UK Politics & Brexit Discussion

[The Artful Dodger]

It's not likely to be enough but Labour's campaign has been infinitely better than the tories so far. Even if I am biased, trying to be objective the Conservatives just don't seem to be able to promote a positive message at all. Is Lynton Crosby still directing them? 

[Fairy In Boots]

On 14/11/2019 at 18:15, Stan said:

I definitely am not and do not live in such a style. 

Stan you’re a socialist you believe in more tax and more spend and the government doing more for you. 

On 14/11/2019 at 18:55, Dr. Gonzo said:

Well you're to the left of right, therefore a socialist. And I'm assuming you've had champagne at least once in your life. Ergo, champagne socialist. 

Champagne socialist is just a term to describe the middle class labour voters who are at odds with the traditional working class heartlands. The type of people that read the guardian where as traditional labour read the mirror. Typically nowadays they’re 20-35 enjoy Costa and Starbucks and have fitbits. 

16 hours ago, Stan said:

Amazing how when it's Labour who want to spend, it's a magic money tree or 'where will he get the money from?!' but when it's the Tories, it's all fine to give £1bn just like that to the DUP or spunk millions and millions on Brexit to get absolutely fucking nowhere. 

Well his plan to nationalise BT has been quoted at 100 billion, and his magic money tree will initially be lending but then when the taps turn off it will be funded by cuts to our education system, health system, defence, science programs etc as we probably have another ten years of Tory cuts to rebalance the mess Labour leave again. It will be the third time in 60 years if so hence the scrutiny. 

Lets say we get “free broadband” it’s not really free, we’ll have to pay more tax to cover it and then it’s state ran so it’s brutally inefficient and due to lack of competition because nationalisation creates a monopoly it will fall behind more innovative free markets so ultimately it’s going to cost us more. The upkeep alone will continue to grow year upon year and rival companies will be ruined and their jobs gone. 

Also look at China, China a communist country with heavy state ownership of everything, what’s their record like on the internet? 

I think at this point if you can’t see this for the lunacy, this is Venezuela style garbage it is, then you’re just so bias you can’t make sense of it all. 

7 hours ago, DNA said:

Labour's proposal for free higher education for adults is a real game changer for me wanting to do a Masters next year, hopefully not an empty promise.

It’s not free though is it, it’s a cost to me you everyone we’ll all pay for it. And actually because uni has become so expensive it’s starting to churn out better quality now because those on a 3 year doss and a leisure and tourism degree have been priced out the market. 

Socialism’s fundamental flaw again and again. If half you’re class don’t take it seriously and there’s no pressure as it’s cost you nothing are you going to really excel? 

The levelling of the playing field creates stagnant monopolies which ultimately drags standards down not up. 

Great example is football (which he’s also look at nationalising )

Liverpool and Man City are the top sides, if we were to take half their squad and swap them with the players in the bottom half clubs, to ensure that the bottom clubs can keep up? If we kept reigning them iN would they then go on to dominate Europe? No we would fall behind Spain & Germany. 

Instead other clubs are forced to innovate and improve to catch them. 

Frankly given the last hundred years have been littered with countless examples of socialism failing and ultimately costing millions of lives you would think this nonsense was dead, I’m not impressed that your votes are so easily bought 

Edited November 16, 2019 by Fairy In Boots

[RandoEFC+]

I'm no expert and I'm not pretending to have read up on the numbers (what's the point? It's basically impossible to find impartial analysis in this country, especially during an election campaign) but I will poke my head above the parapet enough to point out that the current government's own analysis apparently showed that it would be cheaper for broadband provision to be run by the state than to continue as it is now.

I just so can't be arsed reading people's takes on these things now. Sections of the media are likening nationalisation to communism now. I didn't do politics at school or university but even I know what communism is and what it isn't. Perhaps certain members of the media aren't so lucky.

As to the estimated cost, Labour say £20m, Conservatives say £80m, BT say £60m and you're saying £100m. I would bet then that the true figure is probably around £40m as then everyone has lied or exaggerated or underestimated sufficiently in their chosen direction. Can't trust any of it though, people just make numbers up willy-nilly these days to suit their agenda and barely anyone in this country with a loud enough voice and far enough reach is anywhere near impartial enough to provide real information.

[Stan]

32 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

I think at this point if you can’t see this for the lunacy, this is Venezuela style garbage it is, then you’re just so bias you can’t make sense of it all.

I genuinely wouldn't mind being taxed a little more if it meant NHS services, police services and educational and transport services improved. I'd rather that than further cuts to those essential services. Look at the cuts to NHS and figures for waiting times in A&E at hospitals. Look at cuts to police forces and increased crime rates as a result. Then you have Tory promises trying to recover from such cuts and glittering it up as if they're doing a good thing putting more police and nurses and hospitals out there. But if you take what Hancock said the other day - he said 20,000 'more' officers in the streets. In actual fact that doesn't even cover the amount police numbers were reduced by. 

It's ironic you mention bias though because when it comes to politics isn't that what majority of us are? I despise Boris, Tories and the current government. You despite Corbyn, Labour and a potential of a Labour government in future. We're bound to be bias in this regard. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Stan you’re a socialist you believe in more tax and more spend and the government doing more for you. 

Champagne socialist is just a term to describe the middle class labour voters who are at odds with the traditional working class heartlands. The type of people that read the guardian where as traditional labour read the mirror. Typically nowadays they’re 20-35 enjoy Costa and Starbucks and have fitbits. 

Well his plan to nationalise BT has been quoted at 100 billion, and his magic money tree will initially be lending but then when the taps turn off it will be funded by cuts to our education system, health system, defence, science programs etc as we probably have another ten years of Tory cuts to rebalance the mess Labour leave again. It will be the third time in 60 years if so hence the scrutiny. 

Lets say we get “free broadband” it’s not really free, we’ll have to pay more tax to cover it and then it’s state ran so it’s brutally inefficient and due to lack of competition because nationalisation creates a monopoly it will fall behind more innovative free markets so ultimately it’s going to cost us more. The upkeep alone will continue to grow year upon year and rival companies will be ruined and their jobs gone. 

Also look at China, China a communist country with heavy state ownership of everything, what’s their record like on the internet? 

I think at this point if you can’t see this for the lunacy, this is Venezuela style garbage it is, then you’re just so bias you can’t make sense of it all. 

It’s not free though is it, it’s a cost to me you everyone we’ll all pay for it. And actually because uni has become so expensive it’s starting to churn out better quality now because those on a 3 year doss and a leisure and tourism degree have been priced out the market. 

Socialism’s fundamental flaw again and again. If half you’re class don’t take it seriously and there’s no pressure as it’s cost you nothing are you going to really excel? 

The levelling of the playing field creates stagnant monopolies which ultimately drags standards down not up. 

Great example is football (which he’s also look at nationalising )

Liverpool and Man City are the top sides, if we were to take half their squad and swap them with the players in the bottom half clubs, to ensure that the bottom clubs can keep up? If we kept reigning them iN would they then go on to dominate Europe? No we would fall behind Spain & Germany. 

Instead other clubs are forced to innovate and improve to catch them. 

Frankly given the last hundred years have been littered with countless examples of socialism failing and ultimately costing millions of lives you would think this nonsense was dead, I’m not impressed that your votes are so easily bought 

I know what a champagne socialist is but you might want to look up the definition of socialism. Fucking hell lol

[Dr. Gonzo]

Regarding the whole broadband thing - how exactly would it work? I assume the government would assume control of Openreach - which is currently owned all by BT right now.

It’s a good idea in theory - but what’s the impact on the people who work for the businesses that’ll obviously be impacted? Granted, these businesses themselves are really not that innovative and is already reliant on government subsidies to be a viable industry. But I imagine a lot of people would lose their jobs as a result, which is pretty shit for them.

Edited November 16, 2019 by Dr. Gonzo

[SirBalon]

4 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I know what a champagne socialist is but you might want to look up the definition of socialism. Fucking hell lol

There's actually no such thing a a "Champagne Socialist" as it is a typical cliché used by those that opposoe any form of socialism. Why a middle class person (or above) can't support socialism is beyond me... There have been plenty of wealthy people in the past that have been major philanthropists and more. We are in a new era and very diversified which means that an understanding and a consensus has to be applied. I don't believe in each individual being left to their own devices, because not all of us have been lucky in life and we require support which is of benefit to all of us.

[Guest]

Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't socialism worked well in Scandinavian countries? I knew a Finnish girl once and she told me Finnish people and people in other Scandinavian countries generally like their government because they provide for them. I'm pretty certain socialism has worked there? 

[LFCMike]

 

[SirBalon]

2 hours ago, LFCMike said:

 

This is one of the main reasons why Brexit shouldn't happen. It's now been proven without any shadow of a doubt (even ignoring the white paper which is an official document) that we've always had control, we've always had total 100% sovereignty and no more proof is required other than witnessing our parliament over the past year or so including our supreme court.

Brexit only benefits the establishment mand the very wealthy... Brexit caps our human and workers rights including leaving our social benefits out for tender without any say in the matter.

[SirBalon]

 

[Inverted]

The idea that Britain is such an economically attractive trade partner and site of investment, but also that the taps can somehow be "turned off" in terms of foreign lending - at a time of historically low interest rates, when capital across the world is begging for lending opportunities - is absolutely amazing self-deception. 

[RandoEFC+]

Strong enough economy to leave the EU with no trade deals in place but also fragile enough that it's "dangerous" and "catastrophic" to spend more money providing free services to the people that live within it. Have I got that about right?

[Dr. Gonzo]

3 hours ago, Inverted said:

The idea that Britain is such an economically attractive trade partner and site of investment, but also that the taps can somehow be "turned off" in terms of foreign lending - at a time of historically low interest rates, when capital across the world is begging for lending opportunities - is absolutely amazing self-deception. 

It’s from the group of people that first told us there wouldn’t be no deal and that we’d get a good deal from Europe, then they saw what kind of deal we’d be getting... then convinced themselves no deal was in our best interests. Then after that looked like it wasn’t a possibility, they convinced themselves “it’s fine, we just need any Brexit.” Self-deception is their specialty 

[Stan]

 

[RandoEFC+]

Feels more and more like this election is stumbling towards a Conservative majority.

The Lib Dems are ironically becoming the party that ensure Brexit does in fact happen, by shouting and screaming that Labour are a pro-Leave party. Absolute nonsense. Labour are offering the only credible and democratic option for preventing Brexit which is negotiating a deal and holding a second referendum. If the country still votes to Leave then, even as a Remainer, you can't justify staying in the EU. If the country votes to Remain in that instance then Labour are the party that have prevented Brexit. The Lib Dems have absolutely zero chance of a majority so if they really believe in stopping Brexit they should be supporting Labour. This election isn't about Brexit for the Lib Dems, it's about the Lib Dems. Swinson is trotting out that she won't use Lib Dem votes to put Corbyn in number ten but that means she won't use the Lib Dem votes to stop Brexit so can't deliver on her one key campaign promise.

Labour aren't innocent either. By deluding themselves that they could win an outright majority rather than reaching out to the other parties, they too are ensuring that Brexit will happen.

Onto the media. It's astounding that if you type "Russian interference report Brexit" into Google, you'll see articles from the Guardian who are so pro-Corbyn that they'll get laughed off by anyone who isn't already a Labour supporter, and one article from the BBC from last week. It's nothing short of a disgrace that the national media in this country refuse to talk about what appears to be blatant corruption from Boris Johnson as an individual, linked to the Brexit vote. There are independent MPs and journalists all over Twitter warning us that there are serious, shocking revelations in this Russia report and that there's no reason for it not to have been put before parliament and the public. You can forget about Tory, Labour, Lib Dem, Leave, Remain. If this is the case, Johnson is covering up this report and withholding information that should be public in a way that we'd all have called absolutely shocking if Russia or North Korea had been reported to do the same just 5 years ago.

Now it's just become accepted even by the public that this whole thing is a game where nothing matters. There isn't even a pretence anymore, or an attempt to give a convincing reason why it's alright that this report hasn't been publicised. And why would there be? I expect The Sun and The Telegraph not to be probing into something that could damage the Conservative party but where's the scrutiny from the BBC? Sky News?

I've actually given up caring now. We as a country are going to get what we deserve. Five years of Boris Johnson, a known liar that appears to be, at best, compromised, and at worst, in the pocket of Vladimir Putin. Russia wanted Trump, they got him, and their interference in the US election has been successfully covered up for almost a full term of his presidency. Russia wanted Brexit, and they're going to get it, they're going to successfully destabilise the West by putting money in the back pocket of greedy politicians for a second time, and while the UK have put up a fight against it, it's a fight we're almost certain now to lose. This isn't up for debate. If I'm wrong, that report would have been published.

Unless a miracle happens and the Conservatives are prevented from reaching a majority then this country is headed to a dark place under Johnson's premiership.

[Inverted]

"The man, 65, was found slumped in his chair at 9.30am on Friday in Llanelli.

He was waiting for an appointment to discuss Jobseeker’s Allowance after being declared fit for work earlier this year."

 

We're heading for another 10 years of this, and it's going to get much much worse before it gets better. 

Think of all the horrors we've seen in the last decade - tens of thousands driven to their deaths like the man above, the persecution of black Britons and asylum seekers, the pervasive wastage and corruption, Grenfell, the spiralling homelessness and child poverty, stalling life expectancy, the absolute distintegration of public life and discourse.

They're going to seem like nothing in comparison to what this country will see if it can't bring itself to finally see what the Conservative party for what it is.

Edited November 18, 2019 by Inverted

[DeadLinesman]

Diabetes doesn’t mean you’re not fit to work. He could have collapsed for a million and one reasons. Whilst I’m massively against some of the shit the DWP have been putting people through (I work directly with these people so I know), this is just an absolute non story.

[Inverted]

5 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

Diabetes doesn’t mean you’re not fit to work. He could have collapsed for a million and one reasons. Whilst I’m massively against some of the shit the DWP have been putting people through (I work directly with these people so I know), this is just an absolute non story.

I think when a man drops dead in a jobcentre - after years of outrageous DWP work capability determinations being repeatedly thrown out by courts - you can assume that the guy probably wasn't really fit for work. 

If you're prone to dropping dead whilst sitting waiting for a morning appointment, I don't think you're fit to be out job-hunting, never mind working full-time. 

He could have collapsed for a million reasons, but being 65 years old and diabetic are two pretty big reasons I'd guess. 

Edited November 18, 2019 by Inverted

[DeadLinesman]

Just now, Inverted said:

I think when a man drops dead in a jobcentre - after years of outrageous DWP work capability determinations being repeatedly thrown out by courts - you can assume that the guy probably wasn't really fit for work. 

If you're prone to dropping dead whilst sitting waiting for a morning appointment, I don't think you're fit to be out job-hunting, never mind working full-time. 

My dad dropped dead of a heart attack at 46 with no prior illness. It happens. My best mate is type 1 diabetic who struggles with his insulin levels every day. He goes to work. 
 

You can’t say because someone drops dead that they’re not fit to work. Again, there are real stories of people that are severely disabled being asked to attend interviews or having PIP taken off them. This just isn’t one of them.

[Inverted]

14 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

My dad dropped dead of a heart attack at 46 with no prior illness. It happens. My best mate is type 1 diabetic who struggles with his insulin levels every day. He goes to work. 
 

You can’t say because someone drops dead that they’re not fit to work. Again, there are real stories of people that are severely disabled being asked to attend interviews or having PIP taken off them. This just isn’t one of them.

The way you talk about it, you make it sound like collapsing at random is the norm. It can happen at random, but most of the time it's related to a prior condition. 

And yes many diabetics are otherwise quite healthy. This man however was elderly, lives in an area with below-average life expectancy, and was described by witnesses as looking ill. Not to mention that him being in a jobcentre suggests he's extremely likely to be from a lower-income background, and so extremely likely to have compounding health conditions. 

Maybe it will come out in later news that the man was in peak physical condition besides the diabetes, and really did die at complete random. 

However, if you don't make an effort to exclude the obvious surrounding circumstances, and thousands of similar prior cases, it's pretty easy to make reasonable assumptions about the situation. 

If you make assumptions that all of the far less likely options are true, then yeah maybe it's a non-story. 

Edited November 18, 2019 by Inverted

[DeadLinesman]

You keep mentioning the word assumption, and that’s all this article is though. Again, I’ve got a member of the family who at the moment goes to the job centre. He’s not from a poor working background.

What this article has done has simply made you assume that this poor guy has died due to being forced to go to a job interview. Do we know what he died from? Do we know he was poor? Thousands don’t walk into a job centre and die, so there’s not thousands of prior cases either.

What I’m saying is that this is one of a million stories that is being used for political motives before any of the circumstances have been established.

Again, I’m not trying to be a heartless cunt, but I’m not going to be led by any kind of media narrative without being in full custody of the facts.

 

[Fairy In Boots]

On 16/11/2019 at 11:56, Stan said:

I genuinely wouldn't mind being taxed a little more if it meant NHS services, police services and educational and transport services improved. I'd rather that than further cuts to those essential services. Look at the cuts to NHS and figures for waiting times in A&E at hospitals. Look at cuts to police forces and increased crime rates as a result. Then you have Tory promises trying to recover from such cuts and glittering it up as if they're doing a good thing putting more police and nurses and hospitals out there. But if you take what Hancock said the other day - he said 20,000 'more' officers in the streets. In actual fact that doesn't even cover the amount police numbers were reduced by. 

It's ironic you mention bias though because when it comes to politics isn't that what majority of us are? I despise Boris, Tories and the current government. You despite Corbyn, Labour and a potential of a Labour government in future. We're bound to be bias in this regard. 

It’s far to simplistic to just say cuts  when talking about all these issues. Also they weren’t cuts as in £10bn this year 8bn next it was 10bn then 10bn the year after so funding wasn’t keeping up with inflation, we all do that each year, can you say your wage increase matches the cost of living? Our borrowing costs had sored as we lost our credit rating, you have to cut your cloth accordingly. 

Thats the big thing I hate with British politics as a whole, there’s this idea that money solves things. 

The problems we have are the results of several long standing issues within our society that have been as a result of several governments over multiple years from either side of the spectrum. 

NHS is fucked because of multiple factors,

too many managers - this is true of any civil service but in the NHS it’s on speed, it’s convoluted red tape neatly wrapped up in a cluster fuck that is political anthema to even suggest sorting it out as the moronic electorate bleat on as if you’ve just punched a disabled kid whenever you suggest taking an axe to it. 

shit buying and inefficient process . I know medical sales people, have been on several courses with them and one of the sectors I deal with is cap ex investments in the pharmaceutical production industry. They take the piss because frankly health services allow them to, wrong people in wrong positions, making silly decisions. Privatise the purchase of it and you would see greater efficiency. Although the of you subsidise this privitisation then private companies will take the piss like they do on trains etc. 

health tourism - it goes on it’s taking the piss it needs to stop

old population - they live longer and cling to life, ethunasia should be legal. If there’s no quality of life why prolong the agony? 

Increased birth deficiency- bluntly moms don’t breed till late 30’s it makes them higher risk for birth defects. Also in immigrant populations birth defects are high due to inbreeding. Just facts

fat population - to many chunks having knee ops because they buckle at 40, or on tablets because they can’t stop eating. Diabetes is rampant and as a society we’re pushing shite like “plus size models”. Frankly we’re becoming a nation of lazy fat cunts and it should stop. 

Furthermore on that mental illness is rampant to, there’s nothing better for you than physical activity to make you feel better and clear your mind. If you get up go to work, eat shit, read shit then get home and do the same how are you going to feel? Shit. 

Not an NHS issue but the only time I’d agree with throwing more money at the money pit would be if we didn’t throw it at it at all. I’d back a plan to build every school a playing field and increase children’s hours by 5 hours a week with an hour for physical activity every day up until ages 18. That would sort the fucking mess out. 

Its not just the NHS, you blame cuts to police but in reality it’s increased population and declining morals that has more of an effect. 

Knife crime in particular is a problem predominantly with young black males, people talk about toxic masculinity and for the most part it’s fat feminist twats that don’t have a fucking clue what it is, they just use it liberally and get all pissy when some bloke on the tube doesn’t want to crush his bollocks willingly. 

On our streets in urban areas with large ethnic populations predominantly black kids are stabbing one another. One problem is the toxic masculinity of Black society it’s the need to be hard or perceived as “hard” the breakdown of the family unit is huge in the black community, it’s a stereotype that black men don’t stick around as as you get more of a black middle class this stereotype falls down but coming from the area I did there’s no dads, if they were around they came and went. Boys strives to be men before they were and the early teens which are a man’s most formative years the absence of fathers or family units led to many creating gangs or sealing acceptance of older boys. Boy form a hierarchy based on violence in their teens, nowadays the stake have risen and they use knives. 

No amount of police will stop this, it requires a cultural change. I’ve robbed at knifepoint I’ve been attacked with a bat all in my teens, the two lads that did both were black off the estate and I’ve seen them both spend the majority of their 20’s locked away. 

Coupled with this council areas are being gentrified by champagne socialist hipster types and the sudden spike in land value is swaying greedy councils (in my case a feckless Labour one) to force these people out and into areas with a pre existing hierarchy, causing turf wars. 

These same hipsters and I’d bet half the cunts on this board have a huge problem with snorting the by product of the cocoa plant up they’re snouts at every given opportunity causing the problem to get worse as the market gets more lucrative for kids who idiolise gangsters and drug dealers as someone who has done well in life. 

Regarding Bias, I’m anti labour I’ve lived under Labour all my life and you’ve never met a greater  bunch of clowns.  I’m actually not anti corbyn as in I hate him, I don’t know the bloke. I think he’s inept and his policies are shit because they don’t actually work. But hate is a strong word, dislike them sure. 

This is why I’m for more independent wealth and greater responsibility for individuals themselves, we’re just wasting money until someone has the bollocks to call this shit out. 

On 16/11/2019 at 12:49, Dr. Gonzo said:

I know what a champagne socialist is but you might want to look up the definition of socialism. Fucking hell lol

No I know what socialism is, it’s That the means of production be owned by the community as a whole. In this case tax is the means of production and more tax equals more state dependency and less individual wealth. After all Labour are on about nationalising everything at the minute, even football. Just think when Corbyn forces Klopp to join Arsenal comrade. 

On 16/11/2019 at 16:57, Dr. Gonzo said:

Regarding the whole broadband thing - how exactly would it work? I assume the government would assume control of Openreach - which is currently owned all by BT right now.

It’s a good idea in theory - but what’s the impact on the people who work for the businesses that’ll obviously be impacted? Granted, these businesses themselves are really not that innovative and is already reliant on government subsidies to be a viable industry. But I imagine a lot of people would lose their jobs as a result, which is pretty shit for them.

Mate you of all people should know the folly of this, Iran have just turned theirs off have they not? 

Not to say that capitalism isn’t without its pitfalls, greed played a part in May’s horrendous decision to jump into bed with huawei over 5G. Disgusting decision but shows the danger we’re facing from China

On 16/11/2019 at 17:48, Gunnersauraus said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't socialism worked well in Scandinavian countries? I knew a Finnish girl once and she told me Finnish people and people in other Scandinavian countries generally like their government because they provide for them. I'm pretty certain socialism has worked there? 

No they’ve been walking back socialist policies for some time because they’re unsustainable. Sweden is fast becoming a mess and Norway the richest state also has large natural resources like North Sea gas and oil. 

On 16/11/2019 at 17:05, SirBalon said:

There's actually no such thing a a "Champagne Socialist" as it is a typical cliché used by those that opposoe any form of socialism. Why a middle class person (or above) can't support socialism is beyond me... There have been plenty of wealthy people in the past that have been major philanthropists and more. We are in a new era and very diversified which means that an understanding and a consensus has to be applied. I don't believe in each individual being left to their own devices, because not all of us have been lucky in life and we require support which is of benefit to all of us.

Read a dictionary it’s there. But I guess self assessment or deprication aren’t you’re strong point because you’re never wrong. You’re literally like my 4 year old daughter when she’s being entitled. Anyone that claims they know what those living on the breadline in this country needs while posting selfies of themselves “pondering Brexit on the neopolitan Riviera” yet claims there’s no such thing as a champagne socialist can’t be taken seriously. 

[SirBalon]

13 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Read a dictionary it’s there. But I guess self assessment or deprication aren’t you’re strong point because you’re never wrong. You’re literally like my 4 year old daughter when she’s being entitled. Anyone that claims they know what those living on the breadline in this country needs while posting selfies of themselves “pondering Brexit on the neopolitan Riviera” yet claims there’s no such thing as a champagne socialist can’t be taken seriously. 

I come from a working class background, my family were poor and I won't even go into the history of the situation in that sense because I don't have to prove anything in this respect. I do appreciate that there ARE people out there (certain people of 'class') that haven't the slightest inkling as to what suffering due to the lack of financial tools to offer any modum of hope for their family and the future of those loved ones... But not everyone that's done ok for themselves (like say you have yourself) or even better should be frivolously accused of being disconnected from the real world. I do my bit, and I want to do more each time because the fact is that I am in touch and I do understand these situations up to a certain extent.

You may feel you are able to delete me from compassion on a forum, more so on a football forum mate, but I can assure you that where it matters I count! That is what satisfies me, that's where my efforts go as well as to my own.

There is no such thing as a champagne socialist as there is only any such thing as a socialist and it's principled ideals.

Jut because people have created a term and the dictionary has acknowledged the existence of the term and label, it doesn't mean it is real and tangible.

[LFCMike]

Tell you what, seeing some of that Laura Kuenssberg's tweets are sickening. And people say the BBC is impartial...