• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Serious questions and musings

Personally, I think this has been coming since 9/11. (Or 11/9, as the civilised world call it.) Those of us of certain vintage will remember the fuss then. Quote the 2004 album track by Ian Brown. Kiss ya lips (no ID.) "I ain't no number, don't need no ID around my neck. So, Mr politician. ID cards don't stop no hijack jets."

Am I for it. I don't know. I have ID in my wallet, called a drivers license. I have ID when going abroad, called a passport. Do I need to be carrying another form on the phone. Well truth be told, as some have stated everything is already on this small rectangle of doom and gloom, so why not have a form of ID as well? Makes life so much easier. The government already know tonnes about me, and the internet can work out my shopping habits by what I look at.

It's inevitable that this will come in. Society has gotten lazy and would rather everything be at a finger tip. The main issue about the ID thing, is not the ID. But the man who is trying to get it in.

Just another thought. Is the rise in flag noncing, hotels being shouted at and sheer dislike over foreign types, more prominent now, b cause you need to show ID to watch porn?
 
Slugjc said:
Just another thought. Is the rise in flag noncing, hotels being shouted at and sheer dislike over foreign types, more prominent now, b cause you need to show ID to watch porn?
Click to expand...
I think it just comes with the drop in peoples standards of living.

If people could get doctors and hospital appointments when needed, or weren't stuck in ridiculous traffic or on crowded trains, or could get good value housing either from the council, private or via mortgage and all of the other day to day stuff that has genuinely materially got worse over the past couple of decades, I don't think we'd be getting all of this at the moment.

If you look back at the 90s the country was doing pretty well and it could afford to give so much out on benefits and there was such ample housing for those at the lower end of the economic scale that people were having a decent enough time so didn't need to go out causing mischief. More good quality work was available, or apprenticeships. Crime was lower because the state could afford to give generous handouts to the people who weren't earning. It's where all the moaning about the non-working family down the road having the large flat-screen TV and great holidays came from. It was only as the years went on and people higher up on the economic scale started getting squeezed more and more that things changed and the benefit caps started coming in due to political pressure due to the economy going to the dogs. But whilst those who were earning a decent wage could get a reasonable mortgage or rent and afford stuff, they weren't too bothered about the handouts that non-working people were getting. Whilst the system works, everyone's happy. That's how I've seen it anyway.

Now that everyone is getting squeezed, someone's going to be to blame. Immigrants are getting the blame and although it's only a small part of a myriad of causes for inflation, a lack of available affordable housing, over-crowding in urban areas, lack of doctors appointments, there is 'some' merit to it. This amount of immigration has been too rapid.
 
BarryZola said:
I think it just comes with the drop in peoples standards of living.

If people could get doctors and hospital appointments when needed, or weren't stuck in ridiculous traffic or on crowded trains, or could get good value housing either from the council, private or via mortgage and all of the other day to day stuff that has genuinely materially got worse over the past couple of decades, I don't think we'd be getting all of this at the moment.

If you look back at the 90s the country was doing pretty well and it could afford to give so much out on benefits and there was such ample housing for those at the lower end of the economic scale that people were having a decent enough time so didn't need to go out causing mischief. More good quality work was available, or apprenticeships. Crime was lower because the state could afford to give generous handouts to the people who weren't earning. It's where all the moaning about the non-working family down the road having the large flat-screen TV and great holidays came from. It was only as the years went on and people higher up on the economic scale started getting squeezed more and more that things changed and the benefit caps started coming in due to political pressure due to the economy going to the dogs. But whilst those who were earning a decent wage could get a reasonable mortgage or rent and afford stuff, they weren't too bothered about the handouts that non-working people were getting. Whilst the system works, everyone's happy. That's how I've seen it anyway.

Now that everyone is getting squeezed, someone's going to be to blame. Immigrants are getting the blame and although it's only a small part of a myriad of causes for inflation, a lack of available affordable housing, over-crowding in urban areas, lack of doctors appointments, there is 'some' merit to it. This amount of immigration has been too rapid.
Click to expand...


Immigration is a part. We are in need of the vast majority of them. No Brits are taking on the lower paid work, we are struggling to attract workers in key areas. Like the NHS. In the debate of migration the small boats are the only focus of farage, which means it's the only focus of the knuckle draggers. They are loud. As long as farages foreign partner and kids are ok to get in. He doesn't care

But rapidly building new housing estates, in already crowded areas of the country with no new schools, Doctors, hospitals, roads. With no investment in the power, water and gas supply. No wonder the land is seemingly becoming over crowded. My village has seen it's population double in 20 years. Not by migrants but by the British. And yet, we are still having everyone trying to live on area that has had no infrastructure development since the 1970s.
 
Slugjc said:
Just another thought. Is the rise in flag noncing, hotels being shouted at and sheer dislike over foreign types, more prominent now, b cause you need to show ID to watch porn?
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s it. The likes of the Southport riots predated the Online Safety Bill by a good year.

I think @BarryZola is closer. We’re in a tough time for living standards and the economy, people are fed up, and they want to send a message. Migrants are, sadly, an easy group to point to as the cause of everyone’s problems, and the people protesting and such are doing so because they feel like migrants are the sole cause of these issues, even though the reality is very different and much more nuanced.

With regard to digital ID cards, I’m not quite sure what to think myself. I can see the benefits of centralising identification, yet I can also see the potential for civil liberty breaches if the technology is misused.
 
BarryZola said:
I specifically stated it being a situation where they're not suspicious of you having committed a crime. Then you replied to that exact post saying that they do have the right to ask for your details whenever they want...

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't read it properly 👍
Click to expand...

You are indeed correct, misread your original post. Most humble apologies 😊
 
I see lord Nigel Aloysius Farage has already made a video being very very against this.

I reckon I can be against Farage, without ever hearing a single word his said. Here is why.

I can never get behind a man who has such poor taste in suits. They are the suits worn by every bell end In a film about stock brokers. Light coloured, poor tie and (sigh) gold cufflinks.

Seriously, we cannot allow Admiral Ackbar dressed as 90s Alan Partridge to run this country.
 
Slugjc said:
Seriously, we cannot allow Admiral Ackbar dressed as 90s Alan Partridge to run this country.
Click to expand...
My personal theory here is… there’s more than enough dirt on the guy to bury him, and the RW media will do so in 2 or 3 years when the Tory party have got themselves sorted to the extent they can present the illusion of competency. He’s got his die-hards, but the relative moderates flirting with him now will swing back to mainstream parties when the DM and Sun tell them to do so.

At the moment he’s a useful idiot, sowing discontent against Labour, and particularly Starmer. The last thing the Tories want is Starmer to be in charge when the next GE rolls around - presenting an image of consistency when the preceding 8 yrs was so chaotic.
 
Re: Digital ID...

There are a few things that bother me:

Firstly, for a prime minister to suddenly say something - anything - is compulsory... that just rubs me the wrong way. We supposedly live in a democracy, so if you believe it's a good idea, put it in your manifesto and let people vote on it. This idea hasn't just come upon them suddenly...

Secondly, the potential for control is absolutely enormous, especially when linked with Central Bank Digital Currency.

It seems to me that the "migrant crisis" is being used as a very poor excuse for bringing it in, as you need a National Insurance Number to work anyway. So if they're not being honest about why they're doing it, what are they actually bringing it in for?

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be able to trust the Government, but I can't ignore what I've seen. It could be the thin edge of the wedge, and a very difficult trap to get out of.
 
Its a tough one.

Reform make the migrant crises seem easy to fix. You turn them round and put them back into Europe. And just to be safe, we will do it to everyone who is brown, black and has a funny accent. Brush hands together job done.

I think in time, digital ID will come in. It's inevitable. Everything is on the phone now, so why not your ID.

Need the NHS, tap in with your phone at desk. Can I see your driver's license please sir. Tap the phone here.
 
There's a reason Labour is the one party I never have, and never will vote for. I can remember what things were like the last time round....
..... And I've just realised those exact words were spoken by many an adult as I was growing up under Thatcher.
 
East Coast Mariner said:
Re: Digital ID...

There are a few things that bother me:

Firstly, for a prime minister to suddenly say something - anything - is compulsory... that just rubs me the wrong way. We supposedly live in a democracy, so if you believe it's a good idea, put it in your manifesto and let people vote on it. This idea hasn't just come upon them suddenly...

Secondly, the potential for control is absolutely enormous, especially when linked with Central Bank Digital Currency.

It seems to me that the "migrant crisis" is being used as a very poor excuse for bringing it in, as you need a National Insurance Number to work anyway. So if they're not being honest about why they're doing it, what are they actually bringing it in for?

Don't get me wrong, I would love to be able to trust the Government, but I can't ignore what I've seen. It could be the thin edge of the wedge, and a very difficult trap to get out of.
Click to expand...

In today’s gig economy you can present fake NI numbers. These people are not applying for jobs with Tesco’s, it’s companies like Uber, Deliveroo etc that just take a scanned copy of “right to work” and don’t do due diligence on it.

Not saying this ID would resolve that issue but that’s why the current system based on rules set up in the early 20th century don’t work.

We also live in a parliamentary democracy, there isn’t a requirement for governments only to do that which was in their manifesto. Your democratic right is to contact your MP if you disagree.

DiogoJ42 said:
There's a reason Labour is the one party I never have, and never will vote for. I can remember what things were like the last time round....
..... And I've just realised those exact words were spoken by many an adult as I was growing up under Thatcher.
Click to expand...

Did we live in the same country? Last Labour government we had the best healthcare system in the world, booming economy (although the Tories successfully pinned the blame on Labour the UK had the fastest recovering economy after the 2008 crash until the Tories took over and started stagflation), improving educational scores and functioning society.

Literally the only thing I can really think they did bad was joining in the Iraq war which was a major blot on their record but still. You make this random statements but never provide any real evidence.
 
My main reason for hating them is the introduction of tuition fees and student loans the year before I would have gone to uni. In my family, we always said "it's OK to be broke, but never get in to debt". So that scuppered my life plans.

Not to mention how authoritarian they are, as we are seeing right now.
 
Dave said:
...Literally the only thing I can really think they did bad was joining in the Iraq war which was a major blot on their record but still. ...
Click to expand...
What about taking the nation a little back towards the centre after the far right lurch of Thatcherism?
Increase taxation, create a little more equality...but no, hey, cool brittannia, we are on an election roll.
No increases in taxation for the middle classes, we are in power and want to stay here...how cool are we?

As an involved political follower at the time, Labour failed, badly.
The needed tax increases never came.
They had the chance to do something constructive, with a large majority, and simply marched comfortably into the established order with little effective change.
 
Dave said:
Literally the only thing I can really think they did bad was joining in the Iraq war which was a major blot on their record but still.
Click to expand...
Public Finance Initiatives and Public Private Partnerships. Foundation Hospitals, 2004 GP contract, Bank of England independence, The Academy system. Section 44 of the Terrorism Act. Tuition fees / student loans, Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 and the Identity Cards Act 2006 are the things which spring to my mind.

Those were enough for me to want to vote for an alternative in 2010, casting my ballot for the Liberal Democrats. Consider me rather burned. I went for Green in 2015, as I was voting in Holborn & St Pancreas and considerably unhappy with the Mark Duggan and Jean Charles de Menezes decisions.

The record of a previous government has never made me swear off considering a political party and their present offering, however, that just feels incredibly closed minded.
 
I can never lower myself vote Tory, reform or the greens. The greens are Tory's on bike's.

Starmer and Blair are very alike. Left side Tory's. But Blair had a personality that could ride scrutiny.

The danger is reform. Is it me, or are they beginning to falter a bit?. Especially farage, who looks to be cracking under a bit of media pressure. Which is filtering down. Certainly Tice looks to be annoyed he is having to answer to weird farage trying to do trump.

Speaking of serious musings. Swan. I don't live near any royal parks. Does anyone know where I can get some? Asking for a migrant friend.
 
Slugjc said:
I can never lower myself vote Tory, reform or the greens. The greens are Tory's on bike's.
Click to expand...
It’s funny you should say this, particularly the bolded, because with all the political discussion recently, I’ve been having some potentially controversial thoughts about political leaning.

While Reform and the Greens/Corbyn’s party (for example) could not be further apart on the political spectrum on the face of it, I actually feel that ardent supporters of the two camps are surprisingly similar in psyche in some ways. Both are populist movements, both are all for upending the established system, and both are protesting against an “enemy” (immigrants and “woke” in the case of Reform, or the rich and “anti-woke”, for lack of a better term, in the case of the Greens and Corbyn).

With this in mind, my serious question for today is: is it only me who believes that political leaning, in any of the political spectrums you can think of, is circular rather than line-based as people often make out?

Increasingly, I myself genuinely believe this to be the case. I believe that it is absolutely possible to swing so far left that you end up back on the right, just with different enemies. I believe that it is absolutely possible to try so hard to be staunchly liberal that you end up back on the conservative side, just with different enemies. I think trying incredibly hard to be “open-minded” can make you every bit as narrow-minded as the “narrow-minded” people you’re trying to distance yourself from, just with a different enemy.

I recently saw this John Cleese video on extremism, and I honestly think it’s every bit as apt today as it was when it was made nearly 40 years ago:


I don’t have overly entrenched political leanings, but one thing I am against is political extremism on either side of the spectrum. I increasingly believe that centrism and moderation is the political place to be, or the one that suits me the best at least.

I’d be intrigued to know; what does anybody else think of this idea? Does anyone else agree with me?
 
As a voter.

Reform mean nothing to me. Just a fad like UKIP before it.

The Tory's have done so much damage to my local area, the mines etc it's hard for me to even consider voting that way. Especially after austerity and Brexit. Plus our last MP (now not because the lines have been moved) was Alec Shelbrook. Recently knighted by Liz Truss. For all his support for her push to be PM and could never be arsed with out area. Only scene to wave at it.

I will vote labour next time because the lad we have as MP, is actually doing a good job. Despite what his leader is doing.
 
I don't think Farage is even the type of person who would want to be the PM. He seems to get cold feet whenever he's on the verge of actually getting into one of the positions he's campaigned for, if it means he actually has to perform properly and be under scrutiny for it. I think he loves the campaigning and raising his profile for whatever reason, but I bet you he will dodge out somehow when we get closer to a general election and it looks like he might have to actually become the Prime Minister (a lot can/will change by then, I know). I think he loves the idea of it but when reality hits he knows it's not really for him. He's been around these goons who have been PM in the past at cocktail parties, in parliament etc etc for many many years and I think he knows better than to actually put his head truly above the parapet at this point in his life. I think it's partly a game to him at this point, as well as probably being a money making scheme in one way or another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top