Political equality @ Glasto...

[stuartbert two hats]

How on earth anyone can think that a party that simultaneously raises the inheritance tax threshold and removes grants for poorer students is in favour of social mobility is beyond me.

Oh, and there's too many for me to go back and upvote, but I concur with everyone saying how brilliant a lot of the posts in this thread have been (not Teddington's). Top stuff. If you all joined the Labour Party maybe we'd have a chance of getting rid of this shower in 2020

I have a labour MP! (Voted Green though)

[eFestivals]

Btw I am unemployed

I'm pleased to see that your skills have been properly identified by capitalist employers.

[The 38 year old virgin]

[eFestivals]

Thatcher based her entire political career on promoting social mobility.

you weren't even born to know what she did.

But as you're unemployed, can I suggest a career in comedy. Unfactual bollocks like that would go down a storm.

The only mobility that Thatcher championed was for her own family. Laws written *specifically* to benefit Drunken Denis while keeping South Africans in the bondage of apartheid.

 

Followed by putting lovely intelligent lowly estate agent Mark (a friend of mine worked with him in a small village estate agency, where he was utterly shit he was so fucking thick*) into the middle of corrupt multi-billion arms deals that the govt is still covering up the details of today - while Mark still collects on the corruption today and has a hundreds of millions "self made" fortune.

(* think of the the thickest person you've ever met in your life. Now double it, and double it again).

 

You can read about much of that in almost every Private Eye.

 

It's a good job you know what you're talking about, eh?

 

 

 

[sjseabass]

I have a labour MP! (Voted Green though)

I live in one of the safest Tory seats in the country . I too voted Green, and soon I should hopefully be moving to somewhere they'll get another seat in 2020, the People's Republic of Bristol

[Ommadawn]

I'm pleased to see that your skills have been properly identified by capitalist employers.

 

[stuartbert two hats]

I live in one of the safest Tory seats in the country . I too voted Green, and soon I should hopefully be moving to somewhere they'll get another seat in 2020, the People's Republic of Bristol

That's a tough one. I think I would have voted Labour in that situation, as hopeless as it might have felt.

Marginal seat would have been Labour all the way.

[eFestivals]

I live in one of the safest Tory seats in the country . I too voted Green, and soon I should hopefully be moving to somewhere they'll get another seat in 2020, the People's Republic of Bristol

 

personally, I doubt it. I live in that seat.

 

The Greens benefited mostly from people not voting LibDem, and it's likely many of those voters will return to the LibDems at the next election.

 

The Labour vote probably won't hold up particularly well either - it benefited form those ex-LibDems too - but I have trouble seeing that suffer as much as the Greens, and the gap between Labour and Greens was 9%, a very big gap to make up.

 

Here's the stats:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_West_%28UK_Parliament_constituency%29#Elections_in_the_2010s

 

I've got to say tho I do feel smug living here. There can't be many places in the UK where liberal/left parties came 1st, 2nd and 3rd, with the right wing nutters after that (and with UKIP getting just 3%).

[Teddington]

you weren't even born to know what she did.

But as you're unemployed, can I suggest a career in comedy. Unfactual bollocks like that would go down a storm.

The only mobility that Thatcher championed was for her own family. Laws written *specifically* to benefit Drunken Denis while keeping South Africans in the bondage of apartheid.

 

Followed by putting lovely intelligent lowly estate agent Mark (a friend of mine worked with him in a small village estate agency, where he was utterly shit he was so fucking thick*) into the middle of corrupt multi-billion arms deals that the govt is still covering up the details of today - while Mark still collects on the corruption today and has a hundreds of millions "self made" fortune.

(* think of the the thickest person you've ever met in your life. Now double it, and double it again).

 

You can read about much of that in almost every Private Eye.

 

It's a good job you know what you're talking about, eh?

 

I'm not here to defend Mark Thatcher and share similar views with you on him.

 

I am old enough to remember Thatcher.....(and the power cuts, strikes, shit piling up in the street that led to her term in power- most "lefties" on here are not and dont' remember what the last arugably "proper" socialist government led to).

 

What amuses me most though, is the fact that without Capitalism there could BE no Glastonbury.  Well not in the form that most people love anyway.

 

Those sound sets for example.  Correct me if I'm wrong but they are supplied by companies who require profit to drive investment/stay in business.

 

Those food places - again need profit to exist

 

Those tents, that beer, that tobacco that people consume........  I could go on but I'm sure the message has gone through.

 

Incidentally unlike some posters on here, I don't launch into personal attacks on the basis of their politics, I don't call them "left wing nutters".  I display that horrible right wing trait of tolerance.

[eFestivals]

I'm not here to defend Mark Thatcher and share similar views with you on him.

 

but you are defending his mother, who is the very person behind his doings.

 

If you condemn him, you're condemning her.

 

So perhaps you might now realise what a self-serving c**t she was, like all good tories are?

Edited July 11, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

What amuses me most though, is the fact that .....

 

... you'll quickly throw in a squirrel because you know that your defence of the tories can't stand up to scrutiny.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

Equality itself is a horrible socialist value that has no place in our society

Really?

You see that's one of the key reasons I support them. They PROMOTE social equality imo.

??

Baffled.

University debt is only paid back when the student is earning over a certain amount.

On a financial level, yes, mentally £47k worth of debt is a heck of a cloud to leave hanging over someone trying to get their first job tho. But I guess looking at it from a purely financial point of view without taking into account compassion is what we have learnt to expect from your lot by now.

A system based on MERIT.

As in, something like, say, A-Levels?

the Government was elected on a manifesto which had cuts that were much deeper than those proposed a few days ago.

More RW-press bullshit. They couldn't possibly manage that, given they didn't even specify the cuts originally. Even when Call Me Dave did briefly, god forbid, threaten to go into specifics pre-election, he lied. Edited July 11, 2015 by Zac Quinn

[sjseabass]

personally, I doubt it. I live in that seat.

The Greens benefited mostly from people not voting LibDem, and it's likely many of those voters will return to the LibDems at the next election.

The Labour vote probably won't hold up particularly well either - it benefited form those ex-LibDems too - but I have trouble seeing that suffer as much as the Greens, and the gap between Labour and Greens was 9%, a very big gap to make up.

True, true, but the Greens made up a 14% gap between 2005 and 2010 to get Caroline Lucas elected in Brighton Pavilion, and that was coming from third place and with much less organisation and funding than the party has now. When you're in second place it's easier to portray yourself as the viable alternative (as, sadly, we may see in 2020 with all those seats UKIP was a runner-up in this time). Plus Brighton Pavilion is really quite safe now, so they'll need to focus on it less and pump their time and energy into winning other seats. Finally, if Labour continue their rightward trajectory I don't see them holding or increasing their support in Bristol with, as you say, its population's heartening distaste for the right.

[zero000]

I live in one of the safest Tory seats in the country . I too voted Green, and soon I should hopefully be moving to somewhere they'll get another seat in 2020, the People's Republic of Bristol

The Tories took the seat where I grew up, and where my family lives by 27 votes. 27 votes! Labour or the Liberals had held it for over 100 years. Absolutely sickening that greed won out.

My mum made my dad take down the Labour sign in the garden so she's partially to blame!

[amfy]

The problem with the idea of equality of opportunity rather than equality, is that it assumes that everyone is equally able to take the opportunity offered. Some are less able to benefit from 'opportunity' for a variety or reasons - actual disability, simply not being as bright, having a worse starting point, having caring responsibilities...etc.

Left wing ideology looks after the less able. This budget shows several examples of the Tories not being willing to look after the less able, and further, at least one clear example of them not even being willing to offer the 'opportunity' to the less able - the cutting of student grants.

I accept that there are some people that now look upon benefits as a lifestyle choice, but I'd rather look at how we got there, and how we address those individuals, rather than wholesale cuts which affect rafts of people who are simply struggling to find a foothold in society.

It doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone that the 2 children rule will apply to everyone without a Trust fund. Any of us could lose our job and struggle to find another one, or have a work ending injury which leaves us with children we have no means of supporting. I find that incredible, we now have a country where you can't have more than 2 children - yet the OP thinks Glastonbury is reminiscent of Communist China?

[stuartbert two hats]

It doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone that the 2 children rule will apply to everyone without a Trust fund. Any of us could lose our job and struggle to find another one, or have a work ending injury which leaves us with children we have no means of supporting. I find that incredible, we now have a country where you can't have more than 2 children - yet the OP thinks Glastonbury is reminiscent of Communist China?

It's occurred to me. It's the very worst of their policies, pandering to those who get all rilled up after watching an episode of 'benefits street'

[phil the shrew]

Would be interested to know if the OP did look round and engage with the elements of the festival they felt were overly left wing like Greenpeace, CND etc?

To my mind there is no harm, and actually a lot of benefit in actively seeking out views that differ to yours and finding out more about what motivates them and what their campaigns are about. You may hear what they say and end up disagreeing with them but I doubt anyone loses out by hearing a different opinion

I'd class myself as left as centre but try to read up on and meet people with different views to me. Think that's probably what Glastonbury means most to me - that awareness that there are many many different views and opinions in the world and opening up your mind to find out more about them is really enlightening.

Sadly the world seems to be moving in the opposite direction where learning and accommodating others views and life choices seems to be diminishing

[frostypaw]

What amuses me most though, is the fact that without Capitalism there could BE no Glastonbury.  Well not in the form that most people love anyway.

 

Those sound sets for example.  Correct me if I'm wrong but they are supplied by companies who require profit to drive investment/stay in business.

 

Those food places - again need profit to exist

 

Those tents, that beer, that tobacco that people consume.

Oh put some effort in - we covered that over five pages back. Turns out it's your blinkers not reality.

Amfy has hit the nail on the head - equal opportunity doesn't mean equal chance or ability to take. 100 is the average IQ as the most screamingly obvious example. Government must be for those who can't take care of themselves, not those who can do so easily

[Teddington]

The problem with the idea of equality of opportunity rather than equality, is that it assumes that everyone is equally able to take the opportunity offered. Some are less able to benefit from 'opportunity' for a variety or reasons - actual disability, simply not being as bright, having a worse starting point, having caring responsibilities...etc.

Left wing ideology looks after the less able. This budget shows several examples of the Tories not being willing to look after the less able, and further, at least one clear example of them not even being willing to offer the 'opportunity' to the less able - the cutting of student grants.

I accept that there are some people that now look upon benefits as a lifestyle choice, but I'd rather look at how we got there, and how we address those individuals, rather than wholesale cuts which affect rafts of people who are simply struggling to find a foothold in society.

It doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone that the 2 children rule will apply to everyone without a Trust fund. Any of us could lose our job and struggle to find another one, or have a work ending injury which leaves us with children we have no means of supporting. I find that incredible, we now have a country where you can't have more than 2 children - yet the OP thinks Glastonbury is reminiscent of Communist China?

 

 

Amfy - now that's the way to debate.  No insults, no uncalled for emotive language.  I may disagree with you but the debate is civil (as of course it should be).

 

Of course there is no "level playing field".   There never has in the history of not just civilisation but the earth (and perhaps the Universe) as a whole.  However, we should, imo go some way to ensure that people have equal opportunity, and imo education is the key to that.

 

In terms of people "not being as bright".  Well of course not.  But surely this is just a fact of life, just as some will be worse at sport, others better musically, others better leaders etc etc   These differences are what drives mankind forward.

 

 

 

It's occurred to me. It's the very worst of their policies, pandering to those who get all rilled up after watching an episode of 'benefits street'

 

I would say it's the best of their policies.  I cannot understand why people think that the state has an obligation to fund their ever growing families.  Surely this is about personal responsibility?

 

Would be interested to know if the OP did look round and engage with the elements of the festival they felt were overly left wing like Greenpeace, CND etc?

To my mind there is no harm, and actually a lot of benefit in actively seeking out views that differ to yours and finding out more about what motivates them and what their campaigns are about. You may hear what they say and end up disagreeing with them but I doubt anyone loses out by hearing a different opinion

I'd class myself as left as centre but try to read up on and meet people with different views to me. Think that's probably what Glastonbury means most to me - that awareness that there are many many different views and opinions in the world and opening up your mind to find out more about them is really enlightening.

Sadly the world seems to be moving in the opposite direction where learning and accommodating others views and life choices seems to be diminishing

 

I totally agree. 

 

I make a point of debating with the Greens/CND whenever I go to Glasto.  I find myself in agreement on some things, not on others.  Sometimes I come away impressed by the knowledge of the people there, sometimes less so (people jumping on the bandwaggon without actually understanding the issues).  Either way it improves my understanding of society.

[stuartbert two hats]

I would say it's the best of their policies. I cannot understand why people think that the state has an obligation to fund their ever growing families. Surely this is about personal responsibility?

My issue is that the principle of personal responsibility doesn't apply to children. It is the children who are going to be affected the most by this policy.

[Teddington]

Oh put some effort in - we covered that over five pages back. Turns out it's your blinkers not reality.

Amfy has hit the nail on the head - equal opportunity doesn't mean equal chance or ability to take. 100 is the average IQ as the most screamingly obvious example. Government must be for those who can't take care of themselves, not those who can do so easily

 

Re IQ so what?  That's life.  Those with higher IQ's will no doubt go onto higher skilled jobs and create the cure for cancer.  Those with lower IQ's will end up sweeping the streets.  Surely this is the best allocation of a scarce resource?  

 

Re your last sentence.  I believe in a "safety net" for those who NEED it, (not those who choose it).

[Teddington]

My issue is that the principle of personal responsibility doesn't apply to children. It is the children who are going to be affected the most by this policy.

 

So how do you stop the irresponsibilty of the parents?

 

Everything has a cost.

[Winslow Leach]

Amfy - now that's the way to debate. No insults, no uncalled for emotive language. I may disagree with you but the debate is civil (as of course it should be).

Of course there is no "level playing field". There never has in the history of not just civilisation but the earth (and perhaps the Universe) as a whole. However, we should, imo go some way to ensure that people have equal opportunity, and imo education is the key to that.

In terms of people "not being as bright". Well of course not. But surely this is just a fact of life, just as some will be worse at sport, others better musically, others better leaders etc etc These differences are what drives mankind forward.

I would say it's the best of their policies. I cannot understand why people think that the state has an obligation to fund their ever growing families. Surely this is about personal responsibility?

I totally agree.

I make a point of debating with the Greens/CND whenever I go to Glasto. I find myself in agreement on some things, not on others. Sometimes I come away impressed by the knowledge of the people there, sometimes less so (people jumping on the bandwaggon without actually understanding the issues). Either way it improves my understanding of society.

Honk if you love eugenics.

[stuartbert two hats]

So how do you stop the irresponsibilty of the parents?

Everything has a cost.

Even the Telegraph admits that the Government has done no research into whether this would affect the number of children born per family. Even if it did, making the children bear the cost is not acceptable.

[Glastoboy]

I'm beginning to think Teddington should have a slot on Leftfield next year to espouse his tory views on life and the festival. I think I'd quite enjoy seeing him try and debate an opposing, and possibly hostile, crowd.

Edited July 11, 2015 by Glastoboy