‘people were lied to, didn’t know what they were voting for’ - factual
‘old, racist’- subjective/generalisations
The only one of those that’s a demographic is ‘old’
3 Likes
So how does this differ from the analogy I presented. The demonstrable fact is that 52% voted to leave. So, should I call your opinion incorrect or bullshit. I wouldn’t do either because it’s your opinion and facts can be used selectively, to suit a point.
Look, I am not trying to be a troll - waiting for Mascot to pipe up and make a joke about, people starting points with “I’m not a racist, but” - I just think that both sides are guilty of ignorance, and dismissing other peoples opinions as stupid. Maybe if people listened and actually considered views they did not agree with, the UK may not have voted to leave the EU, the USA may not of elected Trump - possibly re-electing him?
As you imply, both are demonstrable facts.
If someone presents a view on something objective which is in denial of the facts, and you cannot convince them that they are wrong, what else is there to do but call them out on their ignorance?
Hypothetically, if someone held the opinion that England won the 2022 World Cup, and no matter how many times you showed them Argentina lifting the trophy they wouldn’t change their mind, what would you do?
2 Likes
My god, talk about selective responding. I am still awaiting response to many of my other posts.
No one knew what they were voting for. What people failed to understand and only became clear with hindsight is that Leave could only speculate what could potentially change. It still had to be voted on through Government and accepted by the EU.
Where was the emergency budget, the increase in unemployment, the crash in housing? Again are these lies or speculation?
Old/racist are subjective generalisations, I agree. So, why are they used by some remainers for a reason as to why the vote went the way it did?
Thanks for the graph. So, taking the oldest age range, 40% voted to remain, down 8% on the overall vote. So, why the rhetoric of the old are to blame, I don’t see a break down of racist voters.
I completely agree! Yet, people are happy to label people who voted leave as ignorant and at the same time ignore the facts.
Anyhow, we have gone off on a bit of a tangent, where we will have to beg to differ. If we are to rewind to where the debate started, if someone considers a term as racist or offensive, it is their opinion, it is subjective. No one can give offence, offence can only be taken. I don’t think the term is racist, that is my opinion. However, to completely dismiss their subjective opinion as wrong, is unfair. Side stepping their questions by not answering directly is unfair.
The facts show that the term is commonly used against white people. General opinion is that the term is an insult, so why is it so hard to understand that someone may consider it racist?
1 Like
But again it was speculation. The remain/leave wasn’t party lead and so harder to deliver.
Labour said they wouldn’t put up taxes, increase NI but they did. They speculated on what they would do without knowing what they could do. Are these lies? I don’t consider them to be, because until you are in power and understand the bigger picture it is speculative.
How many people voted for Labour based on their “Change” promise. Yet, a few months in, it could be argued that they lied, receiving clothing, tickets, accommodation, etc. so you could argue about the scale of influence in this scenario also.
You missed out right wing, knuckle dragging, Daily Mail reading racists.
Those are verifiable facts 
2 Likes
A reminder for us lot in the UK.
The problem is that many Americans were not worse off under Biden; quite the opposite, in fact.
It’s the power of the media making people feel that their lives are worse, when they actually aren’t.
8 Likes
That’s because people don’t look at stats when they are assessing the economy or inflation and so on. The inflation is one that is usually quite distorted. Often you will see a relatively low headline rate but, for many people, the things that they are compelled to buy: rent, food, fuel, have gone up by a greater percent and, for the lowest paid, their discretionary spending has been wiped out.
The other thing is that people will look at certain items as a basis for their entire spend. I’m guessing with the US that petrol prices are a big one. They are everywhere. However, it is often minor items that are used as a bellwether. For example, in Germany it is the price of Irish butter or a street kebab.
4 Likes
No they didnt. They said they woukdnt increase taxes for working people. They haven’t. That is a fact.
6 Likes
The problem is that inequality leads to people making extreme political choices. Our western societies are incredibly unequal. There are lots of people who are objectively very poor, but vast swathes of people who are relatively poor.
In a nutshell neo-liberal economics. The dominant model for 40 odd years now. A small number of people getting incredibly wealthy, while everyone stagnates.
The irony is that the politicians that this leads people to vote for - like Trump and Farage - are bigger exponents of the underlying causes that vote people rebel against. These men are elitists. A small number of people will do very well out of them. The vast majority won’t.
6 Likes
Really? I’ve never heard of it.
4 Likes
Sorry, but almost everything you have written here is wrong. I dont have time to write a fuller response but will do later if no one else covers the points.
1 Like
I’ve held a hefty level of disdain for Hunt and this is not helping
6 Likes
Just a snippet from the link you provided below.
“Hughes, who was responding to questions about Labour’s first budget in 14 years, also said its increase in employers’ national insurance would lead to lower real wages over the longer term.
The OBR’s chief economic adviser, Davi Miles, added that estimates based on a range of studies showed three-quarters of the impact would fall on workers and just one-quarter in lower profits.
Miles said: “Nobody escapes completely, but more of it falls on workers in terms of lower real wages than in lower profits.”
If that was the Tories, you would be calling it a stealth tax!
Also, I said Taxes, I didn’t specify on individuals - That is a fact.
In May Rachel Reeves said Labour had “no plans for increased taxes” - that is a fact.
Regarding the NI - taken from ‘Fullfact.org’
The manifesto said: “Labour will not increase taxes on working people, which is why we will not increase National Insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of Income Tax, or VAT.”
In recent weeks Labour has argued its commitment to “not increase National Insurance” applied to “working people” but not employers, with ministers saying it meant that people wouldn’t see higher taxes on their payslips. It’s [also been noted] that during the election campaign the Conservatives themselves warned that [Labour had only ruled out rises to employee] not employer, NICs.
But didn’t explicitly specify that the commitment applied only to employee National Insurance, leading Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) director Paul Johnson [to say] earlier this month that increasing employer NICs would seem to be a “straightforward breach of a manifesto commitment”.
As I said in my original post, I am not calling them lies. They have had to do what they can, and what they think is best with their budget after re-evaluating the situation they inherited.
You didn’t, but Labour did. That was their manifesto commitment. Anything else is just a stylistic difference, as much as I don’t like it.
And quite clearly they didn’t have any, until Reeves saw the state of the government’s finances. The fact that the OBR is now questioning the pre-election budget should say quite a lot about that.
This is not ideal, but the last part I think is quite revealing about who really has the economic power, and is the real problem, I would say.
Isn’t that precisely what you’re arguing against now though? I would have thought this supports the counter-argument to what you’re trying to say.
Twitter crashed over the last 24 hours due to Labour MP’s furiously deleting derogatory Trump Tweets
2 Likes
The irony being Trump wont really give a shite what anyone in this failed, backward shithole thinks.
1 Like