Off Topic Politics Thread

I wouldn't really call a person that only eats twice a week rich. This lady cuts back on food so she can feed her son. Her putting a little cheese on her sons beans on toast is actually seen as a luxury for her. How crazy is that? Her son goes to school soon and she can't even afford a second hand uniform. She says that the school giving her son a free meal each day will help her to maybe feeding herself 4 times a week. So messed up that we have that kind of poverty in this country.

My point is you can't really compare poverty in one country to another. Poverty is poverty, it's just different depending where you live.

 

Racist bastard...

 

I'm not remotely interested in how well off or otherwise people on this forum are - it's none of my bloody business; unless they are running for public office, in which case I'll vote for the one I consider the most likely to represent the interests of the many, not the few.

London will elect a new mayor next week; I'll be voting for the bus driver's son rather than the Old Etonian billionaire, but that's because of his policies, not because of his background. I'm not totally against being governed by toffs - I just don't think it's worked out all that well so far.

 

I would say there are different levels of poverty in the world which perhaps is what you mean as well.

 

Didn't come of that way. Unless I read it wrong . To me poverty is poverty.

I would even say one of Children in Need or Sports relief etc should just be 100% fundraising for the UK.

 

One thing I have noticed in the past few years as I walk through the City Centre is just how many homeless people there are sleeping on the streets now and anyone who says that there is no real poverty in the inner cities of the UK is living in cloud cuckooland. As Beefy says any poverty is bad and Governments should be trying to address the issue rather than focussing on tax breaks for the well off.
I'm disappointed that the poverty gap actually grew under New Labour a supposedly socially just party., therefore i'm disillusioned with Westminster politics in general.
I describe myself as more of a Humanist these days.

 

Um, that wasn't what I was doing at all. I mostly agree with you. Every government fiddles around with the NHS. I just object to the fact that the Conservatives are the only ones that ever seem to get trash talked about it.

 

I'm not drawing any lines in the sand. The very opposite. I want people to avoid characterisations of any group of people because of their political affiliation. You wouldn't assume that "all black people are always (insert any statement here)" and I wouldn't expect anyone to say that "all Labour/Tory/Green politician are always (insert any statement here)" either. Unfortunately that kind of language has become acceptable, it poisons reasoned debate and it turns political discussion into name-calling.

Vin

 

And I would agree - I read today that the number of working age adults who pay no income tax has risen from 34% to 44% since 2007. These figures are from a report by the Institute of Fiscal Studies (no doubt a Tory mouthpiece - but, in my mind, a professional, apolitical body) - at the same time the proportion of tax paid by the richest 1% has risen from 24% to 27% - so, somewhere, some people are paying more and others are not paying so much.
Now, I know there are lies, damned lies and then statistics, so I am not blind to the issue of poverty - I am a Humanist and no country with the wealth of ours should have people living on the streets or with so little they starve themselves to feed their children. However, I am also a pragmatist and there are people fiddling the system so the real needy sometimes get missed.
I would vote for any government that could fix this and fix the NHS - sadly, though, I believe neither party are capable and spend too much time name-calling .......

 

We do agree then, good.

 

Moving on from tax for a moment ... today Hillsborough, tomorrow Orgreave? It's far more politically sensitive, and I for one can't wait to see a Tory Prime Minister apologise for the attacks Thatcher orchestrated against the miners. Just a thought.

 

Sorry, but why? I don't understand people apologising for other people's actions from years ago. If my grandad had done something appalling, I would not apologise for him unless I'm present there for a racist comment or something of that ilk. It sets a precedent of when do you stop apologising for anything that has ever taken place. I'm sorry to all Muslims for our barbaric ancestors mauling you to control the holy land?

 

OK, so let's be clear.

Why have we just investigated Hillsborough? Of course it's the deaths, but more than that it's the cover up that followed.

Why is Blair criticised for "sexing up" documents to justify his war in Iraq?

Why is the fact that Thatcher lied about the Begrano significant?

Ultimately we surely want our authorities to be honest. I can cope with their cock-ups. Would another police officer have ordered the opening of that gate at Hillsborough? Probably. But once the tragedy unfolded, then being honest might have been good.

Thatcher and her crowd lied about Orgreave. That is why we should be investigating. I don't want a ****ing apology. I wholly agree that these apologies for the behaviour of the Empire are nonsense. What I do want is for the government and the authorities to be held to account when they lie to us. Simple.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36160135

Ken Livingstone digging himself a hole.

 

Always was a racist idiot.

 

He has got a bit of history there. But he also has a point in that criticism of Israel does not and should not automatically equate to anti-semitism.

 

Ken Livingstone has been suspended from the Labour Party indefinitely.

 

George Galloway weighs in:

 

Big bullet in the foot by Labour. A week(?) before the local elections.

please log in to view this image