A Political Thread

[GarethGriffiths]

yeah theyre scum bags

There is no doubt that Oxfam is an outstanding organisation, but it is, and always was, and still is, very obvious to me that the ideals of an organisation (noble and well meaning) does not translate into individual brilliance inside it.

It's the Management where we have the questionable bunch; generally at the top. They say "I am working for a charity because I want to help". Often this translates as helping themselves as much as others. They are not there for charity; they are there to fill their pockets. Why are some executives of charities paid £80k - £120k a year or more - some are paid more than Theresa May for goodness sake! Where do the priorities lie?

Just as in the past the FA gave lip service to people like Barry Bennell, and the Catholic Church turned its back on paedophile allegations, so Oxfam similarly turned a blind eye. All three of them are guilty and deserve the consequences.

 

[Brigantine]

Sounds like one of the top business figures in South Africa just got arrested...

How much is this about politics? Is this as much of a big deal as Al Jazeera is making it out to be?

 

[truthteller]

why do they only dwell on getitng 50% women into parliament? to reflect society when there are only 2 disabled mps out of 650? thats 0.003% when in reality there are aorund 5 million disabled people with is 8.33% of the population so parliament is under representing them by a ratio over 27600 times? absolutely appalling yet we ignore the disabled in favour of womens never ending demands....ps in 1918 5.6 million MEN WERE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO VOTE TOO NO ONE EVER BOTHERS MENTIONING THAT

 

[truthteller]

why do they only dwell on getitng 50% women into parliament? to reflect society when there are only 2 disabled mps out of 650? thats 0.003% when in reality there are aorund 5 million disabled people with is 8.33% of the population so parliament is under representing them by a ratio over 27600 times? absolutely appalling yet we ignore the disabled in favour of womens never ending demands....ps in 1918 5.6 million MEN WERE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO VOTE TOO NO ONE EVER BOTHERS MENTIONING THAT

 

[GarethGriffiths]

why do they only dwell on getitng 50% women into parliament? to reflect society when there are only 2 disabled mps out of 650? thats 0.003% when in reality there are aorund 5 million disabled people with is 8.33% of the population so parliament is under representing them by a ratio over 27600 times? absolutely appalling yet we ignore the disabled in favour of womens never ending demands....ps in 1918 5.6 million MEN WERE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO VOTE TOO NO ONE EVER BOTHERS MENTIONING THAT

If they want a Parliament that truly represents the people of the UK then 80% should be White, 10% BAME and 10% Disabled.

As there were roughly 33,270,000 Women in the UK, compared to 32,377,000 Men, then maybe Parliament should be 51% Female and 49% Male (Statista).

 

[ncurd]

It doesnt have to precise but you don't think Parliment should close to representing the makeup of the country? Roughly in terms of politics and backgrounds.

 

[Brigantine]

The UK parliament is designed specifically to get very close to representing the *geographical* makeup of the country.

(For context, I'm no fan of FPP, and my my criteria for a representative parliament would be primarily about representing the ideological makeup of the population - though identity and geographic representation still matter)

As a purely hypothetical thought experiment, consider abolishing geographic constituencies, asking everyone enrolling to vote to list several key things that they feel define them (can be geographic / ideological / gender / ethnic / cultural / class / career / whatever)... Then creating constituencies in identity-space based on those answers, and electing a parliament on that basis.

Imagine for a moment there were no logistical issues, and that the result was a parliament with all the right percentages for gender / ethnic / ability etc. but 90% of the MPs lived their whole lives in London, and the ideological makeup of parliament was the same as it is now.
(There's not a chance it would actually happen like this, but it's hypothetical)

Would that be an improvement? A big one?

 

[GarethGriffiths]

The UK parliament is designed specifically to get very close to representing the *geographical* makeup of the country.

(For context, I'm no fan of FPP, and my my criteria for a representative parliament would be primarily about representing the ideological makeup of the population - though identity and geographic representation still matter)

As a purely hypothetical thought experiment, consider abolishing geographic constituencies, asking everyone enrolling to vote to list several key things that they feel define them (can be geographic / ideological / gender / ethnic / cultural / class / career / whatever)... Then creating constituencies in identity-space based on those answers, and electing a parliament on that basis.

Imagine for a moment there were no logistical issues, and that the result was a parliament with all the right percentages for gender / ethnic / ability etc. but 90% of the MPs lived their whole lives in London, and the ideological makeup of parliament was the same as it is now.
(There's not a chance it would actually happen like this, but it's hypothetical)

Would that be an improvement? A big one?

That would definitely be worth considering, and also provide MP's with a Hotel Room/Apartment in order to save on expenses.

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1823016659

 

[truthteller]

it should be best person for the job, increase the equality of opportunity for the disabled with disabled access toilets etc for starters....but ban women only shortlists you cant enforce equality of results as its a meritocratic democracy as everyone must be allowed the chance to stand.

 

[Brigantine]

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1823016659

and the "recommended stories" consists of 3 other articles with the exact same headline on different occasions. Nice.

 

[McTallshort]

it should be best person for the job, increase the equality of opportunity for the disabled with disabled access toilets etc for starters....but ban women only shortlists you cant enforce equality of results as its a meritocratic democracy as everyone must be allowed the chance to stand.

And who decides who the best person is?

Clive Woodward was the best person for the England job when Brian Ashton was being replaced but because Francis Baron didnt like him Martin Johnson got the job instead.

90% of getting promoted isnt down to your talent its your ability to network. If you have a group of privately educated men deciding who to promote then will tend to pick someone they can relate to and that will tend to be another privately educated bloke.

Many parts of the senior pubilc and private sector are still a closed shop and the best most talented people tend to be overlooked.

Most of the cabinet and shadow cadinet are not in that role because of their talent. They are there because they agree with the party leader.

The whole best person for the job is such a load of ******** when the people deciding who the best person is just want to keep the status quo.

 

[ncurd]

90% of getting promoted isnt down to your talent its your ability to network.

I'd also argue another large part of the 90% is sheer luck of being on the right projects at the right time to be 'seen'.

TBF most of the current cabinet aren't there because of the party leader but because their party would implode without the correct balance. Still have no talent mind, Philip Hammond is the only who appears to have a brain amongst them.

 

[McTallshort]

I'd also argue another large part of the 90% is sheer luck of being on the right projects at the right time to be 'seen'.

TBF most of the current cabinet aren't there because of the party leader but because their party would implode without the correct balance. Still have no talent mind, Philip Hammond is the only who appears to have a brain amongst them.

Yes it a large part down to luck but knowing the right people having impressed them before with you attitude not necessarily your talent plays a part in that luck.

 

[ncurd]

Yes it a large part down to luck but knowing the right people having impressed them before with you attitude not necessarily your talent plays a part in that luck.

Yup certainly had one occasion where someone was promoted before me in a previous role. Management thought he was great because he worked weekends and late evenings. What they didn't realise was he was **** at the job and had to work that time to keep up.

 

[McTallshort]

Yup certainly had one occasion where someone was promoted before me in a previous role. Management thought he was great because he worked weekends and late evenings. What they didn't realise was he was **** at the job and had to work that time to keep up.

My wife once worked in the head office of a well known German discount supermarket. The working hours were 08:00 to 16:30. If you had to work outside those times for any reason questions about your training or ability would be asked as you should be able to complete the work in the normal hours.

 

[McTallshort]

And another shooting in the States. Bet they are glad they have the 2nd amendment to keep them all safe

 

[Which Tyler]

And another shooting in the States. Bet they are glad they have the 2nd amendment to keep them all safe

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

Over two years in the US we'll have more deaths by gun than we did have casualties in Vietnam.

Americans overwhelmingly support increased gun regulations but the NRA represents gun manufacturers not gun owners.

School's football coach shielded students from gunshots. Died last night.

 

[MarkyH]

fsake! If Sandy Hook wasn't enough to make changes, then nothing will ever change.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1823016659

Yet the USA is more scared of terrorism, and reacts more strongly too than when the killer is a white (sometimes Christian) American just so they can protect The Second Amendment.

It's so sad! There is nothing to say that hasn't been said already.