Brexit .
Who won Marty?
(clue - Micheal Heseltine can offer you guidance)
Brexit isn’t an argument it’s a thing. I’ve had numerous arguments with numerous people about different aspects of Brexit. If it’s ‘will Brexit happen’ then I conceded that on 24th June 2016, I remain firm in my opinion (as does Heseltine) that it’s a bad idea. The proof of that particular pudding will be in the eating.RingoMcCartney wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:28 pmBrexit .
Who won Marty?
(clue - Micheal Heseltine can offer you guidance)
Oh look! The grammar police are here! The nitpicking, nothing better to do, than play the man , not the ball specialists , have taken their anoraks off and got the microscopes out.ksrclaret wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 8:10 pmOut of interest, who do you go to when you need advice on where to place a full stop in a post? Or even how punctuate a post to even the most basic of levels? Because you're being badly advised at the moment, mate. The above post is shockingly incoherent.
You could do a lot worse than asking Frank how to do it.
Who won the arguement Marty?martin_p wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:33 pmBrexit isn’t an argument it’s a thing. I’ve had numerous arguments with numerous people about different aspects of Brexit. If it’s ‘will Brexit happen’ then I conceded that on 24th June 2016, I remain firm in my opinion (as does Heseltine) that it’s a bad idea. The proof of that particular pudding will be in the eating.
Oh dear, do we really have to do this? Just define the argument. Clue- arguments are often expressed as a question.
You asked me a question.
Well you posed two questions there. I’ve never said we shouldn’t honour the referendum result unless there was a democratic vote to overturn it (good luck in finding me say anything different). As to whether we should leave the EU, I’m not sure how a general election proves whether we should or not. As with 2016 it seems that more want to leave than don’t (although technically more people voted for remain or referendum supporting parties than leave parties in the general election, but our electoral system is what it is so ‘leave’ won), but that doesn’t prove either way whether it’s right to leave the EU or not. I still think it’s a bad idea you still think it’s a good idea, but to use one of your popular arguments unless you have a crystal ball you don’t know whether we should leave or not. Only time will tell, in five years time I might be saying it was a great idea or you might be saying we shouldn’t have left, who knows.RingoMcCartney wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:03 amYou asked me a question.
"Do we really have to do this?:
Answer- No, not at all!
But if you want to prolong your agony, so be it.
Given the general election result, which was seen by most commentators as a massive endorsement of Boris Johnson's offer to the British people to "get Brexit done." A viewpoint which, as you well know, after 3 and a half years of of you and I disagreeing on whether we should leave the European union and should we honour the 2016 EU membership referendum?
Who won the arguement Marty?
Me
Or
You ?
((there will be other posters rolling there eyes saying to themselves, " for Gods sake Martin_p, please please please, stop doing this to yourself. Stop feeding Ringo the oxygen he thrives upon. Just let it go. Give the bar steward what he wants . It's done. It's over. Admit it the fights lost. This is unpleasant to watch)
That's you saying "leave won" Marty!martin_p wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:19 amWell you posed two questions there. I’ve never said we shouldn’t honour the referendum result unless there was a democratic vote to overturn it (good luck in finding me say anything different). As to whether we should leave the EU, I’m not sure how a general election proves whether we should or not. As with 2016 it seems that more want to leave than don’t (although technically more people voted for remain or referendum supporting parties than leave parties in the general election, but our electoral system is what it is so ‘ leave’ won ), but that doesn’t prove either way whether it’s right to leave the EU or not. I still think it’s a bad idea you still think it’s a good idea, but to use one of your popular arguments unless you have a crystal ball you don’t know whether we should leave or not. Only time will tell, in five years time I might be saying it was a great idea or you might be saying we shouldn’t have left, who knows.
Answer please Marty........
People, especially the young, dont remember when these industries were last run by the state. They were run at a loss, and propped up by the public.ksrclaret wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 9:48 pm6 billionaires, sorry, I stand corrected. I'm happy with that then.
Look, you're obviously fine with the prices you're paying for these essential services. For others winter fuel payments are necessary for survival of this season. Something has gone terribly wrong somewhere, and you won't convince me that taking these industries into public control won't be better than what we have now.
I agree with all that, but theres nothing wrong with the country being run by Socialists, just not by Corbyns brand of socialism .clarethomer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:04 amThe problem with nationalisation for me is;
It costs the tax payer to nationalise these things
It costs the tax payer to keep them going when they are not performing
There is little evidence of increased productivity
Government have good history of wasting money when it comes to trying to build systems or carry out major projects
Overall the likelihood of nationalisation being more beneficial for the many is highly unlikely on the balance of probabilities as it will end up costing the tax payer when it goes through tough times and it will hit those you were intending to help the most. Sorting out the perceived issues of these industries/sectors will end up costing more than expected etc.
Some of the problems that Labour were trying to solve - such as energy poverty, general,poverty, helping the homeless.
- pumping money into solutions won’t fully rid these things.
- there are a multitude of reasons for these problems where people don’t want to be helped.
There is a story running currently where a young couple (25 ish) with 7 kids who were blaming benefits caps for hardship on their family. They had set a go fund me campaign up and got over 3k in donations.... the follow up story on this is how this money has paid for tattoos and for them to waste the money on drink/drugs and family members reporting of the money not being needed as they had reported.
The point here isn’t about this one family but that the aspiration of living in a world of no poverty or no social issues etc goes well beyond the realms of governments ability to solve.
Yes, there will be people that if help given would take it and more needs to be done, but surely the money that was being offered by Labour was seen as bribes which would have crippled the country if delivered.
They were too radical and not thought through. Corbyn failed to understand what the concerns of the country and played party politics which only annoyed more people. Despite all of the noise from momentum and the brainwashed supporters who loved the idea of a eutopian world, thankfully the country saw through their ill thought through manifesto promises and we are not looking down the barrel of a socialist run country.
‘Leave’ won the election(within the constraints of the system), that’s all I said.RingoMcCartney wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:33 amThat's you saying "leave won" Marty!
Given I was on the Leave side of our arguement. Where as you were, and still are, on the Remain side of the arguement. Is that you confirming that I, RingoMcCartney, won the arguement Marty?
Is it!? Can you actually bring yourself to swallowing that mutton headed pride of yours and finally, after 3 and a half years of frustration with the 2016 referendum result, you can concede that, I won our arguement?
Yes
Or
No?
To clarify. There's a question mark at the end of the word "no". That means I've asked you a direct question
I've done that, specifically, to meet your requirements that
Answer please Marty........
Rail subsidies have tripled since privatisation.Colburn_Claret wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 6:54 amPeople, especially the young, dont remember when these industries were last run by the state. They were run at a loss, and propped up by the public.
The subsidies, by and large, are to Network Rail and are for track maintenance and laying. On average the government seems to break even or make a small profit from the train operators. It might make sense to nationalise Network Rail, perhaps, if the numbers work out better that way. The EU-enforced separation of track and trains is a very odd way to do it, though - perhaps after Brexit it might be better to reunite the two.
Fine. Let's have passengers paying the full cost of rail travel. That doesn't seem a very environmentally friendly policy or particularly likely to come from a socialist way of thinking but let's try it. Rail company profits, don't forget, are about 2% of the total cost of your ticket.
Im responding to the myth that our railways don’t run at a loss to the U.K. tax payer and that private companies have some how turned a loss making operation into a profitable one.thatdberight wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:40 amFine. Let's have passengers paying the full cost of rail travel. That doesn't seem a very environmentally friendly policy or particularly likely to come from a socialist way of thinking but let's try it. Rail company profits, don't forget, are about 2% of the total cost of your ticket.
That is a myth. Although, of course, they actually can't make a profit since their fares are constrained.
No man is an island but if you're the one making the promises then you're the one culpable if they aren't fulfilled (particularly if lots of people have already pointed out how unrealistic they are).Colburn_Claret wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 5:48 pmNo man is an island, whether you are talking abot Boris, or Corbyn or anyother leader, none of them have autonomy on making decisions or promises. They all have advisers, the numbers men behind them. The Tories have their foot in the door in the North, it would be madness to remove it. I think the faceless people are doing a great job. He talks the talk can he walk the walk. One nation Conservatism, can it pull the country together. They'll never get a better chance. If we had a one nation Labour party, we may never have had the chance to find out.
One thing we know from Tory history is the Right wing will stay quiet, until they think it isnt working. You can't rock the boat on someone who just won you an 80 seat majority.
You acknowledge that Leave has won.martin_p wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 9:11 am‘Leave’ won the election(within the constraints of the system), that’s all I said.
By the way, the ‘argument’ that Heseltine refers to having lost is quite different to the one(s) we have on here. He’s referring the the argument presented by remain politicians to the public to try and convince them Brexit was a bad idea. The arguments we have on here aren’t about persuading the general public, none of us have the ability or reach to do that.
aggi wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:32 pmNo man is an island but if you're the one making the promises then you're the one culpable if they aren't fulfilled (particularly if lots of people have already pointed out how unrealistic they are).
I can't see how Johnson can pull the country together, I think it's much more likely he's going to accelerate the breakup of the country. He's already started that process with Northern Ireland, I think that most people would agree that if you start putting customs checks and the rest between NI and the rest of the UK they're going to start thinking that they have more in common with Eire than the rest of the UK. As for Scotland, the harder the Brexit the more they're going to push back by wanting to leave. Johnson is intensely disliked there and I can't see that there's much he can do to get Scotland on side.
You don't think that having somewhere to live helped you to progress in any way. Would you have had the ability to accumulate capital if it was all being spent on keeping a roof over your head?CrosspoolClarets wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:50 pmBetter worded as “would have helped me to progress in any way”. The council house was a valuable safety net for us 50 years ago, but the social mobility came from the ability to accumulate capital and to spend that capital on education to get qualified and to progress in my career. Take away the ability to accumulate capital and we are frankly stuffed.
p.s. I do find it bemusing that the earlier poster started a “is socialism good” debate which led to my original reply, days after an election which soundly rejected it. Mr McDonnell would be very impressed by that perseverence.
NI is a mish mash and I'm not happy about it, but the custom checks between NI and the UK are only for goods coming from the Republic, or heading to the Republic, not NI.aggi wrote: ↑Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:32 pmNo man is an island but if you're the one making the promises then you're the one culpable if they aren't fulfilled (particularly if lots of people have already pointed out how unrealistic they are).
I can't see how Johnson can pull the country together, I think it's much more likely he's going to accelerate the breakup of the country. He's already started that process with Northern Ireland, I think that most people would agree that if you start putting customs checks and the rest between NI and the rest of the UK they're going to start thinking that they have more in common with Eire than the rest of the UK. As for Scotland, the harder the Brexit the more they're going to push back by wanting to leave. Johnson is intensely disliked there and I can't see that there's much he can do to get Scotland on side.
Then we'll agree that socialism provided you with the platform to accrue wealth. Socialism made social mobility easier. I say that because at any time between 1800 and 1900 it almost certainly wouldn't have happened, and between 1900 and 1939 it would have been quite unlikely. Only after Britain embraced socialism and sharply curbed the excesses of capitalism was it more common.CrosspoolClarets wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:45 pmObviously my point wasn’t so much about me but an example concerning everyone. There will always be a big element down to the unique individual and what they are able to achieve, a meritocracy element if you will, to add to the socialist / capitalist mix you describe.
I would concur that there are socialist elements in our society (free education and healthcare being two). Unfortunately education is a postcode lottery, and the thing that dictates that is where someone lives, which is linked to how much capital they have accumulated. So the thing that can lead to achievement in life is linked to the capitalist element.
Generally, the capital someone can be allowed to accumulate plays a major role in their life experience in the UK. Owning their home, owning a car, investing for their retirement etc. I thus feel confident that the capitalism element of the UK is of more benefit than the socialist element for most people, the social bit should be to provide a safety net for those who fall short.
I tend to find your pessimism about the UK today to be totally misplaced, but I have debated that with you before and won’t revisit it tonight other than to say, for example I could point to statistics that child poverty is down since Tony Blair’s time, by the updated modern measure of it from the Social Metrics Commission, but I have never found a left winger who would agree.
Someone else who believes that he knows what's better for the working class of Burnley, than the working class of Burnley!!
Do yo mean like Lord Falconer, Lord Adonis or Lord Mandleson ?
Yes (although I don't remember those being as egregious as being parachuted in days after losing an election. Bringing Mandelson back was pretty embarrassing though). Weird how some "unelected officials" seem to be OK.claretandy wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 1:45 pmDo yo mean like Lord Falconer, Lord Adonis or Lord Mandleson ?
I think it was the idea of the bosses being unelected that was anathema. If the unelected had been subordinate to the elected, there would have been much less opposition.
I dunno, if you search back on here it's generally in reference to officials, bureaucrats, etc. not just the "boss".
And how did that work last time they tried it? They were dismissed and then mostly reappointed. Ask Neil Kinnock.aggi wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 5:55 pmI dunno, if you search back on here it's generally in reference to officials, bureaucrats, etc. not just the "boss".
(Obviously that's putting aside the fact that the EU commission, who I assume is what people are referring to as "unelected" as, are subordinate to the elected EU Parliament as the Parliament has the power to dismiss them.)
Seems?aggi wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:37 pmHmm, it looks like the manifesto commitment to increase the minimum wage has now become somewhat caveated:
The chancellor has pledged that the national living wage will increase, reaching two-thirds of median earnings within five years (projected to be around £10.50 an hour in 2024), provided economic conditions allow.
Before the election I said that I expected to see Johnson promise a lot but not necessarily deliver it. This seems like a very early indication of this.
A slice of the NHS?summitclaret wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:46 pmJust think what she could have had being a member of one nation tory government had she upheld the manifesto that she was elected on.
Like one nation tory Johnson who is ripping up the promises in his manifesto at record speed?summitclaret wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:46 pmJust think what she could have had being a member of one nation tory government had she upheld the manifesto that she was elected on.
Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:52 pmLike one nation tory Johnson who is ripping up the promises in his manifesto at record speed?
Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:52 pm
Fri May 31, 2019 9:42 am
I love the whole idea that Wrongo is somehow on here every day pwning the people who disagree with him over his Brexit fantasies.
The fact is we've been drinking our delicious victory glasses of remain champagne every night since March 29th while the cheap, nasty, celebratory bottle of White Lightning for the Leavers still sits, unopened in the pantry, as lonely and unloved as Theresa May.
Just remember, there hasn't been a Brexit and there won't be a Brexit because it is as it always was, the intelligent will fix the mistake of the stupid.
You had Bercow