Rayvin

https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/money/pensions-and-retirement/scrap-triple-lock-pension-avoid-retirement-age-3782377?srsltid=AfmBOorlAA9z_DajefmuN3ocDjT-wcxP30L8_30fCrIphguGuf_RN2An IFS has come out and said we need to scrap the triple lock or raise retirement to 74. This is due to the lock costing an extra £40bn by 2050, due to an ageing population. They won't get rid of it now though because #boomerlivesmatter As I said before, Gen Z and Alpha will literally be tearing the country apart when they realise the degree to which they've been fucked over. Tbh I might be too at that point. As it's happening, I will ponder whimsically on how the markets might be reacting.

Gen Z is anyone from late 90s to around 2010, from memory - so we're just about to start seeing the Alphas hit adulthood in the coming few years. Z followed Millennials. And I have no idea man, I suspect the media just throw shit around until something sticks and we all run with it.

Generation Alpha is the latest one to be defined after Z I feel bad for the ones who grow up as Gen Beta.

It does have to be a gradual, incremental move. They could start by talking about it - might bring a few more people on board with these cuts, at least from the left. See the thing is, I look at this and think "well, if the situation in the country was really that dire, they'd be telling the truth about it. They'd be acknowledging why we are where we are, and how urgently we need to rectify that". They're not doing that though, so I assume none of them are serious people and this is all just posturing to show they're tough on the economy.

I mean this in the nicest possible way - I don't give a flying fuck about the markets. If they can survive chaos like Trump, they can survive pretty much anything. Beyond that, whether the others have a plan or not, they're under no obligation to give any pointers to the government. Labour took the same stance when the Tories were in charge, they said absolutely fuck all about what they would do. But I do have something for you anyway, as it goes - rejoin the EU. That's what I'd be yelling for. £36bn a year out of the public purse... That wealth tax is coming by the way, Gen Z and Alpha are going to eat people alive at this rate. Unsure how the markets would react to several generations worth of desperate, frustrated rage - but we'll see.

It very much sounds like she might done. Politically, I won't miss her - but saying that I assume everything she's done has been with his full blessing, so I'm not sure what the issue would be here.

I am the literal opposite of you. I have to set alarms to remind me to take in water because if I don't I'll go through the entire day on one or two cups of tea.

Apologies if people aren't ready to move on with this yet but I find this too interesting not to raise it and I'll forget if I wait a day. https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52431-how-would-britain-vote-a-year-since-the-2024-election This poll is really interesting to me - Labour is down 7% to Reform, but down 18% to LD and Greens combined. So again, why are we pandering to that 7%... Reform are clearly eating the Tories, not Labour.

Can absolutely see why it scarred Israeli people. Can absolutely see how it stoked hatred. It's a perpetual cycle of violence in which both sides have hurt each other enough now that they feel that anything they do in reply is justified.

I suspect it wouldn't be too difficult to trace it all. They've got an AI doing it apparently - but yeah maybe you're right. Not sure it's worth the risk though. I keep thinking that some of my clients are US based and if I end up in a position where im banned from going out to them its a really awkward conversation to have.

I still think we should be careful talking about this at all atm. The US is genuinely banning people from entry for the smallest things now and a lot of those things involve criticising Israel. Who knows when that might affect you over the next 4 years. And thats before we get into the nonsense of the UK government trumping up terrorism charges for acts of sabotage. Supporting that group will soon be condoning terrorism, which will also be illegal. I dont think we are free to talk about this to the degree we should be.

Agreed about Starmer tbf but we could stop supplying arms. Instead we're branding the people trying to prevent planes going over there as terrorists. I don't think any sort of genuine de-escalation is even possible anymore tbh, the hatred will span generations. Maybe if Netanyahu answered for war crimes but I don't think he values the peace and safety of his own people enough for that.

It will be whatever the government decides it is in the end. I'm wondering if they might be about to use this to make a show of going after left leaning people and putting them in prison same as they did for the hotel burning fiasco.

I get that for sure. I would throw into the mix as well though that the UK supports Israel whereas it doesn't support Russia - so there's a domestic angle to it there. There's not much more anyone can do than what we're doing with the Ukraine, the government supports them and is assisting them - Russia doesn't give a shit if we protest them but Israel does actually on some level respond to international pressure. So arguably people's energy is actually better spent on Gaza than it is on Ukraine. I think if people's feeds were full of dead and dying Ukrainian children it'd be different though, tbh.

I think a lot of what people struggle with is that they're seeing images of children being shot dead coming from Israel's situation. I've not seen anything like that from Ukraine for a long time. I know a girl living out in Ukraine atm and life sounds horrendous but at the same time they're just about hanging on. I send her some money each month to try to help, my own personal attempt to alleviate just a little of the agony. I don't do that with anyone in Gaza as I don't know anyone personally, so I would contend that I'm more invested in that conflict than this one. For what it's worth, I see Russia as a greater issue than Israel. But Gloom, for real man, idk if you see the videos that do the rounds coming out of Gaza... they're all over reddit, and they are beyond harrowing, sometimes involving IDF servicemen calling for all Palestinians to be murdered like animals etc. Maybe the Palestinians are just better at social media, maybe the videos are faked, dunno. But that's the context for a lot of this.

Why on earth did a Japanese flag cause offence...

Yep that does seem to be a part of it. But still though, it's an Islamic theocracy that supports trans existence on some level It's just wild to me. Maybe we really should regime change them tbh, their government is an anachronism relative to their people.

I thought it had to be based on non-changeable characteristics, identity stuff - that's what google says anyway. My bad though, it's a hate crime then. I suppose I've probably committed a few hate crimes in my time with comments about the Tories... maybe I really should go back and purge my comment history tbh..

As compassionate people we shouldn't be calling for the death of anyone. If this crime meets a threshold from existing legislation to be treated as a hate crime, then it simply does. We shouldn't express any particularly strong views on it anyway, it's a sensitive issue and genuinely if this does become a hate crime then some of the things being said in here about the situation could be viewed that way too.

I think we can work to the definitions provided by the IHRA at minimum. If we can't, there's no line anywhere. There needs to be a shared and agreed basis for what things mean otherwise society just makes no sense. Not to me at least.

I'm seeing this get said a lot these days tbh but if you think it through it's a pretty dangerous sentiment. That could apply to literally anything. I mean for one thing, supporting Israel's right to defend itself could then become Islamophobic - not up to us to define whether it is or not, it's up to Muslims. The whole debate would just become ridiculous.

I was reading Labour's guidelines on antisemitism which are informed by the IHRA. I don't understand how we've gotten to where we are: 13. In contrast, discussion of the circumstances of the foundation of the Israeli State (for example, in the context of its impact on the Palestinian people) forms a legitimate part of modern political discourse. So does discussion of – including critical comment on – differential impact of Israeli laws or policies on different people within its population or that of neighbouring territories. It is not racist to assess the conduct of Israel – or indeed of any other particular State or government – against the requirements of international law or the standards of behaviour expected of democratic States (bearing in mind that these requirements and standards may themselves be contentious). 14. However, care must be taken when dealing with these topics. The fact of Israel’s description as a Jewish State does not make it permissible to hold Jewish people or institutions in general responsible for alleged misconduct on the part of that State (see paragraph 9.g.). In addition, it is wrong to apply double standards by requiring more vociferous condemnation of such actions from Jewish people or organisations than from others – a form of racist treatment also all too common in other contexts, eg. holding Muslims or Muslim organisations to a higher standard than others as regards condemnation of illegal or violent acts by self-defining “Islamic” organisations or States (such as Saudi Arabia or Pakistan). It is also wrong to accuse Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. 15. The term “Zionism” is intimately bound up in the history of Israel’s foundation as a State and in its role in international relations more generally. It is inevitable that the expressions “Zionism” and “Zionist” will feature in political discourse about these topics. The meaning of these expressions is itself debated. It is not antisemitism to refer to “Zionism” and “Zionists” as part of a considered discussion about the Israeli State. However, as the Chakrabarti Report advised, it is not permissible to use “Zionist” (and still less any pejorative abbreviation such as ‘zio’ which the Chakrabarti report said should have no place in Labour Party discourse) as a code word for “Jew”. Chakrabarti recommended that Labour Party members should only use “the term `Zionist’ advisedly, carefully and never euphemistically or as part of personal abuse”. Such language may otherwise provide evidence of antisemitic intent. I would fundamentally agree on every word of that. What I'm struggling with is why the IDF are some sort of protected characteristic. It's in poor taste to chant for their death absolutely, I don't condone it and I would never say it (same as for Russian troops) - but at the same time it doesn't feel like antisemitism per these definitions. In the end though I think we just need to make peace with this - the government has chosen a side and it's Israel/Trump. I'm increasingly concerned about being watchlisted over expressing views about this in case I need to travel to the US tbh, or indeed being charged with terrorism by the UK.

It fucking would have as well. Maybe not directly into the comments but on some level they'd have been seething.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70rreer004o - Parental leave and pay for new parents to be reviewed Gammons in the comments complaining about why they have to pay for other people to have kids. I guarantee that these idiots haven't connected this to immigration and will happily crow about that at the same time. Either we have more kids, or we have high immigration - which is it, you clueless fucking muppets. You can't whine about both things at the same time.

I'm sure they do on many levels but the actual legal situation I googled repeatedly because I didn't believe it either. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_rights_in_Iran Not perfect by any stretch but also not what I expected personally.