International News Donald Trump 🍊🇺🇸

tonyw said:
Just to point out - the US doesn't actually spend less on welfare and health than the UK does. It actually spends about the same amount per member of the population on 'social protection' programs, and more on healthcare - that's the US government; when you factor in individual contributions, the US spends around 2.2 - 2.4 times as much per person on healthcare than Britain does......which shows how staggeringly expensive and inefficient the system is.

The big discrepancy (to make up for the increased defense spending) is that the US federal government spends vastly less per person on education and transportation.
Which is why almost everyone uses their cars here, schools are comparatively rubbish and students routinely get out of uni with six figure debts.
Click to expand...
I guess the US healthcare spend is also not distributed in a very “per person” way, with some experiencing massive spend and others, almost none.
 
Wandering Yellow said:
I didn't do "work experience" in Parliament, but I did study history and politics. I don't believe this gives me any authority at all over anyone on this board. I just point out when people use terms incorrectly sometimes, sorry if that makes me an arrogant b*stard. This board is certainly left-wing by political theory standards, as am I. There is absolutely no chance any political theorist would not class the things QR or the Egg say as firmly to the left.

FWIW I worked on Whitehall and it wasn't for me. I cannot fathom why you don't mute me as my presence on here bothers you so greatly.

Edit: The only poster who regularly posts on here with views I would consider traditionally right-wing (or at least small c conservative) is Essex and he takes pelters on here. Talk about thick skin he must have a rhino hide.
Click to expand...

Prefer Socio-conservative-taliban. :)

Other than that small c conservative is about right, although a more centrist and far longer term approach to things like funding of public services by either party would suit me.

Likewise I`m not against Nationalisation of services that are essential to the UK.

I would also put far, far more time and emphasis on food security and teaching children the basics of cooking with UK seasonal products.

Strong, points based immigration and selecting those we want and all would be happy at EY Towers.

And the abolition of inheritance tax. :)
 
  • React
Reactions: m
Essexyellows said:
Prefer Socio-conservative-taliban. :)

Other than that small c conservative is about right, although a more centrist and far longer term approach to things like funding of public services by either party would suit me.

Likewise I`m not against Nationalisation of services that are essential to the UK.

I would also put far, far more time and emphasis on food security and teaching children the basics of cooking with UK seasonal products.

Strong, points based immigration and selecting those we want and all would be happy at EY Towers.

And the abolition of inheritance tax. :)
Click to expand...
I think that's the point the more sensible posters were trying to make - it's too easy to throw out labels and trade insults, but on many issues there isn't much that divides us here (see funding of public services and nationalisation) but on those that do....that's another matter (see immigration and inheritance tax).

As for this board being 'left-wing by political theory standards' I think that's very debatable and to be honest, almost entirely based on perception, which as we know, isn't actually evidence.
 
  • React
Reactions: m
The Taliban align pretty much with fascist thinking, so I am not sure expounding their ideas and approach to running a country as something to emulate is really a good thing, Unless of course you're comfortable with that.
 
Essexyellows said:
Prefer Socio-conservative-taliban. :)

Other than that small c conservative is about right, although a more centrist and far longer term approach to things like funding of public services by either party would suit me.

Likewise I`m not against Nationalisation of services that are essential to the UK.

I would also put far, far more time and emphasis on food security and teaching children the basics of cooking with UK seasonal products.

Strong, points based immigration and selecting those we want and all would be happy at EY Towers.

And the abolition of inheritance tax. :)
Click to expand...
I think immigration has become a big "divider" between left and right in the UK, when really it's just common sense that the level of immigration is unsustainable and the checks are nowhere near robust enough (proven so many times). How many left-wing people actually believe the immigration system isn't broken, I'd wager you'd have fringe-maniacs like Owen Jones giving it the "bridges not borders" nonsense, but most on the more centrist side of the Labour party probably want change.

In my view, neither party is capable of changing it. And even if there was the desire, it would be shot down for being too extreme (Patel/Braverman style) or the civil service and lawyers would get involved.

I'm probably much to the left of you on a lot of issues. But I have respect for old-school small c conservatives, who must be totally politically homeless right now.
 
Wandering Yellow said:
I think immigration has become a big "divider" between left and right in the UK, when really it's just common sense that the level of immigration is unsustainable and the checks are nowhere near robust enough (proven so many times). How many left-wing people actually believe the immigration system isn't broken, I'd wager you'd have fringe-maniacs like Owen Jones giving it the "bridges not borders" nonsense, but most on the more centrist side of the Labour party probably want change.

In my view, neither party is capable of changing it. And even if there was the desire, it would be shot down for being too extreme (Patel/Braverman style) or the civil service and lawyers would get involved.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I would necessarily put myself on the left, but what angers me about both what the current government has done - and what it's supporters, especially including the press have allowed them to do - is the absurd level of 'Look - Squirrel!' and general hypocrisy in their policy making.

The immigration system is absolutely broken - but every part of the government-driven dialog is focused on crazy, overblown ways to stop small boat migration. Of whom there were 29,437 in 2023.

Meanwhile, overall 1.18 million people migrated to the UK in 2023, with a net of 672,000.

Before this current government came to power, that number had never even been above 300,000 since the end of WW2. Despite the free movement of EU citizens that seemed to be the driving force behind Brexit.

In other words, the government puts in place more and more insane, draconian measures to make life harder for the most desperate 2.5% whilst simultaneously opening the doors wider than they ever have been......because their corporate paymasters still need cheap labour, and otherwise we'd actually have to train enough doctors and nurses to run the health service.

I've said it before, but anyone who says that immigration is one of the key factors influencing them, and then goes ahead and votes Conservative, is a gullible moron of the highest order.

 
tonyw said:
I'm not sure I would necessarily put myself on the left, but what angers me about both what the current government has done - and what it's supporters, especially including the press have allowed them to do - is the absurd level of 'Look - Squirrel!' and general hypocrisy in their policy making.

The immigration system is absolutely broken - but every part of the government-driven dialog is focused on crazy, overblown ways to stop small boat migration. Of whom there were 29,437 in 2023.

Meanwhile, overall 1.18 million people migrated to the UK in 2023, with a net of 672,000.

Before this current government came to power, that number had never even been above 300,000 since the end of WW2. Despite the free movement of EU citizens that seemed to be the driving force behind Brexit.

In other words, the government puts in place more and more insane, draconian measures to make life harder for the most desperate 2.5% whilst simultaneously opening the doors wider than they ever have been......because their corporate paymasters still need cheap labour, and otherwise we'd actually have to train enough doctors and nurses to run the health service.

I've said it before, but anyone who says that immigration is one of the key factors influencing them, and then goes ahead and votes Conservative, is a gullible moron of the highest order.
Click to expand...
Isn't the key difference though that those 1.18 million are entering the country legally, while those 29.437 aren't? While 1.18 million is far too many, at least they got here through through legal means.

I don't think any party represents the publics view on immigration, despite it being one of the few things the public are at least fairly aligned on.
 
MustardYellow said:
Isn't the key difference though that those 1.18 million are entering the country legally, while those 29.437 aren't? While 1.18 million is far too many, at least they got here through through legal means.

I don't think any party represents the publics view on immigration, despite it being one of the few things the public are at least fairly aligned on.
Click to expand...
What is the public's view on immigration?
 
  • React
Reactions: m
MustardYellow said:
migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk

UK Public Opinion toward Immigration: Overall Attitudes and Level of Concern - Migration Observatory

This briefing provides an overview of attitudes toward immigration in Britain.
migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk

According to that survey 52% said immigration should be reduced, while only 14% said it should increase.

52% all believing the same thing is about as good as unanimous as it gets these days :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Taken from the link...

1707991922388.png

52% want immigration reduced, but only 33% think it is a bad thing? So some people think immigration is a good thing but want it reduced anyway? How odd...
 
SteMerritt said:
Taken from the link...

View attachment 17821

52% want immigration reduced, but only 33% think it is a bad thing? So some people think immigration is a good thing but want it reduced anyway? How odd...
Click to expand...
Could it not be that some of the 'don't knows' contribute to the thinking it's good?

To be fair, I don't think it's a very good follow-up question. You can think immigration as a concept is good, while simultaneously thinking too much of it is happening or thinking it's good up to a level, neither line of thinking the question allows for (if that makes sense?).
 
I guess it is possible to think that both immigration is on balance a good thing, but that current immigration levels are too high :unsure:

I would be interested to know what the reasoning is of those who think it needs to be reduced a lot. I wonder if the 29,437 are foremost in their rationale?

Obviously, impossible to say but given the furore and press interest in them, it would not surprise me at all if the 2.5% of all immigrants that they represent* is having a hugely disproportionate influence on their thought process.

*working on Tony's figures up the thread
 
Sheik djibouti said:
I guess it is possible to think that both immigration is on balance a good thing, but that current immigration levels are too high :unsure:

I would be interested to know what the reasoning is of those who think it needs to be reduced a lot. I wonder if the 29,437 are foremost in their rationale?

Obviously, impossible to say but given the furore and press interest in them, it would not surprise me at all if the 2.5% of all immigrants that they represent* is having a hugely disproportionate influence on their thought process.

*working on Tony's figures up the thread
Click to expand...
I'd say I fall into that category. Properly managed immigration can of course be a benefit to the country. It's pretty obvious though that it currently isn't being properly managed, and it surely can't be sustainable adding (more than) the population equivalent of the entire county of Worcestershire to the country each year.

A more logical solution should be immigration policy based on the needs of the country. Tighten up and streamline the whole system. Incentivise immigration from those with the skill sets that we need. People always talk about a 'points based' system but I don't really think that's necessary.
 
MustardYellow said:
I'd say I fall into that category. Properly managed immigration can of course be a benefit to the country. It's pretty obvious though that it currently isn't being properly managed, and it surely can't be sustainable adding (more than) the population equivalent of the entire county of Worcestershire to the country each year.

A more logical solution should be immigration policy based on the needs of the country. Tighten up and streamline the whole system. Incentivise immigration from those with the skill sets that we need. People always talk about a 'points based' system but I don't really think that's necessary.
Click to expand...
So why then do the current government persist in spending so much time and energy on the 2.5% as opposed to actually devoting their time and energy to making sure the other 97.5% the settle here are doing so to the benefit of our society and economy?

You have to admit that the "column inches" and light and heat given to the 97.5% is, at best, minimal.

Might it be because they have systematically defunded and dismantled the very public services that were there to do this over the last 14 years....and we've now ended up with a Border and Immigration service that is no longer fit for purpose, along with all the other public sector support services that sit behind them. Therefore fixing the real issues is not actually possible without huge investment in those services, an investment which they won't make, because . . . think of those sweet, sweet tax cuts!

Might it be that doing so in the name of "austerity" might not have been such a good idea after all? And might it have been a falsehood, often wheeled out by Governments from Thatcher onwards, that running a country was just like running a household budget, and that debt was just like having a credit card, and that this was a huge oversimplification of the way a country actually works. Were they hoping this oversimplification meant that the electorate wouldn't give it another thought and we could all just "leave it to the experts".

So in the end, it's just easier to continually prattle on about the 2.5% in the hope that everyone (including them) can just forget about the other 97.5%, because they will do the square root of f-all towards fixing that.

Ever feel like you've been cheated?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gary Baldi
The Donald Is Coming To Town
2 3
Replies
49
Views
11K
Gary Baldi
Gary Baldi
M
International News Trump NFTs
Replies
9
Views
2K
Wallop
W
Sarge
International News Trump impeached
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
8K
Gary Baldi
Gary Baldi
Back
Top Bottom