|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 10, 2022 17:29:07 GMT
Or a party recognising their ambitions are out of line with what the public want and adjusting. Its strange how the "typical Blairite centrist types" you describe are the ones that bought Labour out of the wilderness and back into power. Have you ever considered that you might be the odd ones out here? Did you ever see the polling figures for many of Labour's 2017 policies? Massive majorities in favour of most of them. Whatever else cost Labor the election it wasn't those. But I know that's an inconvenient fact for most centrists and their supporters. As for Blair and the centrists leading Labour out of the wilderness, the Tories were such an utterly spent and unpopular force by 1997 that almost any Labour leader would have won. It's a pity victory was wasted on another thatcherite establishmentarian. Its not an inconvenient fact. (Incidentally you might consider winding your neck in and talking decently to me.) I liked Labours policies, what lost them the vote was that people didn't trust Corbyn not to take things miles further down the socialist road if he won. Corbyn is old Labour (As I'm sure you are too) but many of us remember what a mess the country was in under old Labour and how the social policies and too powerful unions brought us to being the sick man of Europe. As for Blair only winning because the Tories were spent, perhaps you can explain how new Labour went on to win another two times? Could it be people liked a boring centrist government, a stable economy somewhere in the middle between 'devil take the hindmost' conservatism and unsustainable ideals of socialism. |
|
|
|
Post by totheleft3 on Nov 10, 2022 17:33:38 GMT
Im not sure such jobs has crop picking are low paid by pice work and many immigrants earn a good wage because they are able to pick more crops than the British. I What do you mean by the British and would that include the unemployed of the Bangladeshi, Pakistani and middle eastern groups within which the unemployment levels are much higher than the British in general. Yea of course i do i dont seperate British by ethnicty or race like you do |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 10, 2022 17:41:10 GMT
There clearly isn't. There is a shortage in just about every unpleasant field of employment, from carers to dentists, regardless of pay offered. I think you are wrong. People did not work down coal mines through some sense of worth or ethic, they worked down them firstly because they had to and later because the work was protected and well paid. But the world has changed and its causing major issues. Todays young do not want to keep up with the Jones's, they don't want a bigger car or a 56" TV, they want more spare time and to enjoy the work they do. This is a major issue we face, for while its fine that they are happy with less hours, less responsibility and less goodies. They still want the level of public service the old higher wages harder jobs used to pay for. The word wage slave is not a new one, if anything its out of date. The reason we can't get nurses and doctors is not low wages, its that no one wants the goodies enough anymore to put up with the long hours and stress. How we adjust to this new reality I don't know. You have a point but low pay after 12 years of real terms pay cuts is definitely a factor for nurses as well as the frequent requirement to put in very long shifts, some of it often in the form of unpaid overtime. The starting salary for a nurse is only a few hundred quid a month more than I get as a retail worker. And unlike me, their job requires specialist knowledge acquired through the acquisition of 60 k worth of student debt. This means it costs the nurse a lot in terms of up front learning costs to do the job. Their hours would be a lot less excessive if all nursing vacancies could be filled which itself would make the job less onerous. And those vacancies could be filled if the pay was rewarding enough and if it didn't come with so much debt. Ceasing to rip them off by charging them a fortune to park in their own workplaces would be a help too. As for low skilled fruit picking jobs there remains the reality of crushingly low pay for a job that is demandingly hard work in all weathers. I wouldn't do it unless I had to. But many more local people would be prepared to do it if some of the structural barriers were removed. For example, such jobs can often be well outside any large urban pool of labour. This necessitates effective transportation or temporary on site or near site accommodation. The transport links just aren't there. And on site or near site accommodation has its own inherent problems and barriers. Because the jobs are temporary, permanent addresses need to be maintained elsewhere, increasing overall rental costs. Plus welfare benefits - including in work benefits - will not cover the cost of two addresses even if one of them is temporary for the purposes of work. These systemic structural barriers need to be addressed or else those providing the work need to resolve them, by for example providing their own free or cheap transportation to collect workers from the nearest sizeable town. Better pay and less onerous hours would also help of course. I have several family members working in the NHS and many of our friends, none of them site poor pay for their disillusionment. They site long hours, but they don't want overtime they want more staff so they can occasionally get home on time. They want not to be constantly worried they've missed something critical because the ward is always 2 or 3 staff short. I'm sure like anyone they would welcome a pay rise, but that will not stop the flood of those leaving. Oh, and student fees for a nursing degree are limited to 9k a year. Plus there's a 5k grant. I haven't mentioned fruit picking jobs so I'll leave that for others to address |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 10, 2022 17:41:27 GMT
What do you mean by the British and would that include the unemployed of the Bangladeshi, Pakistani and middle eastern groups within which the unemployment levels are much higher than the British in general. Yea of course i do i dont seperate British by ethnicty or race like you do So it is nationality that defines capability. |
|
|
|
Post by totheleft3 on Nov 10, 2022 17:51:54 GMT
All im saying that the iimigrant population especially the east europeans are better then the British at picking crops per piece work router.
Mainy because many had come from a Arculture background.
Why do you think the present Government reali on immigration to pick the crops 6yrs after Brexit
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2022 18:08:13 GMT
All im saying that the iimigrant population especially the east europeans are better then the British at picking crops per piece work router. Skint British globe trotters are better than Australians at crop picking in Australia. Of course, it's pure assumption. |
|
|
|
Post by sword on Nov 10, 2022 18:18:17 GMT
And what's the real problem in society? And yes Mair had mental illness but can't see how having a obsession with cleaning himself and being radicalized by his far-right believes Led to jo Cox murder. If he had such mental condition has schizophrenia then yes his condition would of course been behind the attack. Has for the left making up excuse that the Islamic terrorist had mental illness has a excuse for there attacks never come across it on the forums I been on. I have not come across it either,its just a figment of some righties imagination. |
|
|
|
Post by totheleft3 on Nov 10, 2022 18:20:26 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2022 18:25:11 GMT
Has for the extremism religious nutters in region whether that be Christian , Muslim or jewish is more conservative right wing then left. These religions are generally socially conservative and frown upon social decadence. However, the politics can be quite different, especially those political Islamist movements that were influenced by Communism and Nazism during the last century. Iran is one example of Marxism taking hold and bringing about revolution.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2022 20:28:49 GMT
Did you ever see the polling figures for many of Labour's 2017 policies? Massive majorities in favour of most of them. Whatever else cost Labor the election it wasn't those. But I know that's an inconvenient fact for most centrists and their supporters. As for Blair and the centrists leading Labour out of the wilderness, the Tories were such an utterly spent and unpopular force by 1997 that almost any Labour leader would have won. It's a pity victory was wasted on another thatcherite establishmentarian. Its not an inconvenient fact. (Incidentally you might consider winding your neck in and talking decently to me.) I liked Labours policies, what lost them the vote was that people didn't trust Corbyn not to take things miles further down the socialist road if he won. Corbyn is old Labour (As I'm sure you are too) but many of us remember what a mess the country was in under old Labour and how the social policies and too powerful unions brought us to being the sick man of Europe. As for Blair only winning because the Tories were spent, perhaps you can explain how new Labour went on to win another two times? Could it be people liked a boring centrist government, a stable economy somewhere in the middle between 'devil take the hindmost' conservatism and unsustainable ideals of socialism. I am debating with you openly on a public politics forum. I do have a forthright posting style and we differ on our perspective, but I regard you as one of the sensible ones around here, even if I think you are wrong on lots of things as I am sure you do me. When it comes to the things that cost Labour in 2017, certainly the unpopularity of Corbyn himself amongst many older people in particular was a significant factor. The Brexit issue itself was a big factor also. So was perceived disunity in the Labour parliamentary party with most of the MPs openly plotting against the leadership, many of them complicit in smear campaigns. New Labour in earlier times went on to win another two terms because the Tory vote went down too, leading to record low turnouts. This and FPTP protected Labour. It nevertheless remains a fact that Labour got fewer votes in 2005 and 2010 than it did in either 2017 or 2019. Uncomfortable but true fact that doesnt fit the preferred centrist narrative. New Labour owes as much of its electoral success to Tory unelectability as it does to anything it did itself. The moment the Tories even began to get their act together, New Labour was toast due to all the votes it had lost, especially working class ones. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2022 20:35:10 GMT
You have a point but low pay after 12 years of real terms pay cuts is definitely a factor for nurses as well as the frequent requirement to put in very long shifts, some of it often in the form of unpaid overtime. The starting salary for a nurse is only a few hundred quid a month more than I get as a retail worker. And unlike me, their job requires specialist knowledge acquired through the acquisition of 60 k worth of student debt. This means it costs the nurse a lot in terms of up front learning costs to do the job. Their hours would be a lot less excessive if all nursing vacancies could be filled which itself would make the job less onerous. And those vacancies could be filled if the pay was rewarding enough and if it didn't come with so much debt. Ceasing to rip them off by charging them a fortune to park in their own workplaces would be a help too. As for low skilled fruit picking jobs there remains the reality of crushingly low pay for a job that is demandingly hard work in all weathers. I wouldn't do it unless I had to. But many more local people would be prepared to do it if some of the structural barriers were removed. For example, such jobs can often be well outside any large urban pool of labour. This necessitates effective transportation or temporary on site or near site accommodation. The transport links just aren't there. And on site or near site accommodation has its own inherent problems and barriers. Because the jobs are temporary, permanent addresses need to be maintained elsewhere, increasing overall rental costs. Plus welfare benefits - including in work benefits - will not cover the cost of two addresses even if one of them is temporary for the purposes of work. These systemic structural barriers need to be addressed or else those providing the work need to resolve them, by for example providing their own free or cheap transportation to collect workers from the nearest sizeable town. Better pay and less onerous hours would also help of course. I have several family members working in the NHS and many of our friends, none of them site poor pay for their disillusionment. They site long hours, but they don't want overtime they want more staff so they can occasionally get home on time. They want not to be constantly worried they've missed something critical because the ward is always 2 or 3 staff short. I'm sure like anyone they would welcome a pay rise, but that will not stop the flood of those leaving. Oh, and student fees for a nursing degree are limited to 9k a year. Plus there's a 5k grant. I haven't mentioned fruit picking jobs so I'll leave that for others to address But surely shit pay for the job expected of them is a factor in the staffing shortages you cite? It is certainly a significant factor motivating so many of them to vote for strike action demanding a decent pay rise. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 11, 2022 8:58:17 GMT
Its not an inconvenient fact. (Incidentally you might consider winding your neck in and talking decently to me.) I liked Labours policies, what lost them the vote was that people didn't trust Corbyn not to take things miles further down the socialist road if he won. Corbyn is old Labour (As I'm sure you are too) but many of us remember what a mess the country was in under old Labour and how the social policies and too powerful unions brought us to being the sick man of Europe. As for Blair only winning because the Tories were spent, perhaps you can explain how new Labour went on to win another two times? Could it be people liked a boring centrist government, a stable economy somewhere in the middle between 'devil take the hindmost' conservatism and unsustainable ideals of socialism. It was just a suggestion, thank you for considering it. I was unaware of smear campaigns from within the Labour party, what put me off voting labour was that while I liked much of what was offered there was no clear demonstration of how is was to be funded or what limits were to be put on it. As a business owner these things were important. In the end all I could go on was Corbyn's political history and I had to assume that things like the living wage would not be based on any economic model but merely old Labours view that a socialist state is possible. As for New Labour our view of history differs. If people had lost faith in Labour and the Tories I would have expected a large rise in votes for smaller parties such as the Greens and the Libdems. As this did not happen I put it down to predictons that New Labour were the clear leaders leading to poor voter turn outs as often happens when we have stable governments. My belief in why Labour lost in 2010 was the 2008 economic crash alongside Gordon Browns lack of charisma which enabled the Tories to claim that Labour caused it. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Nov 11, 2022 9:13:20 GMT
None of it changes the fact they are still illegal immigrants using a network of criminals to get here. Which for some reason the Westminster followers of fashion are trying to deflect the fact.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2022 9:49:13 GMT
It was just a suggestion, thank you for considering it. I was unaware of smear campaigns from within the Labour party, what put me off voting labour was that while I liked much of what was offered there was no clear demonstration of how is was to be funded or what limits were to be put on it. As a business owner these things were important. In the end all I could go on was Corbyn's political history and I had to assume that things like the living wage would not be based on any economic model but merely old Labours view that a socialist state is possible. As for New Labour our view of history differs. If people had lost faith in Labour and the Tories I would have expected a large rise in votes for smaller parties such as the Greens and the Libdems. As this did not happen I put it down to predictons that New Labour were the clear leaders leading to poor voter turn outs as often happens when we have stable governments. My belief in why Labour lost in 2010 was the 2008 economic crash alongside Gordon Browns lack of charisma which enabled the Tories to claim that Labour caused it. Costings were offered for Labour's 2017 manifesto. I presume you simply found them unconvincing. But the Tory alternative at the time was entirely uncosted. Many policies though would have cost nothing - more security of tenure for private tenants, lowering the voting age. Or would have raised revenue - modest tax increases on higher earners. Or saved money - capping private rents, increasing the minimum wage, both reducing the welfare bill. The expensive policies, eg abolition of tuition fees, massive increases in social housing construction, nationalisations, should perhaps have been better explained in terms of costings. But they were popular in the country. It was of course a massive and to me inexplicable failure by Labour under both Brown and Miliband to properly explain the causes of the crash of 2008. At the time everyone knew it was mostly down to greedy and unregulated bankers. The Tory message however started out as Labour not fixing the roof whilst the sun was shining but morphed into blaming Labour for the crash itself. In spite of the fact that it was global and started in the United States. And Labour utterly failed to challenge this lie at all, allowing it to become an established fact in the public mind, however untrue. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2022 16:43:53 GMT
None of it changes the fact they are still illegal immigrants using a network of criminals to get here. Which for some reason the Westminster followers of fashion are trying to deflect the fact. Yes, but the far-left have been relying on screaming racist, nazi, fascist toward those who mention these things, so you have to go softly softly or else the cute far-left will throw rocks and molotovs at you and the police.
Something I found interesting and went way beyond my expectations are the number of arson attacks in this country.
The 2017/2018 figues are:
England; 48%. 167,291 fires attended, 80,610 deliberate
Scotland; 57% 26,115 fires attended, 14,828 deliberate
Wales; 58%. 11,020 fires attended, 6,371 deliberate
Northern Ireland: 66%. 9,356 fires attended, 6,215 deliberate
Estimated cost was £1.49bn, where it was more likely to have been between £5.73bn and £11.46bn.
It goes on: Arson attacks rise in England and Wales after the pandemic
I'm finding it hard to find out how many cost lives, but I'm guessing it was a lot considering the majority of fires are caused by arson.
It really does highlight the political motives, deflections and shameless opportunism that revolves around one mentally ill individual who killed no one.
|
|
