Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

[monkeybarry]

There's very little money in being a politician - if you take the hours, working in London, etc into account, they get paid a pittance.

I think pittance is an I'll advised phrase.
Otherwise, I agree. MPs are underpaid if you compare to what could be made outside of public service.
The opportunities created for other income streams is a good benefit of the role however.

 

[scaramanga]

No mention of lots of fact finding foreign trips, entertainment by companies and individuals,

I'd expect directors of large companies to get that stuff free - I'm a director of a far smaller one and I do.

priority treatment in most places, the opportunity to employ unemployable family members, chance to put contracts to your in-laws companies

That's no more a part of the job than anywhere else. It's no more right as an MP than it is in other places either. What you're describing is power, which comes with any high level job.

plus access to top restaurants and shows in London and far greater choice of rent boys and hostesses.

So does my bank account. I've never asked her about rent boys, but I just call my concierge and she gets me into the show/restaurant that I want her to. That's not part of an MP's job either, that's just a perk of using a bank.

 

[monkeybarry]

Christ, although I kind of agrees I will be 72/73 when Brexit ceases. If I last that long.

The NHS won't exist by them - so you better be eating well

 

[scaramanga]

I think pittance is an I'll advised phrase.
Otherwise, I agree. MPs are underpaid if you compare to what could be made outside of public service.
The opportunities created for other income streams is a good benefit of the role however.

Pittance is probably not the right word, but working for half of the going rate for a similar level of responsibility in a similar part of the country is certainly not chasing the money.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

All are quite esoteric and are the backbone of the Brexit campaign for that very reason as they are many things to different people. Cummings is many things but stupid is not one of them.

Your Brexit quest I doubt will ever happen due to politics. Yours is a deeply-rooted love of Great Britain and the EU are just not for you?

I mistrust all governing bodies equally due to their very nature of governing. UK parliament and the EU are both deeply floored as these things always will be.

So I end up looking for the best deal for me. Not bothered by flags or the like just whats is it costing, like with changing utility companies at home.
My take is there is little gain from leaving because of its too much unnecessary grief/costs. The amount of uncertainty for 'me' leaving is too great and the hassle factor is huge. As would be the reverse, say joining the EU if that was the case in question. It likes the art of great British comedy, 'it is all in the timing'.
I don't disagree passionately with either side of the argument I'm just pragmatic "I" see no upside to Brexit it is too expensive and political navel-gazing.

I get where you are coming from.

It is kind of esoteric, and it is kind of vague.

Im neither a great lover of the UK, nor absolute hater of the EU.

Im not a fan of the EU, or at least - where the project has travelled to - and where it appears to be heading. Which isnt to say it doent have its merits.

And I think its one of those where parting ways now would be the best option. A bit like Poch going.

Not necessarily upset/angry/falling out, just time to call it day.

I do think the UK has big potential. Like you I have misgivings about our leadership being able to realise it, but for me I prefer the idea of taking that chance and seeing what we can make of it to the ever closer union of the EU.

The pros and cons, despite some peoples certainty, really arent absolute. Im a bit more "fudge it, lets see what we can do" where as others seem terrified by the assumption of horror that would follow.

I like the idea of a chance for actual, radical (by the standards of the last 40+ years) change in our politics.

I think our current set of MPs are completely unprepared for having to actually do the job without the EUs making life easy.

And I think, thanks to that, theres a good chance of a new breed coming through. Politicians with actual drive, vision, and ambition for the country.

Which, even if it takes a while to come to fruition, is an exciting prospect to me.

 

[Rorschach]

Full statement from the hospital is that the boy was seen within 20 mins, was receiving treatment in a treatment room (in a chair) whilst awaiting a bed.

The hospital stops short of stating that the parents put the child on the floor for obvious reasons, but it clearly wasn't the hospital.

I've seen completely contradictions to this version also and the node analaysis shows the usual cesspools propagating the 'it was fake' version . But to be honest it doesn't matter one way or the other. The overarching point is not what is true or not now, it is that we cannot tell anymore as there is no arbiter of truth. Yes there is a true version of this story out there but who can tell anyway in all the noise.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Johnson wasn't right to ignore it and shrug it off either - he displayed his character. Whether it's one lacking in compassion or one can't appropriately handle new and sensitive information is down to personal perception.
Either way, nothing in his handling suggested any kind of leadership and influence I want make key decisions over my welfare.

He could have looked at it and said "that does not look good, I will have my team investigate further". He took no ownership of the situation and tried to palm it off with fluff.

(Although, now I think about - maybe the country would be better if Johnson "palmed off" more)

I kind of like that about Johnson.

Not that I like him, or his actions - of course. More that I like that he is honest.

Im sure its not intentional, and yes - I know he is a lying fudger - but he isnt skilled enough to deny what and who he is.

Hes a clam. He knows hes a clam. You and I know hes a clam. And he just kind of owns it (even if inadvertently).

So ultimately he is quite predictable, and we all know where we stand. Which is, for me, refreshing.

You know what you are getting with him - and you know it will be populist etc - and at this time I think its basically what is needed.

Which is no great endorsement of the man. Rather a conclusion that he may be the best of a bad bunch (as always seems the case at election time. No reasons to vote "for" someone, all have reasons to vote "against").

Corbyn, on the other hand, I find far more opaque. Far less trustworthy (in a "you know what theyll do" kind of way), far more radical - and not necessarily for the better. Frankly I think he is more dangerous.

 

[StephenH]

The NHS won't exist by them - so you better be eating well

too well

 

[monkeybarry]

Pittance is probably not the right word, but working for half of the going rate for a similar level of responsibility in a similar part of the country is certainly not chasing the money.

Exactly that.
Wait.....are you finally understanding what it means to work in public service?!
My work here is done.

 

[StephenH]

More that I like that he is honest.

 

[monkeybarry]

too well

Keep off the kale. Don't don't go down the K-Hole.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Boris Johnson has said the possible abolition of the BBC licence fee needs "looking at".

Speaking at a rally in Sunderland, the prime minister questioned how much longer funding a broadcaster out of "a general tax" could be "justified".

Ministers have agreed the licence fee will stay in place until at least 2027, when the BBC's Royal Charter ends.

The fee for a colour TV licence is currently £154.50 a year. It will rise in line with inflation until 2022.

Licence fee income was worth £3.6bn to the BBC in 2018-9, accounting for approximately 75% of the broadcaster's revenues and funding TV, radio and online content. Last year, 25.8 million households had TV licences.

The government and the BBC are currently involved in a dispute over the funding of free TV licences for the over-75s.

Mr Johnson was asked by a member of the public whether he would consider axing all TV licences.

The prime minister said that, while he would not make up policy with three days to go before the election, it was an issue that was worth "looking at" in the future.

"You have to ask yourself whether that approach to funding a media company still makes sense in the long term given the way that other organisations manage to fund themselves," he said.

"The system of funding out of what is a general tax bears reflection. How long can you justify a system whereby everybody who has a TV has to pay to fund a particular set of TV and radio channels."

Various alternatives to the licence fee have been floated over the years, including subscription services or a compulsory broadcasting levy.

At the time of the last Charter Renewal in 2016, the government said the licence fee was likely to become "less sustainable in the long run".

While ministers said there were no plans to replace it with a subscription model, they said the BBC should be given an opportunity to explore whether to make any of its content available on a subscription-only basis.

In its manifesto, Labour says it will ensure a "healthy future" for all public service broadcasters, while the Liberal Democrats are promising to "protect the independence of the BBC and set up a BBC Licence Fee Commission".

The Brexit Party is pledging to "phase out" the licence fee.



About bloody time too. Ive resented being forced to pay the licence fee since I got my own place and was forced to pay the licence fee!

 

[StephenH]

Boris Johnson has said the possible abolition of the BBC licence fee needs "looking at".

And BoJo wonders why the BBC is biased?

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

And BoJo wonders why the BBC is biased?

That you say the BBC is biased says it all.

The BBC has, IMO, long since lost its impartiality, and its reputation for quality programming.

Its basically as tabloid as ITV these days, despite the advantage of not having to pander to the lowest common denominator.

 

[monkeybarry]

@nayimfromthehalfwayline
I sort of agree. I respect his "honesty" / pity his inability to not be a cnut.

But I still don't want it anywhere near decisions that influence my life.

Corbyn, although aloof, does seem principled and genuinely has the wellbeing of the whole country at his heart. I'm not sure I entirely trust him or Labour. However I'm entirely sure I don't trust the Tories.

Thankfully I will be voting for neither and supporting the voices that have less of a voice currently. I'm lucky that my seat will LAB or LD not matter what. And I'm not bothered which way that goes.

 

[scaramanga]

I've seen completely contradictions to this version also and the node analaysis shows the usual cesspools propagating the 'it was fake' version . But to be honest it doesn't matter one way or the other. The overarching point is not what is true or not now, it is that we cannot tell anymore as there is no arbiter of truth. Yes there is a true version of this story out there but who can tell anyway in all the noise.

Which is why I think Johnson is right to dismiss a reporter doorstepping him with an issue he knows nothing about

 

[StephenH]

That you say the BBC is biased says it all.

The BBC has, IMO, long since lost its impartiality, and its reputation for quality programming.

Its basically as tabloid as ITV these days, despite the advantage of not having to pander to the lowest common denominator.

They all carry a torch for one side or another. Stick to the football pagers it's safer.

Quality programming is now Netflix co-productions and the like.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

@nayimfromthehalfwayline
I sort of agree. I respect his "honesty" / pity his inability to not be a cnut.

But I still don't want it anywhere near decisions that influence my life.

Corbyn, although aloof, does seem principled and genuinely has the wellbeing of the whole country at his heart. I'm not sure I entirely trust him or Labour. However I'm entirely sure I don't trust the Tories.

Thankfully I will be voting for neither and supporting the voices that have less of a voice currently. I'm lucky that my seat will LAB or LD not matter what. And I'm not bothered which way that goes.

I like a predictable, moderate clam over a more unpredictable, extreme one - no matter their principles.

If "like" is the word?

If I can bring myself to vote*, Ill probably vote Tory, though my town is a very secure Tory seat regardless so I doubt it would ultimately mean anything.

Id make that choice purely for the sake of the next few years. And happily reconsider where my vote belongs come the next election.

Its a very short term choice, this election, IMO.




*Theres a very genuine chance Ill abstain. For me, I think voting should be a case of voting FOR something, not simply against something else. And there is very little on offer right now I could actively support with my vote, not party that I feel is representative of me or my values or my preferences.

As my constituency is almost certainly a Conservative win, I may well just leave it anyway, any vote seems quite meaningless.

 

[Rorschach]

Which is why I think Johnson is right to dismiss a reporter doorstepping him with an issue he knows nothing about

I think he should have handled it more sympathetically as he didn't know the facts nor even that they were disputed at that juncture. It's a minor point though and a distraction from the real issue - that is will Putin get the election result he wants after investing so much in the Tories.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

They all carry a torch for one side or another. Stick to the football pagers it's safer.

Quality programming is now Netflix co-productions and the like.

Which is precisely why the BBC no longer has the right to the taxation of the people to support it.

The whole point of the licence fee is that they are not bound by ownership, ad revenue, and should not be partisan in any way.

They should be neutral, and focused on providing quality programming. In both an entertainment and educational sense (not necessarily mutually exclusive things, of course).

IMHO the BBC is an utter failure in these respects. So its frankly criminal that I am forced to pay for it. I should have the choice to subscribe, as I do with any other media, and make my own choice as to the value.