The Labour Government

[hilts]

@gordondaviesmoustache @hilts

I think it's fear of how the media treat things, something that I think they have some justification to worry about. There will be endless interviews with opponents about it.

I think the fear of reporting currently exceeds fear of the public voting intentions.

I agree though - apologise and take a solid position of "made a mistake, corrected it, apologised". Be different from Philp (which surely must be a good thing!)

Put the fight back on the media, also its nowhere near a nett sum gain because imho most don't fall for it anyhow. Its the bubble they all live in. Go down a high street and just ask a simple question "what do you think about the honesty and integrity of politicians "

They work for us not some **** who owns the Telegraph.

They could try a bit harder not to cock up in the first place, as soon as everyone heard the policy the first thought that came to most was what about those just above the cut off they're hardly comfortable as it is.
It's worrying you have politicians without these instincts or are blissfully unaware of what a basic income is.
This is not just a Labour thing just that at the moment they are making the decisions.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

@gordondaviesmoustache @hilts

I think it's fear of how the media treat things, something that I think they have some justification to worry about. There will be endless interviews with opponents about it.

I think the fear of reporting currently exceeds fear of the public voting intentions.

I agree though - apologise and take a solid position of "made a mistake, corrected it, apologised". Be different from Philp (which surely must be a good thing!)

Philp is an odious ****.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

It's not a u turn says Milliband it's a readjustment now she has found wiggle room, nothing to do with reforms gains at the locals, suddenly the money was found under Ray Ray's couch. They had coincidentally seen the light just after more people stopped voting for them.
My absolutely favourite bit of this uncomfortable car crash was the old politicians favourite get out clause(most would call it an outright embarrassing lie)
was when he was asked should they apologise to those pensioners who were very worried about not receiving this benefit:-

Well on the doorstep no one has been asking me about an apology. Yeah that's what you've been doing knocking on Beryl's door all day. Bellend.

Milliband comes acrosss as a politician with so little gravitas or credibility. A total wet fish completely out of his depth in all areas. I just couldn't see him getting past interview stage at our company for any role. I was very surprised when Starmer brought him back into government.

 

[Metal Biker]

Rich or poor, having savings or no, it is the right of every pensioner to receive the WFA.

Have an issue with that? Then make a financial contribution to charity or a worthwhile cause, give it to family members. It's YOUR WFA, do what you want with it. Keep it, donate it, put it in your savings, whatever. This bickering about "who should be allowed to get it" is nonsense.

If YOU personally don't want it, hand it back. Don't determine what others should be allowed to do with money that is rightfully theirs regardless of their status.

 

[mancityvstoke]

Rich or poor, having savings or no, it is the right of every pensioner to receive the WFA.

Have an issue with that? Then make a financial contribution to charity or a worthwhile cause, give it to family members. It's YOUR WFA, do what you want with it. Keep it, donate it, put it in your savings, whatever. This bickering about "who should be allowed to get it" is nonsense.

If YOU personally don't want it, hand it back. Don't determine what others should be allowed to do with money that is rightfully theirs regardless of their status.

the nobs on here won't like that .....funny as fuck.

Most of them would kill off pensioners wanting a decent retirement rather than give them 200 notes to help keep warm.

or call them thick cunts for not earning more during their working life.

 

[threespires]

@gordondaviesmoustache @hilts

I think it's fear of how the media treat things, something that I think they have some justification to worry about. There will be endless interviews with opponents about it.

I think the fear of reporting currently exceeds fear of the public voting intentions.

I agree though - apologise and take a solid position of "made a mistake, corrected it, apologised". Be different from Philp (which surely must be a good thing!)

I might be misremembering but I think there's even some research that says voters ask for accountability and honesty but then actually punish politicians they see as 'weak' for acknowledging mistakes. But it's a sorry state of affairs when appearing weak in the 24 hr news cycle trumps actually connecting honestly with voters.

I tend to agree with GDM about Clegg's issues and I suspect this issue of not apologising and 'fighting fire with fire' goes back to the introduction of TV attack ads in the US. LBJ started it with the, albeit implicit, 'Daisy' ad but then in the 80's and 90's the republicans followed by the democrats normalised it. The issue now is that technology means you can get the meme out or produce an attack ad and target the politician at 10 times the speed and a fraction of the cost these days and then amplify it really quickly.

It raises a bigger question too about trying to maintain a democracy in the face of business models in the media that have changed significantly. For a properly functioning democracy you need an informed electorate and if possibly once upon a time that was something that a reasonable chunk of the media respected and understood; I think now they are mostly an impediment to that goal.

 

[BobKowalski]

Think it was Napoleon Bonaparte who said. “In politics, never retreat, never retract, never admit a mistake.”

It seems the practice has a long history :)

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I might be misremembering but I think there's even some research that says voters ask for accountability and honesty but then actually punish politicians they see as 'weak' for acknowledging mistakes. But it's a sorry state of affairs when appearing weak in the 24 hr news cycle trumps actually connecting honestly with voters.

I tend to agree with GDM about Clegg's issues and I suspect this issue of not apologising and 'fighting fire with fire' goes back to the introduction of TV attack ads in the US. LBJ started it with the, albeit implicit, 'Daisy' ad but then in the 80's and 90's the republicans followed by the democrats normalised it. The issue now is that technology means you can get the meme out or produce an attack ad and target the politician at 10 times the speed and a fraction of the cost these days and then amplify it really quickly.

It raises a bigger question too about trying to maintain a democracy in the face of business models in the media that have changed significantly. For a properly functioning democracy you need an informed electorate and if possibly once upon a time that was something that a reasonable chunk of the media respected and understood; I think now they are mostly an impediment to that goal.

The last part is certainly a problem - the attack dog media, and from politicians with no principles are going to cause resistance.

I hoped it was clear that the Clegg issue was dropped in last night by a senior BBC hack, seemingly to the surprise of the host. I'd not heard it before, but maybe it's something that should be investigated (albeit, being dull, and counterproductive to what many media organs want to do).

 

[Rory Bluelow]

Milliband comes acrosss as a politician with so little gravitas or credibility. A total wet fish completely out of his depth in all areas. I just couldn't see him getting past interview stage at our company for any role. I was very surprised when Starmer brought him back into government.

I agree but when I worked in the Power industry, Miliband was a highly respected Energy Minister - viewed as pragmatic and honest - unlike Ed Davey who was ideologically opposed to nuclear power - which the industry felt was essential going forward. So I think Starmer put him in the role because of his past. He’s definitely not a leader and seems to have lost the plot with his crazy dash to decarbonise at all/any costs. Interestingly he’s announced further Nuclear builds this morning. I also think the Spain/Portugal power outage was a massive wake-up call.
The WFA debacle was just one in a growing list of fuck-ups and Miliband ducking and weaving - as all politicians do - and sadly entirely to be expected.

 

[BobKowalski]

Put the fight back on the media, also its nowhere near a nett sum gain because imho most don't fall for it anyhow. Its the bubble they all live in. Go down a high street and just ask a simple question "what do you think about the honesty and integrity of politicians "

They work for us not some **** who owns the Telegraph.

They could try a bit harder not to cock up in the first place, as soon as everyone heard the policy the first thought that came to most was what about those just above the cut off they're hardly comfortable as it is.
It's worrying you have politicians without these instincts or are blissfully unaware of what a basic income is.
This is not just a Labour thing just that at the moment they are making the decisions.

You could have walked down the High St in any decade of the last 150 years and got a damming response on the honesty and integrity of politicians. And the electorate does not value honesty and integrity or the admission of mistakes. The voting public value certainty, simplicity and the illusion of strength. Three word slogans work because they reduce complexity to a level that we can comprehend.

You may decry the politicians we have, but they accurately reflect the politicians the majority of the public want.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I agree but when I worked in the Power industry, Miliband was a highly respected Energy Minister - viewed as pragmatic and honest - unlike Ed Davey who was ideologically opposed to nuclear power - which the industry felt was essential going forward. So I think Starmer put him in the role because of his past. He’s definitely not a leader and seems to have lost the plot with his crazy dash to decarbonise at all/any costs. Interestingly he’s announced further Nuclear builds this morning. I also think the Spain/Portugal power outage was a massive wake-up call.
The WFA debacle was just one in a growing list of fuck-ups and Miliband ducking and weaving - as all politicians do - and sadly entirely to be expected.

Fair enough, good to have some first hand experience.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Think it was Napoleon Bonaparte who said. “In politics, never retreat, never retract, never admit a mistake.”

It seems the practice has a long history :)

Not really the best role model, a nasty dictator and megalomaniac who tried to take over all of Eurpope by force. That never ends well. Im always a little baffled as to why the French celebrate this fella.

 

[meltonblue]

the nobs on here won't like that .....funny as fuck.

Most of them would kill off pensioners wanting a decent retirement rather than give them 200 notes to help keep warm.

or call them thick cunts for not earning more during their working life.

Would they? Think most people just don’t want people requiring state subsidies if they don’t need it when there’s other members of the populace that could benefit more from it.

Personally my issue with it is the same as with the overall tax system in that it’s only looking at the individual and not the household income. I get why they’ve done it though as it would require an overhaul of the current system.

A household that gets 69k pension per annum also getting an additional subsidy doesn’t feel right or the best use of that to me though.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Sizewell C is good news imo. Let's just hope those in charge of our money can try and keep a lid on the cost overruns.
As a side note, its a shame that EDF are building itconsidering that we the UK were once world leaders in nuclear power generation. But times change.

 

[BobKowalski]

Not really the best role model, a nasty dictator and megalomaniac who tried to take over all of Eurpope by force. That never ends well. Im always a little baffled as to why the French celebrate this fella.

Napoleon introduced major legal reform via the napoleonic code which enshrined equality before the law irrespective of social class, private property rights and freedom of religion. The code is the basis of law for over a hundred countries. He is also regarded as one of the greatest military generals in history.

For the purposes of this thread he also knew that it was a political error to admit a mistake. As a rule no one votes for, or follows, a leader(s) who admit to a mistake. So they don’t.

 

[yerwot?]

You could have walked down the High St in any decade of the last 150 years and got a damming response on the honesty and integrity of politicians. And the electorate does not value honesty and integrity or the admission of mistakes. The voting public value certainty, simplicity and the illusion of strength. Three word slogans work because they reduce complexity to a level that we can comprehend.

You may decry the politicians we have, but they accurately reflect the politicians the majority of the public want.

The old "they're all the same" has been reinforced by labour's utterly out-of-touch response to being elected. So many open goals missed, so many wrongs to put right and they score a spectacular own goal. Safe seats, voter-suppression, London-dominated favouritism at the expense of every where else, the lack of accountability for criminal behaviour by ministers and the lobby industry just reinforces the view " they really are all the same", career politicians riding the gravy train, never admitting that FPTP is their free pass..

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Napoleon introduced major legal reform via the napoleonic code which enshrined equality before the law irrespective of social class, private property rights and freedom of religion. The code is the basis of law for over a hundred countries. He is also regarded as one of the greatest military generals in history.

For the purposes of this thread he also knew that it was a political error to admit a mistake. As a rule no one votes for, or follows, a leader(s) who admit to a mistake. So they don’t.

He had a few faults you know? I believe his rule wasn't a great time for women and the man invaded several European countries resulting in millions of deaths. Luckily he lost in the end, so he couldn't have been that great a military leader?

Apart from that he was a fine upstanding, albeit vertically challenged, person.

 

[BobKowalski]

He had a few faults you know? I believe his rule wasn't a great time for women and the man invaded several European countries resulting in millions of deaths. Luckily he lost in the end, so he couldn't have been that great a military leader?

Apart from that he was a fine upstanding, albeit vertically challenged, person.

I’m not sure anywhere in that era was a great time for women. Judging by posts on here, I’m not sure now is going swimmingly well for them either :)

Napoleon was a major threat to Britain, so naturally we paint him as the bad guy, and in many instances with justification. But the reason why France do rate the fella is because he had a major impact on European history and his legacy is visible today - from the legal system to driving on the right.

His ability as a general is regarded as second to none. He was also an excellent mathematician and developed a mathematical theorem which is named after him.

 

[Fiftyyearsandcounting]

He had a few faults you know? I believe his rule wasn't a great time for women and the man invaded several European countries resulting in millions of deaths. Luckily he lost in the end, so he couldn't have been that great a military leader?

Apart from that he was a fine upstanding, albeit vertically challenged, person.

Napoleon was around 5'6" or 5'7", short by todays average but not by the early 1800s. He was actually taller than most of the soldiers in his army.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Napoleon was around 5'6" or 5'7", short by todays average but not by the early 1800s. He was actually taller than most of the soldiers in his army.

Shorter than Wellington then ;-)