Clinton v Trump: Dawn of Presidency

Heard the same thing from Maajid Nawaz on LBC today.

Also, two other points were made that I would agree with, those were that 1. the right have been quicker to adapt to picking up on the concerns of the working class than the left have and, 2. there's been a switch, from the right being the elite and the left representing the forgotten/working class, to the opposite.
 
I think the current internet empowered version of the political left have become too lazy. More concerned with popular blog posts and snarky tweets than being legit politically active. Though I'd say overall in the west politics is treated like a game rather than the serious matter it is. Go watch a British parliament session and see nothing get achieved other than the assembled people trying out their open mic night stand up routines.
 
Yeah, I don't think it's just the left on the net though. Diane Abbott, at the labour conference, called those who voted leave, racist, and though not related, even the praised Shami Chakrabarti made a smear towards 'the essex man', even while being the chancellor of the University of Essex. The left on the net aren't just getting their empowered versions from out of thin air - their leaders make smears and call names to. Jeremy Corbyn does in fact seem to be in the minority, not just in being at odds with the PLP but also, not being as radical and quick to label those with opposing views as his supporters within the party.
 
mrclt1994 said:
Heard the same thing from Maajid Nawaz on LBC today.

Also, two other points were made that I would agree with, those were that 1. the right have been quicker to adapt to picking up on the concerns of the working class than the left have and, 2. there's been a switch, from the right being the elite and the left representing the forgotten/working class, to the opposite.
Click to expand...

The right supporting the working class i think i havent laughed so hard all week. Tax cuts dont help me, there is no evidence a curb on immigration will help me. I think politics is ran on peoples fears and the idea that socialism is a dirty word and dirty politics.
Also more working class people in major politics than all oxford educated elites in both sides of the parliament would help reinvigorate people.
 
Last edited:
Laugh all you want, but the way people are voting across our country and in the states says otherwise and, to be honest, there's no evidence to show that a curb on immigration wouldn't help the working class either (you might be pretty sure that it won't help you in particular but you are not every working class person). You tell me a quicker and more solid solution to people's concerns over immigration and them losing out on jobs to immigration and globalisation - socialism is not the issue being discussed here, the left's smears towards those who think anything different from what they do is, but even then, socialism isn't going to deliver those working class people, less chance of seeing their wages suppressed. Unless you're suggesting we keep ourselves to ourselves, only produce what's needed and nothing more.

Socialism is cool but I'd rather pursue the career of my choice and make as good a living I possibly can that way and be rewarded where I work hard, rather than limit myself to the earning potential dictated by hard people work 'collectively'. Socialism works well when everyone would pulls their weight, but without the incentive to go further, I cannot see how people can maintain high motivation beyond doing the bare minimum required to get by.
 
Immigration is not the problem imo people thinks its the problem while there aren't enough jobs being created not enough funding for the NHS doctors nurses and hospitals. And the potential brexit causes to lose businesses is damaging to jobs imo. I think people listened to the media and the media lied. And socialism helps all, you can still advance careers and all but nationalised businesses mean the welfare of these systems are not put before profit like what is happening with the train system.
 
You just said it - not enough jobs being created, do you think immigration helps that situation? When we've got such a big labour market, who loses out and who has to settle for jobs they wouldn't usually have done in the past or even go without? The working class. This is why working permits that make employers only look overseas when they are looking for those with specialised skills (and therefore commanding a higher salary), and then allowing UK citizens to take up the remaining entry level positions. However, with freedom of movement, those positions can be filled by anyone within the EU, therefore drastically increasing competition for those in the UK labour market.

Can I ask - why would you advance careers in socialism if the fruits of labor are distributed equally and therefore meaning, even if you work harder, or hold more responsibility, you still get the same as everyone else?
 
So the socialist businesses were All the "british companies" thatcher sold also the reason the NHS was state controlled was cos of socialism.
I believe reducing the labour pool is actually a bad idea due to businesses want the most experienced and therefore reducing the size of the market punishes them. Also I believe investing in education would help create jobs apprenticeships etc too. I think the leaving the EU will work in the short term long term not so sure.
 
Socialism =/= Communism.

I thought people understood that in Europe, but perhaps the US has more of a cultural hold than I thought.
 
Most of my annoyance comes from the fact a lot of the mainstream left these days is interested in nothing but divisive identity politics ******** - I've always been of the opinion that race, gender, sexual orientation etc. are (and should be) completely irrelevant in a society that values equality. The modern left seems to think these social issues are the most important issues ever, and spend all their time sweating the minutiae of what bathrooms people should be allowed to use and forcing people to bake cakes while completely ignoring (some even calling people who point it out horrible racists) major issues like the fact people's jobs have been shipped overseas where labour is cheap and workers have no rights, and the fact those goods are then imported virtually tariff free - It's worth noting I don't think the EU was ever a problem in this regard though because Europe has similar living standards and wages and British workers were also allowed to look for work in other EU countries. That was fair. Paying someone in China or India a couple of quid a day and firing a British worker who was getting paid closer to a hundred benefits no-one except the wealthy owners of and investors in multinational corporations, because unions in those countries are either corrupt, non-existent or so **** they'll never get their workers a better deal. If we all got together and asked for fifty quid a day perhaps things would change.

The left have nothing to say about economic inequality any more (or maybe just don't dare because of an incredibly hostile media), the major cause of inequality in society. There are poor people of all races, genders and sexual orientations - Social equality will come once at least some measure of economic equality is achieved and everybody has the chance to work and earn a living. You don't create an equal society by dividing people, and it really does feel like the left does that more than the right now, sadly.
 
Last edited:
Bringing back the jobs is a naive fantasy. Nobody seems to realise that bringing back the jobs inevitably involves paying a lot more for things. As much as you may personally fail to realise it, everyone benefits immensely from globalisation. It might be hard to measure the social and cultural impacts, but at the very least I'm more than willing to bet you couldn't afford the device you're reading this on if it had to be made in Western Europe. Everybody likes the jobs, nobody likes the probable inflation. It would seem to me that education and training were better ways to try and achieve economic equality than tariffs, quotas, subsidiaries and tax breaks, without necessarily making things more expensive, on a thread about the policies proposed by a Billionaire, now President-elect, on the other side of the Atlantic.

Globalisation is not the boogie man everyone wants it to be. It's probably the very reason you're reading a forum about Japanese animation on a device probably made in Asia, talking with a bunch of people who live, at the very least, miles away.



I'm sorry, but the idea that economic equality must be achieved for social equality is laughable. Nobody discriminates against transgender people because they don't have any money. I'd like to think that we as humans were capable of fighting for and supporting multiple causes at the same time. (Though, for what it's worth, I'm genuinely for making unironic use of the phrase "cishet" a capital offence.)
 
Last edited:
The thing with immigration is you will always have bad eggs. All the stories of British holidaymakers being ********s while abroad show that. I'm opposed to Brexit and scapegoating immigrants but it doesn't change the fact that 2 weeks ago in London two Eastern European guys thought it was hilarious to pull out the barrier as I was boarding the escalator behind them. Compare that to the range of people I've worked with who have come here from across the world and been amazing. Humanity is a mixed bag wherever you go.
 
thedoctor2016 said:
Socialism is that governments should own businesses and supervise them.
Click to expand...
So you can be sure that the government will reward everyone well for their work and if they work harder? If you don't get rewarded as you feel you should be, you can't just then go to another company, because everything's owned by the same people. How does that help social mobility?

I believe reducing the labour pool is actually a bad idea due to businesses want the most experienced and therefore reducing the size of the market punishes them.
Click to expand...
I already said "This is why working permits that make employers only look overseas when they are looking for those with specialised skills (and therefore commanding a higher salary), and then allowing UK citizens to take up the remaining entry level positions, work."

It's ok saying globalisation is better for everyone as a whole, but this is the problem isn't it. 'Well, the majority are fine so x group of people don't matter', well it's that group of people and those that recognise they are being forgotten that are now coming out and voting against globalisation. Training for what? If your community relied on factories and a certain industry, how can you, when you're older/middle-aged start retraining for something completely different? In the mean time you'd need money to get by, but all the entry level jobs would be lost to migrants who can afford to be on such lower wages

Yeah, this isn't about one or two migrants behaving badly, this is about a migration policy that is inconsiderate of those that would traditionally rely on entry level jobs and are now losing out on them. Migration is fine, for filling our skills gaps, but where high skills are not needed, those jobs can be left for the British.
 
The majority of immigrants are unlikely to be wealthy (and wealthy immigrants are unlikely to be affected by strict immigration restrictions), so making it more difficult for those people to move to a place that they feel gives them an opportunity at a better life is likely to make things worse for those people. People who favour social ideals are probably less inclined to differentiate between poor people here and poor people there.

The issues with a lack of jobs are at least partly because our society really doesn't need so much labour these days. We could easily meet everyone's basic needs without requiring everyone to work 40 hours a week, and still find plenty of time to produce luxury goods, but instead we continue with a system of artificial scarcity and competition. That system only gets worse as technology advances, the rich hoard their resources and the majority of people remain ignorant while fighting over scraps. I'm not going to say it'd be easy to establish a more efficient system, it's a logistical and social challenge, but it'd be worth it.

I'd probably agree that social equality would be likely to come before economic equality. We have to stop finding excuses to separate "us" from "them" and start treating everyone as people (and that includes ourselves). I'd also tend to agree that this is where training (or rather, education) comes in, we need to start moving society towards the idea of working together and treating people with respect. I'm not sure if empathy is something people are born with or if it can be learned but I do think it should be a priority to try and help people understand each other and see that they can be their own person while allowing others the same.

Sort of an aside, but I'm not really keen on using the term "equality" because I think it implies a certain "one size fits all" mentality that doesn't really hold up. I tend to prefer "fairness", although I'll admit that it's not exactly the most precise term either. Not really relevant, but I thought I'd mention it.

mrclt1994 said:
Socialism is cool but I'd rather pursue the career of my choice and make as good a living I possibly can that way and be rewarded where I work hard, rather than limit myself to the earning potential dictated by hard people work 'collectively'. Socialism works well when everyone would pulls their weight, but without the incentive to go further, I cannot see how people can maintain high motivation beyond doing the bare minimum required to get by.
Click to expand...
The idea of a system that rewards hard work and contributions to society is appealing but it's unfortunate that no such system currently exists in our world. It's true that working hard can improve a person's chances of financial success but it's neither necessary nor guaranteed to help. Indeed, paying as little as possible for work to be done is seen by many as a key factor in running a profitable business. It's generally more important to be perceived as someone who is of value to an organisation/individual (and thus a source of potential profit) than it is to actually be a productive worker. That our political system is a superficial show and popularity contest is merely representative of the overall way our society currently operates.

The reality is that many people are already working hard for reasons other than personal gain, and this despite the fact that society rarely rewards such efforts. We have charities because there are needs going unmet by profit driven systems and people still wish to help meet those needs to benefit others and society as a whole. People work hard in low paid jobs because they have personal pride in their work and feel that putting in less effort would go against their personal beliefs. Some people work merely for the recognition of others and the status of achieving certain goals or positions. Many people are already doing the minimum required to get by and working in jobs that they don't like because they need money to survive, many of those people could probably be doing something more productive and helpful with their time (while also improving their own lives) if they weren't bound by the basic survival requirements that our system enforces.

Our society may be better than some alternatives but it's really very far from approaching something that's actually good.
 
Last edited:
Also the work permit thing isn't set in stone no one knows what our post immigration policy will be as it was a AUS points system during the campaign now according to May it isnt.
 
I know that hard work doesn't always translate into career advancement, I was saying broadly and when I say working harder I mean taking on responsibility, or contributing more in terms of making a difference and being pivotal to a firm's success etc. - essentially, being important to an organisation like you said, Smeelia. I get why people wish to overlook the downside of mass immigration and allowance of unskilled workers to take up entry level jobs, because 'we're all human beings', but by us letting this to go on it does two things - it means there's less opportunities for our own countrymen and, it means the countries where migrants are coming from are not incentivised to do anything about bettering quality of life for their own people, because we'll pick up where they fail. Many countries but their own citizens before others, but it's only us who want to hold ourselves to a higher account than others, which I find odd. Other countries can impose immigration policies that mean their working classes aren't undercut, but as soon as we do it? No no, that's wrong.

Doc, the leave campaign were not the government in weighting. We COULD have an Aus system but it was not set in stone. We have a tier 2 work permit policy in place currently for those outside of the EU so at the very least we can just apply that to everyone from outside the UK. It's not like there's been no working permit policy in place at all before.
 
mrclt1994 said:
I know that hard work doesn't always translate into career advancement, I was saying broadly and when I say working harder I mean taking on responsibility, or contributing more in terms of making a difference and being pivotal to a firm's success etc. - essentially, being important to an organisation like you said, Smeelia.
Click to expand...
The problem is that being perceived as important is what really matters, not the actual importance. Being able to inform others of your success has essentially become an important life skill, and being able to convince others that you're important when you're really not is a practical alternative.

That and there's also the issue that many people simply don't have good opportunities to contribute. Our society doesn't tend to have any good systems to ensure that people's knowledge and abilities are actually put to good use. Marketing/PR is basically the single most important skill to "succeed" because, even if you have plenty to offer, you can't get into a position to contribute if you can't get in touch with the right people and say the right things to them.

mrclt1994 said:
I get why people wish to overlook the downside of mass immigration and allowance of unskilled workers to take up entry level jobs, because 'we're all human beings', but by us letting this to go on it does two things - it means there's less opportunities for our own countrymen and, it means the countries where migrants are coming from are not incentivised to do anything about bettering quality of life for their own people, because we'll pick up where they fail. Many countries but their own citizens before others, but it's only us who want to hold ourselves to a higher account than others, which I find odd. Other countries can impose immigration policies that mean their working classes aren't undercut, but as soon as we do it? No no, that's wrong.
Click to expand...
Lowering our standards because others don't live up to them is only harming ourselves. If we genuinely believe in basic respect for people then we can't exclude people just because of where they come from. Other countries may have terrible systems but the people living in those countries don't necessarily believe in them. Even those who do may simply have never had an opportunity to learn that other possibilities exist. The same is even true of our own country.

If we're only ever working to make things better for a select group of people, then we're just perpetuating the idea that that's all people will ever do. People are capable of choosing who they want to be and what they want to do but they often either fail to realise this or refuse to admit it. We tell ourselves that those people would take advantage of us if they had the chance, so we don't give them the chance. We take advantage of others because we tell ourselves that they would do the same. We say we have no choice because we're trying to justify a choice we've already made.

If we genuinely want to build a worthwhile society then at some point we'll have to stop looking at what other people are doing, stop making generalisations, stop emphasising the worst aspects of people and start honestly trying to make things better.
 
I know what you mean by perception, I was hoping I could say things without fully explaining what I would think is obvious. I am actually pushing my team leader at work to undergo some reputation management training and implement it for our team because we're the ones who keep things in order, and even though we do it successfully, staff see us as an annoyance because by maintaining standards, we have to chase and make sure they do what they're meant to. Yet, even though we are important because of this, there are teams who nominate themselves for awards and spread the word whenever they achieve something so I feel like we could do more to get recognised for the good we do. So believe me, I know about perceived importance.

It's not really lowering our standards if we are removing those that are a detriment to groups in our society. As for telling ourselves people would take advantage - well, I mean, I know most people don't burgle houses for a living, but I still lock my door and set the alarm before leaving my house (means I have to be there with my keys whenever a friend comes round but that's ok, I know it's safer). Banks know a lot of people make credit card payments on time, but still run credit checks and if someone's is bad, they refuse to give out credit cards (meaning some people can't get loans for potential business ideas or getting a new car, but it's good because they can be somewhat sure the person will pay things back). Same thing here - it will stop some people from coming here or mean they have to apply for a visa, but it goes some way to tackling abuse. Unless your line of thinking is that nobody put any safeguards in place for anything in life, and everyone just be free to do what they want.
 
Back
Top