FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Refreshing politics - how?
Refreshing politics - how?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *irldn OP Couple 52 weeks ago
Brighton |
If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?"
Prioritise health and education, a healthy and educated population will always prosper |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Most of the real problems we have, wage stagnation, high taxes, failing services, etc...are due to the government failing to address the issues. Take high inflation now.
Fuel companies report record profits but every other industry reports higher costs (due to high fuel) and in turn higher prices for us all....What does Sunak do? He meets supermarket leaders to pretend he is doing something about it. No, tax the fuel companies on their profits or do whatever it takes to make fuel companies stop stealing wealth from us all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Getting rid of zero hour contracts- employees have little rights and more likely to have to be kept afloat by UC.
Tackling the cost of living - Energy companies and supermarkets have made huge profits. Privatisation was bought in for competition but you can't even change your energy company.
With a housing crisis, do people really need more than one house?
Honestly could go on forever. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Conduct some proper analysis to see if applying to rejoin the EU would be the best way to mitigate against all the problems caused by brexit. Maybe rejoining isn't the best answer.
Untangling government from the fossil fuels industry, so that they can implement policies that work for British people and the environment, and not for the oil companies.
Make education more accessible for under privileged people.
Close tax loopholes/avoidance schemes.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
Continuity in the plans! A more mature manifesto giving us, the risks, assumptions, issues and dependences allowing us to make informed choices not simply based on the headlines.
Clear economic growth plans, not pie in the sky, over complicated word art documents.
Tax overhaul for the country and how the benefits of such change will support further growth in infrastructure builds.
Law and order to include, tackling anti social behaviour, safer roads, support for victims of crime, revamp of antiquated laws such as Sunday trading, obtain public opinions on some laws that could be scrapped that could increase our tax revenues and make streets safer.
Educational improvements, such as a revamp of school times, days and holidays to support the modern family life, to include operating 7 days a week.
I will leave it there for now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Are you going for a hat trick ? 
Stopped being an abuser yet?
Pardon?  "
Still an abuser, then. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Are you going for a hat trick ?
Stopped being an abuser yet?
Pardon?
Still an abuser, then."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Are you going for a hat trick ?
Stopped being an abuser yet?
Pardon?
Still an abuser, then.
"
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Aside from a policy that would direct the police to harass women, what else would attract your vote?"
It’s not harassment if you’re doing illegal things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Aside from a policy that would direct the police to harass women, what else would attract your vote?"
Equality feels like oppression to the privileged. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Aside from a policy that would direct the police to harass women, what else would attract your vote?
It’s not harassment if you’re doing illegal things."
You didn't mention they were doing illegal things. Just that you want the police to harass "white women".
In fairness, it's probably the most bizarre policy suggestion I've ever seen. So fair play. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead "
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing."
What's your beef with "white women"? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Aside from a policy that would direct the police to harass women, what else would attract your vote?
It’s not harassment if you’re doing illegal things.
You didn't mention they were doing illegal things. Just that you want the police to harass "white women".
In fairness, it's probably the most bizarre policy suggestion I've ever seen. So fair play. "
I didn’t write “harass”. That’s your inability to read creeping up on you. Or it’s more likely that you’re poisoning the well, as is usual. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing."
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
What's your beef with "white women"?"
They’re mostly as privileged and as immune from the law as Trump, without realising it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem "
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Aside from a policy that would direct the police to harass women, what else would attract your vote?
It’s not harassment if you’re doing illegal things.
You didn't mention they were doing illegal things. Just that you want the police to harass "white women".
In fairness, it's probably the most bizarre policy suggestion I've ever seen. So fair play.
I didn’t write “harass”. That’s your inability to read creeping up on you. Or it’s more likely that you’re poisoning the well, as is usual."
I used the word "harass" to describe your suggestion for the police to racially profile women for stop and search.
"As usual". I've only been aware of your existence for less than one day. How do you know what's usual for me? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering."
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"Continuity in the plans! A more mature manifesto giving us, the risks, assumptions, issues and dependences allowing us to make informed choices not simply based on the headlines.
Clear economic growth plans, not pie in the sky, over complicated word art documents.
Tax overhaul for the country and how the benefits of such change will support further growth in infrastructure builds.
Law and order to include, tackling anti social behaviour, safer roads, support for victims of crime, revamp of antiquated laws such as Sunday trading, obtain public opinions on some laws that could be scrapped that could increase our tax revenues and make streets safer.
Educational improvements, such as a revamp of school times, days and holidays to support the modern family life, to include operating 7 days a week.
I will leave it there for now."
Having read the thread, I need to add one more thing to my list.. Tougher internet laws would get my vote! Automatic removal of the internet for 7 days and an internet awareness course for persistent offenders.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police? "
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Aside from a policy that would direct the police to harass women, what else would attract your vote?
It’s not harassment if you’re doing illegal things.
You didn't mention they were doing illegal things. Just that you want the police to harass "white women".
In fairness, it's probably the most bizarre policy suggestion I've ever seen. So fair play.
I didn’t write “harass”. That’s your inability to read creeping up on you. Or it’s more likely that you’re poisoning the well, as is usual.
I used the word "harass" to describe your suggestion for the police to racially profile women for stop and search.
"As usual". I've only been aware of your existence for less than one day. How do you know what's usual for me?"
Equal treatment is not harassment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future."
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ild_oatsMan 52 weeks ago
the land of saints & sinners |
Politicians who actually turn up and do a proper days work. No second jobs.
Being an MP should be a full time job.
No employing your wife/husband, brother/sister, daughter/son.
No second houses at taxpayers expense.
MP’s outside say M25 radius are housed in government block of flats allocated on a random basis so that the MP of Godforsaken shire can equally have a chance of the penthouse flat.
Parliament relocates to a different uk region every 3 years removing some of the London centric bias.
David Cameron and JRM are publicly flogged on a weekly basis… |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
What's your beef with "white women"?
They’re mostly as privileged and as immune from the law as Trump, without realising it."
Yeah my white female arse is privileged and not at all discriminated against especially in the salary department or career wise.
There isn't more abuse and violence against women.... there is absolutely a high prosecution of men who commit these crimes |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well? "
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Aside from a policy that would direct the police to harass women, what else would attract your vote?
It’s not harassment if you’re doing illegal things.
You didn't mention they were doing illegal things. Just that you want the police to harass "white women".
In fairness, it's probably the most bizarre policy suggestion I've ever seen. So fair play.
I didn’t write “harass”. That’s your inability to read creeping up on you. Or it’s more likely that you’re poisoning the well, as is usual.
I used the word "harass" to describe your suggestion for the police to racially profile women for stop and search.
"As usual". I've only been aware of your existence for less than one day. How do you know what's usual for me?
Equal treatment is not harassment."
It is if the police are harassing people in equal measure.
My personal preference would be for a reduction in police harassment. That would attract my vote more than a targeted increase towards a specific group based on ethnicity and gender. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively."
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
What's your beef with "white women"?
They’re mostly as privileged and as immune from the law as Trump, without realising it.
Yeah my white female arse is privileged and not at all discriminated against especially in the salary department or career wise.
There isn't more abuse and violence against women.... there is absolutely a high prosecution of men who commit these crimes "
Not my problem if you can’t use your privilege to better yourself.
Yes, most abuse and violence is directed towards men. It may or may not be committed mostly by other men, but both my experiences and the statistics suggest that a woman assaulting me won’t be considered a crime (or at the very least, a much lesser offence than if I were to do the same to her). So, I wouldn’t pay much stock to a biased, racist system. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively.
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ? "
By the legal system as a whole. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively.
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ?
By the legal system as a whole."
Ok, so wouldn’t it be better to sort that rather than getting the police and legal system to harass white women as well ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Aside from a policy that would direct the police to harass women, what else would attract your vote?
It’s not harassment if you’re doing illegal things.
You didn't mention they were doing illegal things. Just that you want the police to harass "white women".
In fairness, it's probably the most bizarre policy suggestion I've ever seen. So fair play.
I didn’t write “harass”. That’s your inability to read creeping up on you. Or it’s more likely that you’re poisoning the well, as is usual.
I used the word "harass" to describe your suggestion for the police to racially profile women for stop and search.
"As usual". I've only been aware of your existence for less than one day. How do you know what's usual for me?
Equal treatment is not harassment.
It is if the police are harassing people in equal measure.
My personal preference would be for a reduction in police harassment. That would attract my vote more than a targeted increase towards a specific group based on ethnicity and gender."
Well, we can start with less harassment of poor and minority men, as that’s where the main harassment by police lies. The equality can trickle down afterwards. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively.
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ?
By the legal system as a whole.
Ok, so wouldn’t it be better to sort that rather than getting the police and legal system to harass white women as well ? "
I don't think that is what he is saying..
He is saying that positive bias towards white women means they are not thought of as a target for stop and search. He is saying that there needs to be some acceptance of this for things to become equal.
Well I think that is what he is saying |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively.
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ?
By the legal system as a whole.
Ok, so wouldn’t it be better to sort that rather than getting the police and legal system to harass white women as well ? "
It will only happen when it happens to white women as well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively.
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ?
By the legal system as a whole.
Ok, so wouldn’t it be better to sort that rather than getting the police and legal system to harass white women as well ?
It will only happen when it happens to white women as well."
Ok, in an ideal world you could stop this unfair harassment , but you want white women to suffer as well? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively.
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ?
By the legal system as a whole.
Ok, so wouldn’t it be better to sort that rather than getting the police and legal system to harass white women as well ?
It will only happen when it happens to white women as well.
Ok, in an ideal world you could stop this unfair harassment , but you want white women to suffer as well? "
The suffering will stop when white women start take their fair share of it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively.
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ?
By the legal system as a whole.
Ok, so wouldn’t it be better to sort that rather than getting the police and legal system to harass white women as well ?
It will only happen when it happens to white women as well.
Ok, in an ideal world you could stop this unfair harassment , but you want white women to suffer as well?
The suffering will stop when white women start take their fair share of it."
You’re missing my point, would you prefer the harassment to stop without the harassment of white women or not? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively.
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ?
By the legal system as a whole.
Ok, so wouldn’t it be better to sort that rather than getting the police and legal system to harass white women as well ?
It will only happen when it happens to white women as well.
Ok, in an ideal world you could stop this unfair harassment , but you want white women to suffer as well?
The suffering will stop when white women start take their fair share of it.
You’re missing my point, would you prefer the harassment to stop without the harassment of white women or not? "
You have no point worth answering. The harassment won’t stop until white women face the same. There is no “without”. It won’t happen “without”. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"We could chalk down the police harassment of white women as a maybe?
What else would people like to see?
A reform of property tax could be good. Especially on unused property/land."
A land value tax would be good, and is an idea that can unite both the left and right of politics, as it can help rid us of monopolies. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"We could chalk down the police harassment of white women as a maybe?
What else would people like to see?
A reform of property tax could be good. Especially on unused property/land."
That would be a bugger to manage and loopholes galore is my first reaction.
I have a number of things in a post way up if you want to have nosey into them and tell me your thoughts, getting the thread back on track  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively.
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ?
By the legal system as a whole.
Ok, so wouldn’t it be better to sort that rather than getting the police and legal system to harass white women as well ?
It will only happen when it happens to white women as well.
Ok, in an ideal world you could stop this unfair harassment , but you want white women to suffer as well?
The suffering will stop when white women start take their fair share of it.
You’re missing my point, would you prefer the harassment to stop without the harassment of white women or not?
You have no point worth answering. The harassment won’t stop until white women face the same. There is no “without”. It won’t happen “without”."
Ok, you obviously haven’t read the OP, you can literally ask for any policy you want, wether it’s realistic or not |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 52 weeks ago
|
"Stopping and searching white women for drugs as much as poor and minority men are.
Why don’t they reduce the searching off poor and minority men instead
Because they won’t do that until white women are affected by the same thing.
Why are you fixated with white women being searched? If poor and minority men are being searched too often then that is the problem
It won’t get solved until white women are stopped and searched. That’s when both the Guardian and Daily Mail will kick up a fuss. In the meantime, it’s easy money for law enforcement, and no political party will do anything serious to stop it until their own are suffering.
Read the OP, it is asking you want you want. Do you think poor and minority men are being unfairly treated by the police?
The legal system as a whole is biased against poor and minority men. Certain elements of both the left and the right won’t change this as it’s beneficial to them. Until this changes, expect to see more Trumps and other populists getting into office in future.
I see, would you accept less searches by the police on poor and minority men without more searches on white women though? Or do you just want white women to ‘suffer’ as well?
Well, they’ll be seen as “capable of crime,” so it’s not really suffering to be treated equally.
Anyway, more stopping and searching of white women (or indeed women generally), would lead to stop-and-search being used less as a whole. Or perhaps just used even more selectively.
do you think minority and poor men are being harassed by the police ?
By the legal system as a whole.
Ok, so wouldn’t it be better to sort that rather than getting the police and legal system to harass white women as well ?
It will only happen when it happens to white women as well.
Ok, in an ideal world you could stop this unfair harassment , but you want white women to suffer as well?
The suffering will stop when white women start take their fair share of it.
You’re missing my point, would you prefer the harassment to stop without the harassment of white women or not?
You have no point worth answering. The harassment won’t stop until white women face the same. There is no “without”. It won’t happen “without”.
Ok, you obviously haven’t read the OP, you can literally ask for any policy you want, wether it’s realistic or not "
Yes. Equality in front of the law is unrealistic and unreasonable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Proportional representation.
Land tax.
Tax thresholds rising in line with inflation, thus preventing fiscal drag penalising the lower earners in society.
Windfall taxes on large corporations to prevent the kind of gouging we’re seeing at present.
Rejoining the EU. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Continuity in the plans! A more mature manifesto giving us, the risks, assumptions, issues and dependences allowing us to make informed choices not simply based on the headlines.
Clear economic growth plans, not pie in the sky, over complicated word art documents.
Tax overhaul for the country and how the benefits of such change will support further growth in infrastructure builds.
Law and order to include, tackling anti social behaviour, safer roads, support for victims of crime, revamp of antiquated laws such as Sunday trading, obtain public opinions on some laws that could be scrapped that could increase our tax revenues and make streets safer.
Educational improvements, such as a revamp of school times, days and holidays to support the modern family life, to include operating 7 days a week.
I will leave it there for now."
I agree with your first point. That's what I argue we should do with regards to attempting to rejoin the EU. Find out what it would do for the country first, before diving in.
Economic growth plans fine. I don't know what they would look like in practice.
I assume your law and order suggestion is aimed at protestors? You know I have a different view. I support the freedom to protest and express dissent.
7 days of schooling per week? I'm not sure what I think about this. I suppose I'd need to know the details. I would support a policy that made further and higher education more accessible to those less well off.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"Continuity in the plans! A more mature manifesto giving us, the risks, assumptions, issues and dependences allowing us to make informed choices not simply based on the headlines.
Clear economic growth plans, not pie in the sky, over complicated word art documents.
Tax overhaul for the country and how the benefits of such change will support further growth in infrastructure builds.
Law and order to include, tackling anti social behaviour, safer roads, support for victims of crime, revamp of antiquated laws such as Sunday trading, obtain public opinions on some laws that could be scrapped that could increase our tax revenues and make streets safer.
Educational improvements, such as a revamp of school times, days and holidays to support the modern family life, to include operating 7 days a week.
I will leave it there for now.
I agree with your first point. That's what I argue we should do with regards to attempting to rejoin the EU. Find out what it would do for the country first, before diving in.
Economic growth plans fine. I don't know what they would look like in practice.
I assume your law and order suggestion is aimed at protestors? You know I have a different view. I support the freedom to protest and express dissent.
7 days of schooling per week? I'm not sure what I think about this. I suppose I'd need to know the details. I would support a policy that made further and higher education more accessible to those less well off.
"
My law and order items were not aimed at protestors, far from it if you look at the last point. Sunday trading laws in my opinion should be scrapped.
Schools are not modern family friendly in this day and age, nothing has really changed since the mothers were expected to stay at home. Making schools a 7 day a week would increase the need for teachers, offer more flexible school times for parents a shake up (not going to school 7 days a week). Reform school holidays to increase the term times and delivery greater educational benefits, stagger them think of something new that fits in with life today. Knock on effect parents will not suffer the day light robbery % increase on holidays in term times.
Small things to modernise the outdated is my view. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?"
I'd like a party that looks after everyone.
A party that will invest in UK products,make us a exporter and invest in people cut out all the bullshit and red tape that hamstrings our businesses.
A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing.
A government who will get hold of law and order by the scruff of the neck and make wholesale change.
Bringing back police on the street tackling anti social behaviour in a robust way .
There must be consequences for people's actions as this country is on a head-on collision for complete anarchy.
Invest in education educate children not just teach them to pass a test.
Get rid of targets and and allow school's to be more active in the structure of the curriculum not just following a set in stone pattern set at clueless detached people.
This one is not going to be popular.
Get rid of ( within limits) care in the community it hasn't worked and allowed many thousands of people who should be receiving help in a hospital environment not set loose on the streets to fend for themselves and usually end up homeless and destitute.
A government willing to invest in social housing.
Another unpopular opinion here.
Introduce compulsory national service for everyone two/three years.
Within this will be apprenticeship opportunities for those not planning on further education at university.
A government who is there to represent the people not themselves and their party.
An honest party who can be held accountable for their actions without some long winded debacle.
A massive investment in the military.
Make road's safer , higher police presence on the roads.
Stop building stupid smart motorways that no-one wants.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?
I'd like a party that looks after everyone.
A party that will invest in UK products,make us a exporter and invest in people cut out all the bullshit and red tape that hamstrings our businesses.
A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing.
A government who will get hold of law and order by the scruff of the neck and make wholesale change.
Bringing back police on the street tackling anti social behaviour in a robust way .
There must be consequences for people's actions as this country is on a head-on collision for complete anarchy.
Invest in education educate children not just teach them to pass a test.
Get rid of targets and and allow school's to be more active in the structure of the curriculum not just following a set in stone pattern set at clueless detached people.
This one is not going to be popular.
Get rid of ( within limits) care in the community it hasn't worked and allowed many thousands of people who should be receiving help in a hospital environment not set loose on the streets to fend for themselves and usually end up homeless and destitute.
A government willing to invest in social housing.
Another unpopular opinion here.
Introduce compulsory national service for everyone two/three years.
Within this will be apprenticeship opportunities for those not planning on further education at university.
A government who is there to represent the people not themselves and their party.
An honest party who can be held accountable for their actions without some long winded debacle.
A massive investment in the military.
Make road's safer , higher police presence on the roads.
Stop building stupid smart motorways that no-one wants.
"
"A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing."
Can you elaborate on this one? From my perspective the government currently doesn't give a shit about people who do good. They know they can do whatever they want, fuck over the poorest people in society with austerity measures, and be assured of being re-elected every time. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
Long-term planning independent of lobbying based on what should be done rather than what is thought to be popular this week.
That way, public services and national strategies won't be messed with every few years just to show that "something is being done". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldn OP Couple 52 weeks ago
Brighton |
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?
I'd like a party that looks after everyone.
A party that will invest in UK products,make us a exporter and invest in people cut out all the bullshit and red tape that hamstrings our businesses.
A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing.
A government who will get hold of law and order by the scruff of the neck and make wholesale change.
Bringing back police on the street tackling anti social behaviour in a robust way .
There must be consequences for people's actions as this country is on a head-on collision for complete anarchy.
Invest in education educate children not just teach them to pass a test.
Get rid of targets and and allow school's to be more active in the structure of the curriculum not just following a set in stone pattern set at clueless detached people.
This one is not going to be popular.
Get rid of ( within limits) care in the community it hasn't worked and allowed many thousands of people who should be receiving help in a hospital environment not set loose on the streets to fend for themselves and usually end up homeless and destitute.
A government willing to invest in social housing.
Another unpopular opinion here.
Introduce compulsory national service for everyone two/three years.
Within this will be apprenticeship opportunities for those not planning on further education at university.
A government who is there to represent the people not themselves and their party.
An honest party who can be held accountable for their actions without some long winded debacle.
A massive investment in the military.
Make road's safer , higher police presence on the roads.
Stop building stupid smart motorways that no-one wants.
"A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing."
Can you elaborate on this one? From my perspective the government currently doesn't give a shit about people who do good. They know they can do whatever they want, fuck over the poorest people in society with austerity measures, and be assured of being re-elected every time. "
No! This thread is about an imaginary party and the policies that matter to us. Not a commentary on current govt or opposition.
I need more time to absorb but I am seeing a fair bit of consensus around what actually matters to people. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things. "
Here here.
ignorance has taken over.
Yo, we got to take the power back. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things.
Here here.
ignorance has taken over.
Yo, we got to take the power back. "
Completely agree.
Everything is sound bites and twitter post's.
No imagination or understanding. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things. "
That would certainly be refreshing politics, not sure to what era though?
I take it you have seen the anger and confusion caused over having to provide a photo ID to vote |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?
I'd like a party that looks after everyone.
A party that will invest in UK products,make us a exporter and invest in people cut out all the bullshit and red tape that hamstrings our businesses.
A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing.
A government who will get hold of law and order by the scruff of the neck and make wholesale change.
Bringing back police on the street tackling anti social behaviour in a robust way .
There must be consequences for people's actions as this country is on a head-on collision for complete anarchy.
Invest in education educate children not just teach them to pass a test.
Get rid of targets and and allow school's to be more active in the structure of the curriculum not just following a set in stone pattern set at clueless detached people.
This one is not going to be popular.
Get rid of ( within limits) care in the community it hasn't worked and allowed many thousands of people who should be receiving help in a hospital environment not set loose on the streets to fend for themselves and usually end up homeless and destitute.
A government willing to invest in social housing.
Another unpopular opinion here.
Introduce compulsory national service for everyone two/three years.
Within this will be apprenticeship opportunities for those not planning on further education at university.
A government who is there to represent the people not themselves and their party.
An honest party who can be held accountable for their actions without some long winded debacle.
A massive investment in the military.
Make road's safer , higher police presence on the roads.
Stop building stupid smart motorways that no-one wants.
"A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing."
Can you elaborate on this one? From my perspective the government currently doesn't give a shit about people who do good. They know they can do whatever they want, fuck over the poorest people in society with austerity measures, and be assured of being re-elected every time.
No! This thread is about an imaginary party and the policies that matter to us. Not a commentary on current govt or opposition.
I need more time to absorb but I am seeing a fair bit of consensus around what actually matters to people."
Ok imaginary you say
Ok how about a party that gives us all 1 year tax free every ten years.
Like a financial purge if you want. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?
I'd like a party that looks after everyone.
A party that will invest in UK products,make us a exporter and invest in people cut out all the bullshit and red tape that hamstrings our businesses.
A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing.
A government who will get hold of law and order by the scruff of the neck and make wholesale change.
Bringing back police on the street tackling anti social behaviour in a robust way .
There must be consequences for people's actions as this country is on a head-on collision for complete anarchy.
Invest in education educate children not just teach them to pass a test.
Get rid of targets and and allow school's to be more active in the structure of the curriculum not just following a set in stone pattern set at clueless detached people.
This one is not going to be popular.
Get rid of ( within limits) care in the community it hasn't worked and allowed many thousands of people who should be receiving help in a hospital environment not set loose on the streets to fend for themselves and usually end up homeless and destitute.
A government willing to invest in social housing.
Another unpopular opinion here.
Introduce compulsory national service for everyone two/three years.
Within this will be apprenticeship opportunities for those not planning on further education at university.
A government who is there to represent the people not themselves and their party.
An honest party who can be held accountable for their actions without some long winded debacle.
A massive investment in the military.
Make road's safer , higher police presence on the roads.
Stop building stupid smart motorways that no-one wants.
"A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing."
Can you elaborate on this one? From my perspective the government currently doesn't give a shit about people who do good. They know they can do whatever they want, fuck over the poorest people in society with austerity measures, and be assured of being re-elected every time.
No! This thread is about an imaginary party and the policies that matter to us. Not a commentary on current govt or opposition.
I need more time to absorb but I am seeing a fair bit of consensus around what actually matters to people.
Ok imaginary you say
Ok how about a party that gives us all 1 year tax free every ten years.
Like a financial purge if you want. "
Where do I put my X |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?
I'd like a party that looks after everyone.
A party that will invest in UK products,make us a exporter and invest in people cut out all the bullshit and red tape that hamstrings our businesses.
A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing.
A government who will get hold of law and order by the scruff of the neck and make wholesale change.
Bringing back police on the street tackling anti social behaviour in a robust way .
There must be consequences for people's actions as this country is on a head-on collision for complete anarchy.
Invest in education educate children not just teach them to pass a test.
Get rid of targets and and allow school's to be more active in the structure of the curriculum not just following a set in stone pattern set at clueless detached people.
This one is not going to be popular.
Get rid of ( within limits) care in the community it hasn't worked and allowed many thousands of people who should be receiving help in a hospital environment not set loose on the streets to fend for themselves and usually end up homeless and destitute.
A government willing to invest in social housing.
Another unpopular opinion here.
Introduce compulsory national service for everyone two/three years.
Within this will be apprenticeship opportunities for those not planning on further education at university.
A government who is there to represent the people not themselves and their party.
An honest party who can be held accountable for their actions without some long winded debacle.
A massive investment in the military.
Make road's safer , higher police presence on the roads.
Stop building stupid smart motorways that no-one wants.
"A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing."
Can you elaborate on this one? From my perspective the government currently doesn't give a shit about people who do good. They know they can do whatever they want, fuck over the poorest people in society with austerity measures, and be assured of being re-elected every time.
No! This thread is about an imaginary party and the policies that matter to us. Not a commentary on current govt or opposition.
I need more time to absorb but I am seeing a fair bit of consensus around what actually matters to people.
Ok imaginary you say
Ok how about a party that gives us all 1 year tax free every ten years.
Like a financial purge if you want. "
...and double tax the following year to make up the difference, or do we just pay 10% more the rest of the time? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things.
That would certainly be refreshing politics, not sure to what era though?
I take it you have seen the anger and confusion caused over having to provide a photo ID to vote "
You think that the electorate is stupid? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things. "
I agree that basic understanding of the political system would be very helpful. The difference between Government, the Commons, the Lords, the Judiciary and the Civil service.
It should be taught in schools.
People should be reminded.
However, they will still be selfish and have their emotions manipulated.
Fear and anger has always and will always be used by the cynical.
Statistics on the performance of national and local governments and parties performance relative to each other in delivering on their promises and relative to each other would prove more helpful. Harder to hide failure. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things.
That would certainly be refreshing politics, not sure to what era though?
I take it you have seen the anger and confusion caused over having to provide a photo ID to vote
You think that the electorate is stupid?"
If you read it again and replace the electorate with the people who speak on their behalf, the ones that think that the electorate are not simple, just easily led by emotion, those are the ones who I'm referring to |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?
I'd like a party that looks after everyone.
A party that will invest in UK products,make us a exporter and invest in people cut out all the bullshit and red tape that hamstrings our businesses.
A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing.
A government who will get hold of law and order by the scruff of the neck and make wholesale change.
Bringing back police on the street tackling anti social behaviour in a robust way .
There must be consequences for people's actions as this country is on a head-on collision for complete anarchy.
Invest in education educate children not just teach them to pass a test.
Get rid of targets and and allow school's to be more active in the structure of the curriculum not just following a set in stone pattern set at clueless detached people.
This one is not going to be popular.
Get rid of ( within limits) care in the community it hasn't worked and allowed many thousands of people who should be receiving help in a hospital environment not set loose on the streets to fend for themselves and usually end up homeless and destitute.
A government willing to invest in social housing.
Another unpopular opinion here.
Introduce compulsory national service for everyone two/three years.
Within this will be apprenticeship opportunities for those not planning on further education at university.
A government who is there to represent the people not themselves and their party.
An honest party who can be held accountable for their actions without some long winded debacle.
A massive investment in the military.
Make road's safer , higher police presence on the roads.
Stop building stupid smart motorways that no-one wants.
"A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing."
Can you elaborate on this one? From my perspective the government currently doesn't give a shit about people who do good. They know they can do whatever they want, fuck over the poorest people in society with austerity measures, and be assured of being re-elected every time.
No! This thread is about an imaginary party and the policies that matter to us. Not a commentary on current govt or opposition.
I need more time to absorb but I am seeing a fair bit of consensus around what actually matters to people.
Ok imaginary you say
Ok how about a party that gives us all 1 year tax free every ten years.
Like a financial purge if you want.
...and double tax the following year to make up the difference, or do we just pay 10% more the rest of the time?"
No they make up the shortfall by adding extra tax to the huge companies making billions in profit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?
I'd like a party that looks after everyone.
A party that will invest in UK products,make us a exporter and invest in people cut out all the bullshit and red tape that hamstrings our businesses.
A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing.
A government who will get hold of law and order by the scruff of the neck and make wholesale change.
Bringing back police on the street tackling anti social behaviour in a robust way .
There must be consequences for people's actions as this country is on a head-on collision for complete anarchy.
Invest in education educate children not just teach them to pass a test.
Get rid of targets and and allow school's to be more active in the structure of the curriculum not just following a set in stone pattern set at clueless detached people.
This one is not going to be popular.
Get rid of ( within limits) care in the community it hasn't worked and allowed many thousands of people who should be receiving help in a hospital environment not set loose on the streets to fend for themselves and usually end up homeless and destitute.
A government willing to invest in social housing.
Another unpopular opinion here.
Introduce compulsory national service for everyone two/three years.
Within this will be apprenticeship opportunities for those not planning on further education at university.
A government who is there to represent the people not themselves and their party.
An honest party who can be held accountable for their actions without some long winded debacle.
A massive investment in the military.
Make road's safer , higher police presence on the roads.
Stop building stupid smart motorways that no-one wants.
"A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing."
Can you elaborate on this one? From my perspective the government currently doesn't give a shit about people who do good. They know they can do whatever they want, fuck over the poorest people in society with austerity measures, and be assured of being re-elected every time.
No! This thread is about an imaginary party and the policies that matter to us. Not a commentary on current govt or opposition.
I need more time to absorb but I am seeing a fair bit of consensus around what actually matters to people.
Ok imaginary you say
Ok how about a party that gives us all 1 year tax free every ten years.
Like a financial purge if you want.
...and double tax the following year to make up the difference, or do we just pay 10% more the rest of the time?
No they make up the shortfall by adding extra tax to the huge companies making billions in profit."
Then you wouldn't need a tax "holiday". You would just have lower income taxes permanently. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldn OP Couple 52 weeks ago
Brighton |
When I get a moment I will tally up the list to see which things are the priority for most people.
A cursory look shows people want more focus on things like education and health and I am reading that as more investment not just structural change (is that right?)
How do we achieve that without higher taxes?
I mean I would love a society that is able to invest more into public services AND pay less tax. Is that possible? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"When I get a moment I will tally up the list to see which things are the priority for most people.
A cursory look shows people want more focus on things like education and health and I am reading that as more investment not just structural change (is that right?)
How do we achieve that without higher taxes?
I mean I would love a society that is able to invest more into public services AND pay less tax. Is that possible?"
yes, we need a bespoke asset / assets that the rest of the world needs.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldn OP Couple 52 weeks ago
Brighton |
"When I get a moment I will tally up the list to see which things are the priority for most people.
A cursory look shows people want more focus on things like education and health and I am reading that as more investment not just structural change (is that right?)
How do we achieve that without higher taxes?
I mean I would love a society that is able to invest more into public services AND pay less tax. Is that possible?
yes, we need a bespoke asset / assets that the rest of the world needs.. "
As in growth industries that the UK is a leader in that then generates lots of sales and bigger corporate tax receipts (enabling a reduction in personal tax)?
If so, then we need a big focus on education to develop a highly skilled workforce. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?
I'd like a party that looks after everyone.
A party that will invest in UK products,make us a exporter and invest in people cut out all the bullshit and red tape that hamstrings our businesses.
A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing.
A government who will get hold of law and order by the scruff of the neck and make wholesale change.
Bringing back police on the street tackling anti social behaviour in a robust way .
There must be consequences for people's actions as this country is on a head-on collision for complete anarchy.
Invest in education educate children not just teach them to pass a test.
Get rid of targets and and allow school's to be more active in the structure of the curriculum not just following a set in stone pattern set at clueless detached people.
This one is not going to be popular.
Get rid of ( within limits) care in the community it hasn't worked and allowed many thousands of people who should be receiving help in a hospital environment not set loose on the streets to fend for themselves and usually end up homeless and destitute.
A government willing to invest in social housing.
Another unpopular opinion here.
Introduce compulsory national service for everyone two/three years.
Within this will be apprenticeship opportunities for those not planning on further education at university.
A government who is there to represent the people not themselves and their party.
An honest party who can be held accountable for their actions without some long winded debacle.
A massive investment in the military.
Make road's safer , higher police presence on the roads.
Stop building stupid smart motorways that no-one wants.
"A government not afraid to make tough decisions and not back down to the mamby pamby do-gooders who jump up and down and cry fowl at everything little thing."
Can you elaborate on this one? From my perspective the government currently doesn't give a shit about people who do good. They know they can do whatever they want, fuck over the poorest people in society with austerity measures, and be assured of being re-elected every time.
No! This thread is about an imaginary party and the policies that matter to us. Not a commentary on current govt or opposition.
I need more time to absorb but I am seeing a fair bit of consensus around what actually matters to people.
Ok imaginary you say
Ok how about a party that gives us all 1 year tax free every ten years.
Like a financial purge if you want.
...and double tax the following year to make up the difference, or do we just pay 10% more the rest of the time?
No they make up the shortfall by adding extra tax to the huge companies making billions in profit.
Then you wouldn't need a tax "holiday". You would just have lower income taxes permanently."
well we should be in government then.
After a brief discussion we have found a good solution without name calling or derogatory comments.
Power to the people
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"When I get a moment I will tally up the list to see which things are the priority for most people.
A cursory look shows people want more focus on things like education and health and I am reading that as more investment not just structural change (is that right?)
How do we achieve that without higher taxes?
I mean I would love a society that is able to invest more into public services AND pay less tax. Is that possible?
yes, we need a bespoke asset / assets that the rest of the world needs..
As in growth industries that the UK is a leader in that then generates lots of sales and bigger corporate tax receipts (enabling a reduction in personal tax)?
If so, then we need a big focus on education to develop a highly skilled workforce."
Education from year 1 needs a revamp to bring education in-line with modern day living, which could be schools are open 7 days a week, term times increased to maximise learning, kick start our youth through a service that caters for high achieving students and those who need more help to succeed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things.
That would certainly be refreshing politics, not sure to what era though?
I take it you have seen the anger and confusion caused over having to provide a photo ID to vote
You think that the electorate is stupid?
If you read it again and replace the electorate with the people who speak on their behalf, the ones that think that the electorate are not simple, just easily led by emotion, those are the ones who I'm referring to "
You were saying that it was politicians feeling "angry and confused" about voter ID, not the people who were turned away from voting? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things.
That would certainly be refreshing politics, not sure to what era though?
I take it you have seen the anger and confusion caused over having to provide a photo ID to vote
You think that the electorate is stupid?
If you read it again and replace the electorate with the people who speak on their behalf, the ones that think that the electorate are not simple, just easily led by emotion, those are the ones who I'm referring to
You were saying that it was politicians feeling "angry and confused" about voter ID, not the people who were turned away from voting?"
I know exactly what I was saying, because it was “me” that said it. Do you do that a lot, tell people what they meant or was thinking, or do you get the wrong end of the stick of lot? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple 52 weeks ago
North West |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things. "
Alternatively, Politicians should perhaps face criminal and financial repercussions if they try to act as PR Consultants instead of fully laying out the facts as they actually are.
It is simply a fact of life that there are vast swathes of the population who just don’t want to think too hard and Politicians know this. It is the reason that we have three word slogans and ridiculously simple soundbytes which are meant to resolve very complex issues.
A fundamental requirement to have to be honest at all times or face the full weight of the Law should be a fundamental part of political life. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things.
That would certainly be refreshing politics, not sure to what era though?
I take it you have seen the anger and confusion caused over having to provide a photo ID to vote
You think that the electorate is stupid?
If you read it again and replace the electorate with the people who speak on their behalf, the ones that think that the electorate are not simple, just easily led by emotion, those are the ones who I'm referring to
You were saying that it was politicians feeling "angry and confused" about voter ID, not the people who were turned away from voting?
I know exactly what I was saying, because it was “me” that said it. Do you do that a lot, tell people what they meant or was thinking, or do you get the wrong end of the stick of lot?"
There was a question mark at the end of what I wrote.
I understand that you really, really, really want us to have identity cards for voting, but that shouldn't stop you from clarifying a perfectly simple point.
Alternatively, just get defensive and angry. Exactly the emotions that our politicians play on. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 52 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things.
That would certainly be refreshing politics, not sure to what era though?
I take it you have seen the anger and confusion caused over having to provide a photo ID to vote
You think that the electorate is stupid?
If you read it again and replace the electorate with the people who speak on their behalf, the ones that think that the electorate are not simple, just easily led by emotion, those are the ones who I'm referring to
You were saying that it was politicians feeling "angry and confused" about voter ID, not the people who were turned away from voting?
I know exactly what I was saying, because it was “me” that said it. Do you do that a lot, tell people what they meant or was thinking, or do you get the wrong end of the stick of lot?
There was a question mark at the end of what I wrote.
I understand that you really, really, really want us to have identity cards for voting, but that shouldn't stop you from clarifying a perfectly simple point.
Alternatively, just get defensive and angry. Exactly the emotions that our politicians play on."
I'm not angry
Successful implementation in my opinion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things.
That would certainly be refreshing politics, not sure to what era though?
I take it you have seen the anger and confusion caused over having to provide a photo ID to vote
You think that the electorate is stupid?
If you read it again and replace the electorate with the people who speak on their behalf, the ones that think that the electorate are not simple, just easily led by emotion, those are the ones who I'm referring to
You were saying that it was politicians feeling "angry and confused" about voter ID, not the people who were turned away from voting?
I know exactly what I was saying, because it was “me” that said it. Do you do that a lot, tell people what they meant or was thinking, or do you get the wrong end of the stick of lot?
There was a question mark at the end of what I wrote.
I understand that you really, really, really want us to have identity cards for voting, but that shouldn't stop you from clarifying a perfectly simple point.
Alternatively, just get defensive and angry. Exactly the emotions that our politicians play on.
I'm not angry
Successful implementation in my opinion. "
So you get that I was asking a question then?
So nobody is upset or angry about voter ID? Neither the politicians not those prevented from voting?
In that case, what point were you making? That people on this site were "angry and confused" about Rees-Mogg unambiguously saying that it was intended to gerrymander? That the Government ignored the "angry and confused" Electoral Commission's recommendation on what forms of ID should be accepted? That the Government ignored the "angry and confused" House of Lords objections? That the Government ignored the recommendations of the "angry and confused" public administration and constitutional affairs committee? That there was no information to suggest that voter ID solved any electoral fraud problem at all?
If more people have been turned away from voting than been even investigated for electoral fraud, will that be a "success"? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Any chance we could have one thread where it isn't turned into essays worth of arguing pathetic points that have nothing to do with the thread?
The OP asked a fairly simple question and hasn't even come back to it yet.
This thread doesn't really require a debate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
"Any chance we could have one thread where it isn't turned into essays worth of arguing pathetic points that have nothing to do with the thread?
The OP asked a fairly simple question and hasn't even come back to it yet.
This thread doesn't really require a debate."
I've answered the OP directly twice now.
Still trying to police how everyone else chooses to behave on someone else's thread as well as your own it seems. Good luck with that. It will only make you "angry and confused" though |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Any chance we could have one thread where it isn't turned into essays worth of arguing pathetic points that have nothing to do with the thread?
The OP asked a fairly simple question and hasn't even come back to it yet.
This thread doesn't really require a debate.
I've answered the OP directly twice now.
Still trying to police how everyone else chooses to behave on someone else's thread as well as your own it seems. Good luck with that. It will only make you "angry and confused" though "
I'm not getting into yet another petty argument with you.
You're entitled to get petty and derail this thread with hangovers from others, I'm entitled to ask a question. End of conversation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Policies based on actual unbiased data and anaysis rather than cherry-picked to justify dogma.
That would make for good Government."
One of my fears is that some snake oil salesman will pop up and tell the electorate that he will, inside the first year he is in power, half income tax, cure cancer, reduce the retirement age to 50 and give everyone a free new luxury EV to halt climate change.
There are far too many who would vote for him without considering the implications or deliverability of what he said.
Brexit was one such case. Massive unfeasible promises were made by the leavers and virtually no one listened because the reality was lsmoke screened by the "Project fear" chant by the leavers. We need our electorate to think before they put their x on the paper. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
"I would vote for a party that proposed that voters had to pass a basic test on the political system in the UK before being allowed to vote. I am tired of the knee jerk choices of the ignorant and unthinking controlling my country and my life.
If folks understood how things worked better, and the history of lies promulgated by politicians to win public favour, we might have a better qualified bunch running things.
Alternatively, Politicians should perhaps face criminal and financial repercussions if they try to act as PR Consultants instead of fully laying out the facts as they actually are.
It is simply a fact of life that there are vast swathes of the population who just don’t want to think too hard and Politicians know this. It is the reason that we have three word slogans and ridiculously simple soundbytes which are meant to resolve very complex issues.
A fundamental requirement to have to be honest at all times or face the full weight of the Law should be a fundamental part of political life. "
The process of addressing policy to the House before going to the press has collapsed.
That is part of the problem. Everything is seen as "in the way" of getting the job done rather than understanding that it is all part of getting the job done.
Proper assessment from the Civil service which will present you problems (some insurmountable) as well as solutions.
Scrutiny from Parliamentary committees that force Government to account for what it's doing. Debate in Parliament to take on board a diversity of view and needs across different constituencies and scrutiny of the consequences.
If you just base policy on how popular the TickTok clip or Facebook post or website click is you get poorly thought trough sound bites.
You get the Liz Truss "everything I wanted to do would be great if it wasn't for reality".
Again, it goes back to Government governing for everyone's benefit rather than for popularity.
A bit like parenting. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
For me it isn't a certain policy.
It is the broken promises, they say on thing and it never happens.
It would be nice to have a government that doesn't lie, puts its hands up and says we fucked up. Get rid of the corrupt politicians that take bribes for favours, that would be a refreshing start for me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan 52 weeks ago
West London |
"For me it isn't a certain policy.
It is the broken promises, they say on thing and it never happens.
It would be nice to have a government that doesn't lie, puts its hands up and says we fucked up. Get rid of the corrupt politicians that take bribes for favours, that would be a refreshing start for me."
We seem to accept this as a population though.
Politicians have realised that they can make impossible promises, not keep them, lie to our faces and not be punished in elections. What incentive to change their behaviour.
Equally, when party's are not in power and come up with policies that theu change because of the circumstances that the current Government creates they are also accused of u-turning.
So changing your mind before getting power is weak and changing your mind whilst in power is dishonest.
We seem to punish the "weak" more than the dishonest though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we all put aside tribalism and our support/hatred for the current set of political parties in the UK, just for a moment and the benefit of this thread, I have been wondering what things in life are most of our priorities.
Assume for the minute a new political party was launched. Assume the people in the party are going to be true to their word and have a track record that demonstrates to you that they have integrity and experience...
What are the really important policies and manifesto pledges they would have to make to win your vote?
What matters to YOU!
Not what the media tells you that matters. What ACTUALLY MATTERS TO YOU?"
More fines for papers and journos that post lies.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
