1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

General Election - June 8th

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion and Ethics' started by Maharg, Apr 18, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bluebird71
    Offline

    Bluebird71 Well-Known Member

    Thanks for the "lesson", but I already knew the rules.

    So, are you telling me if it was, say, Boris Johnson posting leaflets with the MP after his name you would be displaying the same faux outrage? Untangle your knickers, love!

    Personally, I think it's a simple mistake to make and is perfectly forgivable. You make it sound like she's committed the crime of the century. You were quite happy to support one of your party's candidates after he told a teenage girl to **** off. Yet something as trivial as this has drawn your ire. You're starting to look desperate. Don't worry - Maggie's back and she's going to win easily! She's even extended her snatching to hot school meals.

    I'm providing links to left wing sites to balance up your right wing bias. Do different rules apply to me?
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Markham
    Online

    Markham Guest

    I would not have been supportive had he not personally apologised to the 17 year old, her parents and the school, which apologies had all been accepted. Wasn't the MP simply speaking to his audience as adults which treatment your party definitely endorses by seeking to give 16 year olds the vote? You can't have it both ways.

    And by the way, the MP didn't break the law or Parliamentary rules: Olney and her agent may well have done.
  3. Bluebird71
    Offline

    Bluebird71 Well-Known Member

    In other words, I have no problem with "comprehension", but the fact was I was not expecting a "joke" from someone who takes every single thing so literally.

    You have previously called me a Communist, and a Corbynista. Now you think I am objecting to the "rejection of centrism"? Make you mind up, if you are going to throw labels at me, at least be consistent! I've already given you my background, and I think you are capable of respecting why I have the beliefs that I have. As I say, we are all shaped by life experiences. I am left wing, the Corbyn manifesto is one that I approve of (let's not forget that the Tories have delayed wiping out the deficit for 7 more years), but I live in a seat where Labour will be a sorry third. Therefore, I am lending my vote to the Liberal Democrats who, I think, have a splendid opportunity to win here.

    Where, exactly, are you getting this £4,000+ a year tax burden from? Just to add, your point about the break-up of the UK - this is your view and not a fact, right? Talking of the Union, the Tory manifesto provoked some hilarity with a Welsh friend of mine. It says, and I quote "The Conservative Party has a proud record of promoting Welsh Culture".



    Welsh only became compulsory in Welsh schools in the early 90's.

    May is absolutely correct to make the Winter Fuel Allowance means tested. My sister worked at the DWP department that paid such claims and, let's just say, there were names getting the money that would be recognisable to anyone who knows about pop culture in the UK in the 60's, or who knows the name of ANY old-aged politician (it's not just John McDonnell) The Daily Mirror headline of 10m pensioners losing their allowance was false - I would have posted it if I were "trolling". My sister often tells the story of an ex-pat in Spain saying "I need the money to clean my pool". He was, I suspect, joking but it highlights the problem of that particular benefit. It was a benefit that should have been addressed long before talk of bedroom taxes and PIPs and all the rest of it. However, the silver vote is important, even more so when there are talks of hung parliaments. That May is using this election to make the pensioners cheaper to the Treasury is as big of an indication as any that she knows this election is in the bag. It will, however, be fascinating to see if the policies have any effect on the silver vote.

    I have a huge problem with the "we'll take it all, but leave you with £100k". The BBC (seemingly leaning to the right at the moment, but who can blame them?) claimed this would be unfair to people in the South East where the average home is £500k, compared to parts of Wales where homes average a lot less. They are missing the point. The issue is not that, the issue is dependent on how long a person needs care for. I am working hard, paying taxes, saving for rainy days, and buying my own home. It's what Thatcher wanted (and I say this in a nice way). Now, May wants to take my wealth (and when I say "my" I mean "my family's") to pay for something that I thought I was paying towards anyway.

    We all pay NI - that is to pay for things we may need. We may need a state pension. We may die before we get it. It pays for unemployment benefits. We may never use them (if lucky). It pays for disability allowances, again we may never need those. I am sure, or would hope, that these risks are worked out by actuaries in the same way that my car insurance will go up in price if I am involved in an accident, or if I change jobs, or do more miles. We may need social care - our National insurance should cover that too. If it can't be afforded then, frankly, there needs to be a cross-party review of the NI Pot, and it's likely commitments. I would have no problem with increased NI contributions if it meant that no-one is forced to take money from their kids' inheritance to pay for something that should already be paid for.

    If that is the case then, personally, I can accept it providing I have a choice if I am ever diagnosed with dementia. I don't mean to be controversial when I say that, should I get dementia, I would elect to be put to sleep in the most humane way. This would result in my kids remembering me the way they want to, it would result in them not being burdened with visiting a man they don't know and who doesn't know them, and it would result in me dying with dignity. Through my life I have tried my hardest not to place a burden on anyone. A decade of requiring round the clock care before I choke to death is not for me. Far better that I am euthanised, and that whatever my estate is gets passed onto my kids. That is far more practical, and less of a drain on everyone.

    I think we may be heading in that direction. I think it is a topic that now needs to be discussed. We will put loved pets out of their misery, and indeed we will be prosecuted if we don't. It would need strict regulation - perhaps a panel of doctors to review case by case, but I really think a high percentage of past/current/future dementia sufferers would take the same option.
    Last edited: May 20, 2017
  4. Bluebird71
    Offline

    Bluebird71 Well-Known Member

    I think the system may be more forgiving, to be honest.

    As for the MP talking to an audience as "adults". I don't think I've ever told anyone to **** off (although I have often been tempted). I agree, people use trivial things in order to score points (I'm guilty, you're guilty) - but surely the MP would have been clued up? I could laughingly tell a customer to **** off, and he could use the words (and not their meaning) as an excuse to take his custom elsewhere.

    And, for the umpteenth time, I don't have a party.
  5. walesrob
    Offline

    walesrob Administrator Staff Member

    That John Redwood clip....:lol: To be fair I can only sing Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau after 10 pints, even then it can only be compared to something resembling a distressed gorilla. Me and karaoke don't mix. :D
    • Funny Funny x 2
  6. Mattecube
    Offline

    Mattecube face the sunshine so shadows fall behind you Trusted Member

  7. DanPick
    Offline

    DanPick Banned

    He would like you to have one though. A target to aim at.
  8. Timmers
    Offline

    Timmers Well-Known Member Trusted Member

    Take a look at the link below Bluebird, your new avatar perhaps? :)

    http://www.itv.com/news/2017-05-20/liberal-democrats-launch-bizarre-farage-may-campaign-poster/
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. Dave_E
    Offline

    Dave_E Well-Known Member Trusted Member

    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. Markham
    Online

    Markham Guest

    Good, I like to be unpredictable at times, keeps us all on our toes! :D

    That is the estimated additional tax burden calculated by financial whizzkids who've taken into account that McDonnell's taxes on the rich won't raise the revenue they expect due to capital flight. Hollande too fell victim to this phenomena which is why there are reputed to be more French millionaires in London than in the whole of France.

    My view, yes. From the mixed messages coming from Labour, we can, I think, assume that Corbyn wouldn't be too fussed if Scotland left the Union, whereas the Tories and the Lib Dems are very much pro-Union.
    Yep, we agree!

    We agree again and two opinion polls to be published tomorrow show that May's "Dementia Tax" is rather unpopular with our fellow voters. YouGov for the Sunday Times puts Conservatives on 44% (down 5%), Labour on 35% (up 4%) and the Lib Dems are unchanged on 9%. Survation for the Mail on Sunday puts the Conservatives on 46% (down 2%), Labour on 34% (up 4%) and the Lib Dems unchanged on 8%. Both polls put Ukip on 3%.

    Maybe you will agree with me when I say that the National Health Service should be exactly that and should cease to provide vanity and other elective procedures free of charge and concentrate on saving lives, making people well again and provide a decent level of end of life care. I strongly believe that if you follow (potentially) dangerous pursuits, you should carry health insurance to cover the cost of "repair". And if boob jobs, gender adjustments, tatoo removals, IVF (after 2 rounds) and other elective procedures cease to be provided at tax-payer expense and the NHS recover the billions it is owed by EU and non-EU nationals, it would be in a much happier and healthier state.

    I would be strongly opposed to empowering doctors to kill people. That is what happened in Nazi controlled Europe and members of my mother's family suffered as a result - they were not Jews but, in Nazi eyes, just as evil: they were fighters of the Polish Underground.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 20, 2017
  11. Markham
    Online

    Markham Guest

    Oh stop being so coy, you are owned! Currently by Farron but who knows, maybe by Corbyn next year! :lol:
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. Markham
    Online

    Markham Guest

    Here are the full details of the Survation Poll for today's Mail on Sunday:

    [​IMG]
  13. Bluebird71
    Offline

    Bluebird71 Well-Known Member

    I've just had a glug of wine to celebrate our agreement on some things.

    But, sadly, I can't agree on the "vanity and elective procedures", well maybe I partly agree. Where I stand on this is that, for some people, a boob job or a sex change is something that is neither a vanity nor an elective procedure. I have heard of women with very large boobs, for example, asking for a reduction because they feel threatened. I have heard of women (in deed my cousin was one, but she paid for hers) having breast enlargements not through vanity, but as a result of years of taunting and the psychological trauma this caused her. Now, I know that this "trauma" pales in comparison with trauma suffered by soldiers, fire fighters etc - but that doesn't negate some people's need for "vanity" procedures because they are not simply vanity procedures.

    That said, a simple psychological test before hand would separate the people wanting a procedure purely for vanity from the ones who are having the operation for reasons of vanity.

    With regard to gender adjustments - again, I dispute that this is an elective procedure. I cannot comprehend the life a person must lead if they are the wrong sex. It is a complex condition, and I think it is a legitimate request. I can't pretend to understand the condition, but I feel it is a condition and I have no qualms if such operations continued on the NHS (providing each patient has undergone a psychology report as above).

    Tattoo removals - yes, agreed. If someone is silly enough to have a tattoo they later dislike (or more likely the name of a partner they have separated from) then they should also pay to have it removed. MORE WINE!!!

    IVF is a difficult one, again there must come a point where enough is enough. Maybe this should be taken on a case by case basis (for example, in a tragic case where one child has died). I need to think a bit more about this one, but I think I agree with you to some extent. MORE WINE!!!

    It's a bit late now, but I will try to find out how much some of these procedures cost the NHS. I suspect that it is not large sums of money and, referring to an earlier point I think you made, there are more likely to be better savings made with some, frankly, daft jobs paying daft money in the NHS.

    Hats off to the members of your mother's family, they were incredibly brave.

    In terms of euthanasia, though, I still think this is something worth pursuing. Whether we adopt a "donor card" type scheme, or whether we can sign our wishes should we end up with specific illnesses (being of sound body and mind) is something I would like to do.

    An example of how I see it working.

    Firstly, only I can make a decision about whether or not I would like to be put to sleep in the event of getting an illness. A doctor cannot make the decision for me. My wife cannot make the decision. My kids, grandkids, neighbours, MP, old Geography teacher etc cannot make the decision. The decision can be made by me, and me alone, at a time when I am of "fit body and mind". It would be similar to a will, where I can decide who gets my debts when I pass on.

    So, in my will I would have something like

    "In the event of me being diagnosed with dementia, Alzheimer's, locked-in syndrome, I would appreciate being put to sleep at a time when my quality of life is not of a suitable standard. This will be defined by my ability, or lack thereof to recognise close family members, to converse in a meaningful way with any person, to be able to read a book or write a meaningful statement".

    Following diagnosis, my condition would be continually reviewed by my GP. At a time where she feels that my quality of life is not of a suitable standard, she will refer my condition to a panel of doctors (neurologists maybe, maybe five of them) who will then review my case. Only when there is a unanimous decision (I'd prefer a majority) will the decision be made to end my life.

    It's all very morbid - I know, and I appreciate it has pitfalls. I think it should be discussed, openly, because even if 10% of dementia sufferers made this wish, it would have a fundamental effect on Social Care costs. More importantly, it puts power into potential sufferers hands so that - if they have no wish to suffer - they will not suffer.

    Undoubtedly, it is more complex than I have made it out to be, but I think it has the potential to work, and it has the potential to not be abused. The main concern is that some people may be coerced into signing such a document. If that potential exists then, I appreciate, euthanasia can not be considered for anyone.
  14. Bluebird71
    Offline

    Bluebird71 Well-Known Member

    Interesting.
    Dropping vow not to raise tax - SUPPORT
    Cut migration - Oppose
    Winter Fuel - Support
    Replace free school lunches - Oppose
    Pension rise - Oppose
    Quit EU with no deal - Oppose

    I don't think May is more sympathetic to "ordinary" people than Thatcher was. I think Thatcher was a better manager of the economy - but both will benefit the wealthier in society. May is right to ditch Thatcherism, Corbyn has the best policies for the working class.
  15. Timmers
    Offline

    Timmers Well-Known Member Trusted Member

    Do you think JC would actually deliver on the promises he has made in his manifesto if he was to be PM, for me I'm pretty confident he wouldn't?
  16. Bluebird71
    Offline

    Bluebird71 Well-Known Member

    I think he would, it's based on nothing other than the fact that I think he is as principled as May or Farron - if not more so. Say what you like about JC, he has stayed loyal to his beliefs.

    He has no chance on June 8th, and this election still remains about the size of the Tory majority which is currently predicted to be 132

    http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html

    Couple of things about this, I really think the Lib Dems will get a dozen seats and possibly more. I also think the Tories will benefit from the absence of UKIP in other seats. I think there'll be a majority of 150 and the Tories will hit 400.

    It will be interesting to see how the silver vote goes, not quite turkeys voting for Christmas.

    It will be interesting how red the Tories will be. I think it will be more blue than purple in 4 years time, when we will have the next election.
  17. Scotschap16
    Offline

    Scotschap16 Well-Known Member

    Damian Green currently being eviscerated by Andrew Marr on uncosted Tory manifesto. Forensic filleting!
  18. Markham
    Online

    Markham Guest

    Hey, careful now, we've our reputation to defend! :)

    I understand your points completely and you may have a point by suggesting that there should be a means of identifying a medical benefit by a psychiatric asdsessment, for example. I read the other day of a young woman who'd already had several breast enhancements (on the NHS) and was the proud possessor of a pair of 36Ms. She was now wanting/expecting the NHS to augment those to 36W; she should pay, in my opinion. I'm pretty old-fashioned in some of my beliefs including the one that Doctors should run hospitals and matrons run wards. All the bean-counters, statistics-gatherers and paper-pushers introduced into the NHS starting in the Thatcher years but increasingly so under Blair, should be "redeployed" and the "revolving door" whereby highly-paid managers who leave one Trust with a golden goodbye immediately go off and join another Trust on a higher remuneration package. They don't contribute to patient outcomes and yet the NHS pays them several hundreds of thousands of tax-payer money each year. Their pay often increases annually (under the terms of their contracts) whilst medical staff see their pay capped and hospitals starved of resources. It's disgusting.

    Thank you. Accounts of the exploits of the Polish Resistance were unfortunately "drowned-out" as the focus of attention has always been on their counterparts in France and Holland. My grandfather became the head of a large Resistance network in southern Poland and operated escape routes and performed acts of terrorism against German forces and their supply convoys. My mother, who was aged just 12 at the outbreak of war, was a courier on horseback. She was captured in 1943, fortunately not by the Waffen SS who had captured and sent to death camps other family members; her captors were airmen who sent her to a factory camp on the Rhur where she "helped" manufacture shells, many of which deliberately exploded in the gun breaches, and bombs that didn't explode at all! But I digress.

    I understand your point of view completely. If you are so minded, you can draw-up a Living Will to instruct your relatives to take you to a Dignitas clinic in the event that you fail to pass certain key tests. But I would most strongly oppose any changes in the law and, IIRC, doctors - the BMA - are also opposed.
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Markham
    Online

    Markham Guest

    I think that Corbyn would flip-flop on important issues. On Friday, his would-be Foreign Secretary, Lady Nugee aka Emily Thornberry, said that Labour would not honour its manifesto commitments regarding Trident. She was contradicted by Labour's shadow Defence Secretary, Nia Griffith, who told the press that she, and not Emily Thornberry, was the shadow Defence Secretary and Labour was commited to Trident.

    We can be sure that Corbyn supports terrorists, has contempt for our armed forces (and supported the investigation and prosecution of soldiers by Leigh Day and Comrade Phil Shiner) and he would do little (beyond "window-dressing") to stop the anti-semitism in his party and among his supporters.

    Yes, he is true to (some of) his principles. But what evil, nasty principles they are.

    Tom Harris is both a journalist and former Scottish Labour MP for Glasgow between 2001 and 2015. He wrote "Now we socialists have a real leader offering Left-wing policies... Theresa May" in yesterday's Daily Mail. I commend you read it.
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Bluebird71
    Offline

    Bluebird71 Well-Known Member

    The problem with the NHS is it started to follow other civil service models. It's debatable that giving control of wards to matrons would have resulted in lower cases of superbugs like MRSA. I suspect that such rates would have been better managed had we retained an old system that was perfectly functional. I am aware, through first hand experience, of people taking a nice big redundancy in one civil service department, and moving to another civil service department a short time later. I suspected that a similar thing happened between NHS Trusts, and you seem to have evidence that it does.

    The problem with pay-capping is that those who were told their pay would be capped were told it was to manage the deficit. As a result, their wages in real terms have taken a huge hit. That's why, for me, austerity should be challenged. There must be a fairer way. We're hardly talking of big wage earners here.

    As for the lady who seems to be going through the alphabet at a rate of knots. I believe she actually wants boobs of size 36 WMD. WMD standing for, Weapons of Mass Destraction. I suspect that she will be requiring the services of a chiropractor at some stage. Obviously, she is taking the pee. I think the problem we have here is that the NHS is not, strictly, allowed to refuse a patient a particular operation, whilst allowing another. Unless on medical grounds. This means that a culture of no common-sense has started to prevail. Like I say, there are often good reasons for certain operations to be made. Whether there is disfigurement, or a pyschological impact - then I am happy for the NHS to provide a solution. In the example you provided, someone has decided to take advantage of the system. Hopefully such cases are rare but they serve to illustrate that - for all the good will the NHS displays, people will happily abuse it if allowed to.

    Some people (not me) say that the NHS should charge cigarette smokers for lung disease treatments, or alcoholics for whatever treatments they require. I am opposed to this, the way to cut down on smoking is to educate kids from an early age, not punish them because they elected to smoke. My grandfather (still with us at 88) had half a lung removed in 1992. He had some more of his lung removed 10 years later. It's not been determined if it was from smoking (he started smoking because he was paid in cigarettes during National Service in Egypt), or from asbestos. I suspect it is through smoking (asbestos linked cancer has a very poor prognosis). He received a payment because he was exposed to asbestos for many years, which he happily took. I wonder (and I don't know the answer) whether the NHS were also compensated. I doubt it.

    NHS spending increased under Blair, but it's alarming that successive Governments since the mid 90's view the problem in purely monetary terms.

    I admit, I was unaware of a Polish Resistance until quite recently. A Polish friend of mine posted me links to some articles a while back and it was an eye opener. An old work colleague had a Czech grandmother who had similar experiences. I believe they "accidentally" blew up a bridge one day
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page