Anything Political

[DJ360 6,733]

On 9/7/2020 at 6:22 PM, Brew said:

Playing brinkmanship is just another way of saying negotiate. Buying a car, shopping around... we all do it. It is praised for its foresight and courage when it comes off, damned for its stupidity when it doesn't. The alternative is lay down have our tummy tickled and say yes to everything the EU proposes.

 

I'm content that resignations on the Govt. side and the general condemnation of our 'Govt.' for its cavalier treatment of accepted conventions of International Law, point to this being more than simply a negotiating tactic.  Johnson is quoted as recently sayng 'No Deal would be a good outcome'.  Tell that to NI, UK agriculture and manufacturing etc. The man is a liability..unduly influenced by a far right lunatic.

[DJ360 6,733]

On 9/7/2020 at 6:22 PM, Brew said:

As for the most corrupt for almost two hundred years that's just unknowable and unproveable hyperbole...

 

Just one..very small, example...

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/racing/matt-hancock-funded-by-leading-figures-of-wonderful-uk-racing-1.4280397

 

I won't rehearse the rest of it. The Sercos, Crapitas etc.. or the countless examples of lobbying etc. They are totally bent.

[Brew 5,422]

Perhaps you didn't read far enough Col.

 

Quote from the same article:

 

A source close to the Jockey Club said Harding and Rose Paterson had played no part in the process of racing being given the go-ahead to restart, which was managed by the governing body, the British Horseracing Association, to meet safety protocols set out by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. A spokesperson for Hancock said he had not taken part in any of the discussions, nor in the decision for the Cheltenham festival to go ahead on March 10th-13th as the virus was spreading.

[DJ360 6,733]

I read it all Jim.  I just don't buy the denials.  It stretches credibility beyond its limits to believe that Hancock, Dido Harding et.al. had no influence.  They don't have to be on formal committees or executives to have influence.  A word here or there, a well placed promise or threat.. all off the record...

 

You hint at naivety on my part over Johnson's wrecking operation re: Brexit. but you think I don't make the obvious connections here..and elsewhere?

 

Also.. you see my rhetoric as.  'anti Tory.'.  that needs some qualification...

 

 

I do not agree with much of traditional Conservative thinking.especially over economics, taxation, public spending/borrowing, privatisation etc. It does not follow that I think all Conservative thinkers , politicians and supporters are 'Bent'.

 

However... I firmly believe, and the evidence supports my view.. that the present bunch of Tories in Government are a pretty amoral, self seeking and frankly corrupt lot.  They've purged anyone with a shred of decency or belief in the supremacy of Parliament.  They are now setting about politicising the Civil Service.  They have more plans. all quietly smuggled out in the deeper parts of their manifesto.

A bigger bunch of crooks would be hard to envisage.

 

[Brew 5,422]

1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

I just don't buy the denials.

 

The Irish Times article you quote is a verbatim copy/paste from the left leaning Guardian so bound to be slanted against the government

 

Without proof we have to accept that they are telling the truth (innocent until...) and he took no part in the discussions - the fact it's not in keeping with the authors mindset does not make them liars.

The nudge nudge wink wink scenario though is far more probable but that sort of influence is most definitely not the sole preserve of the Tories.

 

A lot of the article is innuendo regarding the financial contributions yet I see no evidence of impropriety. The money and amounts are well documented, nothing as far as I can see is underhand in any way, everything is open to scrutiny. Contributions, both large and small, are part of politics and every party receives donations from supporters.

You also mention lobbying, again it's part of the political process and works reasonably well - providing we discount the  Labour cabinet ministers who where willing to help in return for cash! (I do know some Tories have sticky fingers too).

 

 

1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

You hint at naivety on my part over Johnson's wrecking operation re: Brexit.

 

I don't think you naive on the subject, you can be quite insightful but you can also at times only see negatives.

 

1 hour ago, DJ360 said:

Also.. you see my rhetoric as.  'anti Tory.'.  that needs some qualification...

 

 

It really doesn't Col, scroll back through your own posts when you slip into PFM mode - you can be quite vituperative at times.

 

Government are a pretty amoral, self seeking...      Describes just about every politician on the planet and are virtual prerequisites for the job, not sure all are corrupt though.

 

[DJ360 6,733]

It seems to me to be arguable that the test of a good Politician is not so much their loyalty to their party. but their loyalty to our Democracy and our People.

It seems that even now there are some Conservative politicians who also believe that.. and are prepared to rebel against Johnson/Cummings..in defence of our respect for Law, Democracy and..yes.. Honour.

 

It's rather a pity that our population don't seem to be also engaged with this very real debate concerning or nation's future.

[Brew 5,422]

11 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

It seems to me to be arguable that the test of a good Politician is not so much their loyalty to their party. but their loyalty to our Democracy and our People.

It seems that even now there are some Conservative politicians who also believe that.. and are prepared to rebel against Johnson/Cummings..in defence of our respect for Law, Democracy and..yes.. Honour.

 

It's rather a pity that our population don't seem to be also engaged with this very real debate concerning or nation's future.

 

Surely it's really only a personal opinion and conjecture.  Politicians can't wear two hats, they can't be members of a party and act as an independent.

You are alluding that those who serve in the government are not honourable because they not have resigned in a fit of pique;  yet extol the virtues of a robust opposition. How can politicians effectively oppose policies they disagree with if they are not part of the decision making process? Spitting their dummy out serves no purpose except to bolster egos and give them a grandstand for claiming the high ground - and giving Thatcher's 'wets' a way in. I suspect some possibly have an eye on the future and are manoeuvring to gain an advantage at a later date.

 

When there is something worth getting into an argument about you stand and fight your corner not slink off and sulk or take your ball home and not play anymore.

Being fired for not compromising or not acting contrary to ones principles is an entirely different matter.

 

Do you not think it just tad over the top to judge the population as disinterested in the future? Having seen the degree and depth of feeling over Brexit and Covid I'd say they are very interested.

 

[Oztalgian 3,302]

Question to Brew and DJ360.

Do you think the populace would have more interest in democracy and engaged in debate and policies if :-

 

Voting was made compulsory?

or

A form of proportional representation was used?

[PeverilPeril 3,284]

7 hours ago, Brew said:

When there is something worth getting into an argument about you stand and fight your corner not slink off and sulk or take your ball home and not play anymore.

 

 

That is your interpretation Brew. They are being outspoken and fighting their corner the best they can. Or would you rather them just shut up and become invisible?

[Brew 5,422]

9 minutes ago, PeverilPeril said:

That is your interpretation Brew. They are being outspoken and fighting their corner the best they can. Or would you rather them just shut up and become invisible?

 

Of course it's an interpretation and opinion, so are the preceding 86 pages, it's all conjecture.

 

My contention is that politicians are, by resigning and taking no further part in debates, putting themselves into a position whereby they become invisible. They silence their own voices.

Resignations raise some interesting questions. Do we want or expect our political masters to follow their own set of beliefs and convictions, the policies of the party they were elected to persue or a loud set of populist rabble rousers with entirely different agendas?

To be simplistic, you can't fight your corner if you're not in the ring.

[PeverilPeril 3,284]

4 minutes ago, Brew said:

 

 

To be simplistic, you can't fight your corner if you're not in the ring.

 

Or, live to fight another day.

You mention populist rabble rousers - I give you the PM, prompted by his chief adviser and other nasty people. 

[Brew 5,422]

4 hours ago, Oztalgian said:

Question to Brew and DJ360.

Do you think the populace would have more interest in democracy and engaged in debate and policies if :-

 

Voting was made compulsory?

or

A form of proportional representation was used?

 

I don't think either would have much effect Oz.

There is and has been for years debate that the people lost confidence in the politcal system a long time ago. People turn out to vote when they feel a real connection  i.e Brexit but even that only attracted around 70% of he voters.

The sad fact is democracy doesn't really work very well at all, not that I fancy any of the alternatives.

[Brew 5,422]

3 minutes ago, PeverilPeril said:

 

Or, live to fight another day.

You mention populist rabble rousers - I give you the PM, prompted by his chief adviser and other nasty people. 

 

And I agree! but if no one stands up to them? Which is better, to raise voices in protest where it counts or snipe from the shadows?

By running away from the argument all that will happen is the executive will fill the vacancies with sycophants and they win - which is pretty much the status quo today.

[trogg 2,017]

1 hour ago, Brew said:

Resignations raise some interesting questions. Do we want or expect our political masters to follow their own set of beliefs and convictions, the policies of the party they were elected to persue or a loud set of populist rabble rousers with entirely different agendas?

 

What is the thoughts on how an MP should vote when the Party requires them to vote one way but the people in his Constituency clearly want them to vote against the party. That is what do they put first Party or Constituency?  I have asked several MPs but as you expect never a clear answer.

[Brew 5,422]

It comes down to personal integrity Trogg. Is party policy for the greater good or are local concerns more important? There is no easy answer and running away is no answer at all.

[radfordred 6,284]

Nigel Farage would have made a fantastic Prime Minister, someone of integrity, loves his country, he would have put the great back in to Britain.

[Brew 5,422]

You rubbished Malthus and his catastrophe theory before but now you’re trying to turn into a rich v poor argument - it’s not.

Simply put he claimed that population growth is exponential and food production arithmetically linear, ipso facto we will run out of food at some point, he didn’t say when.

His reasoning of why and when is what was mostly challenged but common sense says there has to be a finite limit.
It was all hypothetical and mocked at the time by Dickens in his role as a social commentator, but no real evidence was offered in repudiation. The whole idea was merely pooh-poohed and ridiculed.

Today it is decried by those who claim technology, agriculture and economic growth precludes it ever happening. So far and to a degree they’re right. Agriculture has made some startling advances he could not possibly have envisioned. Technology and economics have also made huge strides. The problem lies in the fact that people will not face up to the realities. No amount of technological wizardry will create a significant amount of land and land use is the problem. As in the 19th century we can only speculate with known facts, having blind faith that it will come right in the end is sleepwalking into disaster. We cannot keep relying on a quantum leap to save us.

Most of the Earth’s surface is devoid of humans, true. 71% is wet. That leaves only 29% solid ground. 19% is desert. 37% is forest, 50% is agriculture.

The numbers become confusing so suffice it to say we can successfully occupy only a tiny proportion. So where's the problem? Human spreadation (is that a word?), we are taking up land used to produce food at an alarming rate. Around Notts the number of new houses being built is huge, where are they? On farmland

 

Col mentions’ swathes of land with very low population density’. Apart from mountains, bogs and some recreational areas, the majority is farmland, even with our highly productive, high intensity system we can only produce just over half our basic needs. It's something we need more of, not less A crap agricultural policy doesn't help.

The BBC link takes us to a cherry-picked article designed to gloss over the facts and support  the author's view, In reality it’s saying we use too much and must all at some point be reduced to the absolute minimum if we are to survive. Also on the BBC Stephen Hawking changed his view that humans have maybe 1000 years left and came up with a much reduced firgure of about 100yrs due to the increasing rate of changes affecting the planet. Like Malthus they’re hypotheses and only time will tell which is right... if any.

Political dogma and ideology have an impact but are not the cause

Ignoring the ‘I want’ diatribe the use of the royal ’we’ means everyone but ourselves.
 ‘We need to stop’. Anyone care to lead by not buying wine from abroad, travelling in a nice car, not buying imported food?

It’s not a selfish few Col – it’s all of us.
 
 

[Brew 5,422]

22 minutes ago, radfordred said:

Nigel Farage would have made a fantastic Prime Minister, someone of integrity, loves his country, he would have put the great back in to Britain.

 

That's one view RR and might hold water if he wasn't such a self centered, self aggrandizing twerp who's main interest is...

[philmayfield 6,144]

Hydrophonics as mentioned by Margie is what people use to grow cannabis in their lofts. Bypassing the meter to supply the heating and lighting! Judging by the recent arrests everyone seems to be at it. I’ve got to go up into the loft to change the ballcock washer. I might find a Vietnamese family up there.

[Brew 5,422]

1 minute ago, philmayfield said:

I might find a Vietnamese family up there.

 

We caught quite few but you won't find a family. They leave a young boy to look after things because they know the age of criminal responsibility starts at 10yrs old.

[LizzieM 9,511]

A large 5 bedroomed house opposite us was rented by a bunch of Lithuanians last year.  We all knew what was going on and a couple of our neighbours told the police about their suspicions, there was only one full-time resident too.   The police did nothing for several months, until last August.  We missed the excitement of the house getting raided because we were away in Dorset.  It’s taken the dozy owners a year to sort the house out, get rid of all the large plant pots, repair water damaged areas, redecorate, etc etc.  We noticed that the house is up for rental again ...... trust the letting agents will vet any new tenants a bit better this time.  Disappointing that it’s up for rental and not for sale but never mind. 

[Brew 5,422]

That's a problem with letting agents Lizzie they don't do much above the bare minimum.

 

Houses in Strelleh, a popular cannabis  farm area, usually have the electricty meter just in side the front door. As one or two policeman can atest it was a common trick to make the door knob and handles live which is the reason we were called in. I have to say though some of the workmanship I've seen was excellent, dangerous but really well thought out.

[philmayfield 6,144]

It used to be that fraudulent abstraction was done with a couple of hat pins pushed into the cables before the meter. I’ve not personally contemplated it but I’m sure I could do it in a more sophisticated way!

[Brew 5,422]

There are several way of doing it but believe me I seriously anyone can come up with a way they're not familiar with. The cannabis farms had no such sophistication though, they simply smashed the cut-out fuse with a hammer and tapped straight on to the main.

[siddha 825]

I guess this approach works.....................

Those at the bottom of the pile make things work for them in a very practical way.

Those at the top of the pile make things work for them in a different way.

We are the squeezed middle paying for both.