[joeysteele]

I was going to try to respond to the points here in the last few posts but decided what is the point.

Accusations of left wing blindness again come into play in a generalised sense, I see a fair bit of right wing blindness too which rarely gets a mention when there is an opportunity to get at those who are deemed 'left wing'.
I hate hypocrisy as much as anyone, however, I will wait to hear more on this, before I jump in and near hysterically condemn someone.
In fact in the same way I have done as to Conservative politicians from Andrew Mitchell to Nigel Evans over the years, despite being one of these left wing blind people.
Waiting to hear more as to their issues too as to the press and other problems.

Now we are off on council house sales, for goodness sake, many and probably most, bought those houses and stayed in them for the rest of their lives, it is the families often when the parents died,who made the big money out of selling them off later on.

To generalise that the norm was likely that people who bought them got expensive conservatories etc; (what a statement), the people who bought them so cheaply were employed people, why shouldn't they have conservatories and anything else that would add to the value of their newly bought home.

Really,I despair at the narrow mindedness of blaming everything and getting at only those on the left wing of politics.
While presenting the right wing as angels and saints.

How would it ever be possible to really reason with such prejudiced generalisations made against people with more left wing views from those on the right, coming at them with all the ills of the Nation and laying the blame for same at their door.

Both the politics of right and left have failed the UK for decades.
In fact over the last 115 years,through the 20th century and into the 21st century, we had over 60 years of Conservative led govts and around 35 years of Labour led govts
We are still in chaos and a mess, so who really is to blame for that.
Not one not the other but both.

Those who support one side or the other can be fair and accept both have failed a lot of the time,or, they can take out the rose coloured glasses and blame totally one or the other.
None of the latter is right and nothing of the latter warrants reasoned responses to such sweeping generalisations when made, which are then tried to back off from in some way as being said they were misunderstood.

That is like someone saying something really wrong about another person publicly, then apologising later, however the problem remains it was still said in the first place and is out there,a usually subtle move to deride one over another.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I was going to try to respond to the points here in the last few posts but decided what is the point.

Accusations of left wing blindness again come into play in a generalised sense, I see a fair bit of right wing blindness too which rarely gets a mention when there is an opportunity to get at those who are deemed 'left wing'.
I hate hypocrisy as much as anyone, however, I will wait to hear more on this, before I jump in and near hysterically condemn someone.
In fact in the same way I have done as to Conservative politicians from Andrew Mitchell to Nigel Evans over the years, despite being one of these left wing blind people.
Waiting to hear more as to their issues too as to the press and other problems.

Now we are off on council house sales, for goodness sake, many and probably most, bought those houses and stayed in them for the rest of their lives, it is the families often when the parents died,who made the big money out of selling them off later on.

To generalise that the norm was likely that people who bought them got expensive conservatories etc; (what a statement), the people who bought them so cheaply were employed people, why shouldn't they have conservatories and anything else that would add to the value of their newly bought home.

Really,I despair at the narrow mindedness of blaming everything and getting at only those on the left wing of politics.
While presenting the right wing as angels and saints.

How would it ever be possible to really reason with such prejudiced generalisations made against people with more left wing views from those on the right, coming at them with all the ills of the Nation and laying the blame for same at their door.

Both the politics of right and left have failed the UK for decades.
In fact over the last 115 years,through the 20th century and into the 21st century, we had over 60 years of Conservative led govts and around 35 years of Labour led govts
We are still in chaos and a mess, so who really is to blame for that.
Not one not the other but both.

Those who support one side or the other can be fair and accept both have failed a lot of the time,or, they can take out the rose coloured glasses and blame totally one or the other.
None of the latter is right and nothing of the latter warrants reasoned responses to such sweeping generalisations when made, which are then tried to back off from in some way as being said they were misunderstood.

That is like someone saying something really wrong about another person publicly, then apologising later, however the problem remains it was still said in the first place and is out there,a usually subtle move to deride one over another.

You are not actually arguing with me Joey on most of your points, and I am certainly not arguing with you on most of them either, because I have stated MANY times on here that having supported the Labour Party AND the Conservatives in my time, I have become so disillusioned with both, that I am now supporting UKIP.

I have also stated numerous times that BOTH of the main two parties have NOT the interests of the General Public at heart - only their own.

I am merely stating my opinion of Obamamunna and just how his cynical socialist façade dovetails so neatly into what I now regard as Left Wing fallacy.

Whether those who bought their Maggie Thatcher Council Houses at huge discounts did so to make themselves PERSONALLY richer or to take advantage of getting their home at a bargain price, the fact remains that they did so in the FULL KNOWLEDGE that they were depriving the poor and most needy in society from being able to be housed in affordable housing - something which tax-payer built and subsidised SOCIAL HOUSING was NOT created for.

The above is TRUE and relevant.

As is those who bought discounted shares in the once Nationalised but recently PRIVATISED industries purely to make PROFIT in the best sense of good old greedy CAPITALISM.

I am sorry that we are so divided Joey, really.

[Kizzy]

I'm not sure why the us and them divide between those who bought their home and those that didn't.. My dad bought his and was a Labour man until the day he died, he didn't automatically buy into some conservative ideology when he became a homeowner.
I wouldn't think that anyone making the purchases envisaged that there would be the shortage in social housing that there is today, or their decision was in any way mercenary.

I wouldn't decry anyone who buys shares in companies either, nobody is suggesting that all aspects of capitalism are bad. Where it sours is when massive profits are not used to maintain adequate levels of safety, employee wages and customer satisfaction.
I don't think the nationalised companies should have been sold but they were, there was no referendum held on that it was a forgone conclusion that once the government decided it was happening it was going ahead regardless. The fact that royal mail staff were bunged a few shares as a sweetener before they received their redundancy is irrelevant, it does not reflect anything on their principles at all.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I'm not sure why the us and them divide between those who bought their home and those that didn't.. My dad bought his and was a Labour man until the day he died, he didn't automatically buy into some conservative ideology when he became a homeowner.
I wouldn't think that anyone making the purchases envisaged that there would be the shortage in social housing that there is today, or their decision was in any way mercenary.

I wouldn't decry anyone who buys shares in companies either, nobody is suggesting that all aspects of capitalism are bad. Where it sours is when massive profits are not used to maintain adequate levels of safety, employee wages and customer satisfaction.
I don't think the nationalised companies should have been sold but they were, there was no referendum held on that it was a forgone conclusion that once the government decided it was happening it was going ahead regardless. The fact that royal mail staff were bunged a few shares as a sweetener before they received their redundancy is irrelevant, it does not reflect anything on their principles at all.

Being an old fart certainly has its advantages sometimes

I completely agree with the point I highlighted. At the time, the home ownership was championed for people who care for their community, take pride in something that they own and therefore look after it better. No one even considered the effect it would have on housing stock, because at that time, there were not the housing challenges that we face today. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

[Kizzy]

He took just as much pride in it when he was a tenant, he wished to put a porch on it but they wouldn't allow it unless he owned the property, so he bought it.

It was though you're right to reduce the cost of maintenance, as many of the post war prefabricated homes are so shoddy that now they are costing more to maintain them than they're worth, maggie knew this which is why she chose to offload them.