|
Post by crossbat11 on Dec 23, 2023 21:57:33 GMT
Well Crossbat, you and I will never agree about the best team in Birmingham! In Wayne I trust. UTV đ¤đ¤Łđ
|
|
|
Post by mark61 on Dec 23, 2023 22:26:43 GMT
I think it is only fair that we swap managers, to promote Harmony within England's fairest City. KRO.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,374
|
Post by pjw1961 on Dec 23, 2023 22:32:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Dec 23, 2023 22:59:11 GMT
Here's an idea I've just had. We all know that attempting to hammer the very rich with some sort of wealth tax will backfire because they'll just shift their money and/or themselves overseas. The only people paying it would be the comfortably off elderly, such as most posters on here. Now I know that anything Victorian is anathema to most lefties, but what did happen a lot in those days was private investment in public works and benefits. I'll use Birmingham as an example but I'm sure similar things happened all over the UK. The Lickey Hills and Cannon Hill Park and others were gifted to the city. Several major public buildings such as hospitals and Birmingham Art Gallery and the Barber Institute were endowed by local industrialists. These are just the first that occur to me. So why doesn't the government (of whichever stripe) encourage similar things today? For instance (it's just an example) build a new hospital and if a private individual provides the bulk of the cash they could have their name put on it, as in the John Radcliffe Hospital for instance. Because these people are what they are once you get the ball rolling it could get very competitive. We could have the Richard Branson Line (HS2 from Birmingham to Manchester for instance). The Fred Bloggs bypass of some town or other and so on. I'd be interested in views on this. It might not be ideologically pure but I think it could be effective.
|
|
|
Post by mandolinist on Dec 23, 2023 23:48:27 GMT
I just read this story and simply can't find anything amusing or clever to say about it. Quite simply I am outraged, why hasn't he resigned already? Since he hasn't done that and his apology indicates he really did say all that, when will Sunak sack him? Shocking dreadful and unforgiveable.
|
|
|
Post by robbiealive on Dec 24, 2023 0:09:28 GMT
MERCIAN I don't know how one defines or measure Britain's reputation in the world. My guess would be that Brexit, the endless negotiations that followed the referendum, and the successive upheavals that have shaken the government over the last two years made Britain something of a laughing stock. [br Ourself-exclusion from the EU has weakened British influence in European n hence world affairs. The Laurel and Hardy clip of them saying goodbye as they embark on a picnic circulated widely in the EU as a satire on Britain's political paralysis in the post referendum period. youtu.be/ETPN9cFUo58?si=jPGg2adNIy9qVqs8
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Dec 24, 2023 0:50:40 GMT
I just read this story and simply can't find anything amusing or clever to say about it. Quite simply I am outraged, why hasn't he resigned already? Since he hasn't done that and his apology indicates he really did say all that, when will Sunak sack him? Shocking dreadful and unforgiveable. Chokes are verboten unless approved by ze Thought Police.
|
|
|
Post by mandolinist on Dec 24, 2023 1:22:00 GMT
I just read this story and simply can't find anything amusing or clever to say about it. Quite simply I am outraged, why hasn't he resigned already? Since he hasn't done that and his apology indicates he really did say all that, when will Sunak sack him? Shocking dreadful and unforgiveable. Chokes are verboten unless approved by ze Thought Police. Really not something to joke about is it? Especially given Cleverly's position and the proposed legislation on spiking. Sorry Mercian, both you and Cleverly have seriously misjudged this.
|
|
|
Post by pete on Dec 24, 2023 7:56:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by steamdrivenandy on Dec 24, 2023 8:18:27 GMT
Here's an idea I've just had. We all know that attempting to hammer the very rich with some sort of wealth tax will backfire because they'll just shift their money and/or themselves overseas. The only people paying it would be the comfortably off elderly, such as most posters on here. Now I know that anything Victorian is anathema to most lefties, but what did happen a lot in those days was private investment in public works and benefits. I'll use Birmingham as an example but I'm sure similar things happened all over the UK. The Lickey Hills and Cannon Hill Park and others were gifted to the city. Several major public buildings such as hospitals and Birmingham Art Gallery and the Barber Institute were endowed by local industrialists. These are just the first that occur to me. So why doesn't the government (of whichever stripe) encourage similar things today? For instance (it's just an example) build a new hospital and if a private individual provides the bulk of the cash they could have their name put on it, as in the John Radcliffe Hospital for instance. Because these people are what they are once you get the ball rolling it could get very competitive. We could have the Richard Branson Line (HS2 from Birmingham to Manchester for instance). The Fred Bloggs bypass of some town or other and so on. I'd be interested in views on this. It might not be ideologically pure but I think it could be effective. You obviously don't get out much. I happened to drive through Keele Universty's campus yesterday morning and it was noticeable that many of the very modern buildings were named after philanthropists who had funded their construction. HINT the quietest shops at this time of year have to be those on a university campus. The Keele Co op Food store was superb. Spotless, supremely tidy and just me and two other people in it.
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Dec 24, 2023 8:18:38 GMT
Happy Christmas to everyone on this site. May you have the Christmas you desire, whatever wherever that is.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,251
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Dec 24, 2023 8:34:25 GMT
Attachment DeletedJust thought I'd share what Faith has to put up with at Christmas Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Dec 24, 2023 9:54:12 GMT
Compliments of the season to one and all, may you have all you wish for.
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Dec 24, 2023 10:14:38 GMT
Signing off for Christmas festivities now. Before doing so, I thought I'd share the thoughts of Ted the Northern Cat and how he and his usual adversaries have declared a Christmas truce this year. We should share in this fraternal and conciliatory spirit too. The feline metaphors old Ted uses here seem oddly appropriate for this forum. I hope you agree. A Happy Christmas to all my readers. youtube.com/shorts/JvR6v4oAr_4?si=9Gp-WWKB1He83KQ-
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2023 10:19:21 GMT
Ref PJW &DOMJG recent posts Is The Boomer generation the most entitled?, the charge they seem to love to lay at the door of every subsequent generation. The Boomers came into their majority from the mid sixties onwards benefitting from the post war settlement and economic boom hard won by the generation on both sides of the Atlantic defeated European Fascism and Japanese militarism ( with the enormous sacrifice) of the Red Army) By the Mid-to-Late seventies The Boomers consolidated their agency over Govt. and Business banking the fruits of the post war Consensus and property Boom and voting by large majorities for Policies that bit by bit shut out subsequent generations from the same benefits they took for granted, so much for the Summer Of Love! I really, really dislike this broadbrush criticism of people born in the forties /early fifties. As one myself - and knowing many others - I canât think of anyone who wilfully did what is claimed in the second paragraph.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2023 10:22:29 GMT
Signing off for Christmas festivities now. Before doing so, I thought I'd share the thoughts of Fred the Northern Cat and how he and his usual adversaries have declared a Christmas truce this year. We should share in this fraternal and conciliatory spirit too. The feline metaphors old Fred uses here seem oddly appropriate for this forum. I hope you agree. A Happy Christmas to all my readers. youtube.com/shorts/JvR6v4oAr_4?si=9Gp-WWKB1He83KQ-And a happy krissmuss to you and your editing staff Batty. Together you have made some excellent contributions to this boutique over the past twelve months.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,374
|
Post by pjw1961 on Dec 24, 2023 10:32:14 GMT
Here's an idea I've just had. We all know that attempting to hammer the very rich with some sort of wealth tax will backfire because they'll just shift their money and/or themselves overseas. The only people paying it would be the comfortably off elderly, such as most posters on here. Now I know that anything Victorian is anathema to most lefties, but what did happen a lot in those days was private investment in public works and benefits. I'll use Birmingham as an example but I'm sure similar things happened all over the UK. The Lickey Hills and Cannon Hill Park and others were gifted to the city. Several major public buildings such as hospitals and Birmingham Art Gallery and the Barber Institute were endowed by local industrialists. These are just the first that occur to me. So why doesn't the government (of whichever stripe) encourage similar things today? For instance (it's just an example) build a new hospital and if a private individual provides the bulk of the cash they could have their name put on it, as in the John Radcliffe Hospital for instance. Because these people are what they are once you get the ball rolling it could get very competitive. We could have the Richard Branson Line (HS2 from Birmingham to Manchester for instance). The Fred Bloggs bypass of some town or other and so on. I'd be interested in views on this. It might not be ideologically pure but I think it could be effective. I am not opposed to philanthropy as such, same as I am not opposed to charity as such, but both can be a cover for the wealthy evading paying their proper share. The best sort of philanthropy in Victorian times often came from a genuine religious belief - as with the big benefactors in Braintree, the Courtauld family, who were Huguenots (and therefore the descendants of asylum seekers!). However, as an example of how modern philanthropy can just be "greed-washing". To date Jeff Bezos has given about 2% of fortune away to charity and got much praise for it. But he has paid almost no tax (about 3.4%): www.forbes.com/sites/phoebeliu/2023/11/21/jeff-bezos-announces-hes-donated-nearly-120-million-to-help-families-experiencing-homelessness/?sh=3ab08cb11c89www.forbes.com/sites/sarahhansen/2021/06/08/richest-americans-including-bezos-musk-and-buffett-paid-federal-income-taxes-equaling-just-34-of-401-billion-in-new-wealth-bombshell-report-shows/www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/nov/15/jeff-bezos-philanthropist-taxes-amazon-founderP.s. "I know that anything Victorian is anathema to most lefties" - only if your view of what was going on in the world at the time is confined to Queen and Empire. The period 1837-1901 saw tremendous developments on the left in the UK, US and Europe, admittedly mixed with much oppression. Modern liberalism, socialism, Marxism and feminism all owe much to that time.
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Dec 24, 2023 10:45:46 GMT
mercian" Here's an idea I've just had. ....." A few points in reply: 1. Private philanthropy has only ever been a rather haphazard social analgesic for economic and social problems. 2. The major improvements in social infrastructure and well-being have only come about through collective action by government at local and national level ( e.g sanitation,education,public health, employment legislation). 3. 21st century capitalism is a different beast to nineteenth century capitalism. There are fewer exceptionally wealthy individuals connected to their local communities. The mega-rich like Dyson and Ratcliffe are more likely to go offshore to pay less tax rather than be benefactors. They are increasingly citizens of nowhere.
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Dec 24, 2023 10:58:02 GMT
Hi all, just briefly popping in to wish everybody a very Merry Christmas. XXXXX
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Dec 24, 2023 12:21:28 GMT
Ref PJW &DOMJG recent posts Is The Boomer generation the most entitled?, the charge they seem to love to lay at the door of every subsequent generation. The Boomers came into their majority from the mid sixties onwards benefitting from the post war settlement and economic boom hard won by the generation on both sides of the Atlantic defeated European Fascism and Japanese militarism ( with the enormous sacrifice) of the Red Army) By the Mid-to-Late seventies The Boomers consolidated their agency over Govt. and Business banking the fruits of the post war Consensus and property Boom and voting by large majorities for Policies that bit by bit shut out subsequent generations from the same benefits they took for granted, so much for the Summer Of Love! I really, really dislike this broadbrush criticism of people born in the forties /early fifties. As one myself - and knowing many others - I canât think of anyone who wilfully did what is claimed in the second paragraph. Broadbrush criticism certainly but we have polling and election results that prove a significant majority of boomers did precisely that and continue to do it. They chose tax cuts over selling the family silver and reducing public services. You'd be hard pressed to say their thought processes were anything other than self interest or that they really thought tax cuts and selling off publicly owned assets were going to make life better for everyone and improve public services and safety nets. I was pondering robbiealive's post yesterday and I suppose social attitudes did change for the better with the boomers- maybe that was due to the 1960's movements that flagged these things up more and maybe because not being prejudiced was something that did no harm to the personal wellbeing of the boomers and was just a natural evolution from Victorian attitudes that had been gradually changing anyway. Singling out boomers as some sort of evil anomaly in human evolution might be wrong but I have little doubt that "they" took more from the system than they should have done and made life harder for later generations. That's probably just human nature and any generation would have behaved similarly given the opportunity. mark61 makes a very valid point about the 60's that it was a tiny minority that created the impression of it being a fairer more liberal generation and even that tiny minority were ones that could afford to "drop out" or be creative or whatever.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2023 12:40:15 GMT
sheviiâ Singling out boomers as some sort of evil anomaly in human evolution might be wrong but I have little doubt that "they" took more from the system than they should have done and made life harder for later generations.â But itâs that analysis that I object to. People make it sound as though there was deliberate intent âWeâll grab it all now and sod the generations that followâ. But life was not like that for most individuals. I hugely regret the lack of affordable housing and permanent jobs that are now an issue for so many younger people. But, looking back on my life - and even that of the right wing voters - I really donât see what I/they could have done differently to avoid this happening. And, of course, the way the issue is described makes it sound like one of Baldrickâs cunning plans. But it wasnât: it was just loads of individuals getting through their lives in the best ways available to them. The lack of âfairnessâ is not that we lived through relatively affluent times but that successive governments didnât plan ahead. Now you can say that collectively we should have voted for different options which is a fair point - in a wayâŚ. But, given our appalling FPTP election system what exactly were those different options?! And that question leaves aside the fact that *none* of us could see into the future and predict the changes that we would be facing. Happy winterval- especially to mercian. But, of course, to everybody else also. Paul xxx
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,106
|
Post by domjg on Dec 24, 2023 12:40:28 GMT
I really, really dislike this broadbrush criticism of people born in the forties /early fifties. As one myself - and knowing many others - I canât think of anyone who wilfully did what is claimed in the second paragraph. Broadbrush criticism certainly but we have polling and election results that prove a significant majority of boomers did precisely that and continue to do it. They chose tax cuts over selling the family silver and reducing public services. You'd be hard pressed to say their thought processes were anything other than self interest or that they really thought tax cuts and selling off publicly owned assets were going to make life better for everyone and improve public services and safety nets. I was pondering robbiealive's post yesterday and I suppose social attitudes did change for the better with the boomers- maybe that was due to the 1960's movements that flagged these things up more and maybe because not being prejudiced was something that did no harm to the personal wellbeing of the boomers and was just a natural evolution from Victorian attitudes that had been gradually changing anyway. Singling out boomers as some sort of evil anomaly in human evolution might be wrong but I have little doubt that "they" took more from the system than they should have done and made life harder for later generations. That's probably just human nature and any generation would have behaved similarly given the opportunity. mark61 makes a very valid point about the 60's that it was a tiny minority that created the impression of it being a fairer more liberal generation and even that tiny minority were ones that could afford to "drop out" or be creative or whatever. Obviously a gross generalisation to condemn boomers en masse but I do think that generation in most western nations became accustomed to the world reflecting their needs and the state falling over itself to please them from youth through to retirement. The sixties were for them, the neo liberalism of the eighties was for them, brexit was for them etc etc. I don't doubt that it engendered in many of them a pronounced if probably unconscious sense of entitlement and much of their current anger is that the world no longer looks like how they think it should and considering their needs have been pandered to buy the state at every age in their minds that does not compute. The sixties were I think more about individualism (nothing wrong with that per se) than equality and solidarity and it's no real surprise that the broader attitudes it created led to the economics of the eighties.
|
|
|
Post by robbiealive on Dec 24, 2023 13:35:19 GMT
I'm one of the evil boomers. I find the anti-boomer stuff by mark61, shevii n even domjg to be teleological tosh: a-historical & riven by illogical leaps in the dark which force quite different social ideas & trends into a linear, connected process when in fact they have quite different causes. I hv to pop out to spend some of the wealth I hv looted from Generations X Y, & Z, & then visit the blasted Heath to tame the storm with the powers that only boomers possess. but when I return I may hv more to say.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Dec 24, 2023 13:58:00 GMT
The sixties were I think more about individualism (nothing wrong with that per se) than equality and solidarity and it's no real surprise that the broader attitudes it created led to the economics of the eighties. That is something I've often wondered about...not only the hippies of the 60's, but, the punks of the 70's. I think that it's something that needs it's own Issue Specific thread to really explore...I may well start such a thread after the holidays. In the meantime...I think it's a stretch to say that the "boomer generation" delibarately pulled the ladder up behind them, but it could be argued that a majority of said generation did so unwittingly, both in voting choices and in regards to what they consider salient.
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Dec 24, 2023 14:39:45 GMT
Feliz Natal to all from central Portugal.
|
|
|
Post by thylacine on Dec 24, 2023 14:41:55 GMT
mark61 LoC posters largely agreeing with each other? You're having a laugh aren't you??? I think Mark61 may have been on the sauce!
|
|
|
Post by mark61 on Dec 24, 2023 14:49:12 GMT
Oops, having made a plea for harmony, i have then stirred the Boomer nest, I thought it was implicit in outing myself as a LoC Boomer I was accepting there was a an element of generalisation about the Boomer generation. However there is clear evidence that the Boomer cohort voted very strongly for Brexit when the Young were strongly remain and now despite the mess we are in and the very clear evidence of inter generational unfairness they are the only cohort where a majority are planning to Vote for the Incumbents at the forthcoming election.
Anyway Merry Christmas, God bless us everyone, ( including the Boomers!)
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,251
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Dec 24, 2023 15:02:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jib on Dec 24, 2023 15:22:37 GMT
Best wishes to all this Christmas, whether you're left, centrist or right, progressive or conservative, proscribist or liberal, I hope you have a chance to catch up with those that are special to you.
|
|
|
Post by thylacine on Dec 24, 2023 15:48:12 GMT
Merry Christmas. Here's hoping Santa is good to you all đđđ
|
|