Non - Labour Party

TrevorMorganFanClub said:
When did the word "takeaways" stop meaning food you didn't prepare yourself and why do we have to import every American word?

Was there a vote on these things that I missed?

I admit I quite like the fact that we've taken "staycation" and decided it means something else!
Click to expand...

I think it's down to the BBC, trying to Americanize, presumably to make more money for BBC World.

Impact is a noun, not a verb (as I understand it) yet since Auntie's presenters started saying 'will it impact upon you' and similar variations, around 15 years ago, replacing affect (v) and effect (noun) it's become commonly spoken.

Gridlock, is very apt for an American city, where roads are laid out in a grid formation (have a look at a satellite photograph of Chicago as a good example) yet you can hear BBC traffic presenters (and others) talking of gridlock on a motorway (this could also reflect a poor level of education, as with the best will in the world, it's hard to see a way in which the M1 could be gridlocked)

David Attenborough, now pronounces tuna as toona, as opposed to choona. On my first trip to the USA, I asked the waiter in the restaurant for tuna and he asked me to point it out on the menu, as he didn't understand what I wanted; 'oh, toona..' was his response.

Perhaps the worst is gender. Gender refers to the masculinity or femininity of an inanimate object. Sex refers to a living creature (and is defined by chromosomes) Interestingly, Professor Alice Roberts, was discussing something with an American scientist, in a lab. in the US, when she referred to the gender of a living creature; which drew a look from the American in question, who then repeated her question but emphasised sex, in place of gender. And poor old Alice then started saying sex in place of gender during the rest of the interview; no doubt her scientific training displacing her director's right-on, hippy attitude.

It's all irrelevant as language is fluid and being understood is key (although I do think written grammar and spelling are important, due to the lack of nuance and context we receive when actually hearing the words)
After all, we now use the French Autumn in place of the English Fall (apparently some places in Daarrzett still have peeps saying fall) but as Americans spell fence the same as us, why they spell defence as defense seems odd.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
As ever I honestly don't understand what point you are trying to make. The tories brought in austerity in the coalition govt in 2010. It was unfortunately endorsed by the electorate in 2015 when they won a majority. It doesn't matter what they claim to support, they voted for austerity in sufficient numbers.
Click to expand...
So the electorate in 2015 are now said to lack the intelligence to understand what they were voting for, even more of a sweeping condemnation than saying the voters of Hartlepool are uninformed.
 
stanthevan said:
I have. I don’t accept that it’s a good thing and I will continue to point out its failings but it’s here and we can’t change that.
Click to expand...

And you'll completely ignore when someone points out how it might benefit working class people. Tell me Stan, what's more important... socialist principles or the European Union?
 
Ivyhouse said:
The problem for the centre left in this country is the system. Their vote is now split between Labour, Liberals, Greens and nationalist parties such as SNP and Plaid while the right is really just the Tories. Unless they can organise themselves into some form of coalition and use proper tactical voting I think we’re in for a long period of Tory rule.
Click to expand...
10 years ago there were pronounced differences between Labour, LibDem and Greens, but at this point in time if you took the metro liberal wing of Labour and put them with Greens and Lib Dems on a venn diagram, there would be a lot of overlap. They probably have more in common with each other than the separate wings within the Labour party currently do. They would make for a more coherent party and voting constituency than current Labour does.

Where that hypothetical coalition would leave these towns that are starting to vote Tory but aren't naturally inclined that way - I'm not sure. Whether the Tories can accommodate them within it's church long term, making it even broader than previous, I don't know!
 
Tribal.....we are no more 'civilised' than we were in BC times!
..only technology has changed anything ..but basic human behaviour has changed little !
 
northstandmark said:
10 years ago there were pronounced differences between Labour, LibDem and Greens, but at this point in time if you took the metro liberal wing of Labour and put them with Greens and Lib Dems on a venn diagram, there would be a lot of overlap. They probably have more in common with each other than the separate wings within the Labour party currently do. They would make for a more coherent party and voting constituency than current Labour does.

Where that hypothetical coalition would leave these towns that are starting to vote Tory but aren't naturally inclined that way - I'm not sure. Whether the Tories can accommodate them within it's church long term, making it even broader than previous, I don't know!
Click to expand...

I think the tories have a real long term battle on their hands. They are supposedly the party of hard work and aspiration yet things are becoming increasingly difficult for younger generations to be able to afford to live, let alone save for property deposits, until they are in their 30s/40s. Inherited wealth is going to become a more significant determinant than earned wealth in the next couple of decades. When people start to see that hard work and aspiration don't pay as much as connections and luck it's less likely people will put up with the widening inequalities that come with the Tory model.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
And you'll completely ignore when someone points out how it might benefit working class people. Tell me Stan, what's more important... socialist principles or the European Union?
Click to expand...
Hmm, it benefits working class people by getting rid of foreigners and along with Covid, decimating the leisure industry.
 
stanthevan said:
Hmm, it benefits working class people by getting rid of foreigners and along with Covid, decimating the leisure industry.
Click to expand...

Whether you like it or not the labour and property rental markets are subject to demand and supply. When supply goes down price goes up. When demand goes down price goes down.

Higher wages and lower rent is good for working people.
 
Rightly or wrongly, many voters have come to believe that voting for a Tory MP while a Tory government is in power will mean more investment, jobs and prosperity for the town.

Hartlepool has battled high levels of unemployment for decades, seen thousands of its young people head off to cities for work or education, and watched as nearby towns have been prioritised for regeneration.

Despite the best efforts of many local business-owners and community organisations, parts of the town struggle with extreme deprivation and decay - around a third of children grow up in poverty in Hartlepool.

Labour MPs have represented the town in parliament for two generations, and they’ve held power in the council for long stretches of that time.

Despite being in national government for more than a decade, in Hartlepool at least, people saw a vote for the Tories as a vote for change.

https://www.nationalworld.com/news/...-won-and-what-it-means-now-for-labour-3227677
 
northstandmark said:
10 years ago there were pronounced differences between Labour, LibDem and Greens, but at this point in time if you took the metro liberal wing of Labour and put them with Greens and Lib Dems on a venn diagram, there would be a lot of overlap. They probably have more in common with each other than the separate wings within the Labour party currently do. They would make for a more coherent party and voting constituency than current Labour does.

Where that hypothetical coalition would leave these towns that are starting to vote Tory but aren't naturally inclined that way - I'm not sure. Whether the Tories can accommodate them within it's church long term, making it even broader than previous, I don't know!
Click to expand...
The Greens are the natural party for the more left wing of the Labour party, their manifesto (an interesting read to gain a proper insight on the party) is certainly much more left wing and they cleverly dress themselves up as save the planet types to woo the disillusioned voters of both main parties. The Lib Dems ? They are more of a threat to the Tories in the "well off" South. They did actually take some unexpected seats off the Tories in places like Chipping Norton. They still bang on about rejoining the EU so they are still as out of touch with the electorate as Labour. They have all tried various ad hoc coalitions in the past and encouraged tactical voting but it has never amounted to much. I really can't see Labour wanting to enter into any coalition while they still view themselves as one of the two major parties.
As for changing the electoral system - forget it, if Labour get back in they will not be interested in doing it - just as they didn't when Blair was PM. The last time any change was proposed was the Alternative Vote by the Tory/Lib Dem coalition referendum in about 2011, this was rejected in the referendum by about 2 to 1. I am not sure things have moved on much since then and I don't see either of the 2 major parties wanting proportional representation.
 
billythekid said:
Rightly or wrongly, many voters have come to believe that voting for a Tory MP while a Tory government is in power will mean more investment, jobs and prosperity for the town.

Hartlepool has battled high levels of unemployment for decades, seen thousands of its young people head off to cities for work or education, and watched as nearby towns have been prioritised for regeneration.

Despite the best efforts of many local business-owners and community organisations, parts of the town struggle with extreme deprivation and decay - around a third of children grow up in poverty in Hartlepool.

Labour MPs have represented the town in parliament for two generations, and they’ve held power in the council for long stretches of that time.

Despite being in national government for more than a decade, in Hartlepool at least, people saw a vote for the Tories as a vote for change.

https://www.nationalworld.com/news/...-won-and-what-it-means-now-for-labour-3227677
Click to expand...
I think BTK that the Tory Tees Valley Mayor was seen as a major rason for the big Tory win. He is apparently very well regarded up there in terms of bringing jobs and investment back to the run down industrial areas. A lot of people like what he has done and voted accordingly.
 
redharry said:
I think BTK that the Tory Tees Valley Mayor was seen as a major rason for the big Tory win. He is apparently very well regarded up there in terms of bringing jobs and investment back to the run down industrial areas. A lot of people like what he has done and voted accordingly.
Click to expand...

Read and saw on TV from the people how popular he is.

According to the para (at end of this post) from the link I posted, he didn’t seem to come out and back his own parties candidate in Hartlepool.

But it just shows how a person who does things for his local people can come out and win above national politics.

Conservative Tees Valley mayor Ben Houchen - a popular figure in the area with many crediting him with the successful freeport bid and reopening of the airport - failed to publicly back Mortimer, though the good-will voters feel towards him should still be considered a factor in the Tory’s win.
 
redharry said:
The Greens are the natural party for the more left wing of the Labour party, their manifesto (an interesting read to gain a proper insight on the party) is certainly much more left wing and they cleverly dress themselves up as save the planet types to woo the disillusioned voters of both main parties.
Click to expand...

That is a valid option, especially for those who want to completely tear down society and start again.

Some people have called it back to the stone age politics. However, I have read a great deal of Green Party literature, and I do mean a lot, and so much of it is for a utopian view of society where everyone, miraculously, becomes middle class.

In the GP view of the future who is going to empty the bins, pick the asparagus and stack the shelves? Importantly, how is the economy going to generate the wealth to support education and a viable health service?

What the Green Party wants sounds oh, so lovely, but is as workable as each and every mass utopia that has ever been attempted.

Politics is the art of the achievable in an imperfect world full of fallible human beings. The Green Party is pie in the sky and jam tomorrow.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Whether you like it or not the labour and property rental markets are subject to demand and supply. When supply goes down price goes up. When demand goes down price goes down.

Higher wages and lower rent is good for working people.
Click to expand...
Which goes against your comments in your previous post. Make up your mind.

Also if wages go up, prices invariably do as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;