Jump to content

Maggz

Members
  • Content Count

    189
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

70 Excellent

About Maggz

  • Rank
    Z Dedicated

Location

  • Location
    East Midlands, UK

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Trump is a TV reality star which was hot in the 80s as a builder (not really but ok). People were tired of politicians, and elected "the hottest" businessman, ignoring several bankruptcies, unpaid workers, dodgy deals for land, etc. I keep joking that Kardashians are next, the kid billionaire, I bet she knows how to make America billions. It's a middle finger to the establishment. In the UK we're cheering for the establishment whilst watching them destroying public services and selling it to private companies while we have the biggest numbers of food banks, and poor people in a few decades, and doubled the countries debts during the period... crappy book balancing if you ask me. I'm no Corbyn fan and I'm not saying who to vote for, I'm saying who brought us here. Big difference
  2. Because the motivation is to reduce the powers of parliament, and courts, and increase the power the government has. Johnson wants to make sure that next time he lies to the queen, the parliament, and the population, abuses his power and tries to force through, whatever he's trying to force through, that no one will be able to stop him. That's how it can be a bad thing. It's a power grab, and not a review of how we can all live happier and fairer.
  3. How can it be right, when all 11 judges ruled differently? So what you're saying is that a politician knows better, than all 11 judges who devoted their life to their profession? This makes absolutely zero sense to me Judges didn't put the queen in a sticky situation, Johnson lied to her and the nation and probably apologized to her as well. Royals are only involved as a formality, we have a parliamentary democracy, and not a monarchy. You maybe don't like that fact, but it's still fact. What Johnson did, was taken advantage of a procedural formality and used it to try and force his hard brexit threat as a negotiating position with the EU (which is moronic anyway), and prevent the parliament having a say. He literally used her name, status and position for his failed strategy, and made a fool of himself. And the one thing the courts are always....is right. That's why we have them, to tell the retarded plebs like us, what right is and what wrong is. Nothing tricky about it, just a government who's trying to bend laws and procedures to their benefit, and then telling people their own courts and parliament are against them. I mean if this wasn't the UK, and this would happen in a younger democracy, or a dodgier democracy like Turkey, the world would report that they're preparing a coup. What did they say or do to convince you that the only layer of our system who can interpret and decide on what's wrong and not, is your enemy?
  4. In Boris's case you're right. If nothing else, his rhetoric is so bad that he's normalising open racism and bigotry, so if for no other reason, he should be prevented the PM job just because of that. I'm trying to be objective and look at the wider picture, but in his case, ... Yeah, we probably shouldn't do that
  5. The fact that Johnson prorogued the parliament in crunch time was enough for me. And seeing that they're publicly promising a look at the "broader aspects of our constitution" and the fact the Tories will be updating the Human rights act scares the bejesus out of me. I also don't get this concept of needing to like the party leader to vote for a party. Votes should be based on policy and track record of the party, not charisma and how well people speak or look. I mean, cmon, when was the last time anyone really liked a politician?
  6. I was sure you said it selling off NHS wouldn't happen, because it's "unelectable" and people wouldn't stand for it... I guess now you see how that can happen, by selling off small pieces, bit by bit, and hoping no one notices, a bit like you didn't notice/know
  7. Are you sure you're talking with the right person? The above makes no sense to me. Privatisation of public services being bad for poor people is fact with quite a few really well documented examples. Those are not opinions, mine or yours, those are facts. And you saying no one is right, let's please stop talking about it now, is just silly and childish. These are serious topics impacting every single person living here. Where have I mentioned Corbyn or why do you think I'm trying to convince you who to vote for? I also don't need you to agree with me, or to believe me...but it would be great if you read a few articles, studies and economic impacts on privatisation of public services which were not made by a political party. Also, you thinking that your perception of how good your personal train line is, actually equals facts on why privatisation is good or bad, is concerning if not scary. But I guess you were alive in the 80s which makes you a privatisation SME
  8. Attack is the best form of defence when your arguments run dry
  9. No one actually. However it's definitely what they stand for and the narrative they're pushing. I couldn't say who you'll vote for and honestly I don't care. I'm more talking about the similarities between your statements and their rhetoric. Never belittle, I try to educate. The difference is massive. I also never said everything. No need to twist my words when everything is written, just go back and read my posts again. Every country and government has the obligation to ensure basic public services are available to all its citizens, and that includes things like public transport, energy, water, healthcare, etc. Without any of those services, individual people would not have a normal life, or even worse, would suffer horrifically on daily basis. My problem is that some people don't understand, that calling for privatisation instead of reorganization and optimization means, that the core services become expensive due to profits which private organisations chase, and with that, poor people lose them all together as they can't afford them. It's one of the most unpatriotic thing anyone can do. For a proud country like the UK, I'm shocked how little some people care about their fellow countrymen. It's honestly making me sad on daily basis. Nothing to do with Corbyn, Labour, socialism or Boris...but only with the expectation that all people deserve basic and free or at least cheap public services, as otherwise they will be left behind and will not have a half decent life.
  10. I'd vote labour as I don't believe there is a single type of brexit that all wanted 3 years ago. Show the people what brexit means in detail and reality, and let them pick. I don't care if it's hard Vs remain, bojos deal Vs remain, or whatever else. But everyone I talk to is explaining brexit to me in a completely unique way, so obviously loads of people still don't know what it actually means in practice, as it can't be a thousand different things... Now queue all the brexit means brexit, let's get brexit done, no deal is better than bad deal soundbites
  11. It doesn't fit his capitalist and free market (cough tory) narrative. Also, I assume as it was posted by a politician he doesn't like, he just decided it's not true.
  12. You're missing one option buddy, which is "can't vote, I'm European"
  13. @Ekona and @coldel is this one of you?
  14. I'm sure you know this already, but I'll play the game... No public service in modern days gets sold like a pair of sneakers...with a fixed price, and on a specific date when it goes from public to private. How I see this happening is closer to taking a 20K piece puzzle which is assembled, and you take 1 piece and privatise it. Then another, and another, and before you know it you've removed a dozen, and as the companies running them are interested in profits, and not in the best possible service, things tend to degrade. As service degrades and people complain, company says they can't make it better with the low fees they're charging and huge costs they have, and that prices will go up to ensure a better service. And so the govt. helps with some public funding so the people wouldn't need to pay everything (doh, it's still a public service) and to reduce a bit of outrage. So it's not fully privatised, but it is in the process. Govt. is spending billions trying to keep it somewhat good and accessible to all, while having more and more sections private. So you end up with private hospitals, private ambulances, outsourced nurses, doctors, and probably full treatments as well, as it's easier to pay someone to do your job, than sort out and reorganise your own public service. As the costs of outsourcing increases, all this time the govt. is convincing people that they just can't afford a public NHS, that it's spending billions maintaining it, and that costs are going up year after year, and it's still failing, and after it runs out of foreigners and immigration to blame, it comes up with a perfect solution to all the problems - insurance, which you can get as an extra to whatever is in place at that moment. It's a fair (cough) one as well...The more you pay, the better and more luxurious the service you get. Insurance companies have deals with private clinics. All the money and treatment of 'better off' people goes to private insurance companies and private clinics, making the NHS only a service for the poor.... By this time 1/3 of the NHS is private, outsourced, and ran still with @*!# loads of public money, but only the poor ones use it. Because the govt. obviously can't afford the NHS which performs worse and private sections work gloriously (for those that can afford it), the media campaign starts which convinces people the public NHS is money burned, and that with some proper regulation, private healthcare with subsidized insurance for the poorest will be loads better. Makes sense, right? We know the govt. pisses millions on daily basis on inefficiencies and what not, and private businesses don't....so it makes sense. Right? This can happen within a single full government term. Now someone please tell me how many Brits will see, or protest, or fight for each individual puzzle being privatised? Also if you're well off (I am), or not barely making ends meet, this may sound like a great idea. I'll pay a bit more (I can afford it) and I'll get a lot better service. The problem is, I don't want people who can't afford to pay a bit more, to be shafted and forgotten, as all poorer people always are in a privatised public service...no money, no service or no money no product (medicine).
  15. Why would it not happen here?

350z-uk.com

370z-uk.com

×
×
  • Create New...