Politics at Westminster | BREAKING: UKIP

Shamwow said:
Oh dear

Click to expand...

Sweet Square said:
Shades of Tony Abbott from Cameron there with the Saudi question. As for the bomb being dropped over the UK err.... yeah that's not really true is it.
Click to expand...

Kaos said:
I'm glad he's been called up on this. Waxes lyrical over Assad, Gadaffi and other human rights offences in the Middle East, and yet continues to help the Saudis get the Human Rights post in the UN. The pigfecker is so full of shite its unreal. His justification on how the Saudis have saved our lives with the intelligence they give us....jesus wept :lol:

Unfortunately, the media will sweep this under the rug. I hope Corbyn pushes this further.
Click to expand...

If the UNHRC's worth is to be judged by its constituent members then it probably should have been disbanded long ago (ought Cameron to have said that?). In recent years they have included: Russia, China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Congo, Kazakhstan, Ethiopia, and Venezuela to name but a few.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
If the UNHRC's worth is to be judged by its constituent members then it probably should have been disbanded long ago (ought Cameron to have said that?). In recent years they have included: Russia, China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Congo, Kazakhstan, Ethiopia, and Venezuela to name but a few.
Click to expand...

That's not an excuse. You're complaining about a problem that we as a country are helping to create.
 
Many of you bleating on about the new minimum wage limit, voted for a party which set a target of £1 less than the new rate. Yes, the banding is too broad at present, but there have always been such thresholds with the MW.
 
Shamwow said:
That's not an excuse. You're complaining about a problem that we as a country are helping to create.
Click to expand...

The problem is one inherent to the UNHRC itself, would you support the UK boycotting the organisation entirely? Or do we make supposedly principled stands on vote trading but tag along anywy?
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
The problem is one inherent to the UNHRC itself, would you support the UK boycotting the organisation entirely? Or do we make supposedly principled stands on vote trading but tag along anywy?
Click to expand...

Again, you are saying it's inherent to the UNHRC but we are a major reason for that. Let's stop contributing to the problem first.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
Many of you bleating on about the new minimum wage limit, voted for a party which set a target of £1 less than the new rate. Yes, the banding is too broad at present, but there have always been such thresholds with the MW.
Click to expand...
Think the point is Nick that for many people, the cuts in tax credits will make them significantly worse off (whilst still in work) even with the higher minimum wage. This isn't about students working in Costa getting a pay rise, it's about parents that were already struggling to make ends meet having a significant cut in their earnings. That IDS said it would teach people that having kids was expensive gives a sense of the dickheadishness of the gimp.
 
As to Cameron's speech...yeah, Labour are fecked.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
Many of you bleating on about the new minimum wage limit, voted for a party which set a target of £1 less than the new rate. Yes, the banding is too broad at present, but there have always been such thresholds with the MW.
Click to expand...

Without cutting tax credits or withholding it entirely from young people.

Ubik said:
As to Cameron's speech...yeah, Labour are fecked.
Click to expand...

Why? Have you got sucked into this weird response to it that because he claimed to be centrist or even centre-left, he actually is, despite every policy indication to the contrary.
 
Ubik said:
As to Cameron's speech...yeah, Labour are fecked.
Click to expand...

That might be the case if he was standing again. I'm not sure the others can sell the bull as well.

Claiming Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser and hates Britain is Trump level politics though. Poor show
 
Untied said:
Why? Have you got sucked into this weird response to it that because he claimed to be centrist or even centre-left, he actually is, despite every policy indication to the contrary.
Click to expand...

Ubik's been turned because Labour voted for the guy that has the closest values to him or something.
 
Ubik said:
Think the point is Nick that for many people, the cuts in tax credits will make them significantly worse off (whilst still in work) even with the higher minimum wage. This isn't about students working in Costa getting a pay rise, it's about parents that were already struggling to make ends meet having a significant cut in their earnings. That IDS said it would teach people that having kids was expensive gives a sense of the dickheadishness of the gimp.
Click to expand...

There was a case to be made against the present-day role of tax credits i think, and certainly some of the thresholds were open to reform (how many children, hours worked e.t.c.). But has Osborne gone too far, particularly in what continue to be uncertain ecnomic times? Yes

However we still had several posters fixating upon the rise to the minimum wage, which whether they like the source or not, has been an advance on what anyone expected back in May.
 
Shamwow said:
Again, you are saying it's inherent to the UNHRC but we are a major reason for that. Let's stop contributing to the problem first.
Click to expand...

So you're more than happy to work alongside the human rights abusers, just so long as we didn't trade votes with them at the outset?
 
Untied said:
Without cutting tax credits or withholding it entirely from young people.

Why? Have you got sucked into this weird response to it that because he claimed to be centrist or even centre-left, he actually is, despite every policy indication to the contrary.
Click to expand...
Because they're now stealing the language used by Labour that people liked most and are managing to sell it to the Tory party conference. Labour are a shambles and will not sort themselves out for years. The Tories will use this moderate rhetoric for the next five years whilst implementing right wing policies and voters will flood to them. Not unlike the way Blair used centrist language to broaden appeal whilst embarking on lefty stuff like tax credits (which we're now all complaining about being cut to the bone).

Nick 0208 Ldn said:
There was a case to be made against the present-day role of tax credits i think, and certainly some of the thresholds were open to reform (how many children, hours worked e.t.c.). But has Osborne gone too far, particularly in what continue to be uncertain ecnomic times? Yes

However we still had several posters fixating upon the rise to the minimum wage, which whether they like the source or not, has been an advance on what anyone expected back in May.
Click to expand...
Is fair enough, Osborne completely took the rug from under Labour on that one, who are now left in the bizarre position of arguing why a larger increase in the minimum wage isn't sound economics. And he came out with that before the gift that was Corbyn.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
So you're more than happy to work alongside the human rights abusers, just so long as we didn't trade votes with them at the outset?
Click to expand...

If by working "alongside" them we can try to influence things to be better for human rights then yes I am.

Voting for notorious human rights abusers definitely won't make that happen so let's stop that first.
 
Untied said:
Why? Have you got sucked into this weird response to it that because he claimed to be centrist or even centre-left, he actually is, despite every policy indication to the contrary.
Click to expand...

He may only be pretending to be a centre-leftie or centrist - but Labour aren't even bothering to pretend. Worse, they've spent all summer abusing & disowning centre ground Labour voters. Simple fact is that if you're a centrist, only one party wants to know about it.
 
bishblaize said:
He may only be pretending to be a centre-leftie or centrist - but Labour aren't even bothering to pretend. Worse, they've spent all summer abusing & disowning centre ground Labour voters. Simple fact is that if you're a centrist, only one party wants to know about it.
Click to expand...

The Lib Dems?
 
bishblaize said:
He may only be pretending to be a centre-leftie or centrist - but Labour aren't even bothering to pretend. Worse, they've spent all summer abusing & disowning centre ground Labour voters. Simple fact is that if you're a centrist, only one party wants to know about it.
Click to expand...
They've been actively told to join the Tories.

Ah well, maybe the people that never vote will save us.
 
Two more points:

1. This line "Our belief in equality of opportunity, as opposed to equality of outcome" is entirely contradictory. You cannot have equality of opportunity without some equality of outcome.

2. I'm quite concerned by how quick to use the threat of terrorism Cameron is.
Corbyn (poorly) criticises the lack of due process surrounding the assassination of Bin Laden: It's justified because he attacked us.
Cameron is criticised for ordering the probably illegal assassination of two British IS fighters: It's justified because they were going to attack us.
Jon Snow criticises his relationship with Saudi Arabia: It's justified because they helped stop an attack on us.

This is not healthy. In fact it's completely undemocraric to keep appealing to evidence we cannot be shown.

Ubik said:
Because they're now stealing the language used by Labour that people liked most and are managing to sell it to the Tory party conference. Labour are a shambles and will not sort themselves out for years. The Tories will use this moderate rhetoric for the next five years whilst implementing right wing policies and voters will flood to them. Not unlike the way Blair used centrist language to broaden appeal whilst embarking on lefty stuff like tax credits (which we're now all complaining about being cut to the bone).
Click to expand...

@bishblaize

Yeah you are right that in terms of rhetoric they are pursuing the middle-class, right wing with a heart, new Labour voter. Labour has somewhat abandoned that demographic. I probably overestimate the electorate's ability to ignore the rhetorical framing. You're more cynical/pragmatic.

I'm still fairly optimistic they are going to fall apart over Europe, an internal leadership battle, and the crash that should occur before 2020. Additionally their policies will hit low income families in a way Blair never did, and they are completely writing off the young vote which will make up another 5 years worth of the electorate in 2020.
 
Thought Camerons use of 9/11 was particularly spectacular today, but then again he went through a phase of using his son to gain credibility on the NHS so I don't see why we should be surprised.
 
Untied said:
1. This line "Our belief in equality of opportunity, as opposed to equality of outcome" is entirely contradictory. You cannot have equality of opportunity without some equality of outcome.
Click to expand...

If two people get the same chance but one out performs the other the outcome will be unequal. I don't think Cameron meant preventing equality of outcome I think he meant not guaranteeing it.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
If the UNHRC's worth is to be judged by its constituent members then it probably should have been disbanded long ago (ought Cameron to have said that?). In recent years they have included: Russia, China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Congo, Kazakhstan, Ethiopia, and Venezuela to name but a few.
Click to expand...

Its a joke, but what's even more of a joke is Cameron being all sanctimonious on the issue of human rights in the Middle East, while he currently does backhand deals like this, and sells the Saudis weapons.
 
bishblaize said:
If two people get the same chance but one out performs the other the outcome will be unequal. I don't think Cameron meant preventing equality of outcome I think he meant not guaranteeing it.
Click to expand...

That's not what I mean. Errm, I'll try to give an example. Suppose one family can afford music lessons for their child due to being middle earners whilst a lower earning family cannot. That presents us with an inequality of opportunity. If we offer e.g. free music lessons for poor children or make music lessons free for all to remove that inequality of opportunity, we have created an equality of outcome (everyone will be able to provide music lessons for their child regardless of their success). The idea that 'equality of outcome' and 'equality of opportunity' are opposed is complete nonsense. I would actually argue that the only way you can have complete 'equality of opportunity' is to have complete 'equality of outcome' (which I should hasten to add is not something I am advocating).
 
Untied said:
That's not what I mean. Errm, I'll try to give an example. Suppose one family can afford music lessons for their child due to being middle earners whilst a lower earning family cannot. That presents us with an inequality of opportunity. If we offer e.g. free music lessons for poor children or make music lessons free for all to remove that inequality of opportunity, we have created an equality of outcome (everyone will be able to provide music lessons for their child regardless of their success). The idea that 'equality of outcome' and 'equality of opportunity' are opposed is complete nonsense. I would actually argue that the only way you can have complete 'equality of opportunity' is to have complete 'equality of outcome' (which I should hasten to add is not something I am advocating).
Click to expand...

Isn't the outcome there who learns from the lessons though? Who becomes best at understanding, playing, writing music.
 
Untied said:
That's not what I mean. Errm, I'll try to give an example. Suppose one family can afford music lessons for their child due to being middle earners whilst a lower earning family cannot. That presents us with an inequality of opportunity. If we offer e.g. free music lessons for poor children or make music lessons free for all to remove that inequality of opportunity, we have created an equality of outcome (everyone will be able to provide music lessons for their child regardless of their success). The idea that 'equality of outcome' and 'equality of opportunity' are opposed is complete nonsense. I would actually argue that the only way you can have complete 'equality of opportunity' is to have complete 'equality of outcome' (which I should hasten to add is not something I am advocating).
Click to expand...

In this case you'd say equal access to music lessons was the opportunity, however well they learned their instrument was the outcome.
 
Kaos said:
Its a joke, but what's even more of a joke is Cameron being all sanctimonious on the issue of human rights in the Middle East, while he currently does backhand deals like this, and sells the Saudis weapons.
Click to expand...

And also teaches them how to operate prisons.
 
Tory conference: Cameron's 'assault on poverty' pledge belied by new figures
Resolution Foundation report says planned welfare cuts would lead to 200,000 more working households in poverty by 2020

The Conservatives, Cameron said, must live up to their great traditions of social reform and be the right party “for those who work hard, want to get on and want more money at the end of the month”. Insisting Britain was on the brink of something special, he claimed “hope is returning and we are moving into the light”, allowing the Conservatives to be seen as the “party of the fair chance, the party of the equal shot”.
Click to expand...

Hahaha x a billion.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...sault-on-poverty-pledge-undone-by-new-figures
 
For anybody who missed it, the Tory party conference distilled:

Work harder you lazy fecking c*nts! Produce greater surplus value, you lazy feckers!
Plug the production gap for our nation's future.
Or you won't get a home. Or you won't get a pension.
And you'll lie untreated in a hospital corridor. Awaiting death.
Lazy c*nts.
Work harder.
Strive don't skive.
We love hardworking people, but not the immigrant ones. We love the immigrant ones. Except the muslim ones.
Because we love the muslim ones.That's we won't tolerate them passively.
We are well beyond love here.
And you, the under 25s, are even lazier than the hardworking families.
And if you're under 21, the minimum wage is a dying wage.
Still. You need to work harder before you get it. Before we allow you to live.
We'll fecking bury you, if you don't work. But we won't pay you. Workfare, not welfare. Zero fecking hours.
Throw away your crutches! Get up and go!
You lazy feckers.
Work harder, you c*nts.
Like we did. That's why we can lord it over you. We're not lazy c*nts.
Unlike you.
We didn't inherit our wealth. And we didn't all go to Eton, either. Not all Bullingdon here.
Some here today have never even fecked a pig.
White people applauding. Liverpudlians without accents.
Foreigners are a bit shifty. Pssssssttt! They're taking your jobs.
Foreigners are all right though. I mean, If they produce surplus value. If they strive, not skive. And work for the minimum wage.
Unlike you.
Lazy c*nts.
feck off immigrants! Welcome immigrants! Especially Syrians. Straight from the camps.
Not the fearful ones from the jungle.
Corbyn loves Bin Laden. A tragedy. 9/11 rolled out for old times. Taken out for another spin.
Of course we must deal arms with Saudi Arabia. Or they won't tell us what the terrorists are planning.
Tragedy averted.
Flog a blogger, crucify a protestor. Keep your head for God's sake! Keep quiet, keep the peace.
Corbyn loves terrorists. And he won't drop the bomb!
Unlike us.
We will nuke and be nuked. Because we love our country.
Labour hates hardworking families. Corbyn will crucify you with taxes. He will nationalise our assets.
We love our country.
We love austerity.
So work harder you lazy feckers!
And the gays, nearly forgot. Right on, Gay Pride. And stuff like that. No longer the nasty party. The eighties are over.
But the hate-ies are about to begin.
Because Corbyn hates Britain. And the Queen. Labour hates hardworking families. Hates Britain, the land of equal opportunities.
Unlike us. We love hardworking families. That's why we cut tax credits. To motivate you.
Now work like Chinese, you lazy c*nts! Produce more surplus value. Be like the Chinese. Free to sell your labour to lowest bidder.
A suicide net at every factory! Greater output! Greater wealth!
Don't be a freeloader.
Hate immigrants.
Love immigrants.
Love China.
Hate communists like Corbyn.
Love communists like China.
Strive, don't skive.
Two kids only.
Not like China.
Not social engineering.
Just cuts, cuts, cuts.
c*nts!
Great Britain.
Land of lazy fecking c*nts.
Now get back to work.
Click to expand...

...
 
David Cameron says Bin Laden death was a tragedy. Pretty shocking that.

 
Drifter said:
Think it was taken out of context.
Click to expand...
Doubt it. I mean you would have to be an absolute pig of a person to take a comment like this and twist it so it use against them.

Surely that wouldn't be the case here.
 
Sweet Square said:
Doubt it. I mean you would have to be an absolute pig of a person to take a comment like this and twist it so it use against them.

Surely that wouldn't be the case here.
Click to expand...
You've got so many things right here.

Oink.
 
Sweet Square said:
Doubt it. I mean you would have to be an absolute pig of a person to take a comment like this and twist it so it use against them.

Surely that wouldn't be the case here.
Click to expand...

Even when put into the context of his entire statement on the matter, it wouldn't have been a win for Corbyn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.