So here we are, the 22nd of July 2019, the day before we know who our new Prime Minister is to be here in Great Britain. It is pretty clear that this will be Boris Johnson (if it’s Jeremy Hunt then there will have been some major league “stitch up” occurred). Let’s face it, bookmakers are usually “right” about such things and as of 10.00 GMT 22/07/2019 the odds on Boris winning are 1.01 and on Jeremy Hunt 65 (if you’re not familiar with “decimal odds” basically the lower the number, eg closer to “1” the more likely to “win”), the gap between 1.01 and 65 is “pretty damn big”. However, if you stick a tenner on Jeremy Hunt and he wins you’d make a lot of profit and yes I put money on Boris, long before the odds went down to 1.01 as they are now.
Alas United Kingdom is a divided nation as far as the populace is concerned now, with the populace and our politicians arguing (still) over “Brexit”. Without trying to make too many generalisations (but it holds roughly “true”) on the remain side we have remainers, people who voted remain (fair play to them to be fair, we had a vote and whilst many are displeased with the result they accept it, they understand the concept of “vox populi” and respect the majority vote of 2016’s referendum). Then we have leavers (who arguably have “right” on their side as no matter how you slice and dice it 52% > 48% and a majority ruling for “leave”). Then we come to the “discontented”, the so called “remoaners” who are doing everything they can to BACK the status quo and force the United Kingdom to remain in the European Union (hereafter referred to as the EU).
Of course the most vocal remoaners of all are mostly Members Of Parliament, which of course where most of the attempts to block our EU departure happen, which is understandable and has come about due to the efforts of Gina Miller who took the United Kingdom Government court to ensure a “meaningful vote” was held on our EU departure terms. Gina Miller did this because she knew it would obfuscate the process and keep us tied to the EU in the process, presumably in the hope the government would just “give up” concluding it was easier to just remain an EU member? Ironically though Gina Miller did leave a favour because the “deal” our Prime Minister came back from Brussels (the so called Withdrawal Agreement Bill) was truly atrocious, more of a surrender to the EU and not much of a so called “deal” to be seen. Our MPs rightly rejected it three times in Parliament, so they’re not totally incompetent.
We’ve gone beyond what MPs want now though. No matter how you present the numbers the aforementioned 52% in favour of leave is still greater than 48% to remain. The arguing has to stop, the so called remoaners are tearing the United Kingdom apart with the constant battles to halt our withdrawal from the EU, especially the remoaners in the Houses Of Parliament, people like David Gauke, Keir Starmer and Philip Hammond to name but a few. I understand and respect Parliamentary sovereignty, HOWEVER, we had a referendum and the majority said “leave”, there was no mention of a “deal”, no mention of single markets, customs unions or anything else. We were asked “leave or remain” and the majority said “leave”. After 3 years of obfuscation, delaying tactics, sheer “bloody mindedness” and remoaner based manipulation it’s time to “bite the bullet” and leave.
Boris Johnson needs to address exactly that spirit, quickly and affirmatively. Clearly it’s no longer the 1930s or 1940s but what we need is more “Churchill spirit” and a lot less “Chamberlain meh but spirit” now. Leaving with “no deal” isn’t going to be easy, but it’s clear the EU is unlikely to offer us a real “deal” as oppose to Theresa May’s surrender and the leave date being 31st of October 2019 is far too close for anything to actually change anyway (I mean come on, it’s taken Conservatives a month just to decide who’s going to be the next Prime Minister, so set up a trade agreement in 3 months? Good luck with that idea). It’s time for a “Churchill moment”, let’s just hope Boris can deliver one. Boris himself knows this, hence this Daily Telegraph article. I know my support accounts for “diddley squat” in the greater scheme of things but I’m behind him and wish for his success.
So here we are, the 23rd of June. Memorable for certain reasons, firstly for “hell I was basting in my own sweat this time last year, where’s the damn summer gone?” but most importantly for being the 3rd anniversary of Great Britain’s Referendum on EU membership in which it was announced (on the 24th naturally) that the people of Great Britain had voted “leave” by 52%.
Yet we have been betrayed by our political “elite” ever since that day. I’m used to people arguing about results of elections/referendums/votes, after all who can forget Charlotte Church screaming down the Tories after the 2015 General Election? Yet these sort of demonstrations usually fade away and life goes on and the vote is respected. Not so with the EU Referendum alas, it has been a 3 year onslaught of constant betrayals, remainer spin, media bias and a never-ending attempt to derail what was, a majority vote, eg the “vox populi”.
Academically my background is primarily psychology, in particular mental health and psychology of religion (a sort of unknown nobody version of Jordan Peterson, lol!) but it wasn’t always so. Before returning to university, despite having more than adequate qualifications to go straight into university, I did opt to go back to college for a year just to be sure I “was ready” for it and I’m glad I did, for I studied a range of disciplines including politics and economics. The history of politics is fascinating and in this particular scenario the history of democracy.
Basically we have the Greeks to thank for it and the word democracy itself comes from Greek and means “rule by people”. In modern democracy we elect people to represent us and they follow the will of the people (aka the “vox populi“, a Latin phrase meaning “voice of the people”). Now pragmatically our elected leaders (Parliament in the case of the United Kingdom) can’t keep going to the public and saying “do we do this or that or something else?” so we only give those “people” a voice for the really “big stuff”, be it via the opportunity to elect new leaders (a General Election) or on important issues via a referendum. “Do we stay in the EU yes/no?” certainly comes under “big stuff”, ergo a referendum was held and rightly so.
Some facts to consider:
Before the referendum we were constantly assured our vote “counts”.
- June 2015 our MPs voted in support of the referendum by 544 to 43.
- Every single eligible voter was sent a card (I believe the government called it a referendum leaflet or something like that).
- In the 2017 General Election both Conservative and Labour stood on manifesto COMMITMENTS to implement the Brexit referendum result and leave the EU and all its associated “stuff” such as the Customs Union and the Single Market etc.
- Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour promised “to respect the result of the referendum” and that “the freedom of movement would end once we leave the EU”.
- Our Prime Minister (then, she is soon to be a mere blip in history) said she would negotiate hard with the EU, she would be “that difficult woman”, she also said “no deal is better than a bad deal”, she said “Brexit is Brexit” (whatever that’s supposed to impute).
- Theresa May publicly declared we are leaving the EU no less than 108 times.
- March 29th 2019, the “leave the EU” deadline came and went, still no Brexit ….
- The “deal” Theresa May did bring forward was a disgrace, an embarassment, a surrender to the EU.
This has been betrayal after betrayal, a constant barrage of defeat snapped from the jaws of victory if you will. We now have a “deadline” of October the 31st (Halloween and the day after my birthday!).
I make no secret of the fact I voted to leave, for a number of reasons, some not the usual reasons of the MAJORITY, some in common with the majority. But EVEN if I had voted remain I would be pushing for us to leave. Why? Because this is not about “nobody voted to be poorer”, this is not about “but the economy”, this is not about “but British Aerospace jobs”. This is about everything our political system is built on, the very democratic foundation of the way the country is run. Let’s be honest, despite being a democracy, the people’s voices aren’t “heard”, the people are, for the most part, ignored by the “elites” in Parliament. To not enact the will of a majority vote of the people is just totally and utterly WRONG, on so many levels and one step towards a dictatorship. Think I’m exaggerating? Hardly, in a dictatorship the “leaders” get to do what they want and “sod everyone else”, are we not edging ever closer to that if we ignore the referendum result?
It’s time now to be “blunt”, the United Kingdom needs to “sh*t and get off the pot” and just leave the EU and be done with it.
** Previously published article, brought back for reasons I have no need nor desire to go into **
You’ve all heard of Amazon right? Oh, come on surely you all have. I myself started using Amazon.com back in the 1990s, when Amazon.co.uk was but a twinkle in its .com daddy’s eyes. I discovered it mainly because of university, more precisely university books and how much the damn things cost if you bought them from “bricks and mortar” bookshops and like most people I never gave much thought to how Amazon could sell them cheaper than Waterstones or whatever bookshop was around, I was an academic damn it! Not a damn entrepreneur and/or business man. I was just glad to save a few dollars (yeah I bought from the .com site then) on my books, especially as I could pay £24.99 here or $19.99 with delivery, it was a no brainer for me and probably every other student I told about it.
Fast forward a couple of years and I started selling things on eBay and on Amazon BIG TIME. My business was the highest rated eBay UK seller account for a number of years and the Amazon feedback and rating wasn’t too shabby either but it was always tough, no matter what you sold some ba*&^rd (usually Amazon) was selling what we sold but cheaper and like every eBay seller I could never quite get my head round “how” exactly. As I understand it (I’m not sure there’s a class about this specifically if you’re an MBA student but maybe) there’s a sort of “unwritten rule” that 40% of a retail price has to be profit to the retailer, anything less is basically considered “not worth getting out of bed for.” So let’s have a look at some mathematics here:
1 x Marley & Me DVD – Wholesale price £13.61 plus VAT (this is just an example, it was that price when it was released, it isn’t worth squat now) = £16.33 just to get it from a DVD wholesaler (a rare beast these days, they’ve virtually all gone under.) Amazon probably got a “discount” on that £13.61 of up to 40% (I never heard of anybody getting more than that, even the “mighty” Amazon) = £13.61 -40% plus VAT = £9.80 and Amazon probably flogged it for £10.99 maybe? That’s not a lot of profit % there. So looking at Amazon’s business model back in my eBay/Amazon (I no longer sell on either) era I tended to scratch my head and go “eh? You what? Run that by me again.”
It turns out Amazon doesn’t make any money. Worse still, for Amazon (but not for CEO Jeff Bezos but we’ll come back to that) the shareholders are starting to get a bit pi**ed about this little fact. Since Amazon’s launch (.com was the first in the USA) in 1994 Amazon has struggled to actually break even, let alone make a profit. Rejecting standards of success such as “loads of dollars in the bank and happy shareholders kerching” Amazon measures its success with stuff like “profitless prosperity.”
You’ll just have to “imagine” the concubines I guess ….
So we come to: profitless prosperity. This is basically a way of saying that the company is growing and growing until it reaches a critical point when it becomes all powerful and makes so much money the directors and shareholders will be diving into swimming pools of Dollars, Pounds and Euros whilst surrounded by hordes of gorgeous concubines and admirers (but presumably no ducks) and being finally able to buy a gold plated Rolls Royce or something equally pointless. Despite having had an extensive university education none of it was in business or finance but I have learnt a handful of “rules” over the years:
- There’s ALWAYS competition (unless you’re the first, in which case there soon will be competition.)
- Some ba*&^rd will always but always come along thinking “I can sell that as well but cheaper, we’ll be rich mwuahahaha.”
- Nothing lasts forever.
- Don’t buy shares in Amazon (something else we’ll come back to later.)
Amazon also have something called “free cash flow” which at $2 billion a year sounds mighty impressive don’t it? Heck, what I could do with $2 billion a year, I’d be up to my eyeballs in concubines and gold plated Aston Martins. Trouble is free cash flow in pragmatic terms basically means “the money we pay suppliers with on time.” Well, errr, paying suppliers is kind of important you know? Amazon wouldn’t have a business at all if they didn’t do that and that money comes under “expense” on your Excel spreadsheet (although I’m guessing Amazon’s finance department has gone beyond Excel?) and not under “net profit.”
Yeah, I actually Googled for gold plated Aston Martins and found one …
For some reason I can’t quite get, these are seen as indicators of a good, solid and successful business model. I can see why Amazon is so big, a lot of people are “vultures” (I mean this in a kind way, I do understand you want to save money) and if widget A is cheaper at Amazon than at Target/Gamestop/Virgin Records/HMV/whatever then people will buy widget A at Amazon. The harsh truth here is the average “man in the street” doesn’t care if Amazon goes under tomorrow as long as he only paid $10 delivered for Taylor Swift’s latest CD as oppose to $15 from the shop up the road. It’s not the man in the street’s problem after all.
So how did Amazon get so big? It’s a PLC, a public limited company. Some basic explanation here as I realise not everybody will understand how this works (feel free to skip down a few sentences if you want.) In the United Kingdom where I reside there are essentially three main types of business:
- A sole trader. This is someone who starts a business for themselves and they are essentially “the business”, if it goes under money wise they go under as well. This tends to be your basic stuff like taxi drivers, couriers, small shop owners and the like. Don’t be fooled by “sole”, a sole trader can still have employees, the “sole” part just means one person is the business from a legal perspective.
- A limited company. This is where a company is registered with a government organisation (in the case of the United Kingdom Companies House) and the “one person” who registers the company owns one “share” of the company for which they pay £1.00 (sterling, about US $1.60) and the company becomes a “legal entity” in its own right, if it goes under it goes under but the shareholder doesn’t go under because he/she isn’t legally responsible for the company although they have an obligation to keep the company in good standing and accountable to scrutiny etc.
- A PLC, a public limited company. Most limited companies start as 1 person 1 share 1 pound although if two people start it 1 person may have 1 share the other 4 shares so the owner of 4 shares gets 80% of the profit (4+1=5 and 4 = 80% of 5 etc) or it may be a 1 share each 50/50 arrangement, whatever. Later on a limited company (I presume a company has to be limited as a prerequisite to becoming a PLC) can “float” their company on the stock market and make available more “shares” of the company to all and sundry, this is a “public” (hence the all and sundry) limited company. The shares are then bought and sold on the stock market, you can buy some shares at say £2.50 each today and maybe next week they’ll be worth £5.00 at which point you can sell them, kerching 100% profit minus a bit of commission and money in the bank.)
Amazon is a public limited company. I myself owned several thousand pounds worth of shares in Amazon until I sold them last year, spring 2014 to be precise. In October 2014 Amazon’s shares took a hit and lost 20% of their value (I was a bit early in selling them but spring was better than October obviously!) and Amazon made a loss of US $437,000,000 for the YEAR, a tenfold increase on the previous year’s loss. January 2015 and the next “loss” is US $241,000,000, damn that’s a lot of money. Naturally Amazon’s directors are keen to reassure the shareholders (not me I’m out) but it doesn’t look good does it?
Remember that £1.00 a share to start the business? When a £1.00 a share limited company becomes a public limited company and grows and the value of shares goes up the directors (themselves being members of the public as well as directors) can buy more shares in the company, and that’s how the CEO of Amazon Jeff Bezos got to be worth US $3800,000,000 so he’s alright (as long as he sells them quickly) even if Amazon went bankrupt tomorrow …. It comes across to me as a sort of “retail charity”, all it achieves is giving consumers cheaper products giving nothing back to the shareholders, the people who basically invested in Amazon (granted some were just hoping to buy them and flog them later for a profit like myself), but if it went under think how many people would lose their jobs and businesses that would go under because they supply Amazon and so on.
It’s all a bit grim if you ask me.
Well it’s time to bring this back to your attention as someone I know has been “suckered” by them. There’s a company going around that basically promises to give you cheaper gas, electricity, internet and telephone, they are called Utility Whorehouse Shithouse Warehouse. It all sounds good but it’s a lie, a big fat lie at that.
First of all this is how it works: They give you a quote for what your bills will be and it’s always better than what you’re paying currently paying so off you go and sign up and the bills come in and they are cheaper BUT later on you suddenly find these bills are basically all “estimated” and you owe them a load of money and then when you sit down and work it all out it’s actually more expensive. Don’t be suckered by this, they are just a reseller of another company’s services, so how can they be cheaper? It’s not possible, they don’t buy gas and electricity “wholesale” like British Gas, Scottish Power and all the others who are REAL energy companies, this company is just a reseller so they can NEVER be cheaper.
Then there’s the pyramid scheme …. You can be more than just a customer, you can sign up and get a commission on all the suckers who become customers that you sign up, worse still (for them, maybe not for you) you can sign up other people to be sellers as well and you get a commission of their commission, bla la bla and so on. They call it “network marketing” but essentially it’s a pyramid scheme or multi level marketing and that means 99.9% of the people who sign up will fail to make any money and get ripped off. Because that’s the BUSINESS MODEL is: you pay the £200 (or whatever it is now, it was £200) and 99.9% of those £200 pound “joining fees” will end up lining the pockets of Utility Warehouse and you’ll make squat. Fortunately most people have common sense if someone knocks on their door and says you can get the cheapest gas or electricity etc and tells (as I would) them to go “boil your head” (or in my case something a lot less polite.)
When I signed up I should have known better, I’d been burned before (Herbalife), you had to get a minimum of 6 customers and then you started earning your monthly commissions. Trouble is it’s hard just to get that. People don’t believe you and rightly so. They say it’s easy but in reality if, like me, you’re the sort of person who can’t even sell £10 notes for £5 and not a natural sales-person you’re buggered. If you are a natural sales-person then yes you can make it work BUT if you were that person there’s far better ways to make far better money selling something more ethical.
The bastards never paid me my commission, despite getting the arbitrary “6 customers” and frankly the people who signed me up were no help at all and couldn’t give a shit about me. I was in desperate straits at the time, I had been suicidal and lost my home and business due to the recession and nobody gave a flying sh*t. Do you really want to deal with such a business?
MLM companies, bastards the lot of them, I hope you all burn in hell and I wouldn’t urinate on Utility Warehouse if they were on fire, I’d chuck some petrol on instead.
Was perusing an old hard drive last night when I came across some MP3s I didn’t recognise. They turned out to be a selection of comedy sketches, some Ben Elton for example, Eddie Izzard and Derek and Clive …. I’d forgotten about Derek and Clive, although of course it’s all a “bit before my time” whereas Ben Elton was at his height when I was in my late teens.
If you’ve not heard Derek and Clive (Peter Cook & Dudley Moore) you might on first hearing consider this to be simply puerile and offensive drivel but I don’t know I find something humorous about it, but I’m a bloke so puerile and lavatory humour, well you get the idea. So anyway, Derek and Clive (according to my wife, she being significanlty older than me and remembering it so much better from the time) caused merry hell at the time and the complaints came streaming in, although I guess it wouldn’t cause so much outrage now as it did then. However, one sketch might, due to the fact that many people object to word “cunt.” This of course is called the “cunt Sketch” (how appropriate I guess.) Puerile? Offensive? Sure, but still funny and superb in its austere minimalism and at least they were funny unlike that total cunt Frankie Boyle ??
Here it is, in all it’s glory:
Dud: I tell you, the other day, some bloke came up to me, I dunno who it was, an’ he said, “You cunt.”
Dud: I said, “Wot?” ‘E said: “You cunt.”
Pete: Yeah, and you replied, “You fuckin’ cunt.”
Dud: I said … well, no, not straight away … I said: “You cunt,” I said …
Pete: Yeah, yeah …
Dud: … An’ then ‘e said …
Pete: … What’d he come back with?
Dud: ‘E come back, ‘e says, ‘e said “You fuckin’ cunt.”
Pete: You’re jokin’!
Dud: ‘E said, “You call me a …”
Pete: ‘E said “You fuckin’ cunt”?
Dud: ‘E said, “You call me a cunt? You fuckin’ cunt! …” I said, “You f—,” I said, “You fuckin’ cunt.”
Pete: I should ‘ope so. “You fuckin’ cunt …”
Dud: I said, “You fuckin’ cunt.” I said, “You fuckin’ come ‘ere an’ call me a fuckin’ cunt …”
Pete: I should say so.
Dud: I said, “You f—,” I said, “You cunt.” I said, “You fuckin’ cunt.” I said, “‘Oo are you fuckin’ callin’ cunt, cunt?”
Pete: Yeah, what’d ‘e say, cunt?
Dud: ‘E said, “You fuckin’ cunt!”
Pete: Well, you fuckin’ cunt! ‘Oo are you to say to ‘im that ‘e was a fuckin’ cunt?
Dud: Well, what d’you f—, what d’you fuckin’ think, mate? I’m fuckin’ defendin’ my fuckin’ self, aren’t I?
Pete: Well no. ‘E come up to you, call you “cunt,” that’s fair enough, or ‘e said, “You fuckin’ cunt,” an’ you said back to ‘im, “You fuckin’ fuckin’ cunt,” …
Dud: I said, well …
Pete: … well, what d’you expect ‘im to say back, apart from, “You fuckin’ stupid fuckin’ cunt”?
Dud: Well, I don’t … I don’t expect nothin’, do I?
Pete: No …
Dud: But the cunt come back with, “You fuckin’ cunt, cunt.”
Pete: Oh Christ.
Dud: I said, “You cunt?” I said, “You callin’ me a fuckin’ cunt? You fuckin’ …” I said, “You fuckin’ cunt.”
Pete: Jesus Christ, yeah.
Dud: I said, “You …,” I said, “You … you fuckin’ cunt!” …
Pete: Yeah …
Dud: … I said, like that.
Pete: Yeah. You said it, like that, did you? To ‘im.
Pete: Or was ‘e gone by then?
Dud: No, ‘e fuckin’ ‘it me. F— …
Pete: ‘It you, did ‘e?
Dud: Yeah, fuckin’ cunt.
Pete: Killed you dead, did ‘e?
Dud: No, ‘e … ‘e fuckin’ ‘it me.
Pete: Yeah, …
Dud: I said …
Pete: … well …
Dud: I said …
Pete: … you can’t blame ‘im, can you?
Dud: I said, “You … you rotter.”
Dud: An’ ‘e … ‘e went off.
Pete: Did ‘e?
Dud: An’ ‘e said, “You cunt,” again.
Pete: Well, that’s the only way to deal with ‘im, isn’t it?
Dud: Yeah, well, I showed ‘im, didn’t I?
Pete: Yeah, well, you ‘ad to, didn’t you? You ‘ad to stand up for what you stood for, didn’t you?
So our Prime Minister has finally announced her resignation and yes I’m glad. But do I feel any empathy for her? Do I feel any sympathy for her? Well, yes and no really.
I do empathise with her situation, she had a difficult job to do. It was never going to be easy with the EU’s bullying tactics and their desire to “make an example of the United Kingdom” so no other state would want to leave the EU. However, her “error” (in my eyes) was revealed glaringly in her resignation speech when she uttered that one word …. You know the one: “compromise” and that has been her downfall all along.
When the United Kingdom runs an election (or indeed in this scenario a referendum) there is a clear “winner”. This is because the United Kingdom is a democratic state and as such referendums and elections are held when deemed necessary to “listen” and enact the “vox populi” (voice of the people). Now obviously a democratic government can’t have a referendum on every single aspect of the state’s “running” so we have a system whereby we elect a political party that best represents what we stand for to enact the running of the state as they see fit, in the United Kingdom’s case: according to their manifesto (snigger). However, big “important” stuff we have a referendum and so we should; you know, stuff like “leaving the EU yes/no”. It’s not rocket science after all?
Therein lies the problem. Theresa May has been trying to “compromise”, she’s tried to keep leave (52%) happy and she’s tried to keep remain (48%) happy. This is instead of thinking “ok 52% is bigger than 48% so let’s go with that because it’s a majority”. Oh no, instead she’s tried to keep everybody happy and in the process annoyed virtually everybody. You can’t have a compromise in these scenarios and that’s where the state is going wrong. Leave won so just LEAVE. And what does Theresa May waffle on about in her resignation speech? “Compromise” …. Sigh.
I do sympathise with her, I know it’s not easy but that comes with the job. If you don’t want “grief”, if you don’t want “difficulty”, if you don’t want “abuse” then my advice is “don’t become a Public Servant”, because (let’s not forget this, it’s important) that’s what an MP (especially the Prime Minster) is, a PUBLIC SERVANT. Elected by the people to do a job, an MP is still, at the end of the day, a Public Servant.
Yes I feel some sympathy, it’d be heartless not to feel a little twinge of sympathy for her but it’s over now and like I say that’s the price you pay for that job, be it right or wrong you’re going to get grief.
I just hope now we can move on, a Brexiteer MP will become Prime Minster and does what Theresa May should have done and showed some backbone when dealing with the Eurocrats instead of basically rolling over and surrendering. Make no mistake, that’s what Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement Bill was: a surrender treaty. It certainly wasn’t a “deal”.
First up I have to tell you I am no conspiracy theorist. I have no patience with the idea of chemtrails, CIA/SIS (MI6) mind control or manipulating the weather via HAARP etc. The idea that a state government could organise a social engineering program on its populace is often ludicrous, simply because most of them couldn’t organise a booze-up in an off licence (liquor store if you’re not British). Let’s face it, if government was competent then we’d really be in the crap right?
Anyway, enough of the disclaiming (is that a real word?) and on to my “point”. Our illustrious political leader (snigger) has “negotiated” a deal with the behemoth that is the European Union and, to be frank, it’s a “well polished pile of you know what”, well in my opinion at least. So I put forward to you two possible “perspectives”:
- The Prime Minister has done a superb job and considering the complexities of Brexit etc the deal is well done and about as “good as it’s going to get”. Ergo, we should applaud her wondrous diplomatic negotiations and get behind her and so on.
Now like I said above I am no conspiracy theorist but let’s consider the following:
- The Prime Minister doesn’t really care about the whole thing because she’s the fall guy. She’s been an MP for several years but never really “shined” or been put forward for “greater things”, as her time as in the Home Office indicates.
- She’s coming up for retirement age and she was “put forward” (with other candidates standing aside one at a time, Andrea Leadsom etc) for Prime Minister with the intention of wrecking the negotiation, because the government wants us to stay in the EU.
- It wrecks her career essentially but she’s over 60, up for retirement and so on. As a former Prime Minister she’ll get a yearly allowance of £148,500 per annum and a £65,000 pension per annum (no state pension £120 a week here); she’s probably been offered a peerage; and also her husband is a multi-millionaire. All this money is worth wrecking your career over, heck most of us would gladly wreck their career for that sort of income !
- As my friend (who inspired this post) also pointed out: This is why she’s “thick skinned” about the whole business, it makes no odds to her because she’s far better off AFTER the whole business when she can retire, probably prompted by some sort of health scare (possibly diabetes related).
You know what? Conspiracy theorist or not the second scenario sounds far too plausible.
“Read the figures released yesterday that show more than 94,000 ‘hate crimes’ were committed over a 12-month period and you might imagine they all consisted of cases such as mosques being firebombed or Orthodox Jews being attacked in the street.
Those are, of course, very serious offences that deserve to be treated in the severest way.
At first sight, the statistics seem to suggest a rapidly rising intolerance of Britons towards each other — and give succour to the Government’s proposals to extend the definition of hate crime to include acts of misogyny, contempt towards the elderly and even misandry, or hatred of men.
But I can’t read those figures without remembering the many spurious cases where jokes, rude remarks or rough-and-tumble political debate have been recorded as ‘hate crimes’ or ‘hate incidents’.”
Well all I can say is “imagine my surprise”. Let’s face it you’re a struggling Police Force (I’m not going into the “let’s blame the Tories for cuts thing here) that needs to up its “crimes solved” figures. You’ve already milked motorists to death, what next? Oh, I know how about “hate crimes”? Let’s caution/arrest people for saying mean things on Twitter and/or Facebook, we have a winner!
“Take the Labour MP Barry Sheerman, who recently said that he had reported a pro-Brexit group to the police for including the hashtag ‘#Fascist’ in a tweet criticising Tory MP Anna Soubry for wanting to overturn the Brexit vote. It may be a ridiculous exaggeration — but a hate crime?”
That’s not a hate crime, having said that it’s Anna Soubry we’re talking about here, a thoroughly unpleasant woman who, despite her constituents voting “leave” in the UK Referendum on EU Membership (eg Brexit) imputed her constituents were “too stupid to vote” and she remains one of the most vocal “anti Brexit” MPs we have.
“There was the case, too, of a Somerset landlady investigated by police for using a Welsh flag as a target in a St George’s Day archery competition; and the Scottish man convicted of a hate crime for teaching his pet dog to perform a Nazi salute as a (not at all funny) joke.”
Again, not a hate crime, certainly should never have made it to court. Somewhat tasteless though I agree. On the plus side it got right up a lot of people’s noses and irritated the hell out of some extreme liberals so all is good there 😀
“Meanwhile, Nottinghamshire Police have been running a pilot scheme in which they treat wolf-whistling as a hate crime. Yes, they have been branding as ‘hate criminals’ scaffolders who whistle at female passers-by.
That might be boorish, but to try to elevate it to the same level as anti-Semitic rantings or racist abuse is ridiculous.”
All it achieves is to dilute genuine hate crimes.”
Again not a hate crime. Tacky for sure but not a hate crime. You want to know what a real hate crime is? One non indigenous section of the UK populace grooming young females of the UK’s indigenous population and sexually assaulting/raping them over a prolonged period of time. I don’t really need to provide a link do I? It’s been in the news enough in the last couple of years.
Let’s step back for a second and imagine we should “accept” these new definitions of hate crime …. All those MPs who called voters “low information” or “too stupid to know what they were voting for” or “little Englanders” or fascists/racists/waycists/xenophobes/etc surely they’re all guilty of hate crimes as well? That’d be something wouldn’t it? Anna Soubry getting 3 years in Pentonville, bet that’d change her attitude on life. Or Diane Abbott who regularly criticises “white people” on social media, more hate crime, let’s lock her up as well ….
The whole thing is beyond stupid in my opinion. Ok, hate crimes are bad but this isn’t hate crime, it’s mainly “mean words” or “inappropriate behaviour”, none of it worthy of wasting Police time. We have real issues at hand that require the attention of the Police, you know stuff like:
- Moped Muggings
- Moped Robberies
- Acid Attacks
- Knife Attacks
- Terrorist Attacks
- Illegal Immigrants
- etc etc ….
The Police need to change their priorities, they need to “patrol streets, not tweets” (Paul Joseph Watson). Like many of us I’ve been insulted, assaulted and treated like crap at a number of points in my life and can think of at least a dozen examples that could qualify as “hate crimes” (under these bizarre new guidelines) but I just move on.
PS Some examples of real hate speech levelled at a “right” commentator:
I’ve had to give this blog post a lot of thought. I kind of “knew” what I wanted to say but wasn’t entirely sure how to word it properly, so even the most “radical” lefts (or rights for that matter) would, hopefully, see my point.
There’s much talk these days of “lefties/liberals/libtards/Corbynistas” and then “racists/alt-rights/republicans/Conservatives” and so on. I thought about myself in this context and at first glance I would indeed appear to be one of the so called “right”, purely on appearance only. But then I started thinking more carefully about it and I realised the world simply isn’t that simple, especially as we live in a multiphrenic society where people tend to “pick and mix” the best bits from ideologies, lifestyles and politics that they like.
So, let’s break this down a little more. Am I “right”, well at first glance yes. But there again I don’t agree with the death penalty, period, regardless of the crime, that’s pretty “left” if you ask me. I agree with social welfare (aka “benefits”) and fair housing and all the rest of it, again pretty “left”. So where am I going with this? Well, it occurs to me to our society has not exactly mirrored the people within it from this perspective, our society, our government, our “establishment” (Police, media, council staff etc) don’t tend to be that varied and therein, I think, lies the modern dilemma.
We live in an age where information can be spread (be it true or fake) at lightning speed. We have more access to more information than ever before and this is likely to increase. However, politically we (I’m referring mainly to the United Kingdom here but I suspect you can find parallels if you live elsewhere) “swing” from left to right, back again, then back again. Labour’s in and they do a bunch of stuff some people like, a bunch of stupid stuff, a bunch of stuff nobody likes. Then Conservatives come along and they undo it and do some stuff some people like, some stupid stuff and some stuff nobody likes. Then a few years down the line and Labour comes in and on and on and on. This has been going on now for what, 50+ years?
Neither party is that “great” if you think about it, because no matter what they do (or don’t do) it’s going to piss somebody off, somewhere down the line. One party is somewhat “left”, the other is somewhat “right” and we don’t stop to think “hang on a minute we need the good stuff from both sides”, they just charge ahead with their own ideologies regardless. Think about it, you become prime minister tomorrow, surely you’re not naive enough to think what YOU think is right is the ONLY WAY? Now ok, proportional representation, it’s not going to happen. But would we want it to? Hell no, all we’d get is constant disagreement and nothing would actually get done, it’s be like postmodernism for politics, it’d be totally “meh, can’t be arsed”.
The problem we have, as I see it, is we’re being offered one way or the other way (the United Kingdom is essentially a two party system after all, Lib Dems? Hahahaha). Instead of actually listening to people and helping them (which let’s face it is what they are supposed to do) they just storm ahead with their ill thought ideas instead. I mean, fox hunting? Just grow up, we have far more important things to think about right now.
If government was actually accountable and acted upon the wishes of the people and “looked out” for them then maybe, just maybe, we wouldn’t think they were all just useless overpaid …. You get the idea. This is why Theresa May nearly lost the general election. We know she’s busy, we know about Brexit, BUT the vast majority of us are still in “da shite” from 2008/2009 (except the bankers and CEOs) and what did she offer those people, the “JAMs” (Just About Managing) as she called them? I’ll tell you what, sod all. She didn’t have to do a lot, just a few tweaks here and there to say “I haven’t forgotten you, this isn’t much but it’s a start”, stuff such as banning unpaid internships (much discussed but what’s happened about it?), capping utility bills and banning letting agent fees (EDIT: Letting Agent fees now finally “gone” since I first wrote this, so she managed that at least). Theresa May has been prime minister for over 2 years now and has done NONE of these, it’s just all “talk talk talk” and no “action action action”.
Anyway, the crux of society’s modern “ills”. Interestingly enough I mentioned unpaid internships above and that’s part (a small part but still relevant) of the problem. Socialism doesn’t work, people take advantage and virtually everybody ends up with “sod all”, history bears witness to this, time and time again. Capitalism sucks, big time and don’t even start me on the “trickle down theory”. Neither extreme is ideal but what I think is lacking, for most of society, isn’t money, benefits or ideology but OPPORTUNITY. Government needs to remove and dismantle the blocks to opportunity, such as banning unpaid internships which only certain people can “afford” to put up with and consequently get “the job” at the end of it; JUST ONE EXAMPLE.
I’ve done my hardest to “improve my lot” you know, I did all the “right things”, went to university and when I left university all I got when trying to find “decent” employment was barriers, more barriers, prejudice, discrimination (age mainly as I was a mature student). Think I’m paranoid? No I have proof, I’ve kept emails and recorded phone calls that shouldn’t have been made etc. University itself, yet more barriers; I got to pick 6 universities on my UCAS form (bear in mind I had 3 A Levels at A+, a BTEC with 17 distinctions and more at the time) and Oxford, Cambridge, University College London and Birmingham all rejected me without even seeing me (there goes the myth of “white privilege” out of the window, wooosh).
These are the problems we face. We’re being given the message “study hard, work hard and you’ll be a success” but it’s largely nonsense. It mostly comes down to who you know, what school you went to, where you interned (is that a real word?) I got a job at Arthur Andersen, impressive stuff you may think, but ONLY because my ex-wife (well common law wife, obviously we were still on good terms) worked there and “got me in” so to speak.
This is what needs “fixing” in our society, we need to break down the barriers to “opportunity” (real opportunity that is, not MLM or Utility Warehouse sales scams) so that people who do study hard then work hard will do well, will succeed. I bet if we got to that stage the colleges and universities would suddenly be bombarded with people wanting to “better themselves” and who could blame them? If I knew that going back to university right now meant that I would 99% get a £30,000+ a year (bearing in mind I’d be studying at postgraduate level) job afterwards I’d be there in a shot. Who is going to study and/or “work their rear off” when all they’re likely to get is “meh” at the end of it?
That’s what Theresa May needs to do, show us you’ve “got our backs”, don’t go mad (no Corbyn style bankruptcy thank you), then break down those barriers and when more and more people “do well” watch how much better a country to live in this will be, for the many, not just for the few. Finally, before anyone says “but there are opportunities”, try thinking of others for a minute not just yourself, sure there’s opportunities for you with your MSc from Cambridge and membership of the Masons etc but think of others for a change.