Jump to content
yorkie1999

Also in the news

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

God we need a change in system. Let’s stop voting for parties and manifestos full of horse shit promises.

 

Id prefer to vote for an individual leader and individual ministers with a specialist background in their chosen area.

 

The new PM should publish the ringfenced budget for each department area (pre-vote) and let expert candidates put themselves forward and we’ll vote for a person and a deputy person for each role.

 

We then get ministers for transport, environment, justice, education, business etc who are leaders in their field not some **** on a gravy train who was minister for rural affairs last week and the home fracking secretary the next.

 

It then becomes less about party and more about say a six year plan to get something done by people who know stuff rather than one of Gove’s Tory think tanks who have ideas based on how they can grow their bank balances.

I'd be down for this. The amount of politicians that seem to know nothing about their field is incredible.

 

The only problem is attracting leaders of specific fields into government, I'd imagine best in field folk would command a massive salary in the private sector, getting them to deal with all the political shite for comparatively pennies would be difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FIF said:

I just turn my freeview satellite box on. More to the point  though TF1 (French TV) is taken from you as a separate charge alongside your income tax. so pretty much the same as in the UK. You get a bill if you have a TV or even when you buy a TV.

 

 

 

Old folk didn't get it for free, the government subsidised it. Which seems a fair way to go about it. Complain to your government not the BBC. They have a choice. throw the TV and radio out. ridiculous but under your idea of choice it's still a choice.

 

 

 

The celeb generation has finally won through. I guess the UK is going to get what it deserves. I feel sorry for you all.

 

 

It does seem that racism is the only explanation.

 

Welcome to the new UK and possibly the future of Western civilisation. 

 

 

Amazing isn't it? We had those few days of panic discussions - resulting in nothing but getting an extentsion and then absolutely nothing. It's a disgrace. They shouldn't be allowed a holiday - they shouldn't be allowed out of the house of commons until they can sort out what they are going to do.

 

It really is disgusting.

 

 

 

You seem to be inferring that the Conservative party is that party. Corbyn or Johnson - there's still hope for the Liberals and Greens.

Do you work for the bbc or something. What you're actually saying is "tough shit old biddie, pay us for something that you did't pay for before or else, and if you don't like it, go and see your mp".  Some old grannie who was sat in her flat, quite content with watching the tv all day, is now going to have to take on the responsibility of finding the money for a licence or go begging to the state for a handout so they can pay for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/02/2019 at 16:59, Countryfox said:

 

 

 

Think he said he was getting in some serious training for some big hike coming up so presumed he was out and about a lot putting in a few miles with his backpack on ...   he’ll be back soon ..   :thumbup:

 

Very late 50’s I think Muzzett !!   :D

That's right @Buce had posted..he was off on one of his life experience gathering Long pilgrimages../ adventurous hikes..

Silly boy must have forgot his internet

Satellite gear..to keep in touch..:D

He has no excuse..all collapsable,for the corner in the rucksack..throw out and sacrifice unnecessary baggage..

Guiche shoes and Bennoton shirts.

Even razors and shampoo..he can grow a beard,and wash in the cold streams

Edited by fuchsntf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

I'd be down for this. The amount of politicians that seem to know nothing about their field is incredible.

 

The only problem is attracting leaders of specific fields into government, I'd imagine best in field folk would command a massive salary in the private sector, getting them to deal with all the political shite for comparatively pennies would be difficult.

Sure but these posts would be circa 200k and after they could write their own ticket. I also reckon there will be a few out there in their 50’s who have made their money and would relish the opportunity to do something for the greater good. 

 

And ND most of the experts in the public sector  area of jobs probably don’t earn above 150k now. E.g a headteacher who has worked their way up through private and public schools who understands the barriers challenges and landscapes of what works would be a far better minister for education  than somebody who just simply went to Eaton and then Cambridge before moving j to politics with family financial backing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Do you work for the bbc or something. What you're actually saying is "tough shit old biddie, pay us for something that you did't pay for before or else, and if you don't like it, go and see your mp".  Some old grannie who was sat in her flat, quite content with watching the tv all day, is now going to have to take on the responsibility of finding the money for a licence or go begging to the state for a handout so they can pay for it.

 

No I'm not. I'm commenting on the falsehoods that you keep stating. 

 

You're attacking the BBC for something that the government has changed. The licence has always needed to be paid or do you think that people should get the BBC for free? If you do who do you think should fund the BBC? The government through taxation (as they were for old people)? If you do then I agree with you - not sure why you're attacking the BBC for it though. I'd go further and suggest that old people should be able to watch sky and other tv companies for free - do you agree? Are you complaining about Sky charging old biddies for watching any of their pay for channels?

 

What about "old biddies" having to pay for food. Do you think they should have to pay for what is a necessity?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

I'd be down for this. The amount of politicians that seem to know nothing about their field is incredible.

 

The only problem is attracting leaders of specific fields into government, I'd imagine best in field folk would command a massive salary in the private sector, getting them to deal with all the political shite for comparatively pennies would be difficult.

Complete cuckoo land.

 

Looking at SL's post you quoted I think he must be on the Gove powder.

 

The people would simply vote for the leader they liked the most and wouldn't even have an interest in voting for any of the cabinet. 

 

Funniest vote of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, FIF said:

 

No I'm not. I'm commenting on the falsehoods that you keep stating. 

 

You're attacking the BBC for something that the government has changed. The licence has always needed to be paid or do you think that people should get the BBC for free? If you do who do you think should fund the BBC? The government through taxation (as they were for old people)? If you do then I agree with you - not sure why you're attacking the BBC for it though. I'd go further and suggest that old people should be able to watch sky and other tv companies for free - do you agree? Are you complaining about Sky charging old biddies for watching any of their pay for channels?

 

What about "old biddies" having to pay for food. Do you think they should have to pay for what is a necessity?

 

 

Do you pay for a uk tv license if you're living in france and receiving bbc via freesat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, FIF said:

Complete cuckoo land.

 

Looking at SL's post you quoted I think he must be on the Gove powder.

 

The people would simply vote for the leader they liked the most and wouldn't even have an interest in voting for any of the cabinet. 

 

Funniest vote of the year.

I think it’s great we’ve got a poster who is the embodiment of understanding of the mind of the people with the insight to simply dismiss 100 years of technocratic works suggesting anybody that might think it’s worth exploring is on drugs.

 

Mind you this is a poster who has me on block and yet still spends his days liking any post that disagrees with any sentiment I post anywhere on the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Facecloth said:

And you think that's Boris? lol

At the present time there is not other party I could consider voting for than the Lib Dems. They are centre ground and they are remain which suits my needs. Unfortunately many foolish people still seem to vote Labour out of some kind of tribal blind loyalty or cluelessness, 

 

I don't like Boris, I would say he is potentially slightly more clever than Corbyn.

 

Either way a Corbyn Led labour government will be infinitely worse for the country that the hardest of Brexits, unfortunately many seem unable to grasp this. It seems the only way for people to learn will be to experience the pain and poverty they would bestow on the nation. 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FIF said:

 

 

 

 

You seem to be inferring that the Conservative party is that party. Corbyn or Johnson - there's still hope for the Liberals and Greens.

Not at all. I am fully behind the Lib Dems now.

 

Unfortunately they don't seem to attract enough of the blind loyalists from Labour, and fools are still banging on about tuition fees and the fact they went into coalition with the Tories which at the time was the correct thing to do.

 

Labour have also told many lies and continue to tell unfunded lies, Corbyn is a pathological liar its proven with his I was at a wreath laying but not actually present, I was on a full train that wasn't actually full. I will sort past tuition fees.

 

After seeing his mouth frothing speech at the Trump protest I actually think he is insane.

 

The absolute worst thing this country can do, even worse than No Deal - Brexit is to have a Corbyn led Labour government and end up in a trade war with the USA along with all the other negative things it would bring. There is a huge irony that the Labour remain voters believe all of the stories about the doom of Brexit in the press, yet anything printed about the Corbyn government is fear mongering and people scared of Jezzas equal society.  I notice now he doesn't claim to make people richer, he claims to offer social equality. Strange. 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Swan Lesta said:

Sure but these posts would be circa 200k and after they could write their own ticket. I also reckon there will be a few out there in their 50’s who have made their money and would relish the opportunity to do something for the greater good. 

 

And ND most of the experts in the public sector  area of jobs probably don’t earn above 150k now. E.g a headteacher who has worked their way up through private and public schools who understands the barriers challenges and landscapes of what works would be a far better minister for education  than somebody who just simply went to Eaton and then Cambridge before moving j to politics with family financial backing...

 

I’m guessing you didn’t go to Eton ;) 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Swan Lesta said:

God we need a change in system. Let’s stop voting for parties and manifestos full of horse shit promises.

 

Id prefer to vote for an individual leader and individual ministers with a specialist background in their chosen area.

 

The new PM should publish the ringfenced budget for each department area (pre-vote) and let expert candidates put themselves forward and we’ll vote for a person and a deputy person for each role.

 

We then get ministers for transport, environment, justice, education, business etc who are leaders in their field not some **** on a gravy train who was minister for rural affairs last week and the home fracking secretary the next.

 

It then becomes less about party and more about say a six year plan to get something done by people who know stuff rather than one of Gove’s Tory think tanks who have ideas based on how they can grow their bank balances.

 

Got work and stuff to do today, but a few "devil's advocate" points in response to this interesting debate....

 

- You're giving massive power to the PM, effectively handing them most of the power of our cabinet govt. Most likely, you'd currently be handing that massive power to Boris. Maybe in future, if directly elected, it might be Corbyn, Farage, Beckham, Simon Cowell, Russell Brand... Your expert ministers would have some power but only within limits set by the all-powerful Boris, Branson, Robbie Williams or whoever

 

- Are you getting rid of cabinet govt? Presumably the PM is now effectively doing the job once done by the whole cabinet, setting overall policy priorities? If not, you'd still have the same issue re. lack of specialist expertise - you'd have some top expert on transport sitting in cabinet contributing to decisions about N. Ireland, defence, social security or whatever. You'd also risk having individual ministers pulling in opposite directions: e.g. a foreign secretary prioritising intelligence & anti-terrorism & a defence secretary spending her budget on boosting the nuclear deterrent.

 

- The civil service is supposed to provide the continuity & specialist expertise within particular departments. They're then supposed to do the bidding of the minister who sets the policy agenda: e.g. the transport minister tells them he wants to get more people off the road and into trains, but needs more/quicker trains, cheaper fares, better commuter parking at stations & has a budget of £x. The civil servants then have the expertise to advise on options for achieving those goals, having spent years or sometimes a whole career working in that department. Of course, a lot of highly-paid consultants also contribute such expertise these days, for better or worse.

 

- How will the public have the slightest clue who is really an expert in a particular field and who is a bullshitter? These days, a lot of voters see experts as an enemy elite that must be crushed by the people. Even most of those who are not so extreme do not know enough to judge on most subjects.....just think of the level of opinions that lots of people (on both sides) express about Brexit, THE big issue of the day. If most people are that clueless about the issue of the day, how well equipped will they be to decide who's a good potential minister for N. Ireland, defence or social security? I wouldn't feel well qualified for that myself, and I'm someone who pays a lot of attention to politics. Most people don't.

 

- If you're switching to directly-elected PM/ministers, what rules will there be for campaigning and funding of campaigns? If they're not strictly regulated, the obvious risk is that a lot of media-friendly charlatans win election by making impossible promises - or that the only people capable of winning office are those backed by super-wealthy individuals and corporations... 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

I think you're right, plus the fact that he works so hard to be this bumbling funny guy in the media and people buy into that. So many people think he's this harmless buffoon, and they are half right I guess. He, like Trump, does a great impression of being the every man and I think people really gobble that up. Farage does it too, manages to convince masses of poor, working class, people that he's the same as them and convinces them to ignore his merchant banking history etc.  

 

All of the candidates have flaws, of course, but somebody like Rory Stewart seems a far more sensible and rational option. I'd even take Jeremy Hunt over Boris and possibly even Gove (felt a bit of sick in my mouth just typing that). 

 

Yeah.

 

It all seems a bit like choosing between Jimmy Savile or Rolf Harris to babysit your kids, though.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

I think you're right, plus the fact that he works so hard to be this bumbling funny guy in the media and people buy into that. So many people think he's this harmless buffoon, and they are half right I guess. He, like Trump, does a great impression of being the every man and I think people really gobble that up. Farage does it too, manages to convince masses of poor, working class, people that he's the same as them and convinces them to ignore his merchant banking history etc.  

 

All of the candidates have flaws, of course, but somebody like Rory Stewart seems a far more sensible and rational option. I'd even take Jeremy Hunt over Boris and possibly even Gove (felt a bit of sick in my mouth just typing that). 

 

I agree re. the alternative candidates. Amazingly, I'd now be quite happy to see Gove appointed PM, never mind Stewart, who seems that rare thing - a politician worthy of high office (so he'll probably be eliminated today by Tory MPs).

 

Boris reminds me of Inspector Columbo, if you've ever seen that?

 

Farage and Trump very much play the "everyman". Farage, pint in hand, amiably & jokily, talking "common sense" and saying "what we all think". Trump, likewise, the "straight-speaking guy" who says what he thinks, knows about getting a good deal, who cares if a few of the things he does or says are a bit risqué or not strictly accurate.... 

 

Boris is slightly different. You do get men in the pub like Farage and businessmen like Trump, but Boris isn't really "everyman". Like Columbo, he's a charmer & an entertainment / distraction specialist, a Grade A+ snake-oil salesman.

 

I suppose Boris sometimes uses the "common sense, straight-speaking" technique out of the everyman toolkit. But he also has a non-everyman, exotic persona - plummy tones, shambling demeanor, unpredictable responses, rich vocabulary/imagery, disarming humour. Rees-Mogg also uses exotic language and personal charm, but lacks Boris' humour and charisma (God help us!).

 

Inspector Columbo shambles in, wearing his tousled raincoat, fumbles in his pocket, pulls out a boiled egg, causes a distraction by profusely praising an ornament, then ultra-politely asks a question....& soon the suspect has incriminated himself

Boris shambles in, wearing his tousled suit & blond mop, fumbles for words, pulls out a strikingly exotic image, causes a distraction by saying something risqué or humourous, then ultra-politely spouts some populist demagoguery.....& soon the public is charmed by him, votes his massive ego into office and the country is seriously fvcked....

 

I don't know whether to be more or less alarmed that, among those who know him, he seems to have a widespread reputation for being bone idle and never on top of his brief. Is that bad or good news in this context? :dunno:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boris is going to win, might as well get used to it.  I have my doubts as to his suitability, but actually think he might be an effective blunt instrument to deliver a compromise brexit.  What happens then is anyone's guess :)

 

How to people justify voting Lib Dem at the moment when they essentially have sod all presence, no policies to speak of beyond blocking Brexit, and no credible leaders?  Protest vote?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was brought up by a never-trust-a-Liberal Labour-supporting type Dad and probably when I was in my early 20s I may have leaned that way. But I'm so put off by the ideology-above-everything bullshit in both major parties now. And in some ways I find Labour even worse in that respect. Maybe I'm becoming more conservative as I get older.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

McVey lol

 

 

Lorraine holds a lot of sway in the Tory party clearly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Lorraine holds a lot of sway in the Tory party clearly.

 

To get fewer votes than a bloke that even the Tory MPs had never heard of is impressive.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...