Inequality

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Does it? Half the dickheads in this country voted for Brexit.

 

I'm more interested in a persons quality than some idealistic urge to serve. I simply don't get why offering more money wouldn't make it attractive to quality people who currently see it as too big of a risk.

What do you consider to be "quality"?

 

Shouldn't their actual commitment to do the job of representing their constituents be one of the main things you're looking for?

[Jockey]

I'm pretty certain - that Jacos Reese Mog, Boris Johnson, Tristan Hunt, Nick Klegg, David Cameron, Michael Gove are neither noble crusaders nor people who have excelled in business. They are not 'top league' yet enjoy incredible positions of power - and increased wages is irrelevant to them. 

 

They are to a man (and woman) privileged and entitled people to whom a career in politics is a right, and a career choice not an attempt to do some good or help people. The correlation between the percentage of those who have been to private schools and those in senior positions within government is so far out of kilter that it has to be by design and not by accident! 

 

Consider again the tangible links between private schools (small percentage of the population) and Oxbridge (majority of places) and the links between Oxbridge and the government and also the City and Finance (high percentage) - the whole system is for the few not the many. This wouldn't end by closing down Oxbridge - they'd just make Exeter and London the new Oxbridge. It is fundamentally about privilege and entitlement. Increasing the pay for politicians isn't going to change that one iota - it will simple enable more Oxbridge types to enjoy politics and gain more influence. 

[Rico1304]

I'm pretty certain - that Jacos Reese Mog, Boris Johnson, Tristan Hunt, Nick Klegg, David Cameron, Michael Gove are neither noble crusaders nor people who have excelled in business. They are not 'top league' yet enjoy incredible positions of power - and increased wages is irrelevant to them.

 

They are to a man (and woman) privileged and entitled people to whom a career in politics is a right, and a career choice not an attempt to do some good or help people. The correlation between the percentage of those who have been to private schools and those in senior positions within government is so far out of kilter that it has to be by design and not by accident!

 

Consider again the tangible links between private schools (small percentage of the population) and Oxbridge (majority of places) and the links between Oxbridge and the government and also the City and Finance (high percentage) - the whole system is for the few not the many. This wouldn't end by closing down Oxbridge - they'd just make Exeter and London the new Oxbridge. It is fundamentally about privilege and entitlement. Increasing the pay for politicians isn't going to change that one iota - it will simple enable more Oxbridge types to enjoy politics and gain more influence.

That's the point! You'd improve the quality of the opposition to those dickheads who can afford to do it for free!

[AngryOfTuebrook]

That's the point! You'd improve the quality of the opposition to those dickheads who can afford to do it for free!

You'd be trying to attract a pool of highly-paid people in which public-school/Oxbridge, groomed-for-leadership types are already over-represented.  These are the last people we want more of in Parliament.

[Jockey]

That's the point! You'd improve the quality of the opposition to those dickheads who can afford to do it for free!

 

You haven't - because they're the same people from the same background! All you have done is attracted more people from that tiny percentile. Serious question - do you think Cameron, Clegg, Gove, Johnson, Mogg, et al. Need any more money? or couldn't have gained a career outside of politics? 

 

This is a job for them. I guarantee this - there are thousands of privately education 14 year olds who are thinking of a career in politics! And by and large they will get one. 

[Jockey]

You'd be trying to attract a pool of highly-paid people in which public-school/Oxbridge, groomed-for-leadership types are already over-represented.  These are the last people we want more of in Parliament.

 

Exactly! 

 

It is a disingenuous argument because they are one and the same. They go to the same school, they socialise and look after each other. 

[Pureblood]

Only £75k plus expenses and a free flat in leafy Surrey?  How do they cope?

[Strontium]

I have an idea, maybe we should move further away from identity politics altogether rather than trying to extend its scope.

[Jockey]

I have an idea, maybe we should move further away from identity politics altogether rather than trying to extend its scope.

 

Easy to say in yours and mine position though mate! Everywhere I look I primarily see enough representation to keep me happy.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

I have an idea, maybe we should move further away from identity politics altogether rather than trying to extend its scope.

I just googled a definition of identity politics.

 

It pretty much describes the status quo that we're talking about changing.

[Rico1304]

You'd be trying to attract a pool of highly-paid people in which public-school/Oxbridge, groomed-for-leadership types are already over-represented. These are the last people we want more of in Parliament.

No I'm not, why the fuck would Labour want them?

[Hades]

I just googled a definition of identity politics.

 

It pretty much describes the status quo that we're talking about changing.

Moving away from identity politics means sticking with the identity politics of wealthy, white, hetero men who are ancestors of colonialist robbers.

[VladimirIlyich]

You're making a fairly common error when you assume there is always a link between being one of the brightest and best and earning loads of money.

Granted, the link is often there but you obviously don't know much about the Academic or Charity sectors

A certain set of sportsmen earn a king's ransom and yet few of them can tie their own bootlaces. The salary and expenses MPs receive is more than adequate and those in business earning unbelievable amounts of money are rarely earning it on merit. It's why they use Tory MPs to do their dirty work for them. Filthy people using other malleable filthy people to milk the system for their own benefit.

[Section_31]

Yep

[VladimirIlyich]

Yep

Could have been said yesterday if it wasn't for the pre decimal currency mentioned.

[PestiRed]

George Michael's version was more catchy

[VladimirIlyich]

George Michael's version was more catchy

Yeah,but could he have pulled off a pipe as well as old Clement? On second thoughts don't answer that.

[Jockey]

Clement Attlee looks like Patrick Stewart! 

[VladimirIlyich]

Clement Attlee looks like Patrick Stewart!

Patrick Stewart looks fantastic if he outdates Clement Attlee.

[Hades]

 

[Moctezuma]

 

 

 

It's pretty obvious that the poor/lower middle class in the developed world have taken a fairly substantial hit since monetarism has taken hold. I saw Mark Blyth give a lecture on this recently where he equated it to Fabianism for the right where they have made incremental measures over the past 30 to 40 years that have damaged peoples lives and the fabric of society to increase their own personal wealth and reduce the power of labour.

 

There does seem to be a deep aversion to the notion of paying taxes and well funded welfare states, which I find odd as this demonstrably is what leads to happier, more cohesive and stable societies.

 

It's notable that the media also consistently paint previous decades where wages and wealth were more equitous as laden with industrial strife while never pointing out the positives that collective bargaining can bring.

 

Danny Dorling's work almost paints the UK as a guinea pig in-comparison with other Western European countries, Regan/Thatchernomics has lead to far worse health (mental and physical), education outcomes, which of course is inextricably linked to our productivity problem that the right keep banging on about.

 

From: http://www.businessinsider.com/income-inequality-is-hurting-america-2013-9?IR=T

http://inequality.org/facts/inequality-and-health/

 

 

[Moctezuma]

I think that in the West (an in particular those within the Anglophone world) ideas around investment in the state and infrastructure spending were out of fashion for a good while, the below graph has some of it's numbers extrapolated, but gives an indication of this.

 

What I find slightly bizarre about this is that international travel should have enabled policy makes to become abundantly aware that countries/areas that have seen significant state investment have seen significant upticks in their economic and therefore social fortunes.

[Jockey]

There is a great book The Spirit Level by Kate Picket, on inequality. Really uncomfortable and depressing that the Uk stands on its own for inequality within Europe, and the US (considering its wealth) globally. Systems built for the few, increasingly fewer - at the cost of the many. 

 

Saying that, Communism isn't in a position to lecture anyone. If your best answer to accusations of murdering millions is 'you've killed more' you are not 'better', you are as bad. 

[Hades]

Saying that, Communism isn't in a position to lecture anyone. If your best answer to accusations of murdering millions is 'you've killed more' you are not 'better', you are as bad.

I wonder if that number includes all the Nazi soldiers killed by Communists. Anyway, even if you take into account the disputed Imperialist propaganda figures, there's no contest. If we continue on this path, the planet will be dead in a few hundred years.

 

Cuba, a tiny Communist island country cut off from trade, is developing AIDS vaccines and has better healthcare than the USA. They might not have 50 different flavours of Coke, but they have their priorities straight.

[Jockey]

I wonder if that number includes all the Nazi soldiers killed by Communists. Anyway, even if you take into account the disputed Imperialist propaganda figures, there's no contest. If we continue on this path, the planet will be dead in a few hundred years.

 

Cuba, a tiny Communist island country cut off from trade, is developing AIDS vaccines and has better healthcare than the USA. They might not have 50 different flavours of Coke, but they have their priorities straight.

 

As I say, two bald men fighting over a comb. 

 

If your ceiling is what the Nazi's did, you are not on the right side of anything. I mentioned no figure, and if you are seriously suggesting that Stalin killed no-one then, your not free thinking and open minded - you're tool, a PR sheep who follows the same modes of propaganda that you accuse others of adhering to. 

 

Cuba, may get health right (again, the US isn't a barometer it is the wrong end of the moral spectrum) - but, they persecuted gays for decades and imprisoned political opponents and journalists. Hardly the bastion of a free society.