Politics Election 2019

[Wij]

So, apparently, Liz Truss would have got nowhere near the Prime Ministership without a D&I scheme:

Boris Johnson’s former race adviser says Truss would not be PM without diversity scheme

Samuel Kasumu says Liz Truss would not have been elected without scheme prioritising women and minority candidates

www.theguardian.com

So for me - that's kind of an admission that D&I schemes that push candidates forward based on sex or race aren't meritocracies - and can push utterly unsuitable candidates forward?

The PM, of all jobs in the country, needs to be the absolute best person for the job. But D&I is there to hit targets.

The argument that only if there are two identically capable and talented candidates for a role, one being a white male, one being a black woman, for example - the black woman gets pushed forward in that case - is bullshit. Because really - identically capable?

If you have to hit targets, and there is pressure to do so, and you're already promoting from within a pool that is under-represented - there's no way that argument holds.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have representation. Not at all. I'm saying that the current method may, in fact, be promoting turds to the top just to hit targets.

Discuss?

I read that as “without the targets they’d have picked a useless cunt of a white man instead of a useless cunt of a white woman. “

 

[Scouse]

I read that as “without the targets they’d have picked a useless cunt of a white man instead of a useless cunt of a white woman. “

Absolutely it could work out like that. But the principle still stands - it's supposed to be a meritocracy. And from your own experience of Liz Truss - she's thick as fuck.

It's not a job at McDonalds we're talking about (or I wouldn't even have brought it up).

 

[Gwadien]

This doesn't really make sense as Rishi was also a minority, I suppose you could use it to explain why they were the last 2...

But yeah, it's a bit weird how the Tories do this, since they're Tories, but I suppose the PM is just a puppet, if you look at the ERG though...

 

[Scouse]

This doesn't really make sense as Rishi was also a minority

I think you're missing the point. Rishi could well be there on merit.


*if you define merit as billionaire that is.

 

[Raven]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QbZuGBYjc8

 

[Gwadien]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QbZuGBYjc8

I thought he stopped doing this, unless he means it's now exclusive with Dave.

 

[Raven]

I thought he stopped doing this, unless he means it's now exclusive with Dave.

Yeah, pretty sure he did a whole "this is the end" or whatever video about a month ago.

 

[Wij]

The economic consequences of major tax cuts for the rich

Abstract . The last 50 years has seen a dramatic decline in taxes on the rich across the advanced democracies. There is still fervent debate in both politi

academic.oup.com

 

[Scouse]

The economic consequences of major tax cuts for the rich

Abstract . The last 50 years has seen a dramatic decline in taxes on the rich across the advanced democracies. There is still fervent debate in both politi

academic.oup.com

You fucking commie @Wij.

Where's @Bodhi when you need him?

 

[Wij]

Um. Ok.

Treasury refuses to publish UK economic forecast

The UK's independent forecaster has provided an updated outlook for the economy, the BBC understands.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Wij]

The economic consequences of major tax cuts for the rich

Abstract . The last 50 years has seen a dramatic decline in taxes on the rich across the advanced democracies. There is still fervent debate in both politi

academic.oup.com

View: https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1572218921347866624

 

[Raven]

View: https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1572218921347866624

This message brought to you by Smith and Wesson and United Health.

He isn't going to change dick in the next 2 years of office, he has had 2 already.

 

[Embattle]

What is great is that post came out the same day as Liz defends her plans on removing the cap banker bonuses.

 

[Raven]

What is great is that post came out the same day as Liz defends her plans on removing the cap banker bonuses.

Oh, I know, it's like one side of idiocy trying to get one up on the other side of idiocy.

 

[Scouse]

Twat encourages planet to adopt failed policy that's a proven failure.

Anyone who votes Tory in the next election is just following a religion.

 

[Raven]

2 more years until she is jettisoned. I am not sure if we can hold out that long.

 

[Scouse]

2 more years until she is jettisoned

I don't know - given the proclivities of the not-rich proportion of Tory voters for self-rape...

 

[Bodhi]

The economic consequences of major tax cuts for the rich

Abstract . The last 50 years has seen a dramatic decline in taxes on the rich across the advanced democracies. There is still fervent debate in both politi

academic.oup.com

See this is what makes me laugh about left wing economists - they've spent the last 20 years trying to debunk something which doesn't actually exist. Well, that and the fact they've predicted 10 of the last 3 recessions

There is No Such Thing as Trickle-Down Economics

No market advocate ever used this phrase. That's for a reason. It's not what we favor.

fee.org

 

[Ormorof]

See this is what makes me laugh about left wing economists - they've spent the last 20 years trying to debunk something which doesn't actually exist. Well, that and the fact they've predicted 10 of the last 3 recessions

There is No Such Thing as Trickle-Down Economics

No market advocate ever used this phrase. That's for a reason. It's not what we favor.

fee.org

They prefer to call it "supply-side economics", and it's still bullshit

 

[Wij]

See this is what makes me laugh about left wing economists - they've spent the last 20 years trying to debunk something which doesn't actually exist. Well, that and the fact they've predicted 10 of the last 3 recessions

There is No Such Thing as Trickle-Down Economics

No market advocate ever used this phrase. That's for a reason. It's not what we favor.

fee.org

Come on, that article is dogshit. It's just attacking a straw man version of what trickle-down means and saying that nobody believes it. Well they don't because that is not what is understood. What people understand by trickle-down is exactly what he says is true. Letting people (including the rich) keep their own profits (he uses other words, whatever) as far as possible will, through blah-blah, yadd-yadda, grow the economy, which helps everyone, necessarily. That's exactly how the trickle-down theory was characterised at the time when we were taught it, and yes that was the term used by those who weren't necessarily believers, not by those who advocated for such policies.

The problem is, research has shown it doesn't actually work like that. It has been tried and shown that it doesn't lead indirectly to better off poor people, or even grow the economy.

Arguing about the name or the mechanism doesn't change the fact and trying to characterise those who accept this as fringe theorists like Piketty isn't an argument.

 

[Raven]

Trickle down economics is just a different name for a few people getting stinking rich and the rest serving them. A bit like every single flavour of communism, socialism and capitalism that has ever been tried.

The rich still get richer, the poor still get poorer. It's almost as if those in power are in it for the power and wealth...

It's basically serfdom with a few luxuries.

 

[DaGaffer]

See this is what makes me laugh about left wing economists - they've spent the last 20 years trying to debunk something which doesn't actually exist. Well, that and the fact they've predicted 10 of the last 3 recessions

There is No Such Thing as Trickle-Down Economics

No market advocate ever used this phrase. That's for a reason. It's not what we favor.

fee.org

Oh just get tae fuck. The practical effect of "reducing taxes for everybody" as a means to create opportunity is trickle-down economics.

Just because the term was coined by politicians instead of Friedman-monetarists who espoused the concept doesn't make its failures any less true. This is for the very simple reason that the upshot of the whole concept is to make progressive taxation anathema, which by definition, makes the rich richer, while doing nothing to create "more opportunity" (because - greed) which is why social mobility in the most monetarist economies has gone backward and continues to do so. Don't defend the indefensible, tax cuts for the rich are the outcome of late stage capitalism and complete political and regulatory capture by the hyper-wealthy.

 

[Gwadien]

Remember when Corbyn said we should have a £10 minimum wage and he was called a communist?

Real Living Wage rises by record 10% to £10.90 an hour

A record increase in the voluntary pay scheme will benefit 400,000 workers.

www.bbc.co.uk

Hahaha

 

[Raven]

Remember when Corbyn said we should have a £10 minimum wage and he was called a communist?

Real Living Wage rises by record 10% to £10.90 an hour

A record increase in the voluntary pay scheme will benefit 400,000 workers.

www.bbc.co.uk

Hahaha

That's not minimum wage.

 

[Scouse]

It's a should have. Below that people can't really "live" - hence it called living wage.

 

[Scouse]

Tories talking shit again:

Jacob Rees-Mogg dismisses ‘hysteria’ over fracking as ban ends

Energy secretary tells MPs that quakes of 2.5 on Richter scale are routine natural phenomenon

www.theguardian.com

the head of Cuadrilla - the biggest 'fracking' company operating in the UK - came out the other day and said, regardless of regulations, they can't make fracking work in the UK, that it can't (not just won't) help with energy security.

The Tories don't say anything that isn't about appeasing voters. Then they simply do what they want.

Anyone who understands this and still votes Tory is culpable.

 

[Gwadien]

It's a should have. Below that people can't really "live" - hence it called living wage.

Exactly, it's laughable in the first place that we a minimum wage and a suggested 'this is how much money you need to live in the UK'.

 

[Raven]

It's a should have. Below that people can't really "live" - hence it called living wage.

mmm. but minimum wage is not the same thing as living wage, one is enforced, one is optional.

 

[Raven]

Exactly, it's laughable in the first place that we a minimum wage and a suggested 'this is how much money you need to live in the UK'.

Yes, but the 2 things are different. The minimum wage has nothing to do with the living wage. It even says so in the story posted.

 

[Scouse]

mmm. but minimum wage is not the same thing as living wage, one is enforced, one is optional.

Agree.

Minimum wage isn't really enforced though is it. It's enforced about as well as the working time directive is enforced - i.e. not really very much.

It should be illegal to have in-work benefits IMO. It's a tax subsidy to shareholders of unscrupulous firms that don't pay workers enough but still see fit to pay shareholders. Like Tesco.