General Election 2019 (UK)

[jamesg46]

I don't especially care why they can't afford enough surgeons, all I know is that they can't. Oh well, just another day-to-day issue the filthy rich don't have to worry about, so they don't.

I agree, you shouldn't have to care but at the same time I also think that just because somebody has worked hard for they have, they should have to care anymore than you or I.

Don't want to speak for Shaun, but he's surely talking about tax dodging and tax havens, plus the politics of wanting politicians favoring low taxes etc.; not caring quite that literally. They don't have to mentally, as it were, care more, and feel bad for others less fortunately. The question is whether they should at the very least pay their fair share, rather than dodge. You're (inadvertently?) equating something as cold and hard as cool cash to caring.

It's a sliding scale, and I'm sure there's some, who make, say low six figures a year, who have worked significantly harder for their position in society and work life, than say someone stacking shelves at Tesco. The issue, imo at least, is more the exclusively filthy rich. Don't want to come of all Marxist - I'm not, promise not even close in fact - but the money in those cases aren't even remotely correlated to the work effort, and it doesn't come from a vacuum. It comes from a capitalist society, with companies, with workers. They should give back to that society.

I was referring to care in terms of individulal feeling of responsibility, as Shaun said "I don't especially care why they can't afford enough surgeons" - I agree with Shaun on this & at the same time I don't think there can, or could be a range set for people caring more or less based on their own value.

What i'm trying to say is, because person A has more wealth than person B, doesn't mean imo that person A should feel morally obliged to care more about why the NHS can't afford more surgeons, just as I wouldnt expect someone to feel they're a burden because they contribute less, I have to point out that I have no idea what the solution to any of these problems are and I'm only interested in the conversation, I'm not here for disagreement.

In terms of the filthy rich not giving back to society, is there a possibility that this is a two sided coin, I mean don't a lot of these companies generate a lot of paye through the qty of jobs they create?

[greenmark]

I consider this to be one of the root causes of the NHS problems and tbh I did not realise the full extent of the other sectors blighted by it..

https://www.theguardian.com/news/databl ... racts-list

... and the big question is cold the state have delivered an equal or better project for less money overall. I don't even know where to start looking for that info, but the state has a poor record with delivering anything without escalating costs.
I kind of agree with Shaun public ownership has never been run by first rate people, but I do wonder whether human nature is such that public ownership can never work because there's no profit motive, directors share deals and no pressure from shareholders.

[Naffman]

How about we stop British Pakistanis inbreeding (babies are 13x more likely in this community than the UK as a whole to have birth defects) then the NHS would be a whole lot better off

[Dublin_Flyer]

How about we stop British Pakistanis inbreeding (babies are 13x more likely in this community than the UK as a whole to have birth defects) then the NHS would be a whole lot better off

I've done my best to stay out of this topic, but this is pure pulling numbers out of your arsehole. Can you back that up with actual recognised research, or is it some standard racist bullshit you saw on facebook and take as fact, and propogate?

Please do go ahead and quote the recognised scientific journal where the scientifically sound calculation of 13x more likely comes from.

[Euler]

Maybe we should keep the thread on trading. I know everybody has tried hard to do that, but it's tough!

[greenmark]

Well, after the BBC's leaders questions last night the odds on a Tory win and majority didn't budge an inch. So it seems everyone has made up their mind and barring a gaff thats what we'll get.

[Euler]

Well, after the BBC's leaders questions last night the odds on a Tory win and majority didn't budge an inch. So it seems everyone has made up their mind and barring a gaff thats what we'll get.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more movement. But some of the markets during the voting day have been wild in the past. Guess it will depend on the swingometer.

TBF if Labour's manifesto was left of centre it may convince some. But moving ever further to the left means that has sort of fallen completely off the radar of your average voter.

[ShaunWhite]

How about we stop British Pakistanis.....

Fat white alcohol drinkers are by far the biggest problem. The pubs are full of them wobbling around stuffing pints of poison in their bloated bodies and eating crap. If adults acted like adults instead of overgrown babies we'd save billions.

[ShaunWhite]

TBF if Labour's manifesto was left of centre it may convince some. But moving ever further to the left means that has sort of fallen completely off the radar of your average voter.

+1 Do you remember that a while ago we had the concept of the 'shy Tory'? There might be a hint of that with Labour this time, in 9 yrs things haven't been great for average Joe, but probably not enough to sway things much.

[Euler]

I was trying to think through what the shy tory effect would be this time around or whether the shifting landscape has redefined it?

[greenmark]

So who is shy?
Tory - win by a country mile.
Labour - hung parliament.
Libs - hung parliament, lib/lab coalition (?).
Brexit - no chance, forget it!

[superfrank]

+1 Do you remember that a while ago we had the concept of the 'shy Tory'? There might be a hint of that with Labour this time, in 9 yrs things haven't been great for average Joe, but probably not enough to sway things much.

Nothing shy about Labour voters. They tend to be self-righteous and hence pretty vocal in my experience.

[Jukebox]

I was trying to think through what the shy tory effect would be this time around or whether the shifting landscape has redefined it?

Possibly the shy Brexiteer?

[greenmark]

Apologies to Euler re: going off trading. But I have to respond to Kafka.
I have been 1st and 2nd line carer for people dying from cancer. It is so difficult and the support of public services is massive. The UK has so much ability to support those in need. Its criminal that we argue about this stuff. It's about being a good citizen.

[ShaunWhite]

I was trying to think through what the shy tory effect would be this time around or whether the shifting landscape has redefined it?

I think the landscape has changed, certainly not shy anymore. Also worth noting that females voted to remain, outnumbered by Leaver men, and in a loud vigerous debate females often the 'shy' ones. Tory minority gov imo, but slightly closer than the atmosphere would suggest. Ie back to square one. Or worse than square one actually as the Johnson vision of leave might only garner 35-40% of the vote count (if not the seat count), certain less than 50%. That's probably the interesting part about the election.