|
Tarnop posted:That "get out what you put in" directly implies "get less if you put in less" is obvious. For the kind of person that appeals to, the cruelty is the point, and if that's the case then why not just vote for the party of maximum cruelty. Turning a big dial that says "hurt the poor and disabled" etc etc
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 14:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 17:29 |
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:Billionaires take a lot out for putting in very little, so it could be an improvement... They're ~~*job creators*~~
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 14:20
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:It's exactly how we end up with the next Tory government using the exact same rhetoric to justify doing the really bad things, because it becomes normalised. The trick is to not have a next Tory government. There are things that exist that are both popular and good. Do them successfully, and any opposition party that wants to compete in an election would need to adapt its rhetoric correspondingly. Most working age people have a job, so a popular welfare system will be one that serves the interests of that class. Unemployment benefit is not really ‘for’ the unemployed. It’s role is to ensure wages are higher than they would be if the options were literally work or starve. Of course, it currently sucks for that purpose. due to both being too low, too unpleasant, and too means-tested. Only a small minority get any value from the current benefits system; you need to be an uncommon combination of poor, organized and psychologically resilient. So the money spent on it is of course resented, Just as it would be if there was a ‘Pauper’s Health Service’ that had most of the budget of the NHS but only served people too poor for any less demeaning alternative.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 14:26
|
|
|
I'm not sure I'd be on board with a get out what you put in health service where you get a better standard of treatment if you aren't poor though
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 14:28
|
|
|
Spotted this in the Cool Zone, thought some of you guys might have reason to bookmark it for research purposes or w/eVlonald Prump posted:Hi CSPAM. Long time no post.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 14:31
|
|
|
XMNN posted:https://twitter.com/jreynoldsMP/status/1268868602192711680?s=20 people clearly like the furlough schefme so steal the messaging around that ffs
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 14:42
|
|
|
radmonger posted:The trick is to not have a next Tory government. If only we had known that sooner.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 14:43
|
|
|
Tarnop posted:The underlying assumption: that we can just fiddle with the dials and eventually come up with a system that will convince everyone that welfare isn't a transfer of wealth from working people to the unemployed, is ridiculous. It's the same old technocratic garbage. Combining several previous points, the least unfair reading I can come up with is a version of the unemployment/sickness benefit like the furlough scheme, where you get something close to your previous wage, at least for a time. That would by default be more in = more out, while still being a kind of universal thing - the remaining unfairness being that of income inequality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 14:55
|
|
|
TACD posted:I like it already! No 10 have said the Police aren't allowed a separate TT&T scheme. Oh, and R has gone up, whoops!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 15:01
|
|
|
XMNN posted:I'm not sure I'd be on board with a get out what you put in health service where you get a better standard of treatment if you aren't poor though You are confusing wealth and health. As a health system tries to deal with health problems, a national wealth system dose the same with wealth problems. The NHS doesn’t try to bring everyone to the same level of health. Instead, for say a child cancer patient, It judges the gap between where they are and where they could be is larger than average. So the NHS puts In above average resources to close that gap, and doesn’t stop when they reach the remaining life expectancy of a 80 year old. If that would mean a footballer between contracts being paid a million a week dole, then that’s a case where some compromise to the principle might be acceptable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 15:10
|
|
|
Strong social safety nets benefit the middle class in that they don't go to bed worrying about the company going under, or that layabout kids are going to end up living under a bridge. Less stress related illnesses, more chance junior will want anything to do with you after 18-21 years of "helpful" pressure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 15:16
|
|
|
 Lockdown still over though https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1268919851852140544?s=20
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 16:25
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/underthecranes/status/1268925155398615042?s=21
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 16:26
|
|
|
Jesus, it really did a number on him. Why him and not Johnson? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 16:39
|
|
|
The fact that Covid hasn't taken out a single high profile dickhead - Trump, Johnson, Bolsanaro - is frankly this timeline's greatest scandal. The universe has a lot to answer for.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 16:55
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:The fact that Covid hasn't taken out a single high profile dickhead - Trump, Johnson, Bolsanaro - is frankly this timeline's greatest scandal. The universe has a lot to answer for. It's just part of being in hellworld Don't worry we got a lot of protests going to ensure that good people continue to be massively over exposed compared to poo poo heads
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:00
|
|
|
Thanks to the goons who answered my call for advice on anti-fascist/racist advocacy in Kent! The Kent Anti-Racism Network seems by far the most prominent group, and through them I've already engaged with a bunch of similar causes. There's a kind of solidarity event in Canterbury tomorrow, but unfortunately I'll be looking after my baby daughter, and I can't see a way in which it would be responsible/right to attend with someone who definitely won't keep a face mask on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:00
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:The fact that Covid hasn't taken out a single high profile dickhead - Trump, Johnson, Bolsanaro - is frankly this timeline's greatest scandal. The universe has a lot to answer for. Maybe fascism is protective. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:05
|
|
|
Hatred is a powerful force that can not easily be killed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:07
|
|
Doctor_Fruitbat posted:Why him and not Johnson? Because Boris never had it 
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:15
|
|
|
The absolute shamelessness of MPs and people connected to them just ignoring the lockdown is ridiculous https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/05/tory-mp-bob-seely-attended-lockdown-barbecue-with-journalistsquote:The Tory MP spearheading efforts to promote the Covid-19 contact-tracing app trial on the Isle of Wight appears to have broken lockdown rules at a barbecue also attended by the chairman of the Brexit party and political journalists, the Guardian has learned.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:16
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:The fact that Covid hasn't taken out a single high profile dickhead - Trump, Johnson, Bolsanaro - is frankly this timeline's greatest scandal. The universe has a lot to answer for. These people will get special care so i think their risk of death would be real low even when they catch it. They'd of probably sacrificed a few grannys to put boris on a ventilator even if he didn't need one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:16
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1268896198703960064 Thing I've come to really hate is when you criticize the BBC you invariably get some liberal twat saying " Careful, or the tories will privatise it and then there will be nothing to fight the tories". The tories don't want to privatise the BBC. They've put conservatives in every seat of power within it both on screen and off and driven out everyone vaguely leftwing out. It's like the NHS to them, something to be hollowed out and direct massive flows of cash going to their privatised mates.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:21
|
|
|
hemale in pain posted:These people will get special care so i think their risk of death would be real low even when they catch it. They'd of probably sacrificed a few grannys to put boris on a ventilator even if he didn't need one. that would probably have killed him but yeah its basically that they will get taken to hospital and recieve extra attention at a stage of symptoms where everyone else would be being told to go back to the care home and tough it out, particularly if you aren't white
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:22
|
|
|
Communist Thoughts posted:that would probably have killed him That reminds me about the uk letting old people die in care homes. Does anyone know how exactly that works? were we just leaving people to die in their rooms and not taking them to hospital?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:34
|
|
|
No that'd be inhumane, they were taking them into hospital and then discharging them to care homes while they were still infectious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:44
|
|
|
hemale in pain posted:That reminds me about the uk letting old people die in care homes. Does anyone know how exactly that works? were we just leaving people to die in their rooms and not taking them to hospital? like guava said its worse they sent them back to infect and kill everyone else as a purposeful strategy to defend the NHS from having to treat people (since the NHS is on the brink of collapse in normal flu season)
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
Means testing, in theory, is a great idea. Ensuring that the well off don't draw on limited resources that should go to the needy is sound budget planning. That's how technocrats sell the concept. Of course in reality all the benefits which are of most relevance to the poor are tightly means tested excluding many people experiencing hardship and hard to obtain due to all the hoops and applications you have to jump through only to get denied half the time anyway; while the benefits drawn by the well off, like mortgage relief, are not means tested and are easy to claim.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 18:00
|
|
|
So Boris can't be hosed to stop tossing off long enough to do the briefing on the day the "official" death toll hits 40k, then Hancock stands there saying R is between 0 .7 and 0.9 with all areas under 1, while the news is saying it's between 0.7 and 1 with north west just over 1. Amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 18:00
|
|
|
Munin posted:Means testing, in theory, is a great idea. Ensuring that the well off don't draw on limited resources that should go to the needy is sound budget planning. It's not even a good idea in theory, if you're trying to sort a bag of gravel you don't sit and pick each rock out and look at it, you shake it until it separates out under gravity. Or conversely if you're trying to take something already separated and homogenise it, you just mix it with a big stick. There's bugger all that means testing could achieve that couldn't be done better by progressive taxation and massive public spending. You take off the top and put in at the bottom, and you do it hard enough that everything comes out uniform. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 18:05 on Jun 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It's not even a good idea in theory, if you're trying to sort a bag of gravel you don't sit and pick each rock out and look at it, you shake it until it separates out under gravity. Or conversely if you're trying to take something already separated and homogenise it, you just mix it with a big stick. But... But... That would grow the size of the state too much!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 18:08
|
|
|
In the sense that the office of looking at small rocks to figure out where they need to go in the bucket is contracted out to serco for £500 billion a year.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
What are test sieves in this analogy? Because that's what I'd use.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 18:23
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/armagh_john/status/1268668421249667072 makes u think....
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 18:30
|
|
|
"And if my grandmother had had wheels she would have been a bike"
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 18:33
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:In the sense that the office of looking at small rocks to figure out where they need to go in the bucket is contracted out to serco for £500 billion a year. "I need to pay my mates vast sums of money to decide whether we can give a poor person 50p." The whole benefit assessment industry is a blight which needs to be burnt to the ground. Especially since they are mostly there to put politicians at one step removed from the decision to gently caress over people so all the anger is directed at them rather than at the shitheads who designed the system. You should hate both with a burning passion as people in this thread do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 19:08
|
|
|
BalloonFish posted:That said, the this could be talking about a system similar to the German one, where they pay significantly more for their equivalent of NI but get a high percentage of their wage as benefit for 12 months (24 months if they've been employed for a very long time, IIRC) if they've been employed for a period before claiming. I like the sound of this system. Currently, if a comfortably earning family ended up on UC for a few months, that could be the uprooting of them from the family home and into a car or bedsit or something. It doesn't really serve society's interests for this to happen if it's going to be a blip until they find another reasonably well paid job. If they hadn't contributed enough beforehand, take it out of future earnings by adjusting their tax code, so you don't dis-incentivise saving. With a generous non-contributory element to cover the unemployed or people on smaller wages, I can see how this could be popular. Having a contributory element for higher earners helps manage resentment over different people receiving different amounts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
Prince John posted:I like the sound of this system. Currently, if a comfortably earning family ended up on UC for a few months, that could be the uprooting of them from the family home and into a car or bedsit or something. It doesn't really serve society's interests for this to happen if it's going to be a blip until they find another reasonably well paid job. If they hadn't contributed enough beforehand, take it out of future earnings by adjusting their tax code, so you don't dis-incentivise saving. This assumes that the base will be enough to live off. Seeing as how in that article he also mentioned raising UC by 20 loving pounds, I don't think that's going to be the case.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 19:14
|
|
|
I can see it being even more popular with the kind of person starmer's looking to chase if you entirely gutten the non contributory element.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 19:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 17:29 |
|
|
bump_fn posted:https://twitter.com/armagh_john/status/1268668421249667072 I'm sorry but is it just me or does that mural look like a really bad photoshop? I don't mean to naysay the work of the artists, maybe it's just the way the photo comes up on my phone, but the way that George's head eclipses the words makes it look like a comedy photoshop job.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 19:16
|
|
