|
ThomasPaine posted:I sympathise with your frustrations but I have to say that this is some top tier username/posting combo, something awful forums user 'Igotabigdick' Lol my username is such an unfortunate one, I've got some ideas for changing it in the future though! I always snipe when I post in ukmt. 55 is the amount of snipes (roughly)
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 20:33 |
|
|
lol https://twitter.com/Corbyn4Nandy/status/1226807832181444609
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:I mean, you can get the exact same effect by spreading a layer of peanut butter over a layer of marmite. In that sense I've already tried it. It's good. Peanut butter goes with everything. yes, peanut butter and marmite is Very Good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:It's catch 22 - if you can't reach the higher paying jobs in cities by public transport to save deposits and so forth, you can't afford to move to said cities to get the better paid jobs in the better infrastructure. I worked in a local pub for a few months after I moved into this town (mother's in her 80s, I kinda have to be here) and every single person working in that pub had degrees. What none of them had was wealthy parents who could (a) afford to pay for them to have driving lessons (b) afford to buy them a car This is an interesting point. What proportion of the actual working class do have to 'worry about keeping the car on the road' according to that quote? Because quite a lot of (older) people might consider themselves 'working class' while owning their own house, owning a car and having a quite comfortable pension. They're in a very different position from the person getting a bus into work to their zero hours job as a cleaner every day whatever they identify as.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:33
|
|
|
I'm honestly surprised there's still any living people left who are interested in politics and yet don't have a twitter account and need to make one
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:34
|
|
|
Talking of twitter, I know this isn't the right thread for this but I'm not sure what the right one would be. https://twitter.com/CIA/status/1227638516403843074?s=20
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:45
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:otoh the whole of Brexit was run on a "Britain bad now because EU, Britain could good." and appeals to "Britain's doing fine" didn't resonate with people. Good point. Sadly Brexit was all about purging Great Britain of the scourge of foreign influence so its natural greatness can reassert itself. The left (whether you go for the patriotism angle or not) requires accepting that there are problems and the country and its people need to fundamentally change from within. feedmegin posted:This is an interesting point. What proportion of the actual working class do have to 'worry about keeping the car on the road' according to that quote? Because quite a lot of (older) people might consider themselves 'working class' while owning their own house, owning a car and having a quite comfortable pension. They're in a very different position from the person getting a bus into work to their zero hours job as a cleaner every day whatever they identify as. See also my story from a few pages back about the man who is Tory in every way but insists he's 'Labour'. Absolutely identified as working class but owns a massive house (plus one more which is rented out...), has two cars, recently retired early from the public sector with a massive lump sum and a generous pension, takes a cruise and a holiday to Thailand without fail every year etc. etc. There are RP-speaking graduates from the Softy South who are on less income, with much more precarious employment, lower income, zero capital and little scope of getting any, who can't really afford to take time off for holidays and who run a sub-£1k beater of a car who I'm sure he would disparage as "arrogant posh know-it-alls" but are surely more economically working class (and logical Labour voters) than him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:45
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:This is an interesting point. What proportion of the actual working class do have to 'worry about keeping the car on the road' according to that quote? Because quite a lot of (older) people might consider themselves 'working class' while owning their own house, owning a car and having a quite comfortable pension. They're in a very different position from the person getting a bus into work to their zero hours job as a cleaner every day whatever they identify as. It comes down to how do we define 'working class'. Back in the 70s, 80s, the working class ("C1s") were often much better off financially than the 'intellectual middle classes' ("Bs") Working class factory jobs paid quite high hourly wages and overtime, while the teachers, junior managers, academics etc were expected to do unpaid overtime (lots of it) and get by on the concept of 'doing service to the community' or 'passion for their work'. I wouldn't like to say what the position is now regarding those formerly classified as C1s with the loss of manufacturing industries, but it has hardly changed for the Bs. Are we "working class" by pay, by social manners, by nature of the work, choice of holiday destination or leisure activities? Jaeluni Asjil fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Feb 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:46
|
|
|
Can someone tell me bad things about Nandy because she has the support of some people who I generally categorise as dangerously poo poo, but she also appears to have at least some good opinions, so I'm confused. Obviously RLB is my first choice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:47
|
|
|
Working class is a phrase that, when heard, has to be understood from the speaker's frame of reference. After all, it wouldn't be very working class to try and come up with a specific definition on technical terms based on literature or academic study. If your inclination is to cite some seminal figure's definition of working class, okay cool but it neglects what people mean when they identify as working class. Azza Bamboo fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Feb 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:51
|
|
|
Julio Cruz posted:the argument seems to be that the people who currently use trains and go to university are predominantly middle-class so making those things cheaper/free would only benefit the middle class Under the tuition fees system university is free if you are working class and the degree doesnt improve your earning potential. The debt never has to be paid back and eventually just disappears. A graduate tax would be less progressive. A tax on everyone would be less progressive. Universal provision of services is only progressive if you can show you can squeeze the 1% to pay for it all, and while I'm entirely on board with squeezing the 1% far more than we are doing now, it isnt going to cover everything and I think the average labour voter would prefer policies that are genuinely redistributive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:52
|
|
|
BalloonFish posted:I mean, ffs, "energy providers were nationalised in the past, so renationalising them is a backward step" - who the gently caress do these people think owned the electricity companies, the railways, the water supply etc. before they were nationalised? Going back to the 1970s (or, hurr-hurr, the supposed-golden-age of the 1950s) is too regressive but going back to the 1890s is fine... Sure it's my whole discipline and sure the British public are wrong about everything but I had no idea people could be this historically illiterate in tyool 2020. 'The past has been a series of sequential improvements leading to the present, and the present is therefore by definition better' is some 19th century poo poo and it makes me cringe to even type it. Like this is pre-undergrad level stuff that I would hope even GCSE teachers would be trying to get across to 16 year olds. ThomasPaine fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Feb 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:57
|
|
|
Because the government's never retroactively altered the terms of student loans, nope.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 18:58
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:'The past has been a series of sequential improvements leading to the present, and is therefore by definition worse' is some 19th century poo poo 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:00
|
|
|
Nvm, fixed!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:01
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:Idgi You're saying that view of history in which things are bad because they're old, is bad, because it's old
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:03
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:A graduate tax would be less progressive. A tax on everyone would be less progressive. This is bollocks. Working class people who get degrees have more resulting debt than richer people who can just pay the fees, and the interest rate on that debt is high. Consequently working class graduates who then get jobs have to pay back more than the richer graduates do. And all of them have the psychological burden of an astronomical debt that the government changes the rules for whenever it pleases.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:04
|
|
|
Also who is this contingent of super informed voters who have highly involved opinions on redistributative policies but won't vote labour because they're apparently not actual communists? Pretty sure student loans = bad is the opinion of basically everyone who has to have one, or whose kids have to have one. And I'm pretty sure most working class parents want their kids to get degrees and good jobs as a result. Labour absolutely need to tackle the problem of education in this country whereby it's just an excuse for saddling you with a load of debt and doesn't actually do you any good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:06
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:Can someone tell me bad things about Nandy because she has the support of some people who I generally categorise as dangerously poo poo, but she also appears to have at least some good opinions, so I'm confused. She's said some real weird, dumb stuff about Scottish independence. Apparently they can only go if the whole of the UK says they can go, and the British government should take notes from how Spain dealt with the Catalan independence movement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:07
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:It's catch 22 - if you can't reach the higher paying jobs in cities by public transport to save deposits and so forth, you can't afford to move to said cities to get the better paid jobs in the better infrastructure. This is why we need the Lib Dem policy of loans for rental deposits!  Anyway, going back to the person asking about "why is Keir Starmer seen as centrist/on the Labour right when he's been publicly committing to left wing policies": https://twitter.com/Simon_Vessey/status/1227648495064096769?s=20 It's the usual Liberal mealy-mouthed poo poo of saying "Yes we should make left-wing changes!*" Where the asterisk is always: *lol but not really. "We must decarbonise!*" *But I'm not going to commit to this already existing plan that other candidates have committed to "We must end the gender pay gap!" *At a non-specific date in the future, when other candidates have committed to one "We must increase income tax for high earners**" **For some non-specific value of "increase" and "high earners". "We must continue with left-wing policies!***" ***But I'm not going to tell you which ones and some of them will certainly have to go.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:08
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Under the tuition fees system university is free if you are working class and the degree doesnt improve your earning potential. The debt never has to be paid back and eventually just disappears. Also how is a graduate tax less progressive when you still don't have to pay it back if it doesn't improve your earning potential due to minimum payment thresholds, but rich kids have to pay more overall since people who'd end up repaying their loans in full under the current system (or just have their parents pay it off) carry on paying out for their whole working lives, which reduces the amount of revenue you've got to raise for everyone else. What the gently caress is up with your takes this week mate. e: beaten by Oh dear me, who I thought used to have a cool av?!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
Also I'm sure that there's nothing wrong with encouraging universities to hike up their charges, cut their staff and pay, and have the government back the losses of the company that funds it. Definitely not just a gigantic exercise of funneling money from the government and the working class to overpaid dickheads on the university board and usuring loan sharks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:13
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:You're saying that view of history in which things are bad because they're old, is bad, because it's old No, I'm saying it's garbage because it is garbage lol Marx was ages ago and he was pretty cool!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:14
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Because the government's never retroactively altered the terms of student loans, nope. Still don’t get how they got away with that. Astounding.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:15
|
|
|
Very hype to have my student debt sold off to kneecappers llc by the government followed by a law that says it's actually just normal debt now lol.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
Apparently the SLC currently holds £136 billion of debt but it's ok cos they sold about 3.5 billion last year that's totally sustainable lol. There's gonna be no problems going forward as that number keeps getting bigger and more people keep writing it off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:23
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Under the tuition fees system university is free if you are working class and the degree doesnt improve your earning potential. The debt never has to be paid back and eventually just disappears. Do you genuinely not understand how "Just sign here to take on 40k of debt" is a colossal turnoff to working class kids? That the loans are interest-bearing, and repayments start basically when you hit median wage, meaning the majority of recipients will be basically paying them off for *decades* and end up paying out 3 or 4 times the principal makes your claim that it's a progressive system even more ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:This is why we need the Lib Dem policy of loans for rental deposits! Why would anyone commit to specific numbers on tax bands 5 years ahead of the election? You’ve no idea what economic circumstances will be like then. The manifesto promise to end the gender pay gap by 2030 did require Labour to win in 2019. Dropping that target date means not promising to do it in half the time after the next election. I think these tweeters complaints are a bit unrealistic
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:29
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:A graduate tax would be less progressive. A tax on everyone would be less progressive. Universal provision of services is only progressive if you can show you can squeeze the 1% to pay for it all, and while I'm entirely on board with squeezing the 1% far more than we are doing now, it isnt going to cover everything and I think the average labour voter would prefer policies that are genuinely redistributive. The professor the MK Dons were named after held that view; if you have an accurate mathematical model of an economic situation, then the important thing is the properties of that model, not what the variables are called. Mathematically this is correct; hence why the Bank of England once had a working model of the economy literally made out of tanks and pipes. Politically it fails. if you label a thing using an English word like ‘debt’ instead of ‘moneyFlow31’, people will react to the word, and not its role in the model. For example, imagine if the tax system if it worked from the premise that everyone was born into an unpayable debt, and had an obligation to work to pay the interest. In theory, you could tweak the numbers so that mathematically it was identical to either the status quo, or even some reasonable approximation of LGSC. In reality, you would ‘t able to do so. Simply because it would be impossible to communicate what needed to be done using such a wrong verbal model.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:32
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Do you genuinely not understand how "Just sign here to take on 40k of debt" is a colossal turnoff to working class kids? Which is a good lesson when it comes to Wonga or buying stuff on the never never or running up a tab, but if you're faced with the prospect of a giant loan for a course that you're not even certain you can finish (which again has a bunch of class based anxieties in it) then the student loan system is a good way of turning kids off further education. And to any middle class overtures to "well it's not real debt because...", that's exactly what they said about card based easy credit. People are going to get suspicious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:34
|
|
|
Also because I don't think it can be stated enough the government can make it real debt whenever it wants.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:36
|
|
|
radmonger posted:For example, imagine if the tax system if it worked from the premise that everyone was born into an unpayable debt, and had an obligation to work to pay the interest. In theory, you could tweak the numbers so that mathematically it was identical to either the status quo, or even some reasonable approximation of LGSC.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:37
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Honest opinion: Corbyn's problem was that he was insufficiently genuinely left wing, his successor should try the same platform but dump the stuff that is subsidies for the middle class like rail nationalisation and ending tuition fees. Alchenar posted:Under the tuition fees system university is free if you are working class and the degree doesnt improve your earning potential. The debt never has to be paid back and eventually just disappears. Communist Thoughts posted:a lot of things people were telling us or warning us under corbyn that i disregarded because they were stupid melt shitheads was actually true
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:40
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Under the tuition fees system university is free if you are working class and the degree doesnt improve your earning potential. The debt never has to be paid back and eventually just disappears. who bought Vince Cable an account
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:45
|
|
|
Pilchenstein posted:Such as? I think Alchenar might just be trolling us tho. Surely nobody can so consistently dress up obvious neoliberal positions as socialism by accident.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:49
|
|
|
I'm definitely becoming more enthusiastic about her if she's gonna keep up with putting up actual good positions and a moral and practical necessity. Honestly I think corbyn lost a lot of what made him popular in the early days due to contact with the party machine, he got a lot less straightforward over time even if I still liked the man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
Least poo poo, and most likely to make long-term improvements to party democracy to make the party more member-led and thus less poo poo in future.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
I am watching old TNG episodes and just came across this I would like to share. Probably old news to you Brits. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:54
|
|
|
Pilchenstein posted:How many elections in a row now have you voted tory? I stopped at the last london mayoral election for the obvious reasons. Breaking out of tribal voting is a really liberating experience. I was actually all on board for voting for a radical agenda this time around (the system is totally broken, and the Tories have stopped trying to at least keep it broken in a stable way, so why not). Ultimately antisemitism was a red line I wasn't prepared to cross so I sat the last one out. No I'm not going to be drawn on that, it's either obvious to you why that was a problem or it never will be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 20:33 |
|
|
stephenthinkpad posted:I am watching old TNG episodes and just came across this I would like to share. Probably old news to you Brits. This didn't load for me but I am 99% sure it's them talking about irish reunification lol. E: yep Alchenar posted:I stopped at the last london mayoral election for the obvious reasons. Breaking out of tribal voting is a really liberating experience. Lol what and you're whingeing about labour not being left enough
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2020 19:56
|
|