Join the Labour Party and save your country!

rick_chasey

rjsterry wrote:

What logic are you using to arrive at this conclusion? And what on earth is an average amount of racism?

Surrey level; it’s there but no one knows about it because it’s nor remotely diverse.

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

What logic are you using to arrive at this conclusion? And what on earth is an average amount of racism?

Surrey level; it’s there but no one knows about it because it’s nor remotely diverse.

Surrey? Just under 10% BAME so slightly below the national average but hardly "not remotely diverse".

surrey_commuter

rjsterry wrote:

What logic are you using to arrive at this conclusion? And what on earth is an average amount of racism?

How about a yougov poll to give you a benchmark/average and then compare it to subsets of society.

You don’t think one of the big strains in the Labour Party are the woolly liberal values of the north London chattering classes as against the values of their voters in the old industrial heartlands?

surrey_commuter

Rick Chasey wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

What logic are you using to arrive at this conclusion? And what on earth is an average amount of racism?

Surrey level; it’s there but no one knows about it because it’s nor remotely diverse.

Come come Rick, I am sure that you are well aware that racism decreases with exposure to ethnic diversity

rjsterry

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

What logic are you using to arrive at this conclusion? And what on earth is an average amount of racism?

How about a yougov poll to give you a benchmark/average and then compare it to subsets of society.

You don’t think one of the big strains in the Labour Party are the woolly liberal values of the north London chattering classes as against the values of their voters in the old industrial heartlands?

If we can put aside the clichés, do you think that's a problem exclusive to Labour voters? Even after Zac Goldsmith's mayoral campaign?

Even supposing that YouGov had mapped incidence of questionnaire responses that could be classified as racist* against voting intention and geographical location, the idea that you could extract an 'average' degree of racism for a demographic is nonsense. Either something is racist - prejudiced by a person's ethnic background and physical characteristics - or it isn't. There aren't degrees of racism in any useful sense, albeit people might express their views in more or less strident ways.

*I'm struggling to imagine how you could ask a non-leading question to gauge whether someone really did hold racist views as opposed to whether they were happy to appear to hold those views.

TheBigBean

In case anyone is interested in further commentary on Labour's anti-semitism policy here is a collection of letters to the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/j ... tisemitism

Here is Margaret Hodge's original criticism.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... aret-hodge

And here is the Labour party taking action against Margaret Hodge

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44875908

Thigh_burn

It is a farce that Margaret Hodge faces the prospect of censure over this. She called it as she sees it and as an exceptionally highly regarded racism campaigner we should take note.

We are entering a bizarre world where the Labour party is being racists, but is vilifying the anti-racists.

It's a highly emotive topic and as with any emotive topic people's views are trenchant and difficult to change. All I ask, is if you take a different perspective to me on this, just sit back for a moment before you hit the keyboard and think:

We're in the 21st century, in the UK and there is a part of our population that is scared for their safety because of the Labour party.

And please rest assured that fear is real. I know that's hard to believe for many. They think we're in the UK, what on earth have the Jewish community got to feel scared for. Well rising levels of anti-semitic attacks for one. The fact that disturbingly often when we read about terrorist attacks on the population at large, it subsequently turns out they had some Jewish hit list as well, or had been actively targeting the Jewish community. Plus we see what happened in Paris and Brussels where the Jewish community was actively attacked and people killed.

It is genuinely very scary.

rick_chasey

Yes there is a lot of brushing under the carpet and denial.

On a trivial level, I asked my vote labour sticker neighbours during the local elections why they were voting Labour in light on the claims. (I'm making a lot of friends round here with this quality neighbourly chat as you can tell ;-) )

In short, they said they didn't believe it was a problem.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

What logic are you using to arrive at this conclusion? And what on earth is an average amount of racism?

How about a yougov poll to give you a benchmark/average and then compare it to subsets of society.

You don’t think one of the big strains in the Labour Party are the woolly liberal values of the north London chattering classes as against the values of their voters in the old industrial heartlands?

If we can put aside the clichés, do you think that's a problem exclusive to Labour voters? Even after Zac Goldsmith's mayoral campaign?

Even supposing that YouGov had mapped incidence of questionnaire responses that could be classified as racist* against voting intention and geographical location, the idea that you could extract an 'average' degree of racism for a demographic is nonsense. Either something is racist - prejudiced by a person's ethnic background and physical characteristics - or it isn't. There aren't degrees of racism in any useful sense, albeit people might express their views in more or less strident ways.

*I'm struggling to imagine how you could ask a non-leading question to gauge whether someone really did hold racist views as opposed to whether they were happy to appear to hold those views.

I imagine 15% would be racist and proud. I think teasing it out of the others would be relatively easy.

Would you be happy to make immigration easier to do a trade deal with India?
Should the NHS actively recruit from Oz, NZ, Canada,
Should the NHS actively recruit from Jamaica, Botswana, Sri Lanka?

I see racism as a spectrum.

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

Yes there is a lot of brushing under the carpet and denial.

On a trivial level, I asked my vote labour sticker neighbours during the local elections why they were voting Labour in light on the claims. (I'm making a lot of friends round here with this quality neighbourly chat as you can tell ;-) )

In short, they said they didn't believe it was a problem.

In fairness it probably isn't in rural Cambs.

rick_chasey

rjsterry wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Yes there is a lot of brushing under the carpet and denial.

On a trivial level, I asked my vote labour sticker neighbours during the local elections why they were voting Labour in light on the claims. (I'm making a lot of friends round here with this quality neighbourly chat as you can tell ;-) )

In short, they said they didn't believe it was a problem.

In fairness it probably isn't in rural Cambs.

Rural?

Like I would live in rural anywhere.

There is a lot of pro-Palestine (and by virtue anti Israel) activism in Cambridge, so I wouldn't be surprised (though by the same token, I have no evidence for any).

rjsterry

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

What logic are you using to arrive at this conclusion? And what on earth is an average amount of racism?

How about a yougov poll to give you a benchmark/average and then compare it to subsets of society.

You don’t think one of the big strains in the Labour Party are the woolly liberal values of the north London chattering classes as against the values of their voters in the old industrial heartlands?

If we can put aside the clichés, do you think that's a problem exclusive to Labour voters? Even after Zac Goldsmith's mayoral campaign?

Even supposing that YouGov had mapped incidence of questionnaire responses that could be classified as racist* against voting intention and geographical location, the idea that you could extract an 'average' degree of racism for a demographic is nonsense. Either something is racist - prejudiced by a person's ethnic background and physical characteristics - or it isn't. There aren't degrees of racism in any useful sense, albeit people might express their views in more or less strident ways.

*I'm struggling to imagine how you could ask a non-leading question to gauge whether someone really did hold racist views as opposed to whether they were happy to appear to hold those views.

I imagine 15% would be racist and proud. I think teasing it out of the others would be relatively easy.

Would you be happy to make immigration easier to do a trade deal with India?
Should the NHS actively recruit from Oz, NZ, Canada,
Should the NHS actively recruit from Jamaica, Botswana, Sri Lanka?

I see racism as a spectrum.

I think I've posted my views on immigration at length before. I couldn't give a monkey's where people are from. I don't really agree that racism has a spectrum - it's an unfortunate but innate feature of human nature. There is certainly a spectrum in its degree of expression but it's all coming from the same place. By the way, I think "the others" includes pretty much all of us if we are honest, albeit some of us try harder than others to overcome our prejudices.

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Yes there is a lot of brushing under the carpet and denial.

On a trivial level, I asked my vote labour sticker neighbours during the local elections why they were voting Labour in light on the claims. (I'm making a lot of friends round here with this quality neighbourly chat as you can tell ;-) )

In short, they said they didn't believe it was a problem.

In fairness it probably isn't in rural Cambs.

Rural?

Like I would live in rural anywhere.

There is a lot of pro-Palestine (and by virtue anti Israel) activism in Cambridge, so I wouldn't be surprised (though by the same token, I have no evidence for any).

I thought you'd moved to a dormitory village on the outskirts of Cambridge. Suburban if you prefer

rick_chasey

Haha, not a chance.

No no, right in the thick of Cambridge.

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

Haha, not a chance.

No no, right in the thick of Cambridge.

Truly a throbbing metropolis!

In that case, yes, I can well imagine the prejudices you describe.

john80

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

What logic are you using to arrive at this conclusion? And what on earth is an average amount of racism?

How about a yougov poll to give you a benchmark/average and then compare it to subsets of society.

You don’t think one of the big strains in the Labour Party are the woolly liberal values of the north London chattering classes as against the values of their voters in the old industrial heartlands?

If we can put aside the clichés, do you think that's a problem exclusive to Labour voters? Even after Zac Goldsmith's mayoral campaign?

Even supposing that YouGov had mapped incidence of questionnaire responses that could be classified as racist* against voting intention and geographical location, the idea that you could extract an 'average' degree of racism for a demographic is nonsense. Either something is racist - prejudiced by a person's ethnic background and physical characteristics - or it isn't. There aren't degrees of racism in any useful sense, albeit people might express their views in more or less strident ways.

*I'm struggling to imagine how you could ask a non-leading question to gauge whether someone really did hold racist views as opposed to whether they were happy to appear to hold those views.

I imagine 15% would be racist and proud. I think teasing it out of the others would be relatively easy.

Would you be happy to make immigration easier to do a trade deal with India?
Should the NHS actively recruit from Oz, NZ, Canada,
Should the NHS actively recruit from Jamaica, Botswana, Sri Lanka?

I see racism as a spectrum.

I think I've posted my views on immigration at length before. I couldn't give a monkey's where people are from. I don't really agree that racism has a spectrum - it's an unfortunate but innate feature of human nature. There is certainly a spectrum in its degree of expression but it's all coming from the same place. By the way, I think "the others" includes pretty much all of us if we are honest, albeit some of us try harder than others to overcome our prejudices.

Answering yes or no to the above questions does not really make you a racist unless you back it up with some logic that is racist. For example you could say no I would not like easier immigration however if people of Indian origin wish to come to the UK and have the right English language and professional skills that they need then they are more than welcome. For the second and third question you could answer No the NHS should recruit doctors based on the level of professional qualifications they have and the proven pedigree of said qualifications as well as adequate English language skills. This could be any nation in the world subject to political limitations.

To be racist you have to believe that another race of people is inferior to that of your own race. The above questions with simple yes or no answers to not prove anything. Most people are likely to assume that a doctor or nurse from a developed nation is likely to have either education with a higher merit or simply education that can be verified more easily than that of a developing nation. Maybe Botswana has an excellent education system for doctors and is closely aligned with UK standards in clinical care however without assessing their nationwide standards by those capable of doing so we are unlikely to know the answer to this question. The NHS probably do something in this regards already as a lot of medical staff are essentially immigrants and they have been know to run recruitment campaigns in other countries.

coopster_the_1st

rjsterry wrote:

What logic are you using to arrive at this conclusion? And what on earth is an average amount of racism?

RC is not using any logic or reality to arrive at his conclusion, as can be seen by his squirming at answering your question.

He'll be accusing you of being a racist if you are not careful, as you question his made-up '10% of Surrey is racist' view. He'll extend 'his logic' to mean you are part of the 10%!

He throws accusations of racism around like confetti and then gets upset when some of it sticks to him :roll:

rjsterry

Coopster the 1st wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

What logic are you using to arrive at this conclusion? And what on earth is an average amount of racism?

RC is not using any logic or reality to arrive at his conclusion, as can be seen by his squirming at answering your question.

He'll be accusing you of being a racist if you are not careful, as you question his made-up '10% of Surrey is racist' view. He'll extend 'his logic' to mean you are part of the 10%!

He throws accusations of racism around like confetti and then gets upset when some of it sticks to him :roll:

Classic.

RC was not even involved in that bit of the conversation. It was Surrey Commuter's post I was querying. Too long in the sun today?

pblakeney

Why let the ball get in the way of tackling the man?

rjsterry

PBlakeney wrote:

Why let the ball get in the way of tackling the man?

Rick's obviously been playing on his mind.

rick_chasey

I do think a reading comprehension course would really help.

rick_chasey

Regarding the discussions we had a few years ago around austerity, here's an NY Times piece on Portugal and how it's economy has been doing since it jettisoned austerity (hint, it's doing well).

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/22/busi ... v=top-news

Brexiteers will be pleased to hear that Portugal eschewed the EU's advice to tighten its belt and in hindsight EU officials have admitted that Portugal has been much more of a success than they thought it would be as a result.

surrey_commuter

Rick Chasey wrote:

Regarding the discussions we had a few years ago around austerity, here's an NY Times piece on Portugal and how it's economy has been doing since it jettisoned austerity (hint, it's doing well).

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/22/busi ... v=top-news

Brexiteers will be pleased to hear that Portugal eschewed the EU's advice to tighten its belt and in hindsight EU officials have admitted that Portugal has been much more of a success than they thought it would be as a result.

What reassurance can you give those of us who worry about debt? In my world we are still living beyond our means and the next recession will take debt over 100% of GDP.

We already spend £48bn a year on debt interest - is there a level that you deem too high?

These are all genuine questions as I realise I am in a tiny minority of people who worry about these things and can’t understand why nobody else does.

rick_chasey

Read the article.

Broadly, my view is you can grow your way out of debt if you are sensible.

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Read the article.

Broadly, my view is you can grow your way out of debt if you are sensible.

Over what time scale do you think we could grow our way out of £1.8 trillion of debt?

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Read the article.

Broadly, my view is you can grow your way out of debt if you are sensible.

Over what time scale do you think we could grow our way out of £1.8 trillion of debt?

So the way I see it is if your growth in tax receipts over the duration of the debt is higher than the interest rate it’s all good.

FWIW if you’re really worried about debt you ought to look at state AND private debt as cutting a whole bunch of state services may just change the definition of the debt, rather than eliminating the debt.

surrey_commuter

Rick Chasey wrote:

Read the article.

Broadly, my view is you can grow your way out of debt if you are sensible.

I don’t see anything in there that explains how ending austerity drove the economy forwards.

Also interesting that there idea of ending austerity is our idea of austerity

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

Regarding the discussions we had a few years ago around austerity, here's an NY Times piece on Portugal and how it's economy has been doing since it jettisoned austerity (hint, it's doing well).

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/22/busi ... v=top-news

Brexiteers will be pleased to hear that Portugal eschewed the EU's advice to tighten its belt and in hindsight EU officials have admitted that Portugal has been much more of a success than they thought it would be as a result.

Important to note that it was a partial rejection of austerity - public expenditure has only been increased in certain areas and they're still focused on reducing their deficit. I thought the key point was that although they weren't out of the woods yet, the general mood of the country had been turned round. Contrast that with the UK, which in many ways is far better off than Portugal but feels like it has a much more negative outlook.

@SC: see the bit about deficit reduction.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Regarding the discussions we had a few years ago around austerity, here's an NY Times piece on Portugal and how it's economy has been doing since it jettisoned austerity (hint, it's doing well).

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/22/busi ... v=top-news

Brexiteers will be pleased to hear that Portugal eschewed the EU's advice to tighten its belt and in hindsight EU officials have admitted that Portugal has been much more of a success than they thought it would be as a result.

Important to note that it was a partial rejection of austerity - public expenditure has only been increased in certain areas and they're still focused on reducing their deficit. I thought the key point was that although they weren't out of the woods yet, the general mood of the country had been turned round. Contrast that with the UK, which in many ways is far better off than Portugal but feels like it has a much more negative outlook.

@SC: see the bit about deficit reduction.

I will read other sources as that is a bit low on data and big on anecdotes for me. Will also look at Ireland as I thought their economy bounced back well despite harsh austerity measures.

rjsterry

There's not a lot of detail on the precise measures taken, but the point is that austerity is not some binary decision where all cuts in spending are necessarily beneficial, just as all spending will not have a positive effect.

As SC says, there are probably lessons from Ireland as well. And the differences between Portugal,Ireland and the UK need to be evaluated, but still worth looking into.