Cycling UK Forum

I'm in favour of taxing or banning imports and services from countries with environmental standards or employment standards that are less stringent than our own. It seems silly that companies can save money by manufacturing things abroad by creating more pollution than would be allowed here or by employing people with lower pay, worse health and safety, less holiday entitlement etc.

mjr wrote:Has the UK paid compensation to all states affected by slavery yet? This is a road we probably won't like if we start travelling down it.

China is to blame for the virus. Seeking compensation is a waste of time.
Since it was the British Empire which no longer exists that was involved in slavery and the British Empire that did much to abolish it, then no - this country owes not a penny regarding slavery. Some people may feel ancestral guilt over the subject, I suggest you could donate a percentage of your incomes to some worthy UK slavery offenders charity or set one up if they don't already exist. How far back in time should we go, the Roman, Greek empires? Does the slave trade morality compensation scheme have an expiry period?

windmiller wrote:

mjr wrote:Has the UK paid compensation to all states affected by slavery yet? This is a road we probably won't like if we start travelling down it.

China is to blame for the virus. Seeking compensation is a waste of time.
Since it was the British Empire which no longer exists that was involved in slavery and the British Empire that did much to abolish it, then no - this country owes not a penny regarding slavery. Some people may feel ancestral guilt over the subject, I suggest you could donate a percentage of your incomes to some worthy UK slavery offenders charity or set one up if they don't already exist. How far back in time should we go, the Roman, Greek empires? Does the slave trade morality compensation scheme have an expiry period?

The great families that benefited from slavery should have rest less nights? My family & I bet most here dont need to, in the times inquestion we were just as much enslaved, by having no vote?

reohn2 wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:Would be interesting to know what b the party of opposition would have done differently. If you're arguing that this pandemic is a good thing to judge the current government on next ge then you have to consider what the leading opposition would have done.

Easy to criticise around the edges but pretty much most of labour party lines is the they'd do the same as Tories but do it better. Believe that if you're politically inclined then forget about it all next election time 4+ years to go afterall.

We'll never know the answer as to whether a Labour government would've done better but do you think they could've been anymore incompetent than this shower?

Back to relevance. China isn't completely to blame. Globalisation, liberal politics and inaction globally to a known risk

Don't you mean neoliberal capitalist politricks?

If you believe the words of labour figures it seems to me they too believe in following scientific advice and have pretty much agreed with most of the government actions. Indeed the 80% furlough pay deal iirc was higher than they were calling for. The only difference seemed to be calls to bring policy into being faster (easy to say when you're not developing the mechanisms) and consult more with unions (you can guess my view on that).

I mean liberal politics. If we had more of an illiberal political system we could have locked down sooner and more completely. Perhaps we could have had fewer cases. Instead we're moaning about the pathetic lockdown we have. Italy, Spain and others completely locked down in the end we're not fully locked down yet.

mercalia wrote:

ossie wrote:Where did the poll go ?

it was edited out by ........... not me

What an odd decision. Were they worried about the results?

Tangled Metal wrote:I mean liberal politics. If we had more of an illiberal political system we could have locked down sooner and more completely. Perhaps we could have had fewer cases. Instead we're moaning about the pathetic lockdown we have. Italy, Spain and others completely locked down in the end we're not fully locked down yet.

Forget Labour for a moment - even if it had been the Cameron government it would have been cabinet led and I believe an all party approach. As it is this government has been established with Boris as emperor, not that I like that, but it's a complete shambles without him.
BTW - Labour called for a stricter lockdown than the one we have, the wage compensation wasn't as generous but more people would have been eligible and the cap would have been lower and per household.

colin146 wrote:979861A4-4B83-46EE-A13A-52B11616C987.jpeg

So why is testing so important.? what does it tell you ? Apart from whether you have it in a short time frame you were tested in ?

PH wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:I mean liberal politics. If we had more of an illiberal political system we could have locked down sooner and more completely. Perhaps we could have had fewer cases. Instead we're moaning about the pathetic lockdown we have. Italy, Spain and others completely locked down in the end we're not fully locked down yet.

Forget Labour for a moment - even if it had been the Cameron government it would have been cabinet led and I believe an all party approach. As it is this government has been established with Boris as emperor, not that I like that, but it's a complete shambles without him.
BTW - Labour called for a stricter lockdown than the one we have, the wage compensation wasn't as generous but more people would have been eligible and the cap would have been lower and per household.

I thought the only real difference was self employed and zero hours. Tories later set up something for self employed. Reason was more scope for fraud I read somewhere (probably guardian).

Not sure about labour shadow cabinet consensus would apply. Afterall you often saw different labour shadow spokespersons saying conflicting things during pre election interviews about matters like Brexit. I'm also not sure I believe the hype you seem to believe about the Boris cabinet. The chancellor seems to have influence and others too. Of course it all doesn't compute with views that Boris is hopeless and dangerous like trump.

Tangled Metal wrote:I thought the only real difference was self employed and zero hours.

No there were many differences and it would have been better to sit round a table and work them out when they obviously had a common aim, than to play political tennis with them. Much as we could do all night... but for no ones benefit. If you were interested there's plenty on analysis of Boris's leadership style and the lack of experience in the cabinet along with the disproportionate influence of those outside democratic politics. But if you haven't seen any of it, or refuse to believe them, and they come from all sectors, then nothing I can write will change your mind. Just ponder on why Sadiq Khan wasn't included in the emergency meetings for weeks when London was by far the worst effected and so much of the services necessary are under the mayor's control.

Tangled Metal wrote: The chancellor seems to have influence

I can't work out if you were being serious when you wrote that, or just setting the jokes up. How many weeks ago did Boris kick out the chancellor who disagreed with him, because instead of the traditional arms length treasury Boris wanted it bought under the control of No10?

Si wrote:.... as the majority of replies have used civil, reasoned argument to dismantle the OPs proposition, I'm of a mind to pretty much leave it as is.

OK guys, teacher's left the room, riot time

mercalia wrote:The great families that benefited from slavery should have rest less nights? My family & I bet most here don't need to, in the times in question we were just as much enslaved, by having no vote?

I understand where you're coming from with that, however I beg to differ. Slave women could be seduced or raped by the masters, then if they fell pregnant, their child could be taken away from them and sold to another slave owner. any slave could be beaten as much as the master wanted, and if the slave died, no consequences for the owner other than losing a slave. A slave remained a slave for life. In exceptional cases, some slaves were freed, but still faced daily struggle to either find work or a place to live, let alone equal rights to justice etc. A slave could not own anything - anything a slave owned, was in fact owned by the master. Sometimes slaves were paid small amounts, but at any time, the master could take the money away. A slave travelling would be assumed to be escaped, and have to prove that they were on lawful business of their master's. An escaped slave could expect no mercy, if caught they could be severely flogged or even worse as an example to others. A slave had to work as hard as required, regardless of their health or ability. A slave would be fed as much or as little as the master saw fit. Despite the illogicality of it, a master might starve slaves until they were too ill to work, even though they had bought them to work.
The list goes on a lot longer.

And even when slavery was abolished in all countries, in the US in particular, ex slaves remained in poverty and often had to work for their previous masters for a pittance. Recent i.e last 100 years of history is readily available, how in the US black people remained second class citizens all the way through the 20th century, in 1955 Rosa Parks led a bus boycott in the USA, in 1967 Richard Loving, and Mildred Loving took the state of Virginia to the US Supreme Court in order to get the racist law preventing two people of different races from marrying. The Rev Dr Martin Luther King Jr, a prominent campaigner and advocate of peaceful protest, was assassinated in 1968.

So no. Although life for the British working class was very hard indeed a century ago, and our forefathers had fewer rights, we still had more than slaves. It is true that various African civil rights campaigners were in contact with some leading British trade unionists a hundred years ago to discuss human rights, but we have had the Magna Carta in 1215 which led to the English Bill of Rights 1689 The fact that individual people were badly treated was more down to the corruption of those in power, than a lack of technical rights. Though things weren't perfect, as it took until 1965 for the Race Relations Act, and 1975 for the Sex Discrimination Act.

slightly more on topic:

In the letter, Huawei's UK chief Victor Zhang says home data use has increased by at least 50% since the virus first hit the UK, placing "significant pressure" on telecoms systems. Huawei says it has been working with partners like BT, Vodafone and EE to deal with the growth and has also set up three new warehouses around the country to ensure spare parts stay in supply. Mr Zhang also says the current crisis has highlighted how many people, especially in rural communities, are "stuck in a digital slow lane". And he warns that excluding Huawei from a future role in 5G would be a mistake.

"There are those who choose to continue to attack us without presenting any evidence," he writes.

"Disrupting our involvement in the 5G rollout would do Britain a disservice."

them be fighting word them be. Even trump would be proud of words like that.

PH has covered a lot of the Tory v Labour thing in far greater detailmthan I could,and with which I agree with

Tangled Metal wrote:If you believe the words of labour figures it seems to me they too believe in following scientific advice and have pretty much agreed with most of the government actions. Indeed the 80% furlough pay deal iirc was higher than they were calling for. The only difference seemed to be calls to bring policy into being faster (easy to say when you're not developing the mechanisms) and consult more with unions (you can guess my view on that).

You anti union stance doesn't surprise me at all.

By policy I take it you mean lock down and testing/tracing much sooner than it has been?
Testing and quarantining people on flights into the country from known C19 hotspots such as Italy and the far east would've been a huge step forward to stop the spreading this virus,of course the UK Gov knew better
If the government had been prepared,which they should have been after the NHS Cygnus report,which they decided to bury and ignore under the previous PM Theresa May,and followed SK's stance the UK would be in a much better place now both healthwise of it's citizens and economically.
We shouldn't forget that for the past ten years the Tories have been running the NHS down pay freezing it's staff,withdrawing nurses bursaries,starving it of necessary funding,the same as in social care.

I mean liberal politics. If we had more of an illiberal political system we could have locked down sooner and more completely. Perhaps we could have had fewer cases. Instead we're moaning about the pathetic lockdown we have. Italy, Spain and others completely locked down in the end we're not fully locked down yet.

If we had a government not kow towing to and funded by multinational business with a neoliberal agenda that dictates and pulls the strings of the Tory party and government,with their only motivation being power and profit,people may have come first!
As it is those same powermonger's short term profit agenda may have just killed the golden goose and put the economy in such a tailspin it might not recover for generations,though it won't worry them they'll just move on to somewhere more lucrative.
Keep swallowing the rightwing guff and you'll choke on it sooner or later.

mercalia wrote:....... China has nothing to congratulate itself about. A totalitarian state is far more responsible for what it's citizens do than a democracy where personal responsibility is the standard?

Agreed,China is as much a rogue state as Russia or the USA,big isn't beautiful it's a bully,and both right and leftwing theology is complicit with it's bullying.
The name of the game is power,it corrupts,too much of it corrupts absolutely.