Reform UK Party Limited Company

The Farage interview this morning was him mainly using Musk as an advocate of free speech. Read that to mean carte blanche for Reform and the likes of Philp and Jenrick to come out and say just what they like and about who. Add to that Tice doing an interview on Sky this morning and pretty much trying to dictate the agenda. Put all this together and I see us as a country becoming even more polarised and for the first time I am genuinely concerned for the political, and therefore social structure of the country over the next few months/years. We are now in a period that there is a brand of politician that truly don't give a shit about the actual well being of the country, only their own power trip. This was always the case in small and insignificant numbers and with individuals that were in no position of power-that is now not the case.
 
Eh? I literally said in a subsequent post that I have no issue with the coverage reform gets and if anything want to hear from them more.

My point was that shouldn’t be at the expense of others though. The Lib Dem’s currently have 72 members of parliament. They are representing far more of the electorate in parliament than Reform and will have a bigger influence on this session of parliament and whatever their perspective has the potential to directly influence policy. If someone is a reform voter in a Lib Dem area, they absolutely should want to hear what your constituent mp thinks too.

The irony of your second paragraph is that’s what you are suggesting far more than me…
No

Firstly I was typing before your 2nd post but more importantly you have repeated the bigger influence on parliament that the lib dems have.
Labour have a huge majority the libs influence like the other parties is nada, zip, nowt.

There is no irony only a flawed argument that if some peoples opinions are more localised(although probably more a tactical vote) they somehow have more of a right to hear from their guy/girl than one whose support is spread out. I don't agree.
And I'm a bloody green voter so I suppose I get properly shafted.
 
No

Firstly I was typing before your 2nd post but more importantly you have repeated the bigger influence on parliament that the lib dems have.
Labour have a huge majority the libs influence like the other parties is nada, zip, nowt.

There is no irony only a flawed argument that if some peoples opinions are more localised(although probably more a tactical vote) they somehow have more of a right to hear from their guy/girl than one whose support is spread out. I don't agree.
And I'm a bloody green voter so I suppose I get properly shafted.

I don’t agree with you there about influence. The Lib Dem’s wll now be on plenty of cross party committees and personally I doubt the Labour vote will stay unified throughout the whole course of parliament, if that were to happen or any time there’s a free vote, the Lib Dem’s could well have a big impact. Likewise their ability to raise motions is signficantly increased.

My argument isn’t about the right to hear, everyone has the right to hear and be heard (or should), as I said I’d platform reform more rather than less. What I’m saying is the Lib Dem’s should at least get similar coverage and people should be interested in them.

And I voted green too, I agree!
 
It depends what people mean by 'free speech' and who has the 'free speech'.

Frankly, if I claim the Magic Bunny will solve all our ills and give every citizen a free Rolls Royce it doesn't matter. My voice is insignificant, it will not be amplified, and what I am saying is just a harmless fantasy.

If some fascist grifter with the power of the media behind him blames all our troubles on brown people, then that is a horse of a very different colour. The possible implications for social order are clear to anyone who gives it a moment's thought.

The issue is really, some people want freedom to call others 'n****s' and 'p***s' and blame all our troubles on these minority groups. It isn't so much free speech as a desire to lie and inflame tensions. It's a re-run of the 1930s with a different target. The paedo obsession is a good manifestation, the people behind it conveniently forget that most paedos in this country are white natives as it does not fit their narrative.
 
The issue is really, some people want freedom to call others 'n****s' and 'p***s' and blame all our troubles on these minority groups. It isn't so much free speech as a desire to lie and inflame tensions. It's a re-run of the 1930s with a different target. The paedo obsession is a good manifestation, the people behind it conveniently forget that most paedos in this country are white natives as it does not fit their narrative.

Had no idea Jess Phillips was a racist grifter tbh?

Or was she just rightly concerned when calling for more to be done and a national inquiry into the grooming gangs when in opposition?

Wonder what changed for her?
 
I don’t agree with you there about influence. The Lib Dem’s wll now be on plenty of cross party committees and personally I doubt the Labour vote will stay unified throughout the whole course of parliament, if that were to happen or any time there’s a free vote, the Lib Dem’s could well have a big impact. Likewise their ability to raise motions is signficantly increased.

My argument isn’t about the right to hear, everyone has the right to hear and be heard (or should), as I said I’d platform reform more rather than less. What I’m saying is the Lib Dem’s should at least get similar coverage and people should be interested in them.

And I voted green too, I agree!
We are roughly in agreement, the only difference is seats vs popular vote. The only other thing I would say is if you get one of each how big of a difference would there be and that's the problem with our politics. People are scared of expressing an opinion and I can understand it to some extent.(look what happens on here)

If there are three things no politician wants to discuss its immigration, brexit and social care.

They have no answer for any of them. Well apart from bulking out the population which is the ultimate band aid.
 
We are roughly in agreement, the only difference is seats vs popular vote. The only other thing I would say is if you get one of each how big of a difference would there be and that's the problem with our politics. People are scared of expressing an opinion and I can understand it to some extent.(look what happens on here)

If there are three things no politician wants to discuss its immigration, brexit and social care.

They have no answer for any of them. Well apart from bulking out the population which is the ultimate band aid.

Personally I’ve always argued for proportional representation so the seats vs popular vote goes away. Bear in mind I’m still saying platform Reform, just platform Lib Dem’s at least equally too. And platform the Greens more too, I’d advocate anything that allows for more diversity in the debate.

Think there are quite a few in the electorate that could do with changing mindset a bit too, there seems to be more people that are overly partisan in their support on all sides than ever which I’ve never understood. I’ve never agreed entirely with any political party’s manifesto.
 
Because without it there won’t be nearly enough doctors, nurses and carers for the elderly.

I suppose if we take a Logan’s Run approach to society then it won’t be necessary any more. It may actually have to come to something like that eventually; not here hopefully, but elsewhere. I’m struggling to see how countries like China and Russia are going to be able to cope with the demographic tsunami that’s coming their way.

There's no "correct" answer.

The NHS, while being a source of pride for this nation, has become untenable in today's economy. I don't know how to put this with any tact, but the problem is that people now live too long. We can take people with serious illnesses and treat them for long past the time where they should have naturally died. In addition to the average life expectancy raising by around 12 years since the NHS was conceived. It's now at 81. As an average.

Ultimately, this country cannot afford to continue that without a better demographic make up. There's 13 million people over the age of 65 in the country, most of which will need the NHS or pensions that come from the public purse and they'll be drawing that without economic activity for almost 20 years on average. There's literally not enough people to maintain the economy in terms of the technological advances we've made in terms of the tax base needed to sustain. Perhaps we could do a Japan like population incentive? But that solves the problem in 25-50 years rather than now. The only two answers to this problem is that you fuck pensioners out of money and services they've worked their entire life for as part of the social contract, or you increase immigration to bring in more tax paying people. There's no third option in the short to medium term. New industries are always the answer I hear about this but presuming that new/as yet undeveloped tech economies will solve everything is a very common coping mechanism in my experience and it's essentially faith. I watch football every week, I love a bit of faith, but I don't consider blind faith in an unseen tech miracle to be a reasonable solution to a very serious issue of governing a nation.

With that said, with immigration comes societal issues. When two very distinct cultures such as Western liberal and conservative Islamic cultures collide then the social norms are so different that issues are going to arise. There's also the idea that immigration does depress the wages of the poorest in the country which is a huge benefit to companies who really want a greater amount of potential workers and it often can disrupt unions power and workers rights if those workers are willing to sacrifice hard won freedoms. The phrase "immigration is a net economic positive for any nation, but it benefits middle class people while being paid for by working class people" is apt in my opinion. It's also why people who aren't working factories or warehouses saying that the working class right are "brainwashed" or "stupid" is so fucking pretentious and offensive, like these grown adults need someone else to tell them what's good or bad for their lives and need to be led around like children. If you don't trust the electorate to each vote in its own interests then you're not a democrat. It's that simple.

The biggest issue in this whole immigration debate has always been dishonesty from all of the major political parties. They lie about immigration; both in terms of the purpose of it, the desperate need for it, and the potentially large social cohesion issues it can cause. It's a type of intellectually dishonesty I've always found distasteful, these aren't radical ideas, they're just common sense. Immigration needs to be managed and the parties (none of which ACTUALLY want to stop immigration including Reform) need to start telling people that they have a choice of things like the triple lock or immigration because there's no way to make the numbers add up otherwise.

Actually there is a third way. It's to remove immigration and then borrow Covid levels of money every year but as mentioned, I'm talking about the serious business of governing a nation rather than being absolutely mental and bankrupting the country for the next 100 years
 
We are now in a period that there is a brand of politician that truly don't give a shit about the actual well being of the country, only their own power trip. This was always the case in small and insignificant numbers and with individuals that were in no position of power-that is now not the case.

Did you sleep through 2019-2024?
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.