|
|
Post by Toreador on Jan 7, 2023 9:11:21 GMT
I recently met someone I'd not seen for over 30 years. When I last saw him he was a young boy. Now he is a "woman" ... with a deeper voice than most men. His facial expressions and mannerisms were that of a dominant male. He was with his mother ... who seemed quite content with her "freaky" offspring. When I last saw him he was a timid boy being repeatedly bullied by his older brother ... with the apparent approval of his parents. I don't see what the big deal is. If someone thinks they want to change from a male into a female - or vice versa - why should it concern anyone else but them? Why should you or I be bothered about it? How are they harming us? I am instinctively against judgementalism in regards what anyone else chooses to do with their life as long as they are hurting no one. Live and let live. Perhaps if they happened to be married with kids. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jan 7, 2023 9:16:38 GMT
Would that be half gullible? i.e. doable in the public sector but not in the private sector LOL All this not doable in the private sector MIGHT be right, but at the moment it is pure speculation. I call living in the land of 'Lady Bountiful' and 'Pollyanna' being extreme with a REAL likelihood of unintended consequences, not that all of Corbyn's dream world was wrong, that's the difference between the less moderate and myself, I am able to look at the full picture. You are hardly the epitome of moderation. And I in fact know that good things were done in the Blair/ Brown years too. We have no argument about that which is why it is not being discussed. But if it is so important to you that you want examples, there is the introduction of the minimum wage and the working time directive, an extra weeks guaranteed paid holiday, the Good Friday agreement, the minimum income guarantee for pensioners, working tax credits, devolution for Scotland and Wales, removal of most of the hereditaries from the Lords, and so on. Not all those policies were perfect. For example, the minimum wage was unambitiously low, and increased by only very modest amounts so it stayed low. Incredibly the Tories did much more to raise it's value than Labour did. But all such policies were a major step in the right direction. None of which excuses the continuation of Tory housing policies, tuition fees, detention without charge, the Iraq War, more thatcherite deregulation with ultimately disastrous results, sucking up to the rich and powerful, legislating the ATOS disability testing regime into place, and so on. The good does not justify the bad and there is too much of the bad for me to have supported it. I also think that CEO pay caps in the public sector were potentially problematical too, but it is what the Tories were primarily talking about. Far easier just to increase higher rate taxes and redistribute that way. But none of this CEO pay capping malarkey actually happened did it? Which proves my point that if that really was the genuine reason for you voting Tory, they must have seen you coming. Lol 1. NL housing policy was very different to the Tory housing policy, the emphasis for NL was on Affordable Housing thus producing many more homes for the lower paid than the Tories. 2. Tuition fees was a case of facing up to the costs of running University education. NL never claimed it would not put up such fees. 3. Detention without charge was a failed attempt to take the more active terrorists off the streets of Northern Ireland. __"Northern Ireland's then Prime Minister Brian Faulkner was under pressure to take a tougher stance on paramilitaries, particularly the IRA in Belfast and Londonderry. The military-backed Operation Demetrius, as it was officially known, led to 342 people being detained across Northern Ireland on 9 August. Just over 100 were released within 48 hours."__ 4. You have got it wrong on NL and the Invasion of Iraq. You have chosen to accept gossip, insinuation and opinion over the facts that have been put to you. 5. Please post the disastrous results of further deregulation by NL. 6. "Sucking up to the rich and powerful" in what way? 7. Were those on disability worse off after ATOS? 8. I never mentioned anything about capping CEOs income. And may never got the opportunity to impose her ideas on creating a ratio of income fairness within business. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2023 9:22:03 GMT
I don't see what the big deal is. If someone thinks they want to change from a male into a female - or vice versa - why should it concern anyone else but them? Why should you or I be bothered about it? How are they harming us? I am instinctively against judgementalism in regards what anyone else chooses to do with their life as long as they are hurting no one. Live and let live. Perhaps if they happened to be married with kids. If they don't think they are the right gender biologically then they are being highly irresponsible having kids. If they wish to change gender under such circumstances, morally they should wait until the kids have grown up. They made their bed by having them. They should lie in it. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jan 7, 2023 9:23:56 GMT
Perhaps if they happened to be married with kids. If they don't think they are the right gender biologically then they are being highly irresponsible having kids. If they wish to change gender under such circumstances, morally they should wait until the kids have grown up. They made their bed by having them. They should lie in it. Stop wriggling. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2023 9:43:38 GMT
You are hardly the epitome of moderation. And I in fact know that good things were done in the Blair/ Brown years too. We have no argument about that which is why it is not being discussed. But if it is so important to you that you want examples, there is the introduction of the minimum wage and the working time directive, an extra weeks guaranteed paid holiday, the Good Friday agreement, the minimum income guarantee for pensioners, working tax credits, devolution for Scotland and Wales, removal of most of the hereditaries from the Lords, and so on. Not all those policies were perfect. For example, the minimum wage was unambitiously low, and increased by only very modest amounts so it stayed low. Incredibly the Tories did much more to raise it's value than Labour did. But all such policies were a major step in the right direction. None of which excuses the continuation of Tory housing policies, tuition fees, detention without charge, the Iraq War, more thatcherite deregulation with ultimately disastrous results, sucking up to the rich and powerful, legislating the ATOS disability testing regime into place, and so on. The good does not justify the bad and there is too much of the bad for me to have supported it. I also think that CEO pay caps in the public sector were potentially problematical too, but it is what the Tories were primarily talking about. Far easier just to increase higher rate taxes and redistribute that way. But none of this CEO pay capping malarkey actually happened did it? Which proves my point that if that really was the genuine reason for you voting Tory, they must have seen you coming. Lol 1. NL housing policy was very different to the Tory housing policy, the emphasis for NL was on Affordable Housing thus producing many more homes for the lower paid than the Tories. 2. Tuition fees was a case of facing up to the costs of running University education. NL never claimed it would not put up such fees. 3. Detention without charge was a failed attempt to take the more active terrorists off the streets of Northern Ireland. __"Northern Ireland's then Prime Minister Brian Faulkner was under pressure to take a tougher stance on paramilitaries, particularly the IRA in Belfast and Londonderry. The military-backed Operation Demetrius, as it was officially known, led to 342 people being detained across Northern Ireland on 9 August. Just over 100 were released within 48 hours."__ 4. You have got it wrong on NL and the Invasion of Iraq. You have chosen to accept gossip, insinuation and opinion over the facts that have been put to you. 5. Please post the disastrous results of further deregulation by NL. 6. "Sucking up to the rich and powerful" in what way? 7. Were those on disability worse off after ATOS? 8. I never mentioned anything about capping CEOs income. And may never got the opportunity to impose her ideas on creating a ratio of income fairness within business. NL housing policies were all about helping more people to buy like later Tory housing policies whilst doing little to increase supply and very little to build affordable homes to rent. And after 13 years in office, private landlords could still charge as much as they could get away with and evict tenants without just cause. A graduate tax would have been fairer than fees, but to be totally fair should have been applied to all those who'd enjoyed free tuition too - like Blair himself. Re detention without charge you are talking about something that had nothing to do with New Labour but the Heath government's policy of internment. I am talking about the NL legislation allowing suspects to be detained for 28 days without charge. Blair tried to make it 90 days but failed! Twice now I have presented facts re the Iraq War and it's illegality. Both times you have ignored it whilst insisting I am spouting a mere opinion. I am not going to present it to you a third time if you are going to ignore it and do the "la,la,la, I can't hear you", fingers in your ears routine. The banking collapse in this country in 2008 and the crash that resulted was made far worse by Brown's banking deregulation. And wasn't it obvious that NL was courting wealthy donors? Peter Mandelson was forever hobnobbing with them. And sucking up to Rupert Murdoch and his ilk is something New Labour was notorious for. The ATOS testing regime for the disabled which Labour legislated into existence and the Tories inherited and ran enthusiastically with was wilfully cruel, frequently resulting in obviously ill people, some of them at deaths door, others with terminal illnesses, being declared fit for work. Whilst the stress of the whole testing regime applied to the anxious and depressed drove some to suicide whilst actively worsening the condition of many others. Disgusting that Labour could be responsible for such a thing. If you cannot see that forcing CEOs to limit their pay to a ratio of what their workers are paid, must involve some de facto limits, ie capping, you are either being wilfully dishonest or a fool. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2023 9:50:48 GMT
If they don't think they are the right gender biologically then they are being highly irresponsible having kids. If they wish to change gender under such circumstances, morally they should wait until the kids have grown up. They made their bed by having them. They should lie in it. Stop wriggling. I am stating a reasonable opinion about the morality of a theoretical situation where kids are involved. As is my right to free expression, In most cases the gender someone chooses to be is nobody else's business and I fail to see why it should matter to you when it makes no frigging difference to your life. I know two trans people, one transitioning from male to female and the other doing the opposite. The former is a work colleague and the latter the partner of a relative. In neither case does it make the slightest bit of difference to me or you. And neither of them have kids. Most such people don't, at least not until they are in a situation where they are happy with their gender. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2023 10:27:52 GMT
I am stating a reasonable opinion about the morality of a theoretical situation where kids are involved. As is my right to free expression, In most cases the gender someone chooses to be is nobody else's business and I fail to see why it should matter to you when it makes no frigging difference to your life. I know two trans people, one transitioning from male to female and the other doing the opposite. The former is a work colleague and the latter the partner of a relative. In neither case does it make the slightest bit of difference to me or you. And neither of them have kids. Most such people don't, at least not until they are in a situation where they are happy with their gender. Which is one reason I use the name blackiswhite, which is partly the lies these men and women want you to take part in. That is the danger, the abandonment of the truth and even axioms. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 7, 2023 11:53:02 GMT
Bair only got in in 1997 because everyone was sick of the tories , not because people saw new labour moderate. I could have won in 1997 if i was opposite the tories heading the monster raving loony party .
New labours record in government was extreme , including causing the financial crises and blowing up the uk economy....not to mention the bonfire of civil liberties ................
I'm not interested in you OPINIONs or your misconstrued LIES. Thats what a debating forum is...the swapping of opinions and facts in the discussion of politics.
What you mean is as a new labour cult member , you dont want to hear any contrary opinions , and merely want the voting public to be a nodding sheep in your cult jerk circle.
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jan 7, 2023 12:53:46 GMT
1. NL housing policy was very different to the Tory housing policy, the emphasis for NL was on Affordable Housing thus producing many more homes for the lower paid than the Tories. 2. Tuition fees was a case of facing up to the costs of running University education. NL never claimed it would not put up such fees. 3. Detention without charge was a failed attempt to take the more active terrorists off the streets of Northern Ireland. __"Northern Ireland's then Prime Minister Brian Faulkner was under pressure to take a tougher stance on paramilitaries, particularly the IRA in Belfast and Londonderry. The military-backed Operation Demetrius, as it was officially known, led to 342 people being detained across Northern Ireland on 9 August. Just over 100 were released within 48 hours."__ 4. You have got it wrong on NL and the Invasion of Iraq. You have chosen to accept gossip, insinuation and opinion over the facts that have been put to you. 5. Please post the disastrous results of further deregulation by NL. 6. "Sucking up to the rich and powerful" in what way? 7. Were those on disability worse off after ATOS? 8. I never mentioned anything about capping CEOs income. And may never got the opportunity to impose her ideas on creating a ratio of income fairness within business. NL housing policies were all about helping more people to buy like later Tory housing policies whilst doing little to increase supply and very little to build affordable homes to rent. And after 13 years in office, private landlords could still charge as much as they could get away with and evict tenants without just cause. A graduate tax would have been fairer than fees, but to be totally fair should have been applied to all those who'd enjoyed free tuition too - like Blair himself. Re detention without charge you are talking about something that had nothing to do with New Labour but the Heath government's policy of internment. I am talking about the NL legislation allowing suspects to be detained for 28 days without charge. Blair tried to make it 90 days but failed! Twice now I have presented facts re the Iraq War and it's illegality. Both times you have ignored it whilst insisting I am spouting a mere opinion. I am not going to present it to you a third time if you are going to ignore it and do the "la,la,la, I can't hear you", fingers in your ears routine. The banking collapse in this country in 2008 and the crash that resulted was made far worse by Brown's banking deregulation. And wasn't it obvious that NL was courting wealthy donors? Peter Mandelson was forever hobnobbing with them. And sucking up to Rupert Murdoch and his ilk is something New Labour was notorious for. The ATOS testing regime for the disabled which Labour legislated into existence and the Tories inherited and ran enthusiastically with was wilfully cruel, frequently resulting in obviously ill people, some of them at deaths door, others with terminal illnesses, being declared fit for work. Whilst the stress of the whole testing regime applied to the anxious and depressed drove some to suicide whilst actively worsening the condition of many others. Disgusting that Labour could be responsible for such a thing. If you cannot see that forcing CEOs to limit their pay to a ratio of what their workers are paid, must involve some de facto limits, ie capping, you are either being wilfully dishonest or a fool. 1. Remembering that NL had to rebuild the economy, the NHS, education funding and so on from 1997 and were hit by the international financial meltdown starting in 2007. They didn't let the low paid down in terms of housing. 2. Possibly, but both would have been frowned upon by the anti-NL brigade. 3. I see a benefit for holding suspects, if there is good reason to do so, for a longer period. A period that was not a sentence and could be ended at any time if evidence of innocence was shown. 4. You cannot provide evidence of the Iraq war being illegal, because it wasn't. And I have given you overwhelming evidence that it wasn't. Including the evidence that in 2003 a state of war with Iraq still existed. 5. It might have been made marginally worse by Brown answering the years of calls for less red tape and for more freedom for the banks. Which enitionaly seemed to work well, with the likes of Germany trying to buy the UK stock exchange. But that doesn't take away any responsibility from the Banks. I'm glad to see you have moved on from blaming Brown and NL for causing the meltdown. 6. Stick with what was NL aims for introducing ATOS. IIRC there was an area of claims being made by people who were clearly able to work. I remember a time when I damaged my back and had to wear a corset for a couple of months. I took a few weeks off work without pay and then returned to work even though still in pain and unable to walk without pain. I didn't even think about asking for state help. I suspect if more people were like myself there would have been no call for ATOS. 7. NO, no capping, just a raised level of fairness in the distribution of profits. Wages from top to bottom would be determined by the profitability of the company. The comment grew out of the claim that when there was a surge in profits CEOs were taking most of it for themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jan 7, 2023 12:56:45 GMT
I'm not interested in you OPINIONs or your misconstrued LIES. Thats what a debating forum is...the swapping of opinions and facts in the discussion of politics.
What you mean is as a new labour cult member , you dont want to hear any contrary opinions , and merely want the voting public to be a nodding sheep in your cult jerk circle.
Contrary opinions are not a problem unless someone repeatedly tries to push them down your throat. I object to contrived lies, based upon opinions, that don't belong in a debate. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 7, 2023 12:59:30 GMT
NL housing policies were all about helping more people to buy like later Tory housing policies whilst doing little to increase supply and very little to build affordable homes to rent. And after 13 years in office, private landlords could still charge as much as they could get away with and evict tenants without just cause. A graduate tax would have been fairer than fees, but to be totally fair should have been applied to all those who'd enjoyed free tuition too - like Blair himself. Re detention without charge you are talking about something that had nothing to do with New Labour but the Heath government's policy of internment. I am talking about the NL legislation allowing suspects to be detained for 28 days without charge. Blair tried to make it 90 days but failed! Twice now I have presented facts re the Iraq War and it's illegality. Both times you have ignored it whilst insisting I am spouting a mere opinion. I am not going to present it to you a third time if you are going to ignore it and do the "la,la,la, I can't hear you", fingers in your ears routine. The banking collapse in this country in 2008 and the crash that resulted was made far worse by Brown's banking deregulation. And wasn't it obvious that NL was courting wealthy donors? Peter Mandelson was forever hobnobbing with them. And sucking up to Rupert Murdoch and his ilk is something New Labour was notorious for. The ATOS testing regime for the disabled which Labour legislated into existence and the Tories inherited and ran enthusiastically with was wilfully cruel, frequently resulting in obviously ill people, some of them at deaths door, others with terminal illnesses, being declared fit for work. Whilst the stress of the whole testing regime applied to the anxious and depressed drove some to suicide whilst actively worsening the condition of many others. Disgusting that Labour could be responsible for such a thing. If you cannot see that forcing CEOs to limit their pay to a ratio of what their workers are paid, must involve some de facto limits, ie capping, you are either being wilfully dishonest or a fool. 1. Remembering that NL had to rebuild the economy, the NHS, education funding and so on from 1997 and were hit by the international financial meltdown starting in 2007. They didn't let the low paid down in terms of housing. and in the real world.....
www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/apr/25/election2005.economy
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 7, 2023 13:00:17 GMT
Thats what a debating forum is...the swapping of opinions and facts in the discussion of politics.
What you mean is as a new labour cult member , you dont want to hear any contrary opinions , and merely want the voting public to be a nodding sheep in your cult jerk circle.
I object to contrived lies, based upon opinions, that don't belong in a debate. using the quote tags please quote where i have lied to you.?
over to you?
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 7, 2023 13:02:12 GMT
Thats what a debating forum is...the swapping of opinions and facts in the discussion of politics.
What you mean is as a new labour cult member , you dont want to hear any contrary opinions , and merely want the voting public to be a nodding sheep in your cult jerk circle.
Contrary opinions are not a problem unless someone repeatedly tries to push them down your throat. I object to contrived lies, based upon opinions, that don't belong in a debate.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 7, 2023 13:06:49 GMT
NL housing policies were all about helping more people to buy like later Tory housing policies whilst doing little to increase supply and very little to build affordable homes to rent. And after 13 years in office, private landlords could still charge as much as they could get away with and evict tenants without just cause. A graduate tax would have been fairer than fees, but to be totally fair should have been applied to all those who'd enjoyed free tuition too - like Blair himself. Re detention without charge you are talking about something that had nothing to do with New Labour but the Heath government's policy of internment. I am talking about the NL legislation allowing suspects to be detained for 28 days without charge. Blair tried to make it 90 days but failed! Twice now I have presented facts re the Iraq War and it's illegality. Both times you have ignored it whilst insisting I am spouting a mere opinion. I am not going to present it to you a third time if you are going to ignore it and do the "la,la,la, I can't hear you", fingers in your ears routine. The banking collapse in this country in 2008 and the crash that resulted was made far worse by Brown's banking deregulation. And wasn't it obvious that NL was courting wealthy donors? Peter Mandelson was forever hobnobbing with them. And sucking up to Rupert Murdoch and his ilk is something New Labour was notorious for. The ATOS testing regime for the disabled which Labour legislated into existence and the Tories inherited and ran enthusiastically with was wilfully cruel, frequently resulting in obviously ill people, some of them at deaths door, others with terminal illnesses, being declared fit for work. Whilst the stress of the whole testing regime applied to the anxious and depressed drove some to suicide whilst actively worsening the condition of many others. Disgusting that Labour could be responsible for such a thing. If you cannot see that forcing CEOs to limit their pay to a ratio of what their workers are paid, must involve some de facto limits, ie capping, you are either being wilfully dishonest or a fool. 1. Remembering that NL had to rebuild the economy, the NHS, education funding and so on from 1997 and were hit by the international financial meltdown starting in 2007. They didn't let the low paid down in terms of housing.
Another good read on the new labour myth of the prudence of brown
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jan 7, 2023 14:04:32 GMT
Contrary opinions are not a problem unless someone repeatedly tries to push them down your throat. I object to contrived lies, based upon opinions, that don't belong in a debate.
The Spectator? Bluer than Blue, owned and or edited by Tory MPs including Boris Johnson and other well know Tories. Do you really expect to gat an unbiased comment from it? I have already given you one of my main criticisms of PFI criticism, which is that it is the norm to quote the full cost of PFIs as a criticism. This has two faults. 1. It ignores the fact that in 1997 the NHS was in dire straights requiring new hospitals along with more doctors and nurses. Recovery was always going to be expensive. In order to get a truer cost of PFIs the cost of any other method of recovery would need to be subtracted from the costs of the PFI project. DO YOU AGREE yes or no? 2. The economy was doing very well up to around 2005 with no absolute proof that it would not continue to do well. The international financial meltdown in 2008 threw everything prior to it into financial turmoil. DO YOU AGREE yes or no? |
|
