Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2023 8:34:18 GMT
As I thought no qualification other than that of many other people including me. It would be a very bad day if the C0fE had an O level and no other qualifications. so you open a thread to debate the policies of the left, and when given a serious point to debate, choose instead to belittle me as unqualified. Well, i tried to engage in a serious debate on the damage done by soundbite marxism. Hmm, accusing me of being a Marxist is hardly the way to have a serious debate. As I have said before what Healey did he did for reasons that I am not qualified to answer on, I can only assume he knew what he was doing but that was a long time ago and in a different era. What has 1970s economics got to do with the way the world works today? I was half a century ago, we were still using £sd, we had only just joined the EU and the world was a much larger place. I apologise if you feel I insulted you. I was genuinely looking to debate why so many people, at least on this board, have an absolute hatred of the left, after all we are called Marxist, communists, Nazis, terrorist and all manner of things in the most derogatory manner, as my introductory post highlighted. Dennis Healy may have been right or wrong but I find the answer to the question "What is wrong with the left" a here and now question.
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 15, 2023 8:34:23 GMT
This left language is so constructed and obtuse.
Isn't a minority group marginalised by definition?
How do you un-marginalise a minority? By putting them in charge or bolstering their numbers until they are the majority.
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Oct 15, 2023 12:33:13 GMT
so you open a thread to debate the policies of the left, and when given a serious point to debate, choose instead to belittle me as unqualified. Well, i tried to engage in a serious debate on the damage done by soundbite marxism. Hmm, accusing me of being a Marxist is hardly the way to have a serious debate. As I have said before what Healey did he did for reasons that I am not qualified to answer on, I can only assume he knew what he was doing but that was a long time ago and in a different era. What has 1970s economics got to do with the way the world works today? I was half a century ago, we were still using £sd, we had only just joined the EU and the world was a much larger place. I apologise if you feel I insulted you. I was genuinely looking to debate why so many people, at least on this board, have an absolute hatred of the left, after all we are called Marxist, communists, Nazis, terrorist and all manner of things in the most derogatory manner, as my introductory post highlighted. Dennis Healy may have been right or wrong but I find the answer to the question "What is wrong with the left" a here and now question. Ok i picked that particular topic because the way Healey chose to approach the problem IS very much a here and now problem. Unlike many, and i suspect that includes Tony Blair who swore blind in a letter to Michael Foot at about the time one was a brand new MP and the other was about to write the longest suicide note in history that he had read it, i HAVE actually read both The Communist Manifesto AND Das Kapital. I’ve also read Mein Kampf. Being an IT freelancer stuck in a grotty B&B four nights a week dozens or hundreds of miles from home is a really luxurious, exotic lifestyle NOT. The points i would take from Healey’s actions as apply to today is more to reflect on the utter hypocrisy on both sides. The basic policy of the left is to tax the rich more than the poor. Yet today it is impossible to legally be paid for a forty hour working week without being brought into the tax system and the only party that has done ANYTHING to restore the original purpose of income tax as a tax on those who had an income worth taxing are the lib dems who forced a raising of the threshold by far more than the rate of inflation. You might retort that we have a much larger state than we had when income tax was introduced as a temporary measure to fund the napoleonic wars, but that still overlooks the fact that the tax take from the LOWER end of the income scale is massively in excess of what it was when i was a child in the1950’s and sixties and even in the seventies when income tax was thirty three pence in the pound fewer than one in three families in the street paid any (mum and dad being one of the one in three) because there were NO housing benefits because rents on council properties were controlled by a tribunal and set at a rate a manual labourer could afford and a semi skilled blue collar factory worker could afford to keep a family on. And that’s before we start on that bloody VAT which only one of the contenders for the 2017 tory party leadership, Dominic Rabb, had the guts to state he would abolish now we are free of the demonic EU who invented it. If you’ve never been in business on your own account you can’t fully understand how truly regressive and insidious that bastard child of the european hegemony is. Let us suffice to say before 1973 anyone suggesting they impose purchase tax on tampons and jaffa cakes would rightly be thrown off the terrace of the house of commons and probably at low tide so they broke their neck on the stony scree below rather than dissolved in the chemical swill that was the Thames at that time But enough of the hypocrisy of the left who tax the lower income bracket more heavily than the wealthier. Let us now move to the hypocrisy of the right who are keen to focus entirely on their mantra of no increase in the basic rate of income tax, whilst simultaneously hiking up a whole range of stealth taxes, first by not moving the starting rate of tax bands so as to ensnare more every tear, increasing the cost and the workload, snd inventing ever more invisible stealth taxes to skin you with. AND Mein Kampf.
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Oct 15, 2023 12:53:03 GMT
From the 50's onwards our empire got smaller meaning less revenue coming in meaning more taxes would have to be raised to offset losses elsewhere to maintain a modern economy.
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 15, 2023 13:30:56 GMT
This left language is so constructed and obtuse. Doublespeak.
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 15, 2023 17:27:48 GMT
It is illegal to be racist or racially discriminate against a black person in any size shape or form, it is not illegal to so discriminate against a white person. You may call it 'redressing the balance' but in effect you are using a process that you hail as immoral to correct past immorality. Then you say white people are not discriminated against yet the positive actions laws do exactly that by favouring for training ethnic minorities and allowing as arbiter of final selection to be on a racial basis to 'correct' under representation. White people are not allowed to form any form of association where black people can be excluded but black people can in many walks of life form associations that work specifically for their ethnic group and from which white people can be excluded and will receive no benefit. In the end it comes round to opinion, you hold the opinion that we need to redress the balance and as such discriminating against white people (which is what happens) is an acceptable process. Not to mention (but I will) the teaching of white privilege and critical race theory which both place an attribute(s) on white people in the round. This is no different to those who taught at one time that black races were inferior which we accepted as being an immoral stance yet now the whole process has turned volte face. This is the leftish hypocrisy which says " I believe this, therefore it is". Wrong, racism knows no colour, it is illegal to discriminate against any person be they black, white Chinese, disabled....... It is not I that has the opinion that we need to redress the balance it is those that know when discrimination is taking place and put policies in place to remove it. The fact that most people do not believe black people are an inferior race does not mean that racism has ended, it still exists and if people who practice it continue to do so other agencies must deal with it. What I said was true in terms of the law. How do you 'remove' discrimination by discriminating? That is like saying you remove theft by thieving. Many things are illegal, and many have been for years. You cannot stop theft, you cannot stop discrimination, you can only make the action illegal what you do not do is carry out the same action against others to bring it to a stop. It seems that the racism you are referring to is purely racial discrimination.
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 15, 2023 17:29:29 GMT
From the 50's onwards our empire got smaller meaning less revenue coming in meaning more taxes would have to be raised to offset losses elsewhere to maintain a modern economy. From ww2 onwards the Empire was a net cost to the UK, that is why the retreat from Empire was so rapid.
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Oct 15, 2023 17:31:30 GMT
From the 50's onwards our empire got smaller meaning less revenue coming in meaning more taxes would have to be raised to offset losses elsewhere to maintain a modern economy. From ww2 onwards the Empire was a net cost to the UK, that is why the retreat from Empire was so rapid. Yep and we still had not paid off WWI debt either.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Oct 15, 2023 17:55:56 GMT
The voice of the Left...
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 15, 2023 18:55:16 GMT
Jeremy Corbyn is a terrorist loving cock.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2023 19:13:09 GMT
Did anyone remember to tell him that Gaza hasn't been occupied by Israel for 18 years? Land for peace!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2023 7:06:36 GMT
Wrong, racism knows no colour, it is illegal to discriminate against any person be they black, white Chinese, disabled....... It is not I that has the opinion that we need to redress the balance it is those that know when discrimination is taking place and put policies in place to remove it. The fact that most people do not believe black people are an inferior race does not mean that racism has ended, it still exists and if people who practice it continue to do so other agencies must deal with it. What I said was true in terms of the law. How do you 'remove' discrimination by discriminating? That is like saying you remove theft by thieving. Many things are illegal, and many have been for years. You cannot stop theft, you cannot stop discrimination, you can only make the action illegal what you do not do is carry out the same action against others to bring it to a stop. It seems that the racism you are referring to is purely racial discrimination. Is levelling up discrimination?
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 16, 2023 19:18:14 GMT
What I said was true in terms of the law. How do you 'remove' discrimination by discriminating? That is like saying you remove theft by thieving. Many things are illegal, and many have been for years. You cannot stop theft, you cannot stop discrimination, you can only make the action illegal what you do not do is carry out the same action against others to bring it to a stop. It seems that the racism you are referring to is purely racial discrimination. Is levelling up discrimination? Of course it is, any selection based on an attribute is discrimination, the point is that levelling up, whatever it is, is not a race based selection. The whole point as regards 'historic racism' is that the vast majority of people believed that making a judgement as regards someone based on the colour of his skin was just plain wrong. Now it seems the left think that some must be judged by the colour of their skin and must be discriminated against to correct an historic injustice the level of which is uncertain and the continuance of which is a crime; even worse for which the individuals upon whom that new discrimination is enacted have no responsibility for the injustices or the crimes for which they are being discriminated against.
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Oct 16, 2023 19:29:05 GMT
Is levelling up discrimination? Of course it is, any selection based on an attribute is discrimination, the point is that levelling up, whatever it is, is not a race based selection. The whole point as regards 'historic racism' is that the vast majority of people believed that making a judgement as regards someone based on the colour of his skin was just plain wrong. Now it seems the left think that some must be judged by the colour of their skin and must be discriminated against to correct an historic injustice the level of which is uncertain and the continuance of which is a crime; even worse for which the individuals upon whom that new discrimination is enacted have no responsibility for the injustices or the crimes for which they are being discriminated against. Or, as a wise man said: "I didn't own any slaves and you didn't pick any cotton. I don't owe you shit."
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Oct 17, 2023 7:06:34 GMT
Is levelling up discrimination? Of course it is, any selection based on an attribute is discrimination, the point is that levelling up, whatever it is, is not a race based selection. The whole point as regards 'historic racism' is that the vast majority of people believed that making a judgement as regards someone based on the colour of his skin was just plain wrong. Now it seems the left think that some must be judged by the colour of their skin and must be discriminated against to correct an historic injustice the level of which is uncertain and the continuance of which is a crime; even worse for which the individuals upon whom that new discrimination is enacted have no responsibility for the injustices or the crimes for which they are being discriminated against. I'm not particularly a fan of positive discrimination, but how else do you ensure that minorities have fair representation?
|
|