When will indyref2 happen?

[Londonwell]

1 hour ago, pandarilla said:

 

Can you not read properly? Where have I said that very severe poverty is not a thing in Britain?

My point was simply about this idea of relative versus absolute poverty. There was a suggestion above that oaksoft was somehow making that up - or that it didn't exist. It really, really does.

 

I can read fine, thank you.

Go back and read Oaksofts post for yourself. What he said was, " I say poverty even though we really dont have anything like true poverty in the UK - we are not short of chaotic adults who cant organise a piss up in a brewery though, a cultural entitlement complex which seems stubbornly resistant to all efforts to eradicate it and a cultural problem with accepting personal responsibility (everything is always someone elses fault)."

You agreed with this post. It is of course complete nonsense.

If you want to have an interesting and productive debate and not have it descend into something that resembles the "old firm section of p&b", perhaps best to know what you're actually white knighting first of all before you question other peoples literacy.

Edited April 11, 2017 by Londonwell

[pandarilla]

Just because other countries have larger poverty levels than Britain, doesn't take away from the fact that we have people living in acute poverty. The societal safeguards we have in place don't and can't account for everyone. 

Try telling the homeless guy living in a box in Glasgow that he should thank his lucky stars he wasn't born in Africa. Your point about poverty being relative, in context of Oaksoft's argument, is nonsense. 

 

You quoted me - basically saying that people in Britain at living in 'acute' poverty. As you will see in my very first sentence (below), I said that poverty in Britain was, in many cases, 'severe'.

 

You made it looked like I was denying this.

 

The white knight stuff is also 'tedious'.

 

 

 

Yes we have poverty. In many cases it is severe.

 

But the availability of food, shelter, and clean water is higher for people in this country than in the vast majority of countries in the world.

 

Would you rather be in the bottom 5% (in terms of income) of Britain or in parts of Africa, Asia, or south America?

 

 

 

 

[Fide]

Perhaps if Oaksoft didn't address every single poster on here like a naughty toddler he's had to tell off all day, he might get on better.

[pandarilla]

I think this sums up our differences.
I strongly believe in personal responsibility.
You appear to be willing to blame everyone else.
Is that fair?
Is that the real difference between left and right wing?

I think the real difference is that folk on the right believe the individual should take full responsibility for their own affairs (and that is their family etc) and folk on the left believe that the weakest in society should be given some help and support.

Right wing ideology is brutal if you're disabled, or you're a frail pensioner with no family, or you're struggling with health problems (physical or mental), or you're a single mum with two kids and very little support, or generally if you're someone who makes bad decisions - for whatever reasons.

In a 'personal responsibility' sense these people get trampled on. They are seen as the enemy.

Now the crux comes down to those who can work and are choosing not to - call them a sort of underclass if you will (as disgusting as that term is).

It has been proved that these people are far fewer in number than your average punter thinks (due mainly to a right wing media narrative). But they do exist. No-one here is arguing that point.

I agreed with you earlier that there is a problem with a lack of personal responsibility in our society. I'm seeing it with a lot of kids - but a lot are from comfortable, middle class homes. For me it's more to do with over parenting than our welfare state.

[oneteaminglasgow]

The difference between the left and right is that we have a society which has created conditions whereby some within it have to fail and the right want to do f**k all to help them since it's all their fault.

Obviously personal responsibility plays a part, people are ultimately in control of their own decisions but to not admit that we as a society have a responsibility to each other, whether rich or poor, is lunacy as far as I'm concerned.

[Baxter Parp]

15 hours ago, oaksoft said:

They could easily move to another country and put the "fulfilment" warehouse there.

This should be obvious really.

Then they couldn't provide the service that they provide at the moment.  Next day delivery would be impossible and their unique selling point would be lost.  Any number of companies could provide the same goods that Amazon provide and with the same service if Amazon withdrew from the UK. Do you think they built those warehouses as a job-creating charity?

[Baxter Parp]

15 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Now that is the big question. You only need one country in the world to offer a tax haven for this to be a problem.

Right now we have tax havens in the UK (channel islands) which Tesco and others make use of to avoid tax. Luxembourg and others are also competing. Until ALL developed countries agree to stop this and ALL agree to impose huge import costs on their products to dissuade them from simply going to developing countries nothing can be done IMO.

The UK have blocked proposals for a standard EU-wide corporation tax rate.

[Baxter Parp]

15 hours ago, oaksoft said:

OK for a start, companies struggle to recruit top quality executives.

Do they?  Where are the stats on that?

[Baxter Parp]

7 hours ago, oaksoft said:

I think this sums up our differences.

I strongly believe in personal responsibility.

You appear to be willing to blame everyone else.

Is that fair?

Is that the real difference between left and right wing?

The idea that society has no responsibility for those who live in poverty is based on sheer greed and selfishness.

[renton]

15 hours ago, oaksoft said:

I am not disagreeing with much of that but again its a left wing lecture of what in theory should happen.

HOW do we get to that point wothout unwanted side effects?

It's not a lecture and it's not a theory. Much of this is practice in - for example - the Scandinavian countries. Living costs are high, taxes are high but not disproportionally so to the wage structure in place. It's a much more self replenishing system than the one we live in. In terms of side effects? You don't have to do it overnight, but you do have to have a process for getting there. Start small, like a minimum wage rising above inflation, modest shifts in the tax bands, to offset the PA on higher earners. Living wage for all public procurement supply chains. At the end of the day you aren't going to have a totally painless transition, we'd lose and not replace some low income jobs, we'd suffer some talent flight (but only in a very select niche of ultra high earners, the majority of upper middle class - the technical middle class, new affluent worker classes would stay so long as they have roots here). On the other hand the empowerment of those lower income percentiles through a living wage and progressive tax base will create new commodity markets, and capitalism abhors an unfilled market.

Fact is the current system is already filled with some pretty awful side effects, not unwanted and actually a necessary part of the system.

[pandarilla]

It's not a lecture and it's not a theory. Much of this is practice in - for example - the Scandinavian countries. Living costs are high, taxes are high but not disproportionally so to the wage structure in place. It's a much more self replenishing system than the one we live in. In terms of side effects? You don't have to do it overnight, but you do have to have a process for getting there. Start small, like a minimum wage rising above inflation, modest shifts in the tax bands, to offset the PA on higher earners. Living wage for all public procurement supply chains. At the end of the day you aren't going to have a totally painless transition, we'd lose and not replace some low income jobs, we'd suffer some talent flight (but only in a very select niche of ultra high earners, the majority of upper middle class - the technical middle class, new affluent worker classes would stay so long as they have roots here). On the other hand the empowerment of those lower income percentiles through a living wage and progressive tax base will create new commodity markets, and capitalism abhors an unfilled market.
Fact is the current system is already filled with some pretty awful side effects, not unwanted and actually a necessary part of the system.

Outstanding post.

[renton]

8 hours ago, oaksoft said:

I think this sums up our differences.

I strongly believe in personal responsibility.

You appear to be willing to blame everyone else.

Is that fair?

Is that the real difference between left and right wing?

Well no, there is plenty of room for blaming others on that definition of right wing, as you either make it under the system, in which case you are an extraordinary citizen of exemplary talent, and you can sit around and blame all those who just don't want it enough. Or, you fail and instead of accepting you are a piece of failed shit (and frankly, very few people have so little ego they'd accept that as a working hypothesis) you blame everyone else for stymieing your obvious, slighted talent: Immigration and government intrusion being the favourite targets for your temporary, embarrassing position of not being a millionaire.

Edited April 12, 2017 by renton

[Baxter Parp]

https://www.theguardian.com/small-business-network/2017/apr/06/small-business-owners-support-sturgeons-second-independence-referendum-brexit?CMP=share_btn_tw

Small business owners support Sturgeon's plans for another referendum

[pandarilla]

The economist guy Richard Murphy was just on radio Scotland and I have to say he got a fair whack of telt from the other guy. Murphy was slagging off gers but for me he lost the argument.

Tell me we're not pinning our hopes on him?

[Fide]

3 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

The economist guy Richard Murphy was just on radio Scotland and I have to say he got a fair whack of telt from the other guy. Murphy was slagging off gers but for me he lost the argument.

Tell me we're not pinning our hopes on him?

Kevin Hague, as he always does in a debate, insults, shouts and interrupts to prove his point.

Hague conceded you can't use GERS to model for an independent Scotland. That's all you really need to know.

[pandarilla]

Kevin Hague, as he always does in a debate, insults, shouts and interrupts to prove his point.
Hague conceded you can't use GERS to model for an independent Scotland. That's all you really need to know.

He did say that - but he was the more rational participant in that debate. He didn't win by shouting and interrupting.

On a few detailed points, he had Murphy floundering.

[williemillersmoustache]

13 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

The economist guy Richard Murphy was just on radio Scotland and I have to say he got a fair whack of telt from the other guy. Murphy was slagging off gers but for me he lost the argument.

Tell me we're not pinning our hopes on him?

You've read the classified results upside down here, Richard received no telt whatsoever and Kevin when pressed, resorted to sniggers, jibes and a bit of name calling.

To cap it all, Hague openly stated that GERS is of absolutely no use when discussing an Independent Scotlands finances.

Pretty much the biggest yoon own goal ever and the entire basis of the dog food salesman and part-time graph makers celebrity status. 

 

[williemillersmoustache]

1 minute ago, pandarilla said:

 

He did say that - but he was the more rational participant in that debate. He didn't win by shouting and interrupting.

On a few detailed points, he had Murphy floundering.

 

He was talking about completely different things, when pressed he started talking about costs and naming people he read about. He was pathetic.

[pandarilla]

To cap it all, Hague openly stated that GERS is of absolutely no use when discussing an Independent Scotlands finances.

 

He admitted that from the beginning - it wasn't some sort of revelation that he let slip.

I'm definitely not an expert on economics but I do sincerely want independence. That interview did not leave me with any faith in our economic argument.

I'm assuming the snp / Scottish government have not criticised gers.

[renton]

1 minute ago, pandarilla said:

 

 

He admitted that from the beginning - it wasn't some sort of revelation that he let slip.

I'm definitely not an expert on economics but I do sincerely want independence. That interview did not leave me with any faith in our economic argument.

I'm assuming the snp / Scottish government have not criticised gers.

 

Then why does he constantly use GERS as a standard for how an independent Scotland would manage it's finances?

I've read a lot of Murphy's blogs about GERS. He's absolutely right, it's a textbook case of GIGO (Garbage In Garbage Out).