Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Ekkie Thump said:
Righto, lets grant outcomes would have been the same, but a Saturday clearly makes it more convenient for folk to vote. Are you maybe arguing that inconvenience is a virtue in this instance since it places a cost on voting and only those that care enough should get to voice their opinion?
Click to expand...
Just spoke to my Serbian colleague and they voted on Sunday, he didn't like the idea as it ate into his weekend.

Holland vote on Thursdays, maybe Saturday wouldn't have delivered the crap we have now that are unable to form a coalition since march but I very much doubt it.
 
Stanley Road said:
Pauls not getting the point that when you literally have nothing you have nothing to lose, I get it.

You cant pluck a bald chicken
Click to expand...

I get the point, but on my travels I have seen far more poverty than one can see anywhere in the UK, so there is always something worse, or further to fall and although people might desperately vote for something that they hope will improve their lot, unless there is actually a possibility that that could be the case then why vote for it and that brings me back to the original point which is ignorance, whether it's their own fault or not and thus such a decision should never be put in the hands of people who do not have sufficient knowledge to make an informed decision.

At an election the voters can oust the party that was voted in within a few years but this is a decision which will determine the future of the country for decades to come.
 
Stanley Road said:
Just spoke to my Serbian colleague and they voted on Sunday, he didn't like the idea as it ate into his weekend.

Holland vote on Thursdays, maybe Saturday wouldn't have delivered the crap we have now that are unable to form a coalition since march but I very much doubt it.
Click to expand...

Vast majority of countries hold votes at the weekend.

I guess I can see the eating into the weekend argument, but you still don't have to vote if you don't want. It just makes it easier to prioritise since most folk have fewer responsibilities during the weekend. Also there's no payback for idiots like me who stay up all night waiting for my team to lose.

I guess I think we should be trying to make voting as hassle free and equitable as possible even if it has little or no effect on the end result. Weekends seem like an improvement in this regard.
 
Stanley Road said:
Your are suggesting, not for the first time, that all thickets voted Brexit
Click to expand...

No, I'd assume that some thick people just did what smarter people told them was a good idea, and some smart people let themselves down by getting sucked in by propaganda. By and large though, sure.
 
Stanley Road said:
Me too, have lived in Sierra Leone and Mexico City but still, if you have no home, no job, no money, what is there to lose?
Click to expand...

No British citizen living in Britain permanently has no home, job or money. Our social system is specifically designed to ensure that never happens. The only reason anyone even lives like that temporarily is in cases where the governments twisted new austerity measures have punished them with temporary freezes. The idea that you could even compare the worst off in Britain with people in Sierre Leone is fecking mental quite frankly.
 
Kentonio said:
Of course they're wrong, things can always be worse.
Click to expand...

It might not seem that way? Besides it's relative. If your primary source of food is a foodbank then yes it could get worse if that foodbank closes. The price of a value tin of beans could go up by 5p. These are the measures when you are living in poverty.

Kentonio said:
No British citizen living in Britain permanently has no home, job or money
Click to expand...

I've spent over 20 years coming into daily contact with people who have no home, no job, and no source of income. In short you are wrong.

This is part of the issue here -there's a lack of understanding of just how some people in this country barely live. If people can't grasp that then it's natural that there's a failure to comprehend why they might vote a certain way. The explanation seems to often be that it's because they're "thick"
 
Paul the Wolf said:
I get the point, but on my travels I have seen far more poverty than one can see anywhere in the UK, so there is always something worse, or further to fall and although people might desperately vote for something that they hope will improve their lot, unless there is actually a possibility that that could be the case then why vote for it and that brings me back to the original point which is ignorance, whether it's their own fault or not and thus such a decision should never be put in the hands of people who do not have sufficient knowledge to make an informed decision.

At an election the voters can oust the party that was voted in within a few years but this is a decision which will determine the future of the country for decades to come.
Click to expand...

I agree that the public should never have been asked to make a decision (all of the public whether informed or those who like to think that they are)

And poverty is relative - but I can tell you now that I have gone into houses and living conditions that Orwell would've recognised. Absolute squalor and filth.
 
Stanley Road said:
:lol:

New low. If you cant find 5 minutes between 7am and 10pm you don't deserve a vote
Click to expand...

At the time my wife was spending ridiculous amounts of hours due to some research she was doing. All trains were delayed but we do have decent transportation service which means she did eventually got on the train. We don't have have kids, I came from work early which means I was the one cooking (ie that's another half an hour spared) and the polling booth happened to be a spit away from her underground station. She also live about 45 minutes away from work. She ended up voting at 9pm. Modify or change any of those variables and she wouldn't have probably not voted at all.


So tell me why voting isn't shifted on weekends?
 
Barca84 said:
I agree that the public should never have been asked to make a decision (all of the public whether informed or those who like to think that they are)

And poverty is relative - but I can tell you now that I have gone into houses and living conditions that Orwell would've recognised. Absolute squalor and filth.
Click to expand...

Yes I meant all of the public as well.
Poverty is relative and such poverty shouldn't exist especially in so called first world countries but yes it does.
But some people in some African countries would think those poor people in the Uk were rich.
 
Stanley Road said:
Maybe the Yoof should have got off their fat lazy arses during the referendum, thats where remainers need to direct their contempt. Your own age group let you down.
Click to expand...

Stanley Road said:
Not enuff obviously or maybe they didn't vote the way you think.
Click to expand...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-leave-eu-talks-minority-jeremy-a7871541.html

Same youth vote that came out in record numbers for the GE apparently didn't both turning up for the referendum, despite having the strongest feelings towards it of any age group?

The youth voted in both. Unfortunately, there are around 35 million people in the 50+ age range, and these people vote in the largest numbers. The 18-25 age range includes on 16 million people.

Youth vote doesn't matter.
 
Kentonio said:
No British citizen living in Britain permanently has no home, job or money. Our social system is specifically designed to ensure that never happens. The only reason anyone even lives like that temporarily is in cases where the governments twisted new austerity measures have punished them with temporary freezes. The idea that you could even compare the worst off in Britain with people in Sierre Leone is fecking mental quite frankly.
Click to expand...
I haven't made a comparison its in your headq
 
Barca84 said:
It might not seem that way? Besides it's relative. If your primary source of food is a foodbank then yes it could get worse if that foodbank closes. The price of a value tin of beans could go up by 5p. These are the measures when you are living in poverty.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

Barca84 said:
I've spent over 20 years coming into daily contact with people who have no home, no job, and no source of income. In short you are wrong.

This is part of the issue here -there's a lack of understanding of just how some people in this country barely live. If people can't grasp that then it's natural that there's a failure to comprehend why they might vote a certain way. The explanation seems to often be that it's because they're "thick"
Click to expand...

Please explain how a British citizen living in Britain with no home or job is not qualified for any benefit payments. I know it can be a lot harder to claim welfare help especially if you don't have a fixed abode, but there are ways around that as you know perfectly well. I'm not saying no-one in Britain is in poverty, or suffering because I know very well that they are, but saying people can permanently be without home, job or source of income seems hyperbolic. The only realistic causes I can think of for that would be mental illness or serious addiction that made people incapable of seeking help or engaging with that help.

Then again, if you know of another major contributing factor I'd be interested to hear it. Obviously its a very complex issue and I'm not claiming to be an expert.
 
rcoobc said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-leave-eu-talks-minority-jeremy-a7871541.html

Same youth vote that came out in record numbers for the GE apparently didn't both turning up for the referendum, despite having the strongest feelings towards it of any age group?

The youth voted in both. Unfortunately, there are around 35 million people in the 50+ age range, and these people vote in the largest numbers. The 18-25 age range includes on 16 million people.

Youth vote doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

They turned out for that one because Corbyn promised them a load of bollocks. Some of those numpties thought he was even going to write off existing student debt! Didn't a recent survey show that they also thought he was going to help deliver a soft Brexit too? In other words they got mugged off.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
They turned out for that one because Corbyn promised them a load of bollocks. Some of those numpties thought he was even going to write off existing student debt! Didn't a recent survey show that they also thought he was going to help deliver a soft Brexit too? In other words they got mugged off.
Click to expand...
Shock horror, people voting for things they like the sound of.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
They turned out for that one because Corbyn promised them a load of bollocks. Some of those numpties thought he was even going to write off existing student debt! Didn't a recent survey show that they also thought he was going to help deliver a soft Brexit too? In other words they got mugged off.
Click to expand...
The link I posted shows exactly that. That the number one remainers voted Labour is because they thought it was the best chance of a soft brexit

Which makes sense

Little to do with bribes
 
rcoobc said:
The link I posted shows exactly that. That the number one remainers voted Labour is because they thought it was the best chance of a soft brexit

Which makes sense

Little to do with bribes
Click to expand...

Doesn't make sense anymore though. Corbyn backs hard Brexit. There is little deistinction between him and the Tories on it.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
Doesn't make sense anymore though. Corbyn backs hard Brexit. There is little deistinction between him and the Tories on it.
Click to expand...
Indeed. But a lot of the Labour party back soft Brexit, no Brexit, etc. My local candidate wanted a 2nd referendum.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Yes I meant all of the public as well.
Poverty is relative and such poverty shouldn't exist especially in so called first world countries but yes it does.
But some people in some African countries would think those poor people in the Uk were rich.
Click to expand...

They are in relation to some people in African countries. But they don't live there so this is not relevant.

Kentonio said:
Absolutely.

Please explain how a British citizen living in Britain with no home or job is not qualified for any benefit payments. I know it can be a lot harder to claim welfare help especially if you don't have a fixed abode, but there are ways around that as you know perfectly well. I'm not saying no-one in Britain is in poverty, or suffering because I know very well that they are, but saying people can permanently be without home, job or source of income seems hyperbolic. The only realistic causes I can think of for that would be mental illness or serious addiction that made people incapable of seeking help or engaging with that help.

Then again, if you know of another major contributing factor I'd be interested to hear it. Obviously its a very complex issue and I'm not claiming to be an expert.
Click to expand...

You'll have to take it from me that in almost 20 years of working in front line homeless services a day barely passed when we did not have a service user who was 1) Without a home and not eligible for further housing assiatnce from the state 2) Had never worked and was not capable of working 3) Was sanctioned and/or had failed to meet conditions of benefits payments and was therefore in receipt of no benefit. Without the assistance and advocacy that can be provided as part of engagement with services to challenge scenarios such as this it is a reality that many people exist in Britain under those exact conditions. There is a world out there populated by those who have truly been marginalised to the extreme edges of society that is difficult to comprehend - I know of a community of people who have taken to local woods and live in trenches surviving only on what they can scavenge for example.
 
Barca84 said:
They are in relation to some people in African countries. But they don't live there so this is not relevant.
Click to expand...

It is relevant in that they can fall a lot further, the Africans can't turn to their government for help but my point is that no-one in the UK should ever be in that situation, and if they are it is a failure of the government, how do these people then blame the EU for the government's failure , because the government have lied to them yet again and people believe them the same as other Brexit voters, the majority of which were not in this poverty -stricken situation
 
Barca84 said:
You'll have to take it from me that in almost 20 years of working in front line homeless services a day barely passed when we did not have a service user who was 1) Without a home and not eligible for further housing assiatnce from the state 2) Had never worked and was not capable of working 3) Was sanctioned and/or had failed to meet conditions of benefits payments and was therefore in receipt of no benefit. Without the assistance and advocacy that can be provided as part of engagement with services to challenge scenarios such as this it is a reality that many people exist in Britain under those exact conditions. There is a world out there populated by those who have truly been marginalised to the extreme edges of society that is difficult to comprehend - I know of a community of people who have taken to local woods and live in trenches surviving only on what they can scavenge for example.
Click to expand...

That sounds terrible. I always thought that in the whole of Western Europe a social net of 'last resort' exists where you get provided with all the things you need to survive (it exists where I'm living, we call it the 'subsistence minimum') with no questions asked other than «do you have no assets?» How you can even lose eligibility to housing assistance is beyond me. This is workfare gone horribly wrong.
 
Javi said:
That sounds terrible. I always thought that in the whole of Western Europe a social net of 'last resort' exists where you get provided with all the things you need to survive (it exists where I'm living, we call it the 'subsistence minimum') with no questions asked other than «do you have no assets?» How you can even lose eligibility to housing assistance is beyond me. This is workfare gone horribly wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid that in this country you can genuinely be left with nothing and people are. There are safety nets but people fall through them and often it's the most vulnerable who do.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
It is relevant in that they can fall a lot further, the Africans can't turn to their government for help but my point is that no-one in the UK should ever be in that situation, and if they are it is a failure of the government, how do these people then blame the EU for the government's failure , because the government have lied to them yet again and people believe them the same as other Brexit voters, the majority of which were not in this poverty -stricken situation
Click to expand...

No there are some people in this country who can't fall much further. That's my point.

I would say that many people simply see a system that does not appear to provide for them economically and never has done. They also perceive this system as providing for others. When you live in the old pit villages and towns where there has been no work for 4 or 5 decades, and no hope of any in the future, and every promise of a better future for the past 40 or 50 years has proven to be a false one then voting for change carries little risk. You should see some of the towns around here - they look post apocalyptic. And they are in a way. They've been abandoned after their use as the engine rooms of the industrial revolution came to an end. People die on average 7 years younger then others living just 200 miles away in the same country.
 
endless_wheelies said:
Weirdly Theresa May's manifesto was geared towards making older people pay their share and all the young voters shot it down.
Click to expand...

How exactly did that happen, care to elaborate please? How did the young people shoot it down, because they voted for Corbyn? Cause that's not the same.
 
MadMike said:
How exactly did that happen, care to elaborate please? How did the young people shoot it down, because they voted for Corbyn? Cause that's not the same.
Click to expand...
Theresa May tried to ditch the pensions triple lock, cut winter fuel payments and cut social care but the young hippies of the country had a whinge about it and voted for Jeremy Corbyn.

Going to be fun having it come out of all of our taxes instead, or watch the country go into even more ludicrous debt.
 
endless_wheelies said:
Theresa May tried to ditch the pensions triple lock, cut winter fuel payments and cut social care but the young hippies of the country had a whinge about it and voted for Jeremy Corbyn.

Going to be fun having it come out of all of our taxes instead, or watch the country go into even more ludicrous debt.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but I don't agree in the slightest.

The young voted for Corbyn for a number of reasons. The young were against Brexit and Theresa is not only pushing for one but for a hard one. Corbyn promised (quite ridiculously imo) to cut the student debt. Also Theresa had some disastrous stuff in her original manifesto that made her even more unpopular, like repealing the fox hunting ban etc. That's just scratching the surface.

My point being the young rejected Theresa. Not that particular policy. You don't get to pick and choose policies but the whole package. Rightly or wrongly the young chose Corbyn.

Finally, from manifestos to realisation there is a huge, huge bridge to cross. Politicians of all colours fail to deliver on the majority of their pre election promises. The majority of Tory votes come from pensioners, so I personally believe Theresa's claims about ending the pension triple lock as much as I believed Corbyn's claims about nationalising everything and writing off student debt while spending 100s of billions in infrastructure. Which is not a lot.
 
MadMike said:
I'm sorry but I don't agree in the slightest.

The young voted for Corbyn for a number of reasons. The young were against Brexit and Theresa is not only pushing for one but for a hard one. Corbyn promised (quite ridiculously imo) to cut the student debt. Also Theresa had some disastrous stuff in her original manifesto that made her even more unpopular, like repealing the fox hunting ban etc. That's just scratching the surface.

My point being the young rejected Theresa. Not that particular policy. You don't get to pick and choose policies but the whole package. Rightly or wrongly the young chose Corbyn.

Finally, from manifestos to realisation there is a huge, huge bridge to cross. Politicians of all colours fail to deliver on the majority of their pre election promises. The majority of Tory votes come from pensioners, so I personally believe Theresa's claims about ending the pension triple lock as much as I believed Corbyn's claims about nationalising everything and writing off student debt while spending 100s of billions in infrastructure. Which is not a lot.
Click to expand...
My point is that at least she was somewhat on their side in trying to somehow fund our aging population through the pockets of the aging themselves, Jeremy Corbyn on the other hand was vociferously against increasing the burden on them in any way whatsoever.

The idea that Corbyn would pursue a soft Brexit was pure fantasy, he's never once intimated that that is something he would pursue, the same with writing off existing student debt.
 
May stated that a vote for her was a mandate for Brexit. Hence many anti brexit people would have voted for their most likely non-Tory candidate to win their local seat, in most cases Labour.

Corbyn didn't have a strong stance on Brexit before the GE, so people weren't necessarily voting for him, but against May.
 
Barca84 said:
No there are some people in this country who can't fall much further. That's my point.

I would say that many people simply see a system that does not appear to provide for them economically and never has done. They also perceive this system as providing for others. When you live in the old pit villages and towns where there has been no work for 4 or 5 decades, and no hope of any in the future, and every promise of a better future for the past 40 or 50 years has proven to be a false one then voting for change carries little risk. You should see some of the towns around here - they look post apocalyptic. And they are in a way. They've been abandoned after their use as the engine rooms of the industrial revolution came to an end. People die on average 7 years younger then others living just 200 miles away in the same country.
Click to expand...
I get the feeling that some people would prefer to ignore what you just described. I agree with almost everything you post on this subject and will never understand why some people just don't get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.