|
|
Post by barbara on Sept 2, 2022 9:29:23 GMT
Politically impossible in any liberal democracy I'd have thought No I don't think so. Cultural norms can and do change. The Society in which they exist can influence them. Sensitivity is required -of course. Education in the long run must be a big enabler. Actually I think women are the key to this particular problem. But it would require a political consensus which I can't see here. I grew up in a two parent family with a violent father and a mother who was trapped and helpless and would use her children to save herself. (by telling tales on us to my dad so that his anger would be vented on us and not her.) To outsiders our family would have looked normal. My parents were hard working and responsible. My dad wanted us to do well and have careers. We were well fed and clothed, parents attended parents evenings etc. We went on holidays. We had toys and trips out. Our misery was inside the home, subject to daily unpredictable and uncontrollable outbursts of anger and violence from my dad interspersed with normal behaviour and you never new how long that would last - and indifference from my mum who had given up I think. Like living on a volcano. I assure you a single parent who was calm, stable and loving would have been a lot better for me and my sister. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,573
|
Post by Danny on Sept 2, 2022 9:30:55 GMT
It's a bit of a myth that people once lived communally & that the nuclear household is a relatively modern invention. In England, pretty much as far back as we have evidence, marriage led to the formation of a new nuclear household. There were more three-generation households, but these were temporary arrangments & did not fundamentally disturb the basic model. I had in mind also however that people used to have lots of servants. And these servants werent simply employees, but became members of the family. Pepys for example illustrated this. Sure, thats a rich man, but it begs the question to what extent all society rather expected much more communal living. So..up to a point you agree that households were clustering around the rich. We dont see this much these days, but still some 500 people work at Buckingham palace and many live there. Time was a castle had a great hall and hardly any other rooms. Everyone lived and slept together. begs the question to what extent birth control was understood and practicesed. Might not be quite so chaste, just really important to be careful. Its very clear rich societies have fewer children. Making people even just a bit richer cuts the birth rate, been proven time after time, look at any country developing. This rather belies the argument that poverty imposed chastity imposed birth control. Though maybe the last century or so has been atypical, if we now have cheap reliable optional birth control. Though again, I gather Queen Victoria was keen on small families for others at least, so thats 150 years ago and there must have been a practical way to do it. I see the logic that if you have one parent you will get less parental attention. But it might not be true. Especially if we widen 'parental' to extended family or family friends who might share responsibility. You could end up with the situation two parents plus three kids both work and expect the kids to look after themselves. Whereas single parent doesnt work. Or has clear arrangements with granny who accepts this because parent is single. But also in making my argument I was also thinking that human history extends way back before individual homes were the norm. Before even humans ceased being nomadic. I'm sure pair bonding was always a thing, and people would naturally spend more of their time as a couple. But there has to have much more wider responsibility for children from the whole group, something we actively discourage these days -strangers do not take responsibility for disciplining your kids in a supermarket. More likely to regarded as a potential abductor than civicly responsibly contributing to child care. And then there is the question of whether the human male is evolutionarily adapted for group sex (or indeed female), and how homosexuality in fact makes chances of reproduction greater (which it must, or it wouldnt exist). My top theory on that one, is because it fosters wider relationships than just male-female pair- you can add an extra male (or female) to your group. But again it smacks of evolving as a species for group bonding through sex. Christianity seems to have been dead against group sex or more than two in a unit. Which sounds like a mechanism of social control, breaking up those wider links within society and concentrating allegiance on the central authority. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 9:33:33 GMT
I'd like people to have a choice about work and what type of work etc - massive uplift in universal child benefits, no more two child only rules, stop treating people as individual units for tax purposes but as couples for benefits etc
Universal basic income of at least £10K a year for all adult citizens uprated in line with inflation. That'd be a start.
Then people can decide if they want to live in nuclear family units - or not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 9:42:54 GMT
Politically impossible in any liberal democracy I'd have thought And what about widows and widowers left to bring up children alone or women in violent, abusive or coercive relationships. The problem with right wing governments is that they like to scapegoat groups of people in society as feckless and irresponsible. Similar situation to people on benefits. No distinction made for the disabled, those unable to find work, those with mental and physical health problems which restrict the type of work they can do. 'Strivers vs Shirkers". Life is a lot more complicated than many people feel comfortable with. I think skivers being forced to work is policy failure waiting to happen. Let those who want to work, work. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 9:51:05 GMT
I'd like people to have a choice about work and what type of work etc - massive uplift in universal child benefits, no more two child only rules, stop treating people as individual units for tax purposes but as couples for benefits etc Universal basic income of at least £10K a year for all adult citizens uprated in line with inflation. That'd be a start. Then people can decide if they want to live in nuclear family units - or not. big problem with UBS is that the retired, who as we have seen elect the Government, won't want it. |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Sept 2, 2022 10:04:16 GMT
Politically impossible in any liberal democracy I'd have thought No I don't think so. Cultural norms can and do change. The Society in which they exist can influence them. Sensitivity is required -of course. Education in the long run must be a big enabler. Actually I think women are the key to this particular problem. But it would require a political consensus which I can't see here. |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Sept 2, 2022 10:19:41 GMT
LLL: " Its not the 1950's you know."
I think that fact may be what underlies the evident grouchiness of many old, right-wing white men. Oh for the good old days, when Irish, blacks and women knew their place!
|
|
alurqa
Member
Freiburg im Breisgau's flag
Posts: 781
|
Post by alurqa on Sept 2, 2022 10:28:02 GMT
Something which hasn't received much attention during the Tory leadership camapaign is the fall in the value of the £. This morning trading at £1.16 against the US dollar. Yes, but also note that the euro is now around parity with the dollar. The pound and euro have both slid together against a much stronger dollar. The dollar is strong because the Fed has been strongly pushing up interest rates and, because the US is less affected by the war in Ukraine, 'money's' longer-term view of the US economy is more bullish than that of Europe, so it's all moving over there pushing up the dollar. That our currency has fallen along with the euro indicates how closely tied our economy is to Europe. The plus side is my dollar investments[1] are soaring ahead!! :-) [1] I used to work for a US company and could buy their shares every month -- glad I did now. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Sept 2, 2022 10:30:14 GMT
RAF I go back to the general question I posed. What parts of the "platform" has Starmer "disavowed" to the extent he's burnt any bridges that can't be crossed again? And what's this straw man "anyone but Corbyn"? As many others have said, I campaigned for him throughout the time he was leader. I thought all along that he and his key acolytes were wastes of space as politicians, and I did think of quitting at times, but I wanted Labour to win and for the increasingly right wing Tory Party to be defeated. Anyone but Corbyn?? Yeah it is a straw ma I thought he was a waste of space but voted for Corbyn because I would rather have seen him in Downing St than May or Johnson. I wanted a Labour Government. I didn’t get all precious “ooh I don’t think I can vote Labour with him in charge. Ooh I can’t decide. I might vote Green. I could spoil my ballot paper”. Ffs. Some of us find Tory policies just as unacceptable when pursued by Labour leaders - and are being perfectly consistent in refusing to support them. |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on Sept 2, 2022 10:32:59 GMT
Couple of hours ago, FWIW.
'' @techneuk
NEW: Labour now lead by 10 in Techne's Westminster voting intention tracker.
Lab 42% (+1)
Con 32% (-1)
LibDem 12% (+1)
Green 5% (-1)
SNP 4% (nc)
1,628 questioned on Wed & Thu. Changes with 24-25 August.
Details & data at technetracker.co.uk pic.twitter.com/zKUod9f5A5
02/09/2022, 08:17''
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,156
|
Post by domjg on Sept 2, 2022 10:33:05 GMT
Hi domjg This is what i don't get, an apparent failure to appreciate the level of danger (and damage already done) the current, populist manifestation of the Tories represent not just to the material well being of the nation and it's inhabitants but also to political culture, civic discourse and the rule of law itself.Well while such concerns and topics may exercise liberal minded centre-left posters on a site such as this, I don't necessarily think they are at the fore-front of most voters minds apart from in the context of views on trust etc. For most, politics is primarily a bread and butter issue rather than an ideological one. Well hopefully they won't wake up some day soon and suddenly wish they'd been paying more attention. If societal stability and the rule of law are not guaranteed then material/economic well being is threatened also. Foreign investors are already giving this country a huge swerve. And even if such concerns are not front of mind for the voters you mention, largely due to lack of awareness, that certainly shouldn't be the case for you. Nice to get a like from mercian though, reaching out across the aisle and all that  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 10:35:00 GMT
LLL: " Its not the 1950's you know."I think that fact may be what underlies the evident grouchiness of many old, right-wing white men. Oh for the good old days, when Irish, blacks and women knew their place! I hope that isn’t aimed at colin as that seems very unfair. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Sept 2, 2022 10:40:18 GMT
While I am inclined to agree with the nonsense of virtue signalling voting and allegiance it's a bit more nuanced than that. If I lived in a constituency where the only likely outcome was a Tory or Labour representative I would 100% of the time vote Labour. But I don't. I live in a constituency where the liberal democrats have gained massively against the Tories at local elections and despite in the past being the second party to the Tories where Labour local representation has reduced to zero on the local council.I also live in a constituency where the liberal democrats have won the adjacent two constituencies against the Tories at Westminster level. As it stands at the moment the liberal democrats are simply a better fit particularly in regard to European union relations and a more likely method of ejecting our Tory mp. I could equally well support the green party but under fptp that would be virtue signalling nothing more. LD success at Local Elections often flatters to deceive and fails to transfer to Parliamentary Elections. NE Somerset provides a good example of that where there was much hype in 2019 re- LD prospects there based on the EU elections and an opinion poll. Despite Labour's poor national result the LDs came in 3rd and effectively boosted JRM's majority by misleading Labour voters who erroneously switched to the LD for tactical reasons! Had they been more psephologically aware , such voters would have known that the predecessor seat of Wansdyke had been Labour-held 1997 - 2010. |
|
alurqa
Member
Freiburg im Breisgau's flag
Posts: 781
|
Post by alurqa on Sept 2, 2022 10:42:58 GMT
Truss apparently just argued to increase defence spending, radio suggested £150bn. Will she close hospitals to pay for this? Raise taxes? Bung it on the credit card? Well the credit card won't be happy: www.reuters.com/markets/rates-bonds/uk-gilt-fire-sale-persists-5-year-yield-highest-since-2010-2022-08-31/Investors flee UK bonds, pushing gilts to huge monthly loss
LONDON, Aug 31 (Reuters) - Investors alarmed at Britain's bleak economic outlook and political uncertainty dumped government bonds on Wednesday, extending a recent selloff and putting some gilt maturities on track for their sharpest monthly loss since records began.
Some gilts saw far heavier selling than U.S. or German bonds as a decline in the value of sterling and doubts over the ability of Britain's next prime minister to handle the growing economic crisis added to strains on investor confidence.
...
The central bank has said it wants to sell gilts even through difficult economic times, although it has pointed to the March 2020 meltdown as an example of what might force it to change tack.
"The really ugly part of it is it's relentless," Ostwald said of the sell-off in gilts. "There's no one stepping in to catch the falling knife."As for March 2020, lookup QE Infinity! It looks like she'll have to choose one of the other two unpalatable choices. Just bite the bullet and tax the pensioners Liz. That is where the money is. I read somewhere there is one trillion pounds of untaxed housing wealth in this country. People like me have the money. We can afford it. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,768
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Sept 2, 2022 10:49:16 GMT
Some comments regarding Corbyn's principles.While in most instances he probably intended that these were in the best interest of the public in common with the effective trade union leader Mick Lynch his opinion on the principles and purposes of the European union were as devoid from connection with reality as any right wing brexitanian loon.
As leader of an overwhelmingly pro remain party Corbyn clearly felt unable to pursue his own delusions on the European union and it's of course conceivable he might have changed his mind but they are still a matter of record and nothing after his defenestration gives any indication that he has changed from his original position that it was in essence a capitalist conspiracy.
|
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Sept 2, 2022 10:50:37 GMT
Crofty: "I hope that isn’t aimed at colin as that seems very unfair."
Your irony doesn't escape me, but to take your point at face value: no, my comment wasn't about Colin, whose current (or maybe well-established) dyspepsia is I think based on a more thought-through despair at how the wheels seem to be coming off all the cherished free-market, low tax, small-government, sound-money nostrums that he has long championed here. It can't be a comfortable experience.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,768
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Sept 2, 2022 10:51:54 GMT
graham That's why I emphasised the two liberal democrat wins at Westminster elections in the adjacent two constituencies. The demographics of the three constituencies are much the same other than ours was a bit more brexity.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,768
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Sept 2, 2022 10:53:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by robbiealive on Sept 2, 2022 10:54:01 GMT
It's a bit of a myth that people once lived communally & that the nuclear household is a relatively modern invention. In England, pretty much as far back as we have evidence, marriage led to the formation of a new nuclear household. There were more three-generation households, but these were temporary arrangments & did not fundamentally disturb the basic model. I had in mind also however that people used to have lots of servants. And these servants werent simply employees, but became members of the family. Pepys for example illustrated this. Sure, thats a rich man, but it begs the question to what extent all society rather expected much more communal living. So..up to a point you agree that households were clustering around the rich. We dont see this much these days, but still some 500 people work at Buckingham palace and many live there. Time was a castle had a great hall and hardly any other rooms. Everyone lived and slept together. begs the question to what extent birth control was understood and practicesed. Might not be quite so chaste, just really important to be careful. Its very clear rich societies have fewer children. Making people even just a bit richer cuts the birth rate, been proven time after time, look at any country developing. This rather belies the argument that poverty imposed chastity imposed birth control. Though maybe the last century or so has been atypical, if we now have cheap reliable optional birth control. Though again, I gather Queen Victoria was keen on small families for others at least, so thats 150 years ago and there must have been a practical way to do it. x the central authority. Poorer societies do have v high birth rates but they also have 50% infant n child motality, say, which is why their populations grow slowly. Once you get the demographic transition where death rates plummet but birth rates are sustained then you get v fast growth. Fall in death rate is accompanied in growing & urbanised economies by a lagged fall in b rate. Late marriage in pre-transition societies does not preclude sex but it limits it. Yes richer households are larger, tho whether on a family basis I doubt: other than authority of heads of households. Pepys used to molest female servants as was revealed in unexpurgated edition. Parents invest in their children & rarely get much of a return in later life, or expect to. Indeed they often return later n invest time n money in grand kids. But their kids invest, or should do, in their kids & so it goes on. The investment is downward by generation The potential problem with one-parent families, in our society as it's constructed, is that the one parent is usually the woman who earns less; hence without external support in childcare, p\arental payments & benefits the investment may be insufficient. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 11:02:30 GMT
No I don't think so. Cultural norms can and do change. The Society in which they exist can influence them. Sensitivity is required -of course. Education in the long run must be a big enabler. Actually I think women are the key to this particular problem. But it would require a political consensus which I can't see here. What a typical knee jerk response. Without even asking you make an assumption that I meant it was "womens'" fault. Your prejudices are on show I'm afraid. What I meant is that to the extent that absent fathers are an ethno /cultural phenomenon-as the Childrens' Commissioner's Report reveals- then the strong , caring women in those families who stay and care for their children, including sons, can surely play a pivotal part in the education of young men about their family responsibilities. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Sept 2, 2022 11:03:42 GMT
Interesting that turning a blind eye to Corbyn , by a Labour voter, is being pragmatic and "not precious", but doing the same thing as a Tory voter in respect of Johnson, is unforgivably unprincipled. Totally unprincipled as Johnson has no principles. Nothing wrong with Corbyn's principles, it was his lack of leadership and inablity to communicate effectively that was wrong with him I would just add to this that imo he was a cypher for entryists whose agenda was different to that of the party I was a member of. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Sept 2, 2022 11:07:53 GMT
Well, shiver me timbers. Mrs Starmer, get measuring those Downing Street curtains!
|
|
alurqa
Member
Freiburg im Breisgau's flag
Posts: 781
|
Post by alurqa on Sept 2, 2022 11:08:03 GMT
A lot of old fogies (especially when they are also internet trolls) look back fondly to a time when men went out to work and women had the kids - apart from that fact that one income isn't enough nowadays (dammit two ain't!) there was also the problem that in that system women were basically housebound and de facto property of the men. Yeh. My mother , like millions of other women of her generation, had to organise her own life during WW2 - husband away for years- & in her early widowhood, again so common given male mortality rates. This brought out a pretty remrakable resourcefulness & resilience that was latent in other periods of her life (their lives). The rise of education -- female education -- has empowered women. And what happened here has now happened world-wide, and is arguably one of the more powerful transformative forces across the globe. Educated women have fewer kids, live healthier lives, and globally can in many cases earn their own ways. Literacy rates here soared after 1870 when primary education was introduced. And so it is now also soaring among the young, globally.
If there was anything one needs to think, when they get out of bed in a morning, about will the world become a better place, then look no further than women's education!!
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Sept 2, 2022 11:14:04 GMT
I'm cracking open my first can of newly purchased, and heavily discounted I may add, Aston Villa Purity IPA to celebrate that latest poll.
The rest can wait until after we've beaten Manchester City tomorrow.
Erling Haaland, Jack Grealish, Pep Guardiola, whoever the hell is ruling the UAE these days...your boys will take a helluva beating tomorrow...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 11:14:59 GMT
No I don't think so. Cultural norms can and do change. The Society in which they exist can influence them. Sensitivity is required -of course. Education in the long run must be a big enabler. Actually I think women are the key to this particular problem. But it would require a political consensus which I can't see here. I grew up in a two parent family with a violent father and a mother who was trapped and helpless and would use her children to save herself. (by telling tales on us to my dad so that his anger would be vented on us and not her.) To outsiders our family would have looked normal. My parents were hard working and responsible. My dad wanted us to do well and have careers. We were well fed and clothed, parents attended parents evenings etc. We went on holidays. We had toys and trips out. Our misery was inside the home, subject to daily unpredictable and uncontrollable outbursts of anger and violence from my dad interspersed with normal behaviour and you never new how long that would last - and indifference from my mum who had given up I think. Like living on a volcano. I assure you a single parent who was calm, stable and loving would have been a lot better for me and my sister. Sorry to hear that. It must have been awful. I don't know if you have read the report?. Asian families have a very low level of absent fathers. Do you think that leads to a higher level of violence from those fathers in the home ? The report contains masses of data on families and Dame Rachel de Souza's conclusions about the importance of "family" seems clear. I don't really understand the leap of logic from your single and awful experience to the nation and its children at large. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Sept 2, 2022 11:23:48 GMT
It is a frequent misrepresentation of the left by Blairites, that the left act like nothing would be better under a right wing Labour Government. But no one argues that Blair didn’t put more money into schools and hospitals. (Though the right ignore how the process involves handing more assets to the private sector, so long-term it can involve more costs etc.) The problem the right ignore, is that despite this, the inequality trajectory overall can still be downwards, when you look at housing costs, utility bills, zero hours rather than full employment etc. And how hiking house prices means the better off can still get themselves into preferred schools etc. Currently it can be quite handy in helping you have a better insulated home. This is the problem with the “But Blair did some good things!” refrain. We know he did some good things. The problem is you have to look at the overall picture. Otherwise it’s like going “But Johnson got the vaccine programme going quickly!” and ignoring the rest. Part of the reason we struggled with the pandemic is that Blair binned the Coronavirus plan they were given. Part of the reason we are struggling with energy now is that governments of that era didn’t plan for an energy crisis etc., though not just Labour obviously. That's actually pretty good imo and has to be seen in the context of what is realistic in a socially conservative country which has a dominant right of centre party which is usually in Govmt. If you wish to emphasis the fact that inequality still increases and that is not a good enough record.....show us your plan @carefrew; show us how a more equal society is electorally possible in Britain? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 11:25:13 GMT
I'm cracking open my first can of newly purchased, and heavily discounted I may add, Aston Villa Purity IPA to celebrate that latest poll. The rest can wait until after we've beaten Manchester City tomorrow. Erling Haaland, Jack Grealish, Pep Guardiola, whoever the hell is ruling the UAE these days...your boys will take a helluva beating tomorrow... Are you sure you're only on the first can?  |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Sept 2, 2022 11:25:41 GMT
colin - thank you for your lesson in how to post excerpts and what to say about them. As somerjohn says - I expect you to post entire articles in future. In your agitation, you forgot to look at the context I added to my post, where I said - "Build nuclear which won't start generating until 2035, and buy a new kettle." So thanks, yes I know Johnson was trying to project some newfound in site into energy policy needs, but as you put it previously, what the F is that going to do for people with £5,000 energy bills this winter? The bottom line though is how funny it is watching a waste of skin like Johnson make claims about long term planning. And that there are, apparently, still some posters who actually believe a word he says.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 11:31:33 GMT
Asian families have a very low level of absent fathers. Do you think that leads to a higher level of violence from those fathers in the home ? It certainly makes it much harder for abused women (and children) to escape when violence occurs. |
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Sept 2, 2022 11:46:12 GMT
It is a frequent misrepresentation of the left by Blairites, that the left act like nothing would be better under a right wing Labour Government. But no one argues that Blair didn’t put more money into schools and hospitals. (Though the right ignore how the process involves handing more assets to the private sector, so long-term it can involve more costs etc.) … That's actually pretty good imo and has to be seen in the context of what is realistic in a socially conservative country which has a dominant right of centre party which is usually in Govmt. If you wish to emphasis the fact that inequality still increases and that is not a good enough record.....show us your plan @carefrew; show us how a more equal society is electorally possible in Britain? Haha, yesterday I said a plan was problematic, and now you’re asking me for a plan! Putting a plan together is difficult, in part because of media opposition, in part because of the takeover of the right in the party. And in part because of past actions to try and get the public to buy info right wing stuff, e.g. house price inflation. If you consider the main pillars, like full employment, affordable utilities, housing etc., then they can all receive opposition by vested interests. Housing is especially problematic as a lot of people benefit from inflated house prices, though homeownership is falling (Trade arrangements can also lock out left wing actions but currently these things are perhaps being relaxed a bit) But creating more and better jobs might not achieve much resistance, especially if not in big state employers. Probably wouldn’t get much resistance to a state player in the energy market. Polling suggests even a lot of Tories would be ok with more affordable housing. One would imagine Starmer might do at least a bit on job creation and house building? The question really is whether he would do enough to reverse the overall trend towards greater struggle. Polling shows even Tories are more accepting of more affordable house building now. Another aspect, is bypassing the media. The decline of the unions has diminished an alternative avenue to get the alternative message out. They might develop their own media channels but I think Labour might benefit from developing other organisations to involve people to do useful stuff while giving them the chance to get some info. Times are also changing. Home ownership declining. Labour to the right of the public on nationalisations since the recent change and the Guardian are also now in favour. More middle class jobs are becoming casualised. Even the Tories have been dragged leftward in some ways. As have the EU, so I think things will shift anyway. Question is how far how quickly. So, it is partly about how much can you do without frightening too many horses, and how much you can do to communicate while bypassing the horses. I think Blair’s son’s approach of focusing on apprenticeships is interesting - he’s also getting powers to provide degrees too now which makes it more interesting, though haven’t had a chance to have a better look at it. I think it’s something else Labour could do a lot more of. |
|
