The Political Thread

[Proudhuff]

It could further argued that Legalization would reduce Crime; Trafficking at the very least

The state effectively muscles in on the dealer's/traffickers action and assumes the role of the biggest pusher in history.

or re-assumes if its Britain. ( Dutch East India Co, 'Boxer' Rebellion, HK etc)

[Frank]

Fuck you, commie! Her Majesty, Queen Victoria, was ripped off her tits on cocaine during that whole era - as were a good number of the middle classes - and it was all legit. Anyone who wanted to could get all the ching and skag they wanted from main street pharmacies, so really, any proposal to introduce high street clinics where junkies could shoot up during their lunch break from Starbucks would only be a return to the values that turned 80% of the globe pink.

All that business with the gun boats was just us trying to raise Chinese living standards and consumer choices to those of the English middle classes.

[Theblazeuk]

I feel like today's Labour announcement is being covered by the  media in all the stereotypical ways, completely missing what is actually being said. "Labour to cut youth benefits" was the tagline on BBC News - which is not entirely accurate. That's what the Tories are doing. The Labour policy is a bit more nuanced, even if sadly pandering to the gits in society who favour the ludicrous idea of a sharp stick poking people into employment rather than the only realistic solution of providing opportunities so people can be employed.

All depends on what this 'training' consists of. If it's worth doing then maybe it would be of some good, though the mandatory stance is once again, thoroughly disgusting. I'm doubtful of course as I'm well aware of what Job-seekers training seems to consist of, though have no experience of it myself.

However all aside, I feel it's a case of misrepresentation to boil it down to Labour to Cut Youth Benefits.

[Frank]

I feel it's a case of misrepresentation to boil it down to Labour to Cut Youth Benefits

Which is the headline Labour HQ wanted, of course. One of their wonks was on The World At One today, and eventually admitted that it's impossible to say whether the higher rate of benefits for anyone who's previously been in employment for a certain number of years may actually end up costing more than the existing model ...

... which, presumably, isn't the kind of headline Labour HQ were after when they came up with this policy on the back of a fag packet because they wanted to appeal to voters who think they're soft on benefits scroungers.

[Professor Bear]

I would have thought victimising young people to be a great way to win Tory voters.  To really bring it home, Miliband should go on tv and announce that Labour will be clamping down on kids hanging around in groups, and making sensible haircuts/shoes compulsory.

[Frank]

I would have thought victimising young people to be a great way to win Tory voters

Nobody much younger than fifty votes, and everyone knows it. The old are hatefully resentful of the young, and there are no votes to be lost by picking on folk with plukes on their faces.

[Theblazeuk]

All too true.

[ZenArcade]

That is right, right, right....the modern narcissistic, navel gazing, solophistic etc don't vote insanity of our youth perversly denudes them of a future. To be bought and paid for like a bunch of £10 whores by a crass, unrealisable, corporate propogated dreamworld: F**ked up and sad! Z

[The Legendary Shark]

Children should be educated about government and politics at school and also be able to vote. At age 8, they should get half a vote, at 9 they should get 9/16ths of a vote, at 10 5/8ths and so on up to a full vote at age 16.
.

[Hawkmumbler]

Thats an awful idea. Not the education part, thats great, but giving children bellow the age of 18 the right to vote? You do realise they'd just vote for their favourite colour, right?

[Prodigal2]

I was involved in political education programmes designed to promote active engagement in Norn Iron's political process for half a life-time.

I have this vague sense of guilt about it now.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/first-minister-peter-robinson-in-uturn-over-locals-only-race-row-30370144.html

[Hawkmumbler]

Hey! Who would have thunk it! Another school shooting in the US! Bet they still want to keep the second amendment though don't they!

[The Legendary Shark]

Er, most people just vote for their favourite colour anyway. Giving youngsters a partial vote in conjunction with a political/governmental education would be, I think, a good way to instill in them what voting and democracy are all about. The goal is to have the children understanding how it all works better than the adults - which should really be our goal throughout all education, I think.

[Professor Bear]

I dunno - I quite like the idea of being the first country to vote to become a fire engine.

[Fungus]

children bellow the age of 18

One way to get your voice heard...   

I think 18 is fine? Gawd help us, but 16-year olds are being encouraged to vote in our (oor) Independence Referendum, and campaigners will say that this makes sense because - amongst other things - you can get married at 16, and drive at 17.
But... married at 16 is surely a phrase that chills the soul? And as far as responsibility goes, there is a reason why young 'uns pay higher car insurance premiums?