Interesting. But is he right about the political implications? It might be 'back votes at 16 and get the blame from those who oppose this barmy idea, without getting the credit from those who support it'.
It's seems logical to me that the age of voting should be aligned with the age of majority.
The only counter-argument is that left wing parties hope to gain an advantage.
The main argument for votes at 16 is that participation in formal democracy is learnt behaviour that far too few youngsters are adopting. There is an opportunity to "learn" to vote while in education. It doesn't of itself solve the problem of low participation, but it does make a difference and is worth doing. Any age cut off is arbitrary. 16 year olds are just as capable of making policy decisions as 18 year olds, but there is a good reason to set the cut off at the lower age.
I'm unclear how lowering the age helps it become 'learned' behaviour any more than at 18, particularly given how many people are already in education until 18. I would also dispute that 16 years olds are just as capable as 18 years at making various decisions, since we don't trust 16 year olds to do any number of things because we don't think they are mature enough. So I don't quite see how it is certain that it will make a difference and be worth doing purely on that basis.
However, it is already inconsistent (the army recruitment age being one commonly brought up) and in any case the point was conceded when 16 yr olds were allowed to vote in the SindyRef, so while my preference would be harmonising other things so they take place at 18, not 16, I think 16 is an inevitability at this point and not worth getting worked about.
SindyRef wasn't really a precedent, because 16 has always been the age of majority for many purposes in Scotland.
Do 16 yr olds know what a pencil is? How will get to the polling stations? They cant drive
If we got a third to turn out at general elections that would be on a good day I imagine, I would be surprised if even 10% of 16 year olds would vote in local polls.
Interesting. But is he right about the political implications? It might be 'back votes at 16 and get the blame from those who oppose this barmy idea, without getting the credit from those who support it'.
It's seems logical to me that the age of voting should be aligned with the age of majority.
The only counter-argument is that left wing parties hope to gain an advantage.
The main argument for votes at 16 is that participation in formal democracy is learnt behaviour that far too few youngsters are adopting. There is an opportunity to "learn" to vote while in education. It doesn't of itself solve the problem of low participation, but it does make a difference and is worth doing. Any age cut off is arbitrary. 16 year olds are just as capable of making policy decisions as 18 year olds, but there is a good reason to set the cut off at the lower age.
I'm unclear how lowering the age helps it become 'learned' behaviour any more than at 18, particularly given how many people are already in education until 18. I would also dispute that 16 years olds are just as capable as 18 years at making various decisions, since we don't trust 16 year olds to do any number of things because we don't think they are mature enough. So I don't quite see how it is certain that it will make a difference and be worth doing purely on that basis.
However, it is already inconsistent (the army recruitment age being one commonly brought up) and in any case the point was conceded when 16 yr olds were allowed to vote in the SindyRef, so while my preference would be harmonising other things so they take place at 18, not 16, I think 16 is an inevitability at this point and not worth getting worked about.
SindyRef wasn't really a precedent, because 16 has always been the age of majority for many purposes in Scotland.
And if it is accepted as working there, I don't really see how it cannot in the rest of the country despite not being my own preference - harmonisation in this I think is necessary, and giving something to people rather than taking away is probably easier.
Do 16 yr olds know what a pencil is? How will get to the polling stations? They cant drive
If we got a third to turn out at general elections that would be on a good day I imagine, I would be surprised if even 10% of 16 year olds would vote in local polls.
There is no real demand for it
Except from the parties that would probably benefit the most. Funny that.
Interesting. But is he right about the political implications? It might be 'back votes at 16 and get the blame from those who oppose this barmy idea, without getting the credit from those who support it'.
It's seems logical to me that the age of voting should be aligned with the age of majority.
The only counter-argument is that left wing parties hope to gain an advantage.
The main argument for votes at 16 is that participation in formal democracy is learnt behaviour that far too few youngsters are adopting. There is an opportunity to "learn" to vote while in education. It doesn't of itself solve the problem of low participation, but it does make a difference and is worth doing. Any age cut off is arbitrary. 16 year olds are just as capable of making policy decisions as 18 year olds, but there is a good reason to set the cut off at the lower age.
I'm unclear how lowering the age helps it become 'learned' behaviour any more than at 18, particularly given how many people are already in education until 18. I would also dispute that 16 years olds are just as capable as 18 years at making various decisions, since we don't trust 16 year olds to do any number of things because we don't think they are mature enough. So I don't quite see how it is certain that it will make a difference and be worth doing purely on that basis.
However, it is already inconsistent (the army recruitment age being one commonly brought up) and in any case the point was conceded when 16 yr olds were allowed to vote in the SindyRef, so while my preference would be harmonising other things so they take place at 18, not 16, I think 16 is an inevitability at this point and not worth getting worked about.
SindyRef wasn't really a precedent, because 16 has always been the age of majority for many purposes in Scotland.
And if it is accepted as working there, I don't really see how it cannot in the rest of the country despite not being my own preference - harmonisation in this I think is necessary, and giving something to people rather than taking away is probably easier.
How about we lower the age of everything by 2? Voting at 16, joining the army at 14, and age of criminal responsibility at 8.
And if it is accepted as working there, I don't really see how it cannot in the rest of the country despite not being my own preference - harmonisation in this I think is necessary, and giving something to people rather than taking away is probably easier.
Why not harmonise on 18, the voting age in almost every civilised country in the world, and the UN definition of the end of childhood?
Do 16 yr olds know what a pencil is? How will get to the polling stations? They cant drive
If we got a third to turn out at general elections that would be on a good day I imagine, I would be surprised if even 10% of 16 year olds would vote in local polls.
There is no real demand for it
Except from the parties that would probably benefit the most. Funny that.
Yes, no surprise the SNP and Labour are pushing this
And if it is accepted as working there, I don't really see how it cannot in the rest of the country despite not being my own preference - harmonisation in this I think is necessary, and giving something to people rather than taking away is probably easier.
Why not harmonise on 18, the voting age in almost every civilised country in the world, and the UN definition of the end of childhood?
As I said I would prefer 18. But while you may not see it as a precedent, I think it will be hard to argue against a major referendum where it was permitted to be lower. It has been resisted so far, but long term I don't know.
UKIP's share estimated at £200K, according to John Stevens. But if Ms Collins can't cough up all of her bit, does that mean UKIP are on the hook for even more?
The default position is "yes" but the judgment may state otherwise.
Interesting. But is he right about the political implications? It might be 'back votes at 16 and get the blame from those who oppose this barmy idea, without getting the credit from those who support it'.
It's seems logical to me that the age of voting should be aligned with the age of majority.
The only counter-argument is that left wing parties hope to gain an advantage.
The main argument for votes at 16 is that participation in formal democracy is learnt behaviour that far too few youngsters are adopting. There is an opportunity to "learn" to vote while in education. It doesn't of itself solve the problem of low participation, but it does make a difference and is worth doing. Any age cut off is arbitrary. 16 year olds are just as capable of making policy decisions as 18 year olds, but there is a good reason to set the cut off at the lower age.
I'm unclear how lowering the age helps it become 'learned' behaviour any more than at 18, particularly given how many people are already in education until 18. I would also dispute that 16 years olds are just as capable as 18 years at making various decisions, since we don't trust 16 year olds to do any number of things because we don't think they are mature enough. So I don't quite see how it is certain that it will make a difference and be worth doing purely on that basis.
However, it is already inconsistent (the army recruitment age being one commonly brought up) and in any case the point was conceded when 16 yr olds were allowed to vote in the SindyRef, so while my preference would be harmonising other things so they take place at 18, not 16, I think 16 is an inevitability at this point and not worth getting worked about.
SindyRef wasn't really a precedent, because 16 has always been the age of majority for many purposes in Scotland.
And if it is accepted as working there, I don't really see how it cannot in the rest of the country despite not being my own preference - harmonisation in this I think is necessary, and giving something to people rather than taking away is probably easier.
There's no right or wrong answer. Cut off ages are arbitrary. There's a reason why 16 might be a better age than 18 for voting. I don't think the cut offs need to be coordinated, say with the age you can buy tobacco. One's about harm prevention, the other is about encouraging civic responsibility.
Do 16 yr olds know what a pencil is? How will get to the polling stations? They cant drive
If we got a third to turn out at general elections that would be on a good day I imagine, I would be surprised if even 10% of 16 year olds would vote in local polls.
There is no real demand for it
Except from the parties that would probably benefit the most. Funny that.
For those of you who use Facebook is this a plausible defence?
Yes. Other people can join you to groups. You'd have to click "yes" to agree to join, but the easiest way to deal with crap like that is agree to join, unfollow the group and get on with one's life.
For those of you who use Facebook is this a plausible defence?
No
Wrong.
here is the group's manifesto, incidentally, which anyone can read because they are too clueless to make the group secret rather than just closed:
"Description Britain is a nation that has been shooting at it's own feet for too long. Too much tolerance of socialism has cost us a trillion pounds. Things must change faster than any political party dare liberate us from fundamental failure of funding failures.
As a member of British Ultra Liberal Youth aka The Ultras. You are free to remained aligned to the political party of your choice as long as it is the Conservative party.
If this were a football field. We would be racing down the right wing so close to the touchline, we would be doing so very carefully making sure we don't put our feet outside the field of play. While watching from the stands are an electorate unaware a liberalised life beyond Council Houses, Free Healthcare and Social Security can exist let alone work.
As an Ultra. It is your duty to support and pressure the mainstream of the Conservative party that such policies as: Privatisation of healthcare. The Sale of all council housing at market value and Workhouses for debtors are right and have found their time to enter Britain."
Logic and punctuation both suggest this is a false flag UKIP operation.
Adil Rashid opts out of first-class cricket for 2018 season
• Leg spinner to concentrate on white-ball cricket • Stokes may train on Saturday after reunion with team-mates
Adil Rashid has put his ambitions for a Test return on hold and negotiated a new white-ball deal at Yorkshire after losing some of his appetite for the first-class game.
@hugorifkind: Gavin Williamson's attack on Corbyn is fascinating. Aimed squarely at people who are
a) traditionally patriotic, b) likely to vote Labour, c) so far unaware of Corbyn's backstory, and d) give a shit what Gavin Williamson thinks.
Who are they? Has anybody ever met one?
@hugorifkind is quite wrong. It's aimed squarely at people who are
a) Conservative party members b) who are likely to be voting in a leadership election contest sometime soon and c) who might be open to considering voting for a Defence Secretary who sticks it to Jeremy Corbyn on a subject Conservative party members feel strongly about.
Corbyn should declare he thinks Williamson has great leadership potential, would make an excellent PM, and that he agrees with Williamson that a long Brexit transition period where we stay very close to the EU is absolutely necessary.
Adil Rashid opts out of first-class cricket for 2018 season
• Leg spinner to concentrate on white-ball cricket • Stokes may train on Saturday after reunion with team-mates
Adil Rashid has put his ambitions for a Test return on hold and negotiated a new white-ball deal at Yorkshire after losing some of his appetite for the first-class game.
Isn't it a pity nobody thought to negotiate a contract like that for Giles Clarke in 2005? If he'd been ordered only to negotiate contracts on paper clips think how much stronger cricket would be today.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Or we could combine the two themes, with compulsory military service for 16- and 17-years olds, together with the North Korean rule that anyone in the military gets to vote whatever their age. It seems to work to everyone's satisfaction there, judging by the turnout and unanimity.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Do 16 yr olds know what a pencil is? How will get to the polling stations? They cant drive
If we got a third to turn out at general elections that would be on a good day I imagine, I would be surprised if even 10% of 16 year olds would vote in local polls.
There is no real demand for it
Except from the parties that would probably benefit the most. Funny that.
How well I remember the crowing on here pre-Sindy ref when sub samples of polls showed 16-17 years olds favouring the Union, and the obsessive monitoring of school debates to prove that the jugend were going to vote the 'right' way. 'Major strategic error by Eck' was the cry, and the PB Yoons seemed to have quite come round to the idea at that point.
A large portion of the over-65s can't even use the justification that "National Service didn't do me any harm" any more....National Service was abolished in 1960 so you would have to be older than 75/76 today to have done National Service.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
I always wonder why bringing back peacetime conscription is such a big thing anyway: the UK only had it for twelve years! Anyone under 77 would have missed it.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
I always wonder why bringing back peacetime conscription is such a big thing anyway: the UK only had it for twelve years! Anyone under 77 would have missed it.
My father missed it by a few weeks. He was very grateful for that and has never had the desire to see it reinstated. One wonders who all these zimmer frame generals are.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
Interesting. But is he right about the political implications? It might be 'back votes at 16 and get the blame from those who oppose this barmy idea, without getting the credit from those who support it'.
Ie.
The main argument age.
I'm unclear how lowering the age helps it become 'learned' behaviour any more than at 18, particularly given how many people are already in education until 18. I would also dispute that 16 years olds are just as capable as 18 years at making various decisions, since we don't trust 16 year olds to do any number of things because we don't think they are mature enough. So I don't quite see how it is certain that it will make a difference and be worth doing purely on that basis.
However, it is already inconsistent (the army recruitment age being one commonly brought up) and in any case the point was conceded when 16 yr olds were allowed to vote in the SindyRef, so while my preference would be harmonising other things so they take place at 18, not 16, I think 16 is an inevitability at this point and not worth getting worked about.
SindyRef wasn't really a precedent, because 16 has always been the age of majority for many purposes in Scotland.
And if it is accepted as working there, I don't really see how it cannot in the rest of the country despite not being my own preference - harmonisation in this I think is necessary, and giving something to people rather than taking away is probably easier.
There's no right or wrong answer. Cut off ages are arbitrary. There's a reason why 16 might be a better age than 18 for voting. I don't think the cut offs need to be coordinated, say with the age you can buy tobacco. One's about harm prevention, the other is about encouraging civic responsibility.
Given the extent of the responsibilities you can take on by 16, being able to vote at that age isn't unreasonable. In my experience sixth formers and students are more thoughtful and engaged in political issues than young people in work. Starting the voting habit when they are interested rather than disinterested seems sensible in the hope that the voting habit sticks into the 20s.
Also worth remembering that, with (say) four-year GEs, votes at 16 mean that 25% will first participate at age 16, 25% at 17, at 18, and 19. Compared to 25% at 18, 19, 20 and 21 currently. I was 20 by the time I first got the chance to cast a GE vote. Which, to me, felt very late.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
You couldn't blame them. The current batch of wrinklies have been a generation of spongers, first relying on their parents' funding the establishment of the modern welfare state and now relying on their children to pay for something they will never benefit from. Far from showing any gratitude, they take every opportunity to salt the ground for those who come after them.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
I always wonder why bringing back peacetime conscription is such a big thing anyway: the UK only had it for twelve years! Anyone under 77 would have missed it.
My father missed it by a few weeks. He was very grateful for that and has never had the desire to see it reinstated. One wonders who all these zimmer frame generals are.
I missed it by 3 years and no I would not bring it back and am surprised at the 48/36 split of the poll
So Abram rose, and clave the wood, and went, And took the fire with him, and a knife. And as they sojourned both of them together, Isaac the first-born spake and said, My Father, Behold the preparations, fire and iron, But where the lamb for this burnt-offering? Then Abram bound the youth with belts and straps, and builded parapets and trenches there, And stretchèd forth the knife to slay his son. When lo! an angel called him out of heaven, Saying, Lay not thy hand upon the lad, Neither do anything to him. Behold, A ram, caught in a thicket by its horns; Offer the Ram of Pride instead of him.
But the old man would not so, but slew his son, And half the seed of Europe, one by one.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
You couldn't blame them. The current batch of wrinklies have been a generation of spongers, first relying on their parents' funding the establishment of the modern welfare state and now relying on their children to pay for something they will never benefit from. Far from showing any gratitude, they take every opportunity to salt the ground for those who come after them.
Those who live long enough to witness the total collapse of the NHS just as they need acute care in their old age may come to regret the way they have shafted the young.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
My thoughts exactly, in regard to all of the above.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
I always wonder why bringing back peacetime conscription is such a big thing anyway: the UK only had it for twelve years! Anyone under 77 would have missed it.
My father missed it by a few weeks. He was very grateful for that and has never had the desire to see it reinstated. One wonders who all these zimmer frame generals are.
I missed it by 3 years and no I would not bring it back and am surprised at the 48/36 split of the poll
Arguably the main reason it was abolished was that the military resented having to babysit the entire population of male 18 year olds, most of whom didn't want to be there, it was a big distraction for them and not very useful outside wartime.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
That is utter nonsense.
You hope
I do not need hope - it will not happen and it portrays a hatred of the elderly who have worked hard all their lives, raised their children, paid large amounts of tax and saved towards their retirement and to support their social care.
It is sad that anyone can hate the elderly so much
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
You couldn't blame them. The current batch of wrinklies have been a generation of spongers, first relying on their parents' funding the establishment of the modern welfare state and now relying on their children to pay for something they will never benefit from. Far from showing any gratitude, they take every opportunity to salt the ground for those who come after them.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
I always wonder why bringing back peacetime conscription is such a big thing anyway: the UK only had it for twelve years! Anyone under 77 would have missed it.
My father missed it by a few weeks. He was very grateful for that and has never had the desire to see it reinstated. One wonders who all these zimmer frame generals are.
I missed it by 3 years and no I would not bring it back and am surprised at the 48/36 split of the poll
Arguably the main reason it was abolished was that the military resented having to babysit the entire population of male 18 year olds, most of whom didn't want to be there, it was a big distraction for them and not very useful outside wartime.
You are talking nonsense and seem to have a hatred of the elderly
The current batch of wrinklies have been a generation of spongers, first relying on their parents' funding the establishment of the modern welfare state and now relying on their children to pay for something they will never benefit from. Far from showing any gratitude, they take every opportunity to salt the ground for those who come after them.
Vey few of them alive now who would have fought in WW2, but they would all have grown up in the war or the long shadow it cast into the fifties. Rationing ended in 1954. They had a truly shit start to life, bing bombed, evacuated, or never seeing a banana until they were into puberty.
You have to be a viciously mean-spirited person to write about this generation of "wrinkles" as you do. No wonder they kicked you in the balls by voting for Brexit.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
My thoughts exactly, in regard to all of the above.
Not at all. Young people are extremely generous to the older generation. That's why at the last election they turned out in such numbers to try to vote a 67-year old into No 10, on a platform of keeping the Triple Lock, keeping untaxed Winter Fuel Payments and free bus passes for wealthy old people, and ensuring that wealthy old people don't have to pay for their own care.
The current batch of wrinklies have been a generation of spongers, first relying on their parents' funding the establishment of the modern welfare state and now relying on their children to pay for something they will never benefit from. Far from showing any gratitude, they take every opportunity to salt the ground for those who come after them.
Vey few of them alive now who would have fought in WW2, but they would all have grown up in the war or the long shadow it cast into the fifties. Rationing ended in 1954. They had a truly shit start to life, bing bombed, evacuated, or never seeing a banana until they were into puberty.
You have to be a viciously mean-spirited person to write about this generation of "wrinkles" as you do. No wonder they kicked you in the balls by voting for Brexit.
It's nothing more or less than a statement of fact. The current generation of pensioners have been both remarkably cosseted compared with both those who went before them and after them and collectively are colossally selfish. Their sense of entitlement is extraordinary.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
My thoughts exactly, in regard to all of the above.
Not at all. Young people are extremely generous to the older generation. That's why at the last election they turned out in such numbers to try to vote a 67-year old into No 10, on a platform of keeping the Triple Lock, keeping untaxed Winter Fuel Payments and free bus passes for wealthy old people, and ensuring that wealthy old people don't have to pay for their own care.
Somehow, I don’t think that’s the reason why younger voters voted for Corbyn. Although, I don’t think most younger voters have a grudge towards older voters. That said, if the anti-millennial narrative continues a pace, that may well change.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
My thoughts exactly, in regard to all of the above.
Not at all. Young people are extremely generous to the older generation. That's why at the last election they turned out in such numbers to try to vote a 67-year old into No 10, on a platform of keeping the Triple Lock, keeping untaxed Winter Fuel Payments and free bus passes for wealthy old people, and ensuring that wealthy old people don't have to pay for their own care.
Probably to be paid for by 100% inheritance tax, huge land and property taxes, buy to let taxed out of existence etc (none of that in the manifesto I know).
But in all seriousness I think a spell of radical left government is coming our way sooner or later and I know you've said so yourself. It will obviously be Millennials reacting against the boomers but it's less easy to know how my generation, stuck in between them, will fare (I am in my 40s). I'm guessing those of us with assets will get as much of a haircut as the older ones.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
My thoughts exactly, in regard to all of the above.
Not at all. Young people are extremely generous to the older generation. That's why at the last election they turned out in such numbers to try to vote a 67-year old into No 10, on a platform of keeping the Triple Lock, keeping untaxed Winter Fuel Payments and free bus passes for wealthy old people, and ensuring that wealthy old people don't have to pay for their own care.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
My thoughts exactly, in regard to all of the above.
Not at all. Young people are extremely generous to the older generation. That's why at the last election they turned out in such numbers to try to vote a 67-year old into No 10, on a platform of keeping the Triple Lock, keeping untaxed Winter Fuel Payments and free bus passes for wealthy old people, and ensuring that wealthy old people don't have to pay for their own care.
Corbyn also promised them free university tuition, cheap housing and low utility bills. He promised just about everything except free owls and unicorns to everybody.
The only group of people he didn't try to nakedly bribe were (ironically) welfare recipients.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
My thoughts exactly, in regard to all of the above.
Not at all. Young people are extremely generous to the older generation. That's why at the last election they turned out in such numbers to try to vote a 67-year old into No 10, on a platform of keeping the Triple Lock, keeping untaxed Winter Fuel Payments and free bus passes for wealthy old people, and ensuring that wealthy old people don't have to pay for their own care.
Somehow, I don’t think that’s the reason why younger voters voted for Corbyn. Although, I don’t think most younger voters have a grudge towards older voters. That said, if the anti-millennial narrative continues a pace, that may well change.
Nonetheless that's what they voted for. It's a bit rich to blame older voters, who voted for the opposite in each case, for the political choices made by the youngsters.
Completely off topic but there are times when the criminal justice system just sickens me. I heard on the radio driving home that that paedophile of a football coach was sentenced to 73 years first time around but because the sentences were concurrent he was destined to serve the longest individual sentence of 9 years. So he was released after 4.5 years.
American sentences of 60 or 75 years are of course ridiculous but so are ours. This scumbag should have been dying in jail already. Surely that will be ensured on Monday.
The current batch of wrinklies have been a generation of spongers, first relying on their parents' funding the establishment of the modern welfare state and now relying on their children to pay for something they will never benefit from. Far from showing any gratitude, they take every opportunity to salt the ground for those who come after them.
Vey few of them alive now who would have fought in WW2, but they would all have grown up in the war or the long shadow it cast into the fifties. Rationing ended in 1954. They had a truly shit start to life, bing bombed, evacuated, or never seeing a banana until they were into puberty.
You have to be a viciously mean-spirited person to write about this generation of "wrinkles" as you do. No wonder they kicked you in the balls by voting for Brexit.
As a baby cowering under a table in Manchester as the v bombs were falling around us, one killing 6 of our neighbours, then the rationing and hard times of the fifties, starting work at 16 on £3.00 a week and marvelling when my Father was promoted and his income rose to £1,000. My Mother and later my wife sewing, mending and making do, never buying anything if we could not afford it.
Working honestly 60 - 70 hours a week to buy a home and raise a family still living within our means.
Eventually after 49 years of work paying all taxes I retire on a state pension and a private pension I had sacrificed to contribute to I am now told the state will come and take everything away from me is beyond belief
Completely off topic but there are times when the criminal justice system just sickens me. I heard on the radio driving home that that paedophile of a football coach was sentenced to 73 years first time around but because the sentences were concurrent he was destined to serve the longest individual sentence of 9 years. So he was released after 4.5 years.
American sentences of 60 or 75 years are of course ridiculous but so are ours. This scumbag should have been dying in jail already. Surely that will be ensured on Monday.
I think the best one on sentencing was an American judge who sentenced a particularly unpleasant man to a total of 342 years in prison to be served consecutively. With a wonderfully dry wit he commented 'You will of course not serve all of this sentence, as in this state we allow up to one-third remission for good conduct.'
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
My thoughts exactly, in regard to all of the above.
Not at all. Young people are extremely generous to the older generation. That's why at the last election they turned out in such numbers to try to vote a 67-year old into No 10, on a platform of keeping the Triple Lock, keeping untaxed Winter Fuel Payments and free bus passes for wealthy old people, and ensuring that wealthy old people don't have to pay for their own care.
Corbyn also promised them free university tuition, cheap housing and low utility bills. He promised just about everything except free owls and unicorns to everybody.
The only group of people he didn't try to nakedly bribe were (ironically) welfare recipients.
Yes, that was one of the most striking features of the Labour manifesto. It's not even clear why; since they were planning to fork out an extra £40bn a year in current spending, £176bn* in nationalisation, countless further billions on 'investment', and in an absent-minded moment £11bn in cancelling existing student loans, it seems very odd that they didn't bung in a few tens of billion for the poorest.
* According to the calculation by Centre for Policy Studies
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
My thoughts exactly, in regard to all of the above.
Not at all. Young people are extremely generous to the older generation. That's why at the last election they turned out in such numbers to try to vote a 67-year old into No 10, on a platform of keeping the Triple Lock, keeping untaxed Winter Fuel Payments and free bus passes for wealthy old people, and ensuring that wealthy old people don't have to pay for their own care.
Somehow, I don’t think that’s the reason why younger voters voted for Corbyn. Although, I don’t think most younger voters have a grudge towards older voters. That said, if the anti-millennial narrative continues a pace, that may well change.
Nonetheless that's what they voted for. It's a bit rich to blame older voters, who voted for the opposite in each case, for the political choices made by the youngsters.
On the issue of winter fuel allowances et al, it certainly wasn’t down to the political choices of young people to introduce all those benefits. It just so happened to be the case the party that young people felt was advocating most for their interests supported all those things.
The current batch of wrinklies have been a generation of spongers, first relying on their parents' funding the establishment of the modern welfare state and now relying on their children to pay for something they will never benefit from. Far from showing any gratitude, they take every opportunity to salt the ground for those who come after them.
Vey few of them alive now who would have fought in WW2, but they would all have grown up in the war or the long shadow it cast into the fifties. Rationing ended in 1954. They had a truly shit start to life, bing bombed, evacuated, or never seeing a banana until they were into puberty.
You have to be a viciously mean-spirited person to write about this generation of "wrinkles" as you do. No wonder they kicked you in the balls by voting for Brexit.
As a baby cowering under a table in Manchester as the v bombs were falling around us, one killing 6 of our neighbours, then the rationing and hard times of the fifties, starting work at 16 on £3.00 a week and marvelling when my Father was promoted and his income rose to £1,000. My Mother and later my wife sewing, mending and making do, never buying anything if we could not afford it.
Working honestly 60 - 70 hours a week to buy a home and raise a family still living within our means.
Eventually after 49 years of work paying all taxes I retire on a state pension and a private pension I had sacrificed to contribute to I am now told the state will come and take everything away from me is beyond belief
You can put the violin away mate....that's life. My kids are 3 and 5 and your generation (note, not necessarily you personally) voted to ruin their future. By the time they are of voting age that will be painfully obvious and to say the least you will not be popular.
The current batch of wrinklies have been a generation of spongers, first relying on their parents' funding the establishment of the modern welfare state and now relying on their children to pay for something they will never benefit from. Far from showing any gratitude, they take every opportunity to salt the ground for those who come after them.
Vey few of them alive now who would have fought in WW2, but they would all have grown up in the war or the long shadow it cast into the fifties. Rationing ended in 1954. They had a truly shit start to life, bing bombed, evacuated, or never seeing a banana until they were into puberty.
You have to be a viciously mean-spirited person to write about this generation of "wrinkles" as you do. No wonder they kicked you in the balls by voting for Brexit.
As a baby cowering under a table in Manchester as the v bombs were falling around us, one killing 6 of our neighbours, then the rationing and hard times of the fifties, starting work at 16 on £3.00 a week and marvelling when my Father was promoted and his income rose to £1,000. My Mother and later my wife sewing, mending and making do, never buying anything if we could not afford it.
Working honestly 60 - 70 hours a week to buy a home and raise a family still living within our means.
Eventually after 49 years of work paying all taxes I retire on a state pension and a private pension I had sacrificed to contribute to I am now told the state will come and take everything away from me is beyond belief
I can in principle understand May Leadsom Syndrome, where an individual's views on political issues are allegedly affected by childlessness. It's significantly harder coming to grips with commentators who seem never to have had any parents either.
The solution is simple. Introduce compulsory military service for pensioners.
Grandad's Army?
It's the latest piece of evidence that old people really are bastards to the young. Every time you think they can sink no lower, they find a new way to try to screw them.
Today's under 40s will get their revenge in about 10 years time, by which time they will outnumber and outvote the baby boomers. I expect there to be a government elected some time in the 2020s which will be dedicated to stripping the boomer generation of their pensions and property assets.
My thoughts exactly, in regard to all of the above.
Not at all. Young people are extremely generous to the older generation. That's why at the last election they turned out in such numbers to try to vote a 67-year old into No 10, on a platform of keeping the Triple Lock, keeping untaxed Winter Fuel Payments and free bus passes for wealthy old people, and ensuring that wealthy old people don't have to pay for their own care.
Probably to be paid for by 100% inheritance tax, huge land and property taxes, buy to let taxed out of existence etc (none of that in the manifesto I know).
But in all seriousness I think a spell of radical left government is coming our way sooner or later and I know you've said so yourself. It will obviously be Millennials reacting against the boomers but it's less easy to know how my generation, stuck in between them, will fare (I am in my 40s). I'm guessing those of us with assets will get as much of a haircut as the older ones.
Yes, that was one of the most striking features of the Labour manifesto. It's not even clear why; since they were planning to fork out an extra £40bn a year in current spending, £176bn* in nationalisation, countless further billions on 'investment', and in an absent-minded moment £11bn in cancelling existing student loans, it seems very odd that they didn't bung in a few tens of billion for the poorest.
* According to the calculation by Centre for Policy Studies
The one criticism of your post is that it's £76 billion to wipe student debt. Or were you just referring to current students and future loans?
That manifesto was a real eye-opener. I had assumed Corbyn was just a sort of typical dense socialist and while I thought his ideas very foolish I wasn't unduly bothered about them. It wasn't until I studied it and noticed how he was splurging money at potential voters and ignoring everyone else that I realised he was a straightforward populist, utterly cynical and utterly dishonest. It came as a bit of a shock.
The current batch of wrinklies have been a generation of spongers, first relying on their parents' funding the establishment of the modern welfare state and now relying on their children to pay for something they will never benefit from. Far from showing any gratitude, they take every opportunity to salt the ground for those who come after them.
Vey few of them alive now who would have fought in WW2, but they would all have grown up in the war or the long shadow it cast into the fifties. Rationing ended in 1954. They had a truly shit start to life, bing bombed, evacuated, or never seeing a banana until they were into puberty.
You have to be a viciously mean-spirited person to write about this generation of "wrinkles" as you do. No wonder they kicked you in the balls by voting for Brexit.
As a baby cowering under a table in Manchester as the v bombs were falling around us, one killing 6 of our neighbours, then the rationing and hard times of the fifties, starting work at 16 on £3.00 a week and marvelling when my Father was promoted and his income rose to £1,000. My Mother and later my wife sewing, mending and making do, never buying anything if we could not afford it.
Working honestly 60 - 70 hours a week to buy a home and raise a family still living within our means.
Eventually after 49 years of work paying all taxes I retire on a state pension and a private pension I had sacrificed to contribute to I am now told the state will come and take everything away from me is beyond belief
You can put the violin away mate....that's life. My kids are 3 and 5 and your generation (note, not necessarily you personally) voted to ruin their future. By the time they are of voting age that will be painfully obvious and to say the least you will not be popular.
I voted remain if that is your problem but your hate does you no favours and by the way, when your children are of voting age this Country will be every bit as good as it ever has been, in or out of Europe and more than likely I will not be a problem for the young anymore
On the issue of winter fuel allowances et al, it certainly wasn’t down to the political choices of young people to introduce all those benefits. It just so happened to be the case the party that young people felt was advocating most for their interests supported all those things.
With the consequence that they've cemented those things in for the foreseeable future. Good result, hey?
Completely off topic but there are times when the criminal justice system just sickens me. I heard on the radio driving home that that paedophile of a football coach was sentenced to 73 years first time around but because the sentences were concurrent he was destined to serve the longest individual sentence of 9 years. So he was released after 4.5 years.
American sentences of 60 or 75 years are of course ridiculous but so are ours. This scumbag should have been dying in jail already. Surely that will be ensured on Monday.
I think the best one on sentencing was an American judge who sentenced a particularly unpleasant man to a total of 342 years in prison to be served consecutively. With a wonderfully dry wit he commented 'You will of course not serve all of this sentence, as in this state we allow up to one-third remission for good conduct.'
That is perhaps not the kind of softness I am talking about. But 4.5 years served for the multiple rape of children is an absolute outrage. Consecutive sentences for multiple crimes really should be the norm.
On the issue of winter fuel allowances et al, it certainly wasn’t down to the political choices of young people to introduce all those benefits. It just so happened to be the case the party that young people felt was advocating most for their interests supported all those things.
With the consequence that they've cemented those things in for the foreseeable future. Good result, hey?
Yes, good result. Young people now have had issues that affect them - e.g. housing, tuition fees, the gig economy - given more attention.
On the issue of winter fuel allowances et al, it certainly wasn’t down to the political choices of young people to introduce all those benefits. It just so happened to be the case the party that young people felt was advocating most for their interests supported all those things.
With the consequence that they've cemented those things in for the foreseeable future. Good result, hey?
The current batch of wrinklies have been a generation of spongers, first relying on their parents' funding the establishment of the modern welfare state and now relying on their children to pay for something they will never benefit from. Far from showing any gratitude, they take every opportunity to salt the ground for those who come after them.
Vey few of them alive now who would have fought in WW2, but they would all have grown up in the war or the long shadow it cast into the fifties. Rationing ended in 1954. They had a truly shit start to life, bing bombed, evacuated, or never seeing a banana until they were into puberty.
You have to be a viciously mean-spirited person to write about this generation of "wrinkles" as you do. No wonder they kicked you in the balls by voting for Brexit.
As a baby cowering under a table in Manchester as the v bombs were falling around us, one killing 6 of our neighbours, then the rationing and hard times of the fifties, starting work at 16 on £3.00 a week and marvelling when my Father was promoted and his income rose to £1,000. My Mother and later my wife sewing, mending and making do, never buying anything if we could not afford it.
Working honestly 60 - 70 hours a week to buy a home and raise a family still living within our means.
Eventually after 49 years of work paying all taxes I retire on a state pension and a private pension I had sacrificed to contribute to I am now told the state will come and take everything away from me is beyond belief
You can put the violin away mate....that's life. My kids are 3 and 5 and your generation (note, not necessarily you personally) voted to ruin their future. By the time they are of voting age that will be painfully obvious and to say the least you will not be popular.
I voted remain if that is your problem but your hate does you no favours and by the way, when your children are of voting age this Country will be every bit as good as it ever has been, in or out of Europe and more than likely I will not be a problem for the young anymore
Your inability to debate this without taking things intensely personally also does you no favours. Just because the old moan about the young, as they have since the dawn of time, does not mean they hate them, and vice versa.
Comments
There is no real demand for it
For all the fact criminal responsibility is usually 10, it doesn't mean that they go to "real prisons", which they don't.
The HMI Prisons report into Feltham was very alarming, it isn't an isolated incident.
It was this one.
https://twitter.com/twlldun/status/964187316779700224
Would those who think children should vote @ 16, still think that if more 16/17 year olds were likely to vote Tory?
The closed group called "The Ultras" also argues for privatising healthcare and the return of workhouses for debtors.
Dominic Raab says he wasn't aware he was part of it.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexspence/the-tory-housing-minister-was-in-a-private-facebook-group?utm_term=.xgedv7A7M#.sfo1boBo3
For those of you who use Facebook is this a plausible defence?
Edit. I guess Ruth Davidson would also continue to support votes at 16
Obviously don't agree with the way the point was expressed either.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/noriaki-kasai-the-japanese-ski-jumping-legend-going-for-gold-at-forty-five
here is the group's manifesto, incidentally, which anyone can read because they are too clueless to make the group secret rather than just closed:
"Description
Britain is a nation that has been shooting at it's own feet for too long. Too much tolerance of socialism has cost us a trillion pounds. Things must change faster than any political party dare liberate us from fundamental failure of funding failures.
As a member of British Ultra Liberal Youth aka The Ultras. You are free to remained aligned to the political party of your choice as long as it is the Conservative party.
If this were a football field. We would be racing down the right wing so close to the touchline, we would be doing so very carefully making sure we don't put our feet outside the field of play. While watching from the stands are an electorate unaware a liberalised life beyond Council Houses, Free Healthcare and Social Security can exist let alone work.
As an Ultra. It is your duty to support and pressure the mainstream of the Conservative party that such policies as: Privatisation of healthcare. The Sale of all council housing at market value and Workhouses for debtors are right and have found their time to enter Britain."
Logic and punctuation both suggest this is a false flag UKIP operation.
Adil Rashid opts out of first-class cricket for 2018 season
• Leg spinner to concentrate on white-ball cricket
• Stokes may train on Saturday after reunion with team-mates
Adil Rashid has put his ambitions for a Test return on hold and negotiated a new white-ball deal at Yorkshire after losing some of his appetite for the first-class game.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/15/ben-stokes-may-train-england-team-mates-reunion
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/964195272095092747
If only someone had pointed that out before.
Also worth remembering that, with (say) four-year GEs, votes at 16 mean that 25% will first participate at age 16, 25% at 17, at 18, and 19. Compared to 25% at 18, 19, 20 and 21 currently. I was 20 by the time I first got the chance to cast a GE vote. Which, to me, felt very late.
The case was brought by three Rotherham Labour MPs over comments made by UKIP MEP Jane Collins about the Rotherham child abuse scandal.
Mr Justice Warby said the defamation action would have been "swiftly" settled had UKIP not interfered.
He added the party should be held liable for some of the costs.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-43072864
They should grow up.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/964195272095092747
edit: I see it was.
So Abram rose, and clave the wood, and went,
And took the fire with him, and a knife.
And as they sojourned both of them together,
Isaac the first-born spake and said, My Father,
Behold the preparations, fire and iron,
But where the lamb for this burnt-offering?
Then Abram bound the youth with belts and straps,
and builded parapets and trenches there,
And stretchèd forth the knife to slay his son.
When lo! an angel called him out of heaven,
Saying, Lay not thy hand upon the lad,
Neither do anything to him. Behold,
A ram, caught in a thicket by its horns;
Offer the Ram of Pride instead of him.
But the old man would not so, but slew his son,
And half the seed of Europe, one by one.
It is sad that anyone can hate the elderly so much
You have to be a viciously mean-spirited person to write about this generation of "wrinkles" as you do. No wonder they kicked you in the balls by voting for Brexit.
But in all seriousness I think a spell of radical left government is coming our way sooner or later and I know you've said so yourself. It will obviously be Millennials reacting against the boomers but it's less easy to know how my generation, stuck in between them, will fare (I am in my 40s). I'm guessing those of us with assets will get as much of a haircut as the older ones.
The only group of people he didn't try to nakedly bribe were (ironically) welfare recipients.
American sentences of 60 or 75 years are of course ridiculous but so are ours. This scumbag should have been dying in jail already. Surely that will be ensured on Monday.
Working honestly 60 - 70 hours a week to buy a home and raise a family still living within our means.
Eventually after 49 years of work paying all taxes I retire on a state pension and a private pension I had sacrificed to contribute to I am now told the state will come and take everything away from me is beyond belief
https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/964216467414814722
Ohhhhhh
https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/964216569508311041
Well, if you look back far enough, then maybe if you call swapping The Black Death for being bombed by a Heinkel, then maybe you have a point.
* According to the calculation by Centre for Policy Studies
I always assumed that he had one that was quite small.
That manifesto was a real eye-opener. I had assumed Corbyn was just a sort of typical dense socialist and while I thought his ideas very foolish I wasn't unduly bothered about them. It wasn't until I studied it and noticed how he was splurging money at potential voters and ignoring everyone else that I realised he was a straightforward populist, utterly cynical and utterly dishonest. It came as a bit of a shock.