. The military said no: the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs took the rather extraordinary step in the leadup to the election of reminding personnel that they had a legal duty to ignore unlawful orders, even from the president. A bunch of Republican elected officials at the state level said no, which caused their fake elector scheme to come apart. And Mike Pence, crucially, said no. Beyond his refusal to go along with Trump's scheme, he was the one to call in the National Guard after Trump refused to do so, which ensured that they could hold the vote.

What would differ in 2025 is that they are already laying the groundwork to ensure that there won't be anyone to say no the next time. Project 2025 is the playbook, and the central element is rooting out anyone within the executive branch and military who might resist Trump's orders. They are being incredibly up-front about their aims: consolidate power in the hands of the president and remove any resistance to his rule:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025

He failed the first time because he was unprepared. He won't be unprepared again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saints_Alive, ChilcoSaint and shoot_spiderman
Rumours going around that Farage will now be standing for MP, with Clacton being the likely constituency.
Reform seems to think that is the best place for him to have a chance.
Announcement at 4pm apparently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back