You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Is there any way back for Britain? where to now?

DoublemeDoubleme Member Posts: 2,199
So few on here would come out to defend the Tories record. I have heard points of debate blaming labour for the mess Tories inherited etc, but this falls down on a number of points.

1.13 years in power has been plenty of time to fixed any alleged mess that Labour allegedly created.
2. In hard times one would think the way to go was to look after the weakest and most vulnerable in society not seek to crush them down further whilst finding more resources for rich friends.

However should I be wrong and Labour do in fact win the next election do we really think things will get better? I believe if the Tories can do this and win the next election then they now know they can get away with literally anything, and considering they have been caught saying let people die, some may view this an extreme thing to say but I don't fully rule out concentration camps.

So yes if Conservatives win the next election things will get way worse then they are already and so there is little choice in a two party system but to vote Labour. having said that which party would be viable if I was going to go for another one? Reclaim and Reform just come across as far right, UKIP are far right and seem redundant anyway. Liberal Democrats maybe? Green party? I mean they would be throwing a vote away but would they even be worth voting for if it wasn't?

We now have unsustainable levels of debt as a country an out of control immigration system faltering services need I go on.

It is a sorry state of affairs when I would select a dude picked at random down a pub then any of the choices we have. Ultimately Labour wont fix this mess, they will just slow down the decline.

regardless of who wins the next election I think it will be the far right that win the election after that. I tick many of the boxes that the far right would want to eradicate so it is only sensible to hope Labour win to give me 4 years to get out of here before it is to late.

The only question is how and where to?

Comments

  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,587
    It doesn't matter either way because politics.

    Whoever is in charge will only try to fix what the xenophobic, dogmatic electorate demand in order to stay in charge, rather than tackling real issues with real solutions.

    It's just a game. The best solution on a personal level is to be existential and stop playing along.
  • DoublemeDoubleme Member Posts: 2,199

    It doesn't matter either way because politics.

    Whoever is in charge will only try to fix what the xenophobic, dogmatic electorate demand in order to stay in charge, rather than tackling real issues with real solutions.

    It's just a game. The best solution on a personal level is to be existential and stop playing along.

    I think anyone that hates immigrants is very ignorant, people are people immigrants are no better or worse then you or I.

    what is a concern though is mass immigration and again that is not against immigrants its against mass immigration.

    I think we need to be careful not to throw anyone who says "unlimited immigration without any form of control may not be a good thing" into the same camp as Tommy Robinson and Jada Franssen.

    There is a bigger problem under the service one I saw from a very young age one that is not fixable. Nearly every country in the world is facing ruin and there is little to fix that. I think its the mentality of certain countries and the time left in each country that can influence which country is better to live in.
  • kapowblamzkapowblamz Member Posts: 1,587
    edited November 2023
    The true argument for or against mass immigration should never be about origin or colour. That is the only narrative that mainstream media seems to mention, pretty much daily. People gobble it up. Those people are the electorate.

    The only debate that should fundamentally ever be had is one of slavery. The most effective way to increase GDP, and effectively your state's power, in a capitalist world is immigration. The limit is until we're bursting at the seams. It's all growth until then. Is that slavery or not? That's the debate. Is allowing immigrants in for labour purposes slavery and what factors make it so, or not so.

    The only reason our govt, led by an economist, does not allow endless streams of labour migrants in is because of a xenophobic electorate and a govt that needs to retain power come voting time.

    Nearly every country in the world is facing ruin


    You are jumping on the bandwagon. It amazes me how people come to this conclusion. The truth is this is the greatest time in history for nearly every country of the world in modern history. The info age has allowed an unprecedented amount of transparency. What makes you think countries are near ruin relative to other periods of their history? Particularly when, for most of human civilization, countries have literally been straight up ruined. Genocide has been rife forever.

    If anything is being ruined, and you want to channel the energy you receive, from all of the negativity you feed on, then put it into the natural world. That's amount the only thing you could make the tiniest bit of diffference to.

    Stop watching the news. It's utter ****.
  • DoublemeDoubleme Member Posts: 2,199

    The true argument for or against mass immigration should never be about origin or colour. That is the only narrative that mainstream media seems to mention, pretty much daily. People gobble it up. Those people are the electorate.

    The only debate that should fundamentally ever be had is one of slavery. The most effective way to increase GDP, and effectively your state's power, in a capitalist world is immigration. The limit is until we're bursting at the seams. It's all growth until then. Is that slavery or not? That's the debate. Is allowing immigrants in for labour purposes slavery and what factors make it so, or not so.

    The only reason our govt, led by an economist, does not allow endless streams of labour migrants in is because of a xenophobic electorate and a govt that needs to retain power come voting time.

    Nearly every country in the world is facing ruin


    You are jumping on the bandwagon. It amazes me how people come to this conclusion. The truth is this is the greatest time in history for nearly every country of the world in modern history. The info age has allowed an unprecedented amount of transparency. What makes you think countries are near ruin relative to other periods of their history? Particularly when, for most of human civilization, countries have literally been straight up ruined. Genocide has been rife forever.

    If anything is being ruined, and you want to channel the energy you receive, from all of the negativity you feed on, then put it into the natural world. That's amount the only thing you could make the tiniest bit of diffference to.

    Stop watching the news. It's utter ****.
    what is best for the economy is not necessary what is best for the population at large. If a company can have free labour as they would under the Tory government proposal of forcing people on benefits to go to work experience or lose their benefit the conditions competitiveness and wage of others will be reduced. Will definitely be profitable for business to get free labour and good for GDP figures or the measures of the economy often cited but it wont be good for the everyday man.

    Immigration is a tough one because it seems hard to say you have concerns about that without been labelled a fan of a guy called Adolf. However I am not against Immigration or Immigrants what I have a concern about is mass uncontrolled immigration. I am sure it is good for big business or any business to get cheaper labour but again this lowers the workers competitiveness and thus reduces their wage. It also increases the costs for housing and services. is it right to expect that we should have a protected privileged advantages compared to others born elsewhere just because we were lucky enough to be born on this land and not another? arguably not. However if we allow mass immigration to the point we are bursting at the seams we will become indistinguishable from poorer countries. That will greatly benefit the rich but not the working man.

    as for things been doomed its simple to explain but few seem to get it. so I will give this example suppose I have a credit card with a large amount of debt on it and you say to me
    "doubleme you really should sort your debt out your financial position would be much better if you worked towards clearing that"
    and I responded
    "its okay I will be of the debt of that credit card with a second credit card"
    you then
    "ask okay but how will you pay of the second credit card"
    and I say with a third credit card and it becomes apparent my plan is to pay of each credit card debt with yet another credit card indefinitely.

    You would quite rightly assume that it is highly highly probable that I would go broke would you not?

    The reason I point that out is because that is how the entire economic system is based and it is a mathematical certainty that the debt will continue to compound to the point of breaking.

    The issue isn't if its when, and it may not be in our lifetime if we are lucky but things dont look great at the moment.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nBPN-MKefA&t=19s
  • Bean81Bean81 Member Posts: 608
    I've no loyalty to any party but would recommend listening to extended interviews with Starmer. He's smart, analytical and cares. The mainstream media won't give him my airtime however because he's not a buffoon.

    I couldn't believe at the time anybody would vote for that buffoon Johnson. It turns out voting for somebody because they're a bit of a laugh is a disaster when the proverbial hits the fan. The information coming out of the COVID inquiry is fascinating.
  • DoublemeDoubleme Member Posts: 2,199
    Bean81 said:

    I've no loyalty to any party but would recommend listening to extended interviews with Starmer. He's smart, analytical and cares. The mainstream media won't give him my airtime however because he's not a buffoon.

    I couldn't believe at the time anybody would vote for that buffoon Johnson. It turns out voting for somebody because they're a bit of a laugh is a disaster when the proverbial hits the fan. The information coming out of the COVID inquiry is fascinating.

    It was Corbyn or Boris I thought Corbyn would be a disaster so I voted for Boris I said at the time I thought Boris was awful but a better choice then Corbyn.

    I think Keir Starmer is bad too but a better choice then any of the Tory lot. I will be voting for Labour next election but I hold no illusions about them fixing anything. I just think they are a better choice then the tories.
Sign In or Register to comment.