|
|
BREXIT
Oct 3, 2019 7:32:23 GMT
via mobile
Post by Lobster on Oct 3, 2019 7:32:23 GMT
Three days ago, The Express ran a typically hyperbolic story headlined "Labour’s minimum wage plan could cost you YOUR job and send unemployment soaring.” "...LABOUR’S plan to increase the minimum wage to £10 per hour have been torn apart by critics, who raged it could cost millions of Britons their jobs and destroy the efforts get employment levels to record highs." Will the Express run a repeat for Sajid Javid’s “I’ll raise you 50p” plan? Will they hell. On the subject of the Tories’ copying Labour’s plan, I notice they’ve only committed to putting it in place in five years’ time if they win the next election. Yet, they are in power right now, they could raise the minimum wage today if they wanted to. Another bribe to keep power that they won’t honour, I’m sure. Has Javid confirmed that his £10.50 proposal is for hourly wage and not annual salary?  Also, his proposal is Living Wage, not minimum wage. I'm not sure what exactly the purpose of Living Wage is other than to tell businesses what it would be nice to pay people, but they're not legally obliged to. Why we have a minimum wage that's below what is deemed enough to live off is another question. |
|
|
|
Post by Firestick Frank on Oct 3, 2019 9:22:12 GMT
Same can be said for state pensions - one of the lowest in the developed world. Doesn’t stop them taking free TV licenses and winter fuel allowances off the pensioners though, nor does it stop them raising the retirement age.
|
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 3, 2019 16:54:19 GMT
via mobile
Post by Ian H Block on Oct 3, 2019 16:54:19 GMT
What has happened to Charlie Runkle’s post? It was a classic of its kind, up there with his ‘Gary Stevens is our next Manager’ garbage from last year.
|
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 4, 2019 12:07:04 GMT
via mobile
Post by South Wirral Blue on Oct 4, 2019 12:07:04 GMT
What has happened to Charlie Runkle’s post? It was a classic of its kind, up there with his ‘Gary Stevens is our next Manager’ garbage from last year. He was right in a way, you would think every Devachatter was as far left as can be if you went off what's offered on this thread. Mercifully it's not true. Anyway, elsewhere the government is apparently willing to seek a Brexit extension if there's no deal by 19 October. Didn't expect that news at this stage. I feared the 'no deal' threats would continue for a few weeks yet. |
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 4, 2019 15:56:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by Lobster on Oct 4, 2019 15:56:52 GMT
What has happened to Charlie Runkle’s post? It was a classic of its kind, up there with his ‘Gary Stevens is our next Manager’ garbage from last year. He was right in a way, you would think every Devachatter was as far left as can be if you went off what's offered on this thread. Mercifully it's not true. I didn't see it, but if people don't agree I don't know why they don't chime in on here rather than just complaining about people having similar view. You do, to be fair, and you had Derry Exile for a while with his "no, you're wrong" type posts and trying to make out that we're all the time, but if people don't speak up, what do they expect? Personally, I like debate and enjoy talking to people I don't agree with, so I'd welcome more right-wingers on this thread. I miss NFBF, in fact! |
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 7, 2019 12:27:08 GMT
Post by iandychesterfc on Oct 7, 2019 12:27:08 GMT
Some interesting theories here about Boris's behaviour. www.wired.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-model-google-news"For instance – the hypothesis goes – by saying he was the “model of restraint”, Johnson was attempting to divert attention from stories detailing his alleged affair with former model Jennifer Arcuri, which became less visible in search results for “Boris Johnson model." I've always thought he is extremely intelligent and something of a schemer. His quirky public persona masks his very ugly politics. There's an awful lot to say for being likable in Politics. As you say, not a lot of people are that interested in the actual detail and people rally behind a personality. I think it kind of started with Blair, obviously Cameron won a decent majority against Milliband who I think was good guy, had reasonable ideas but couldn't get beyond his oddities and voice tone. Theresa May inspired no-one and i'm still surprised she won the election given how awful her campaign was. Looking forward to seeing the outcome of this next election, when it finally comes. i imagine those on the left are not particularly relishing taking on Boris, whereas they'd have been delighted with Gove or Hunt. |
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 7, 2019 17:13:35 GMT
Post by Lobster on Oct 7, 2019 17:13:35 GMT
Some interesting theories here about Boris's behaviour. www.wired.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-model-google-news"For instance – the hypothesis goes – by saying he was the “model of restraint”, Johnson was attempting to divert attention from stories detailing his alleged affair with former model Jennifer Arcuri, which became less visible in search results for “Boris Johnson model." I've always thought he is extremely intelligent and something of a schemer. His quirky public persona masks his very ugly politics. There's an awful lot to say for being likable in Politics. As you say, not a lot of people are that interested in the actual detail and people rally behind a personality. I think it kind of started with Blair, obviously Cameron won a decent majority against Milliband who I think was good guy, had reasonable ideas but couldn't get beyond his oddities and voice tone. Theresa May inspired no-one and i'm still surprised she won the election given how awful her campaign was. Looking forward to seeing the outcome of this next election, when it finally comes. i imagine those on the left are not particularly relishing taking on Boris, whereas they'd have been delighted with Gove or Hunt. Yes, my biggest fear from day one of the whole Brexit mess was that Boris Johnson would end up in No. 10, and now that it's happened, I feel like everyone is so worn down, it's been met more with a groan of inevitability than any real anger. That article is fascinating though. I think the 'kipper' thing might be a bit far-fetched, but it's an intriguing idea that by rambling on about making models of buses out of wine boxes, he created one daft story that helped bury negative stories about models, buses (the infamous Brexit bus) and wine (the row with his partner about spilling red wine on the carpet). I thought it was odd a few weeks ago when he said he'd rather be "dead in a ditch" than delay Brexit. It was almost like he was trying to tee up his detractors to overstep the mark, and when the odd one does and says "well, go on then!" it gets viewed as making death threats, helping him and his rabble take the moral high ground. I do think he's getting advice on how to "play" the news. |
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 13, 2019 12:34:10 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Oct 13, 2019 12:34:10 GMT
Johnson is going to waste yet more public money on forcing the Queen to read what amounts to the Tory election manifesto at the State Opening of a Parliament that he intends to shut down just seven days later. He has no chance of getting his Queen’s Speech passed given his -66 minority.
The thinly-veiled mask of “lovable buffoon man of the people” is slipping to reveal just exactly what he is. He isn’t “Boris” or “BoJo” or anything else that makes him a cuddly character we can laugh at/with, he’s Johnson - a nasty Tory bastard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2019 14:25:51 GMT
Still can't see Labour getting a majority in g e. As much as you dislike bo Jo. I don't particularly like him myself but choice between him and can't make up my mind jeremy bo Jo wins hands down
|
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 14, 2019 17:31:22 GMT
Post by Lobster on Oct 14, 2019 17:31:22 GMT
So now Boris wants to stop people voting if they don't have photo ID.
Sounds a good way of weeding out the young, poor and vulnerable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
BREXIT
Oct 15, 2019 8:50:32 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 8:50:32 GMT
I have no problem with having to have Id to vote. I still have my Id card from 1946 if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. I personally would like to see a d.n.a. data base with everybody on it.
|
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 15, 2019 11:22:03 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Oct 15, 2019 11:22:03 GMT
So now Boris wants to stop people voting if they don't have photo ID. Sounds a good way of weeding out the young, poor and vulnerable. ... who are less likely to vote for his Party. Classic voter suppression and election rigging, it’s scandalous. |
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 15, 2019 11:23:05 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Oct 15, 2019 11:23:05 GMT
I have no problem with having to have Id to vote. I still have my Id card from 1946 if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. I personally would like to see a d.n.a. data base with everybody on it. Not everybody can afford holidays or to drive (or nights on the razz) so of course they can’t afford or see the need to own a passport or a driving license. |
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 15, 2019 19:47:49 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Oct 15, 2019 19:47:49 GMT
So Johnson appears to have secured a Brexit deal.
Unfortunately, it puts a border down the Irish Sea, and even Theresa May said ‘no Prime Minister could ever accept’ that.
It’s also a deal that Johnson would have voted against before he became leader.
Fireworks ahoy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
BREXIT
Oct 15, 2019 20:31:49 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 20:31:49 GMT
I dont have a passport or driving license I do have a bus pass and numerous cards with my photo on from when I was working. Safety cards training cards and the like I think a utility bill would do, as long as it's recorded and used only once. At the moment the system is open to abuse
|
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 15, 2019 20:42:15 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Oct 15, 2019 20:42:15 GMT
At the moment the system is open to abuse In the 2017 GE, there were eight suspects and one conviction of voter fraud, of an electorate of 46,843,896. That's a policy designed to address an issue that affected 0.000002% of the vote. Or rather, it’s a policy to take away the opportunity for 11 million people to use their hard-fought right to vote in a democracy. Election rigging, pure and simple. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
BREXIT
Oct 15, 2019 20:44:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2019 20:44:27 GMT
black your turn now
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Oct 17, 2019 10:10:07 GMT
I have no problem with having to have Id to vote. I still have my Id card from 1946 if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. I personally would like to see a d.n.a. data base with everybody on it. That's a rather naive stance that belongs in 1946, frankly. If nothing else, the reminders of how irresponsible companies like Facebook and Google can be with our data should make us very concerned about our privacy. For me, the potential for sinister use of technology like facial recognition and DNA profiling by far outweigh any positive roles they could play.
Besides, it's undemocratic. If you legally live in the UK, you're entitled to vote. This is a cynical attempt to isolate a section of the electorate and has nothing to do with electoral fraud.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2019 10:36:30 GMT
So my opinion is irrelevant because I was born in 1946.i for one would feel much safer with facial recognition. I repeat if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear. No facial recognition would mean those who break the law can just do as they please because nobody is watching them. If you have done nothing wrong your face will not be on the data base
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Oct 17, 2019 10:47:02 GMT
So my opinion is irrelevant because I was born in 1946. i for one would feel much safer with facial recognition. I repeat if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear. No facial recognition would mean those who break the law can just do as they please because nobody is watching them. If you have done nothing wrong your face will not be on the data base That's not what I said. I meant "if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear" might have been a reasonable argument in a post-war, analogue technology era, but in 2019 it's dangerous one. I don't believe facial recognition technology is being developed with crime prevention in mind, but rather marketing and data harvesting. Why else are Facebook so obsessed with it? There are marketers who want to be able to detect faces as they walk down the street, find out who they are and tailor adverts to them on the bus shelters they walk past. The technology to do this is pretty much already there. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2019 11:23:18 GMT
I agree if it is not used correctly it could be abused. I just feel that if you are looking for a certain person in an area it would be a great help I don't know if you saw the recent series. The capture it was about this very subject it showed the good and bad it probably needs more work but definitely got its good points
|
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 17, 2019 12:03:46 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Oct 17, 2019 12:03:46 GMT
So my opinion is irrelevant because I was born in 1946.i for one would feel much safer with facial recognition. I repeat if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear. No facial recognition would mean those who break the law can just do as they please because nobody is watching them. If you have done nothing wrong your face will not be on the data base So those who don’t have the ability to get a driving license or a passport have, in your words, “done something wrong”? |
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 17, 2019 12:47:47 GMT
Post by Al on Oct 17, 2019 12:47:47 GMT
So my opinion is irrelevant because I was born in 1946.i for one would feel much safer with facial recognition. I repeat if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear. No facial recognition would mean those who break the law can just do as they please because nobody is watching them. If you have done nothing wrong your face will not be on the data baseIncorrect.
Everyone's face would need to be on the database in order for it to work correctly. Crime isn't just committed by already known about criminals,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
BREXIT
Oct 17, 2019 13:21:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2019 13:21:52 GMT
As I was saying the technology is beyond me but the series I mentioned gave a good insight. Into the system. When they were searching for a known suspect his photo was fed into the system. Face scanning then gave a reading either no match near match or deffinate. If this is actually available I can't see it being a problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
BREXIT
Oct 17, 2019 13:22:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2019 13:22:39 GMT
So my opinion is irrelevant because I was born in 1946.i for one would feel much safer with facial recognition. I repeat if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear. No facial recognition would mean those who break the law can just do as they please because nobody is watching them. If you have done nothing wrong your face will not be on the data base So those who don’t have the ability to get a driving license or a passport have, in your words, “done something wrong”? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
BREXIT
Oct 17, 2019 13:23:24 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2019 13:23:24 GMT
Where on earth do I say that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
BREXIT
Oct 17, 2019 14:59:35 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2019 14:59:35 GMT
Sychden blue you have not answered my question. As a moderator I would have thought you would be big enough to apologise for miss quoting me
|
|
|
|
BREXIT
Oct 18, 2019 5:54:57 GMT
via mobile
Post by Firestick Frank on Oct 18, 2019 5:54:57 GMT
I have a full-time job in the NHS that this government and Brexit will destroy, and a young family with three children who face a bleak future unless real change is made - sorry I wasn’t around to answer a post on an Internet forum sooner.
To answer your question, you said if people have nothing to hide and have done nothing wrong then they shouldn’t have a problem with photo ID. The issue, though, is the poor (who you would hope would not vote against their own interests) can’t afford passports and driving licenses - you could argue they can’t afford a car or holidays so feel no need to have those forms of ID. Those who can afford to get a passport but don’t have one, would have to pay 75 quid just to vote. Madness.
That’s 11 million people ruled out of their right to a vote because ONE person was convicted for voter impersonation at the last GE.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
BREXIT
Oct 18, 2019 6:38:46 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2019 6:38:46 GMT
Do you hand on heart believe only one person tried to cheat. I don't believe everything I read but everybody had a chance to have an I. D card for a couple of quid but it was voted down if you work in n h s you no doubt wear a lanyard with an I d attached issued at no cost to you. This is common practice even in construction
|
|
|
|
Post by midfieldgeneral on Oct 18, 2019 7:04:08 GMT
Frankly, any Labour MP tempted to vote for Johnsons crap deal should lose the Labour whip and face automatic deselection.
|
|
