Everybody Who Voted For The Tories Got Exactly What They Deserved

[iamnumerate]

2 minutes ago, yelims said:

Is there examples of this luxury housing giveaway in London ? Or is that something that you read in a tabloids whose owners want to get you and other common sheeple to vote for their corrupt buddies so they can squirrel a few billions more to their accounts in BVI?

I did say in a previous post.

This happened to me under Labour.  It wasn't the Tories who did this but my own eyes seeing people on benefits living in houses than I can't afford.  Even once telling me that they wouldn't live where I live - it wasn't good enough for them.

Genuine question Are you interesting in debating me or just insulting me?  Calling people sheeple implies you have contempt for their views.  A good way of ignoring them and keeping the current Government in power.  Is that what you want?

[yelims]

Just now, iamnumerate said:

I did say in a previous post.

This happened to me under Labour.  It wasn't the Tories who did this but my own eyes seeing people on benefits living in houses than I can't afford.  Even once telling me that they wouldn't live where I live - it wasn't good enough for them.

Genuine question Are you interesting in debating me or just insulting me?  Calling people sheeple implies you have contempt for their views.  A good way of ignoring them and keeping the current Government in power.  Is that what you want?

That seems like a good dose of  begrudgery to me

we started with example (yet another!) of Tories whittling away millions and billions via blatant corruption which you are totally unconcerned about

How would you feel if you learn that the results of this blatant corruption was houses in Caribbean or maybe even few empty luxury properties in London also keeping you from your dreams.

btw I couldn’t give rats **** about Labour, the fact that you live in such a polarised two party systems is yet another example that democracy in UK is rotten to the core, this doesn’t happen under PR STV

[GregBowman]

5 hours ago, yelims said:

Meh the “working class” will eventually ask why their jobs are gone and they became “welfare class” queuing at a food bank. Tories removed the usual EU scapegoat so next they will just blame the poor people for not pulling themselves up by bootstraps like Republicans in US do

 

aside: I find this talk of class and various castes quite amusing and quaint, British society is really ******ed up. I guess it all stems from being subjects of the crown and not citizens.

So there is no class system in Ireland or the US ? I guess your not looking hard enough 

From the Irish Post no less

https://www.irishpost.com/news/its-time-to-face-the-facts-about-irelands-classless-society-9990

[yelims]

4 minutes ago, GregBowman said:

So there is no class system in Ireland or the US ? I guess your not looking hard enough 

From the Irish Post no less

https://www.irishpost.com/news/its-time-to-face-the-facts-about-irelands-classless-society-9990

Nowhere near as pronounced as the class stratified society that is UK, of course there is inequality but once again there is not an obsession with the "proper place in society, sir"

As for US, well they are after emerging from 4 years of Trump/Republicans those guys makes Tories look like fresh meat arriving at Hitler Youth Camp

Edited May 6, 2021 by yelims

[GregBowman]

22 minutes ago, yelims said:

Nowhere near as pronounced as the class stratified society that is UK, of course there is inequality but once again there is not an obsession with the "proper place in society, sir"

As for US, well they are after emerging from 4 years of Trump/Republicans those guys makes Tories look like fresh meat arriving at Hitler Youth Camp

I worked in a factory my children went to a public school never felt different as a parent in fact from three generations there to us 'new' money. The attitude was if you can pay you can play. Its overblown the class thing

[yelims]

2 minutes ago, GregBowman said:

I worked in a factory my children went to a public school never felt different as a parent in fact from three generations there to us 'new' money. The attitude was if you can pay you can play. Its overblown the class thing

It’s clearly on show on this thread tho, perhaps that’s one reasons Labour suck so much they are also furthering class divide and whole working class shite 

[GregBowman]

1 hour ago, yelims said:

It’s clearly on show on this thread tho, perhaps that’s one reasons Labour suck so much they are also furthering class divide and whole working class shite 

Do you think so ? genuine question, more have money or not, if there is a class system as typified by the middle class its normally more subtle than that - you know accent, loving so called culture etc 

[Bruce Banner]

5 minutes ago, GregBowman said:

Do you think so ? genuine question, more have money or not, if there is a class system as typified by the middle class its normally more subtle than that - you know accent, loving so called culture etc 

An example...

When Blair took Britannia away, Sir Donald Gosling of NCP made his yacht "Leander" available to the Duke of Edinburgh for Cowes week and in return HRH managed to get Gosling membership of the RYS, which he had been refused for years because he was in trade, but senior honorary RN rank tipped the balance.

[dugsbody]

4 hours ago, iamnumerate said:

Thank you for your question.

I wouldn't say that people who have a nice house even if they are cash poor are poor.

I don't think that Tory sleaze is much worse than Labour sleaze so changing Governments would not reduce the amount of sleaze by very much. 

 

However, I think the idea of getting rid of the benefit cap is awful.  I remember hearing it come in and I thought that is wonderful.

I would go further and look at time limiting housing benefit in London - not got an exact idea at the moment.  However people shouldn't be allowed to live in London forever for free whilst others have to commute long distances.

Also I wouldn't pay people to come here.  

Getting rid of sleaze wouldn't have given me a better house under Blair.  Not paying others to live in nice houses might have done. (I could have bought them).

 

Thanks for the reply.

I am in mixed minds about social housing. One the one hand, I lived in central London for some years (Hackney) and could see that there were quite a lot of people living in social houses on streets where the min house was £1m. That did get under my skin a little. On top of that, it distorts the market because businesses don't have to pay a proper wage to these people because no matter how little they pay, they already have their housing covered so the workers won't go elsewhere. It seems it would make more sense to have people who genuinely need it a safety net of money, then allow them the choice of where to live, like those of us not in receipt of benefits.

But on the other hand, what problem am I trying to solve here? Is this view too simple? What would the outcome of that sort of policy be? I think we'd end up with far more ghettos, segregation, division, bad feelings, poverty as some people would just be forced to live in the worst areas with low investment, low access to decent jobs leading to lower social mobility. I think the end result would be worse for everyone.

Therefore I kind of got over it, as I walked from my small flat past these better houses. I knew that ultimately I would not swap my life for theirs, and that was the really revealing thing.

Anyway, I encourage you to have a think about that, maybe it gives you a different view, maybe not.

[iamnumerate]

13 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

Thanks for the reply.

I am in mixed minds about social housing. One the one hand, I lived in central London for some years (Hackney) and could see that there were quite a lot of people living in social houses on streets where the min house was £1m. That did get under my skin a little. On top of that, it distorts the market because businesses don't have to pay a proper wage to these people because no matter how little they pay, they already have their housing covered so the workers won't go elsewhere. It seems it would make more sense to have people who genuinely need it a safety net of money, then allow them the choice of where to live, like those of us not in receipt of benefits.

But on the other hand, what problem am I trying to solve here? Is this view too simple? What would the outcome of that sort of policy be? I think we'd end up with far more ghettos, segregation, division, bad feelings, poverty as some people would just be forced to live in the worst areas with low investment, low access to decent jobs leading to lower social mobility. I think the end result would be worse for everyone.

Therefore I kind of got over it, as I walked from my small flat past these better houses. I knew that ultimately I would not swap my life for theirs, and that was the really revealing thing.

Anyway, I encourage you to have a think about that, maybe it gives you a different view, maybe not.

Thanks for that I agree it is a tricky policy to solve. 

I think though there should be a benefit cap.  I think also reducing benefits for those who don't work would lead to a better outcome for all. (Obviously not for their landlords)

I used to know some people on benefits quite well (they moved to a more expensive area).  I wouldn't want to swap my life for theirs because I would feel guilty about it - if I were immoral maybe yes.

At the end of the day work should pay.  It was wrong in the 19th century for people to be paid in Truck 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truck_wages#Britain

It is wrong today for people to be given housing benefit that enables them to afford more than even a junior doctor can rent and in doing so encourages BTL.

We may not agree on the conclusions, however I think we can agree that what a society should like is not something that all will agree on.

 

[iamnumerate]

3 hours ago, yelims said:

 

btw I couldn’t give rats **** about Labour, the fact that you live in such a polarised two party systems is yet another example that democracy in UK is rotten to the core, this doesn’t happen under PR STV

As Labour didn't change the system in 13 years. Perhaps the headline of this topic should be everyone who voted Labour or Tories got what they deserved.

Edited May 6, 2021 by iamnumerate

[yelims]

Just now, iamnumerate said:

As Labour didn't change the system. Perhaps the headline of the system should be everyone who voted Labour or Tories got what they deserved.

Maybe, tho Tories are in power for what a decade now? How long can they get away with flogging a dead horse

Edited May 6, 2021 by yelims

[LandOfConfusion]

8 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

This boomer is looking forward to voting Labour, for the first time in my life today, to stick it to BJ and his disingenuous and incompetent band of Brexiteer clowns.

In the country council elections I'll probably be avoiding the Conservatives, but not because the CC Conservatives are particularly linked to BJ or any of that nonsense. No, in my case it'll actually be for a local reason: namely their apparent belief that wealthy Boomers have the right to obstruct pavements with their Merc's & BMW's and force people, mainly women with preschool aged kids and pre- & intra-war OAP's to walk into busy roads. Absolutely disgusting attitude from the supposed party of law & order.

8 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

Sending gunboats to the Channel Islands to confront the French... unbelievable . Plenty of rocks in those waters, I hope they run aground!

I tend to agree with you on this; it does seem this government keeps on acting in an inequitable & antagonistic manner w.r.t. fishing rights. Just take the shell fishing beds for instance; the French operated a closed season to protect stocks whilst so-called "Conservative" ministers took the 'fill yer boots' approach. But of course it's all the fault of the French for not controlling their fleet. Obviously.

[Social Justice League]

11 minutes ago, yelims said:

Maybe, tho Tories are in power for what a decade now? How long can they get away with flogging a dead horse

Yeah agree, the Tories have been in power now since May 2010 and the country is a disaster.  The Brexit ref was all their fookup too with David Cameron so sure he would win..............that he lost and had to resign.......lol.

A right shower of idiots.  Labour are just as bad with useless leaders galore.

[simon99]

On 05/05/2021 at 19:43, MonsieurCopperCrutch said:

I don't just see myself as morally and intellectually superior, it's been researched and now known as fact. Leave voters are thicker. Not sure why cold hard facts offend you.

 

No offense here, in fact it amuses me how people so intellectually superior and condescending haven't worked out why they keep losing elections yet.

[iamnumerate]

15 hours ago, Social Justice League said:

Yeah agree, the Tories have been in power now since May 2010 and the country is a disaster.  The Brexit ref was all their fookup too with David Cameron so sure he would win..............that he lost and had to resign.......lol.

A right shower of idiots.  Labour are just as bad with useless leaders galore.

I agree with that.  No one can seriously think that the Tories are great - HTB was a crazy idea - but the other parties support it.

Then again so does a lot of the electorate so maybe most of us are the problem

[dryrot]

17 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

An example...

When Blair took Britannia away, Sir Donald Gosling of NCP made his yacht "Leander" available to the Duke of Edinburgh for Cowes week and in return HRH managed to get Gosling membership of the RYS, which he had been refused for years because he was in trade, but senior honorary RN rank tipped the balance.

Can you provide evidence for this? Sounds like bullsh*t to me. Gosling was a honorary Captain (charitable services to RN) since 1993.

Gosling was a rough diamond - he was ennobled by Harold Wilson - but no mention of your allegation in https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/profile-a-multistorey-monopolist-sir-don-gosling-the-chief-of-national-car-parks-is-not-keen-on-nosy-parkers-as-william-kay-discovers-1412969.html

Edited May 7, 2021 by dryrot
add link

[zugzwang]

6 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

I agree with that.  No one can seriously think that the Tories are great - HTB was a crazy idea - but the other parties support it.

Then again so does a lot of the electorate so maybe most of us are the problem

Wrong!

Help to Buy is a terrible idea no matter who endorses it.

Ditto Right to Buy, Build to Rent, Shared Ownership, and the various Term Funding Schemes. They're all producer/supplier subsidies helping to keep the monstrous bubble of phantom equity in the housing market artificially inflated.

[iamnumerate]

2 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Wrong!

Help to Buy is a terrible idea no matter who endorses it.

Ditto Right to Buy, Build to Rent, Shared Ownership, and the various Term Funding Schemes. They're all producer/supplier subsidies helping to keep the monstrous bubble of phantom equity in the housing market artificially inflated.

I think it is HTB etc are awful.

My point was the fact that all parties support does make it a good idea - rather that all parties are bad.

A depressing but true fact.

[Bruce Banner]

26 minutes ago, dryrot said:

Can you provide evidence for this? Sounds like bullsh*t to me. Gosling was a honorary Captain (charitable services to RN) since 1993.

Gosling was a rough diamond - he was ennobled by Harold Wilson - but no mention of your allegation in https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/profile-a-multistorey-monopolist-sir-don-gosling-the-chief-of-national-car-parks-is-not-keen-on-nosy-parkers-as-william-kay-discovers-1412969.html

No, and it was not an "allegation" as no crime or wrongdoing was suggested, merely a favour. It was a subject discussed in yachting circles in the late 90s.

Is a knighthood ennoblement? I think not.

[Pop321]

51 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

I agree with that.  No one can seriously think that the Tories are great - HTB was a crazy idea - but the other parties support it.

Then again so does a lot of the electorate so maybe most of us are the problem

As Weller says “the public gets what the public wants”.

Thats why I don’t worry anymore about my lack of wealth tax and the situation some find themselves in, it’s what people asked for.....of course the truly disadvantaged is a very different matter.

I am spiritually ‘left wing liberal ’ but as you elude to....that isn’t a solution any political party really meets. I also believe in rewarding true hard work and again that isn’t really represented.

Never mind, I am sure a new series of the X Factor will be on soon to numb the brains and the pains of the masses. 🤦🏻‍♂️

Edited May 7, 2021 by Pop321

[Locke]

16 hours ago, iamnumerate said:

It was wrong in the 19th century for people to be paid in Truck 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truck_wages#Britain

Hysterical. That article is one of the clearest demonstrations that Wikipedia is a left wing propaganda outlet.

[dryrot]

22 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

No, and it was not an "allegation" as no crime or wrongdoing was suggested, merely a favour. It was a subject discussed in yachting circles in the late 90s.

Well, that puts me in my place!  Interesting that this - I suppose "story" is the best description - was never recorded. You didnt menion that it was a rumour on the original post, to.

 

"Is a knighthood ennoblement? I think not."

Wrong again. https://cilane.eu/index.php/ufaqs/what-is-knighthood/

"Thus, the dubbed knights, and their descendants, came to be distinguished from other mounted soldiers, and conferring knighthood, or eligibility for knighthood (typically with a right to a coat of arms) was an early form of ennoblement. In this way the knightly class became the core of the nobility."

[Bruce Banner]

16 minutes ago, dryrot said:

Well, that puts me in my place!  Interesting that this - I suppose "story" is the best description - was never recorded. You didnt menion that it was a rumour on the original post, to.

 

"Is a knighthood ennoblement? I think not."

Wrong again. https://cilane.eu/index.php/ufaqs/what-is-knighthood/

"Thus, the dubbed knights, and their descendants, came to be distinguished from other mounted soldiers, and conferring knighthood, or eligibility for knighthood (typically with a right to a coat of arms) was an early form of ennoblement. In this way the knightly class became the core of the nobility."

Again?

Anyway, you have found a reference that says knights are noble, bravo, but most say the opposite. In the modern UK the term "noble" is normally used when referring to a lord rather than a knight.

[Sour Mash]

3 hours ago, simon99 said:

No offense here, in fact it amuses me how people so intellectually superior and condescending haven't worked out why they keep losing elections yet.

You've it the nail on the head.

Don't expect the 'I know better than you' authoritarian left to get a clue, though.