How to manage austerity in a caring society

[hypochondriac]

No, I doubt many floating voters read the Express or Mail. Its still corrosive though. Every time I see my mum she's worrying about some made up piece of crap about Labour seizing her home or stealing her pension. It would be funny if it weren't true, for her and millions of older people who get their news from printed media. If editorial had to abide by the same standards adverts do most of it would never get printed.

 

Not everyone shallows everything they read in this manner.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Not everyone shallows everything they read in this manner.

 

Some lefties don't seem to understand that The Mail & The Sun are commercial operations and pitch their " opinions" in a place that can bring in the most money . Forget this " it was The Sun that won it" pony. They follow their readership rather than pull ordinary decent folk to the right. That's why their views are incoherent and all over the place. This latest " campaign " against wftc cuts isn't some principled stand or genuine belief , its there because many of its readers are going to be losing money.

 

They didn't convert to New Labour, they just saw the way the wind was blowing.The Sun in jock land even backed the SNP ffs, what more evidence does anyone need than that?

 

They pitch themselves where they feel they can get maximum revenue. If The Sun & Mail ceased to exist England would not suddenly move to the left. Watch what they do for the EU vote, they'll follow the polls rather than try and persuade people. All this pony about Murdoch as some sort of puppet master is pure pony. He is a staunch Republican but The Sun would never call for the end of the monarchy as that would cost them readers. Its just too easy for the left to blame " propaganda" rather than to rethink their beliefs and realise they're out of sync with the voting majority of the country.

[Sheaf Saint]

Some lefties don't seem to understand that The Mail & The Sun are commercial operations and pitch their " opinions" in a place that can bring in the most money . Forget this " it was The Sun that won it" pony. They follow their readership rather than pull ordinary decent folk to the right. That's why their views are incoherent and all over the place. This latest " campaign " against wftc cuts isn't some principled stand or genuine belief , its there because many of its readers are going to be losing money.

 

They didn't convert to New Labour, they just saw the way the wind was blowing.The Sun in jock land even backed the SNP ffs, what more evidence does anyone need than that?

 

They pitch themselves where they feel they can get maximum revenue. If The Sun & Mail ceased to exist England would not suddenly move to the left. Watch what they do for the EU vote, they'll follow the polls rather than try and persuade people. All this pony about Murdoch as some sort of puppet master is pure pony. He is a staunch Republican but The Sun would never call for the end of the monarchy as that would cost them readers. Its just too easy for the left to blame " propaganda" rather than to rethink their beliefs and realise they're out of sync with the voting majority of the country.

 

The whole reason for that was to try and take as many votes away from Labour as possible to stop 'Red Ed' getting into no 10. Either side of the border they simply sided with whoever had the best chance of beating Labour, to increase the likelihood of the Tories getting elected. Don't try and paint it out to be just pandering to the readership. It was a deliberate, calculated strategy to try to keep the Tories in power because they are the party most friendly to their interests.

[Sour Mash]

The views of some on here sum up the left's attitude to the UK population. They're too simple to understand politics or news and are just deluded simpletons that blindly follow whatever is printed in the tabloids. If only they could be enlightened academic Guardian readers like us, they'd see the real truth, they really would

[hypochondriac]

The whole reason for that was to try and take as many votes away from Labour as possible to stop 'Red Ed' getting into no 10. Either side of the border they simply sided with whoever had the best chance of beating Labour, to increase the likelihood of the Tories getting elected. Don't try and paint it out to be just pandering to the readership. It was a deliberate, calculated strategy to try to keep the Tories in power because they are the party most friendly to their interests.

 

I really don't think the public are as thick as those on the left would believe. I simply don't believe that the majority vote a certain way because a paper tells them to. People tend to buy things that already mirror their ideas. I'm sure there are some gullible older people who swallow lies or exaggerations but I doubt it's that high a percentage. The way some of you go on it's like the sun and the rest of the mainstream media have brainwashed the nation. I give the public more credit than that.

[badgerx16]

I simply don't believe that the majority vote a certain way because a paper tells them to.

 

This is probably true, but when the Prime Minister stands up in front of live TV cameras from across the world and states that the leader of the Labour Party 'hates Britain', how is he expecting people to react to it ?

[Jonnyboy]

No, I doubt many floating voters read the Express or Mail. Its still corrosive though. Every time I see my mum she's worrying about some made up piece of crap about Labour seizing her home or stealing her pension. It would be funny if it weren't true, for her and millions of older people who get their news from printed media. If editorial had to abide by the same standards adverts do most of it would never get printed.

 

Ditto. Mine genuinely believed Ed Milliband was a communist.

[Batman]

This is probably true, but when the Prime Minister stands up in front of live TV cameras from across the world and states that the leader of the Labour Party 'hates Britain', how is he expecting people to react to it ?

 

do you believe Dave?

[hypochondriac]

This is probably true, but when the Prime Minister stands up in front of live TV cameras from across the world and states that the leader of the Labour Party 'hates Britain', how is he expecting people to react to it ?

 

I expect most people will realise it's a silly comment and deliberately exaggerated to make a political point. I really doubt many people genuinely believe that corbyn hates Britain merely because Cameron gets it written for him in a speech just as I don't reckon he knows what the great British bakeoff is but that didn't stop them trying to capitalise on that popularity either.

[hypochondriac]

Ditto. Mine genuinely believed Ed Milliband was a communist.

 

The good news is that even if there are this mass of geriatrics voting the way the mail tells them, it appears that the young aren't afflicted with the same gullibility so hopefully it will die out in time.

[aintforever]

I really don't think the public are as thick as those on the left would believe. I simply don't believe that the majority vote a certain way because a paper tells them to. People tend to buy things that already mirror their ideas. I'm sure there are some gullible older people who swallow lies or exaggerations but I doubt it's that high a percentage. The way some of you go on it's like the sun and the rest of the mainstream media have brainwashed the nation. I give the public more credit than that.

 

I think you underestimate the power of the media and overestimate the intellect of the average voter.

[Jonnyboy]

Not everyone shallows everything they read in this manner.

 

Why do companies spend billions on advertising each year then? Because the media is very powerful influence on people. Much of politics is a propaganda war.

[hypochondriac]

I think you underestimate the power of the media and overestimate the intellect of the average voter.

 

That's the typical left wing response and one I reject. It's easier to pretend that the majority of the British public are brainwashed and easily influenced by the media rather than the truth which is that the majority of the British public simply don't want what the left are selling currently. The idea of a passive audience died out for advertisers a long time ago- maybe those who blame the media when people vote conservative should do the same. If only the media hadn't existed then ed would have won by a landslide right?

[hypochondriac]

Why do companies spend billions on advertising each year then? Because the media is very powerful influence on people. Much of politics is a propaganda war.

 

Of course media has an influence and I have never pretended it didn't. But some on here are vastly overestimating the influence of the media and suggesting that the majority are a bunch of gormless idiots unable to formally any opinions for themselves. I don't believe that is true and I don't believe that people voted conservative because the paper told them to.

[Whitey Grandad]

The good news is that even if there are this mass of geriatrics voting the way the mail tells them, it appears that the young aren't afflicted with the same gullibility so hopefully it will die out in time.

 

Geriatrics have a vote too.

[hypochondriac]

Geriatrics have a vote too.

 

Eh? I know they do but it appears that the younger generations aren't afflicted as badly with the swallowing whatever the paper tells them gene if the experience of posters on here is anything to go by.

 

Given time this should mean that this apparent influence will diminish.

[Guided Missile]

You need a caring society to have a caring society. It's nothing to do with whether politicians care about society. All they care about is votes.

 

Anyway, in the end society gets the government it deserves. We have done nothing to deserve a Labour government.

[Guided Missile]

Is it the government's fault that many of those that are poor and homeless are in that situation because of the abuse of drugs and/or alcohol?

 

Just asking....

[Guided Missile]

I'm off to the pub...

[Johnny Bognor]

I think Cameron's attack was unnecessary. He doesn't need to get involved in that type of bull****.

It should be easy enough to defeat Corbyn's ideas with a little bit of basic common sense.

 

His attack lacks class and looks like the type of response someone gives, when they've lost the argument.

 

Play the ball, not the man (afterall this is a footy forum afterall)

[Whitey Grandad]

Eh? I know they do but it appears that the younger generations aren't afflicted as badly with the swallowing whatever the paper tells them gene if the experience of posters on here is anything to go by.

 

Given time this should mean that this apparent influence will diminish.

 

Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps they have a better and more balanced view of the world than the young?

 

People buy papers for all sorts of reasons. I get them for the puzzles.

[hypochondriac]

Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps they have a better and more balanced view of the world than the young?

 

People buy papers for all sorts of reasons. I get them for the puzzles.

 

Yeah it has. If you read what I wrote then I wasn't the one claiming that about older people. It was the likes of Tim saying it about his mum, I don't believe it to be the norm except in a few cases.

[buctootim]

I think Cameron's attack was unnecessary. He doesn't need to get involved in that type of bull****.

It should be easy enough to defeat Corbyn's ideas with a little bit of basic common sense.

 

His attack lacks class and looks like the type of response someone gives, when they've lost the argument.

 

Play the ball, not the man (afterall this is a footy forum afterall)

 

Good post. There is plenty of fertile ground to attack Corbyn's policies. Impugning his patriotism or pretending he thought Bin Laden's death was a tragedy just diminishes respect fro the Tories, and i say that as a floating voter.

[JackFrost]

I think Cameron's attack was unnecessary. He doesn't need to get involved in that type of bull****.

It should be easy enough to defeat Corbyn's ideas with a little bit of basic common sense.

 

His attack lacks class and looks like the type of response someone gives, when they've lost the argument.

 

Play the ball, not the man (afterall this is a footy forum afterall)

 

Totally agree,

 

I was disappointed with Cameron there

[Whitey Grandad]

Yeah it has. If you read what I wrote then I wasn't the one claiming that about older people. It was the likes of Tim saying it about his mum, I don't believe it to be the norm except in a few cases.

 

Ok, thanks, my apologies for the misunderstanding.

[aintforever]

That's the typical left wing response and one I reject. It's easier to pretend that the majority of the British public are brainwashed and easily influenced by the media rather than the truth which is that the majority of the British public simply don't want what the left are selling currently. The idea of a passive audience died out for advertisers a long time ago- maybe those who blame the media when people vote conservative should do the same. If only the media hadn't existed then ed would have won by a landslide right?

 

It's nothing to do with being right or left, the media do have an influence, how much is debatable. Milliband would not have won regardless though because he was unelectable. If Labour had a decent leader and the press on their side there could have been a different result though IMO.

[hypochondriac]

It's nothing to do with being right or left, the media do have an influence, how much is debatable. Milliband would not have won regardless though because he was unelectable. If Labour had a decent leader and the press on their side there could have been a different result though IMO.

 

Good I'm glad we agree. Let's not pretend that labour lost because the public were brainwashed by the media then.

[aintforever]

Good I'm glad we agree. Let's not pretend that labour lost because the public were brainwashed by the media then.

 

I never did. Fact is no one knows what the outcome would have been with an unbiased press so let's not pretend we do.

[hypochondriac]

I never did. Fact is no one knows what the outcome would have been with an unbiased press so let's not pretend we do.

 

You didn't but that was the basis of this discussion in the first place (that loads of people voted tory simply because of what they have read in the papers.) clearly the main reasons they lost are because their policies were rubbish and Ed was rubbish. Acting like it was because of brainwashing from the media does a disservice to the average British voter.

[buctootim]

but that was the basis of this discussion in the first place (that loads of people voted tory simply because of what they have read in the papers.)

Except they didnt and it wasn't. What goes on inside your head bears little resemblance to what goes on outside it.

[Lord Duckhunter]

I never did. Fact is no one knows what the outcome would have been with an unbiased press so let's not pretend we do.

 

How can you have an " unbiased " press ? What do you want reporting that states " Today David Cameron said x y and z" . **** me , yould only need one paper and it would be pretty boring . Bias is seen through the prism of your own views. I think the Guardian is biased and a bunch of sandal wearing half baked lefties read it . A leftie would consider it balanced and in line with British values . How on earth can you have a unbiased opinion piece . I thought Thersea May made a balanced and sensible speech , whereas a load of lefties are screaming that she's Enoch Powell in a skirt. What do you want a bias police to check for bias in the papers

[hypochondriac]

Except they didnt and it wasn't. What goes on inside your head bears little resemblance to what goes on outside it.

 

Sorry Tim but you're the main culprit- going on about your mum etc. You're wrong on this one as usual.

[buctootim]

How can you have an " unbiased " press ? What do you want reporting that states " Today David Cameron said x y and z" . **** me , yould only need one paper and it would be pretty boring . Bias is seen through the prism of your own views. I think the Guardian is biased and a bunch of sandal wearing half baked lefties read it . A leftie would consider it balanced and in line with British values . How on earth can you have a unbiased opinion piece . I thought Thersea May made a balanced and sensible speech , whereas a load of lefties are screaming that she's Enoch Powell in a skirt. What do you want a bias police to check for bias in the papers

 

Its simple. You have a code along the lines of what adverts must comply with - basically honest, decent and true. Bold, Ariel and Persil all manage to advertise claiming they're the best without saying the Unilever CEO's dad hated Britain. You can and should have diversity of opinion and interpretation of events, policies and facts. Ive no issue with the Telegraph or Spectator, its facts through a right wing prism. Hounding people asnd distorting the truth is a totally different matter. Its not solely a political thing - most people would agree phone hacking, upskirt shots of celebrities and simple crap made up is beyond the norm of reasonable behaviour.

Edited 7 October, 2015 by buctootim

[Sour Mash]

Milliband would not have won regardless though because he was unelectable.

 

Fact is no one knows what the outcome would have been with an unbiased press so let's not pretend we do.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Its simple. You have a code along the lines of what adverts must comply with - basically honest, decent and true. Bold, Ariel and Persil all manage to advertise claiming they're the best without saying the Unilever CEO's dad hated Britain

 

But what's decent and true . Opinions and politics are basically more nuanced than simple right or wrong . Why is saying Corbyn hates Britain any different than saying Cameron hates the poor . Surely saying the NHS is not safe under the Tory government is either true or untrue depending on your politics , rather than any actual facts . There are already laws against lies but quite rightly there are no laws against opinions or your conclusions you gain from studying others views . If you believe that Corbyn or Milliband snrs policies mean that in your opinion he hates Britain , that's a perfectly legitimate conclusion to reach .,it is for the electorate or consumers to judge that opinion , not the law. Just as a court or law can not rule on whether the Tories are " balancing the books on the back of the poor " , or selling the nhs to their " mates in the city "

[Sheaf Saint]

You didn't but that was the basis of this discussion in the first place (that loads of people voted tory simply because of what they have read in the papers.) clearly the main reasons they lost are because their policies were rubbish and Ed was rubbish. Acting like it was because of brainwashing from the media does a disservice to the average British voter.

 

You are correct that the principal reason why Ed lost was because he was a weakling with bad policies. But I agree with aintforever - you clearly do overestimate the average intelligence of the average British voter. The amount of ignorant, mis-informed b*ll*cks I encounter in my daily life is truly staggering. In my experience, most working class people tend to take at face value what they read in the press when it comes to politics. Cameron and co know this full well, and have exploited it as much as possible over the last decade.

 

Using the propaganda machine of the Murdoch press, the Tories successfully managed to implant the idea into people's minds that it was the Brown government that was responsible for the global banking crisis that crashed the economy by repeating it ad infinitum until people just accepted it as fact. It's truly astonishing the amount of people I have discussed this with who simply have no idea what actually caused it and find it much easier to just blame whoever was in government at the time.

 

In 2010, the Tories issued a contract to the public stating clearly what they intended to achieve and asking the voters to 'kick us out in 5 years time if we fail'....

 

 

So did they remind the electorate of this in the run up to the 2015 election? Of course they didn't, you wouldn't expect them to. But they went a whole lot further than that - they tried to have every single mention of it removed from the internet as if it never existed in the first place. That's an Orwellian level of re-writing history.

 

You ought to have a read of Owen Jones' book The Establishment, And How They Get Away With It. You probably won't, because I suspect you would think he's just a biased leftie, but during his research he spoke at length with many people outside of government, from journalists to heads of supposedly independent think-tanks (whom he describes as 'Outriders' for the right-wing elite) who openly admit to just how devious and calculated the propaganda machine has been operating since the election of Maggie Thatcher to shift the range of acceptable public opinion (the Overton Window) to the right. It is a very sobering read.

Edited 7 October, 2015 by Sheaf Saint

[Lord Duckhunter]

Owen jones quoted in a discussion about right wing bias . Lol. Next up Keith Richards on how to lead a sober life

Edited 7 October, 2015 by Lord Duckhunter

[Sheaf Saint]

You ought to have a read of Owen Jones' book The Establishment, And How They Get Away With It. You probably won't, because I suspect you would think he's just a biased leftie

 

Owen jones quoteded in a discussion about right wing bias . Lol

 

Point proved.

 

Regardless of what you think of him as a journalist, the book contains transcripts of interviews with people who are/were directly involved in the propaganda machine for the right-wing elite. It's not just the opinion of someone who disagrees with them.

Edited 7 October, 2015 by Sheaf Saint

[Lord Duckhunter]

Point proved.

 

Regardless of what you think of him as a journalist, the book contains transcripts of interviews with people who are/were directly involved in the propaganda machine for the right-wing elite. It's not just the opinion of someone who disagrees with them.

 

And I'm sure if my mummy let me I could be like Little Owen Jones and find the infiltration of charities , quangos and the bbc by Leftie " outriders" .

[Jonnyboy]

How can you have an " unbiased " press ? What do you want reporting that states " Today David Cameron said x y and z" . **** me , yould only need one paper and it would be pretty boring . Bias is seen through the prism of your own views. I think the Guardian is biased and a bunch of sandal wearing half baked lefties read it . A leftie would consider it balanced and in line with British values . How on earth can you have a unbiased opinion piece . I thought Thersea May made a balanced and sensible speech , whereas a load of lefties are screaming that she's Enoch Powell in a skirt. What do you want a bias police to check for bias in the papers

 

Well even the Telegraph is calling her speech dangerous and factually innaccurate (lol, ie full of lies).

[Lord Duckhunter]

Well even the Telegraph is calling her speech dangerous and factually innaccurate (lol, ie full of lies).

 

Lol indeed . Lol at what constitutes "The Telegraph ".

 

Telegraph view ? no that said May was right .

 

What you should have put was "James Kirkup in The Telegraph called her speech ect ect ", otherwise people might think you were telling lies or trying to mislead people .

Edited 8 October, 2015 by Lord Duckhunter

[Sheaf Saint]

And I'm sure if my mummy let me I could be like Little Owen Jones

 

And here was me thinking I was debating with mature adults

[JackFrost]

 

Using the propaganda machine of the Murdoch press, the Tories successfully managed to implant the idea into people's minds that it was the Brown government that was responsible for the global banking crisis that crashed the economy by repeating it ad infinitum until people just accepted it as fact. It's truly astonishing the amount of people I have discussed this with who simply have no idea what actually caused it and find it much easier to just blame whoever was in government at the time.

 

Labour didn't cause the global financial crisis but they spent, spent spent right up until it happened. As for Gordon he was sticking two fingers up at anyone who was expressing concern at the size of the deficit, years before the global crisis happened.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2005/apr/18/politics.ukgeneralelection20051

 

Then just before the crisis hit over here in the 2nd half of 2007 Blair stood down and Gordon Brown got the job he'd always wanted.

 

Course, Blair never saw that coming. . .

[JackanorySFC]

Left wingers not getting their way in the polls so blaming the British public that didn't happen to agree with their political beliefs for being thick/ stupid/ easily led. Some of the comments here are absolutely astonishing. The patronising tone of some of the left wing posters on here is actually quite offensive and completely out of touch with the way people inform themselves and make decisions.

 

This arrogant, superior, looking down one's nose nonsense is exactly the reason why the ordinary working man and woman (who, like it or not, have never been more informed via multiple media touch points) is drifting further and further away from the political left. Whatever happened to simply admitting "yeah we got that wrong, OK what can we learn from it and change in time for next time?" Instead they are showing more pig headedness than a Eton School soggy biscuit for starters initiation ceremony, concluding everyone else is stupid so going completely the opposite way.

[hypochondriac]

Precisely jackanory. You've summed it up...

[Patrick Bateman]

Left wingers not getting their way in the polls so blaming the British public that didn't happen to agree with their political beliefs for being thick/ stupid/ easily led. Some of the comments here are absolutely astonishing. The patronising tone of some of the left wing posters on here is actually quite offensive and completely out of touch with the way people inform themselves and make decisions.

 

This arrogant, superior, looking down one's nose nonsense is exactly the reason why the ordinary working man and woman (who, like it or not, have never been more informed via multiple media touch points) is drifting further and further away from the political left. Whatever happened to simply admitting "yeah we got that wrong, OK what can we learn from it and change in time for next time?" Instead they are showing more pig headedness than a Eton School soggy biscuit for starters initiation ceremony, concluding everyone else is stupid so going completely the opposite way.

 

Great post, sir!

[aintforever]

How can you have an " unbiased " press ? What do you want reporting that states " Today David Cameron said x y and z" . **** me , yould only need one paper and it would be pretty boring . Bias is seen through the prism of your own views. I think the Guardian is biased and a bunch of sandal wearing half baked lefties read it . A leftie would consider it balanced and in line with British values . How on earth can you have a unbiased opinion piece . I thought Thersea May made a balanced and sensible speech , whereas a load of lefties are screaming that she's Enoch Powell in a skirt. What do you want a bias police to check for bias in the papers

 

You can't have an unbiased press, I never said you could just that it was biased.

 

Try learning to read.

[aintforever]

 

It could have been a different outcome without a Milliband win you thick ***t. It could have been a hung parliament.

[Whitey Grandad]

Well even the Telegraph is calling her speech dangerous and factually innaccurate (lol, ie full of lies).

 

Don't believe everything you read in the press.

[saint1977]

Left wingers not getting their way in the polls so blaming the British public that didn't happen to agree with their political beliefs for being thick/ stupid/ easily led. Some of the comments here are absolutely astonishing. The patronising tone of some of the left wing posters on here is actually quite offensive and completely out of touch with the way people inform themselves and make decisions.

 

This arrogant, superior, looking down one's nose nonsense is exactly the reason why the ordinary working man and woman (who, like it or not, have never been more informed via multiple media touch points) is drifting further and further away from the political left. Whatever happened to simply admitting "yeah we got that wrong, OK what can we learn from it and change in time for next time?" Instead they are showing more pig headedness than a Eton School soggy biscuit for starters initiation ceremony, concluding everyone else is stupid so going completely the opposite way.

 

Well, here's the view from the floating voter in the centre, not the left like some posters here and not the Thatcher right like you. Whoever isn't in power and out of favour always feels the opposition have duped the electorate, I was an undergraduate in 1997 when Blair won the election and you can take it from me (I was at a largely Conservative supporting university) that the right were furious at Blair's wooing of the media, especially Rupert M. The arguments back then and in 2001 after I'd graduated sounded remarkably similar. Other more radical right wing groups (such as the Countryside Alliance) sought to disrupt the Labour government by organising strikes and disorder, just as the unions have at times with the Tories in power. They were also moaning that Labour was a largely metropolitan party which didn't understand the countryside (some truth in that if you look at the last few elections although they were overstating rather and were overwrought by the fox-hunting ban. They tend to hold similar views about Cameron and Osborne as well). So what you hearing now is different, but also very similar to those times.

 

Neither party ever fully admits to getting it wrong, the banks got away with murder and Labour wouldn't admit to it's regulatory failures which led to it, the right blamed over-spending which was an oversimplification which ignored some chronic market failures which still aren't fixed and the dopey old taxpayer, small businesses and public sector had to sort out the private banks' mess. Bad, wasteful spending of which Labour was clearly guilty of (e.g NHS IT system), yes, but spending efficiently and proportinately ahead of when needed on your infrastructure, education system and R&D are never bad things if well directed, although some on here will never agree with any state spending or even having a state.

 

The sensible people work with whatever government is in power and make the best of it.