Brillo calls out BoJo

[Trophy Husband]

Agammemnon said:

Red 4 said:

Because you have less rights than an employee.
You are not regarded as an employee. You are regarded as a worker.
Plenty of stuff for you to do your own research on ...

My payscales reflect the difference in status. I don't need to do any further research regarding my career, thanks.

FYI it's fewer rather than less.

As I said, how is it immoral if all parties are happy?

Like sodomy you mean?

[Mobile Chicane]

Agammemnon said:

Trophy Husband said:

We'll have....................... a proliferation of immoral zero hours contracts

I have a zero hour contract. Could you please explain to me in what way it's immoral bearing in mind that both I and the people for whom I work are happy with this arrangement?

If you are a barrister on £4,000 a day, I can see that arrangement working.

A pot washer on £8.41 an hour, not so much...

[oyster]

smn159 said:

Thing is, Corbyn is being very open about what you'll get from a Labour government, including large investments in infrastructure and the return of utilities to government control paid for by a rebalancing of wealth. You can disagree with the aims, but you know what you'll be getting.

Paid for by how?

Your statement sounds beyond vague. Yet you claim Labour are being open.

They certainly aren't.

[Red 4]

Agammemnon said:

As I said, how is it immoral if all parties are happy?

Who says people on zero hour contracts are happy ?
Most people would prefer a steady job with full employments rights.
Lots of people take what they can get.
It is that simple. Like you.

[Ayahuasca]

Red 4 said:

Most people would prefer a steady job with full employments rights.

Any research to back that assertion?

[Pan Pan Pan]

chow pan toon said:

I was going to vote Tory with my nose firmly held in light of the sheer ineptitude of Corbyn but I'm not prepared to overlook Johnson's manifest personality flaws any more. I think this latest example of his cowardice is the straw that broke the camel's back.

Anyone who bases how they will vote on the utter guff coming from all parties in the run up to a general election, should probably not be allowed to vote at all.
They are all promising the moon on a stick (for Free), and jumping ever higher like frogs on a hot plate to get your vote. Your vote should be about which party you consider will do the UK the least harm, rather than the shabby leaders (and they all are) of the parties involved.
I doubt we ever had the ability to vote for a political party which we believed would do the UK as a whole some good.

Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Friday 6th December 14:59

[chow pan toon]

Pan Pan Pan said:

chow pan toon said:

I was going to vote Tory with my nose firmly held in light of the sheer ineptitude of Corbyn but I'm not prepared to overlook Johnson's manifest personality flaws any more. I think this latest example of his cowardice is the straw that broke the camel's back.

Anyone who bases how they will vote on the utter guff coming from all parties in the run up to a general election, should probably not be allowed to vote at all.
They are all promising the moon on a stick (for Free), and jumping ever higher like frogs on a hot plate to get your vote. Your vote should be about which part you consider will do the UK the least harm, rather than the shabby leaders (and they all are) of the parties involved.

I disagree. My vote (and everyone else's) should be for the party and leader that they want to run and represent the country. "Vote for us because we're less ste than the other bloke and we're the only chance of stopping him" is a poor offer at the best of times and a contributing factor to the general weakness of the field. If Johnson is happy to duck interviews he doesn't fancy then it just adds to the weight of evidence that he really isn't someone I trust to represent me.

[Mafffew]

Halb said:

Crafty_ said:

Gove getting stabby, the replies are amusing!

https://twitter.com/calumam/status/120285720285752...

...wow...
What was Gove thinking?

Cocaine, probably.

[Red 4]

Ayahuasca said:

Red 4 said:

Most people would prefer a steady job with full employments rights.

Any research to back that assertion?

Silly me. You're right. Most people prefer sporadic work with fewer rights in law. What was I thinking ?
Note to self - must try harder.

[tim0409]

Crafty_ said:

Its because Johnson is incapable of talking about anything except "get brexit done", he literally can not have a conversation without repeating those words over and over while completely ignoring the rest of the conversation.

The Tories will have spent a fortune on focus groups, and the clear message that resonated will have been "get Brexit done"; I agree that it's annoying but it must be working for them otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. Boris has been surprisingly good at staying on message.

[Murph7355]

Red 4 said:

Who says people on zero hour contracts are happy ?
Most people would prefer a steady job with full employments rights.
Lots of people take what they can get.
It is that simple. Like you.

People on them, from the study done not so long ago.

As you keep noting to others, plenty of info on the net. Go educate yourself

Now, where is the study that shows most people prefer a steady job with full employment rights?

[Gary29]

Why does AN think he's billy big bks? Surely any other journo/correspondent is just as capable as grilling BJ as him?

If I were BJ I'd have told him to fk off as well.

[Red 4]

Murph7355 said:

Red 4 said:

Who says people on zero hour contracts are happy ?
Most people would prefer a steady job with full employments rights.
Lots of people take what they can get.
It is that simple. Like you.

People on them, from the study done not so long ago.

As you keep noting to others, plenty of info on the net. Go educate yourself

Now, where is the study that shows most people prefer a steady job with full employment rights?

Here's a study that directly contradicts you.
I'm not the one who needs educating.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/05/ze...

[chow pan toon]

Red 4 said:

Murph7355 said:

Red 4 said:

Who says people on zero hour contracts are happy ?
Most people would prefer a steady job with full employments rights.
Lots of people take what they can get.
It is that simple. Like you.

People on them, from the study done not so long ago.

As you keep noting to others, plenty of info on the net. Go educate yourself

Now, where is the study that shows most people prefer a steady job with full employment rights?

Here's a study that directly contradicts you.
I'm not the one who needs educating.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/05/ze...

Come on Red 4, you've shared an actual article there and from The Guardian, that won't be acceptable. All you need to say is something like "people prefer proper jobs with paid holidays, plenty of info on the net, go educate yourself."

[Electro1980]

Stussy said:

Electro1980 said:

And it goes round and round with the candidate refusing to answer the question until the interview has to move on to another question that won’t be answered. They all do it

Therefore it is utterly pointless wasting time on such a thing.
They all lie, they all avoid the questions.
What is to be gained from that?

How about not cutting out the bit where I explain the value?

[Electro1980]

WestyCarl said:

Electro1980 said:

They don’t. They push for an actual answer whilst politicians try to say something unrelated to turn the conversation the way they want without actually answering the question. Something along the lines of:

“Can you explain your statement on X”
“Well, if you look at our party manifesto...”
“I wasn’t asking about the party, but about your statement”
“If you let me finish... the party manifesto”

And it goes round and round with the candidate refusing to answer the question until the interview has to move on to another question that won’t be answered. They all do it, and it is useful because the public can tell when the politicians want to avoid an answer. Boris is trying to avoid scrutiny, probably for the same reason we have seen nothing from JRM, he will be seen as the idiot he is.

But that's not pushing for an answer, it's just trying to dominate and generate headlines by creating an argumentative and agressive environment. The alternative is;

“Can you explain your statement on X”
“Well, if you look at our party manifesto...” {let them finish}
“Thanks for explaining the manifesto now please explain without repating the manifesto"

And let them turn ten simple questions probing for answers in a short interview in to a party political monologue, where they hope the listeners will forget what the question is? You don’t see a problem with that?

[Red 4]

chow pan toon said:

Red 4 said:

Murph7355 said:

Red 4 said:

Who says people on zero hour contracts are happy ?
Most people would prefer a steady job with full employments rights.
Lots of people take what they can get.
It is that simple. Like you.

People on them, from the study done not so long ago.

As you keep noting to others, plenty of info on the net. Go educate yourself

Now, where is the study that shows most people prefer a steady job with full employment rights?

Here's a study that directly contradicts you.
I'm not the one who needs educating.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/05/ze...

Come on Red 4, you've shared an actual article there and from The Guardian, that won't be acceptable. All you need to say is something like "people prefer proper jobs with paid holidays, plenty of info on the net, go educate yourself."

TBH one thing I have found on these forums is that even when people are presented with evidence they will argue for the sake of argument.
It is odd. People rarely do this face to face. They will either concede defeat, compromise or just walk away.
Not here though. Oh no. I find it comical sometimes. Even more so when people get angry.

[RoverP6B]

I'm at the point of wishing for the Queen to intervene and tell the whole sorry lot of 'em to foxtrot-oscar. Gove was at least a competent Env Sec (even those at Defra who disagree fundamentally with Tory politics generally admit he did quite a good job and was capable of working across ideological divides) and might just make a better PM than No-Show-Bo-Jo. Or Patel? The first female ethnic minority PM being a hang-em-high Zionist Tory as well as a Gujarati woman should make a fair few Labour/Momentum heads explode with confusion... and if it's a choice between her and Dihaven'tanabacus...

[Touring442]

Mobile Chicane said:

Personally I dread the prospect of a BoJo government. When Tory grandees like Heseletine and Major are urging people not to vote Conservative that signals a level of disgust with the type of politics the Conservative Party has descended into.

The Tory party I used to know and love ended probably 20 years ago. What we have now is a pack of venal animals, the most utterly disgusting creatures in politics.

[Keoparakolo]

chow pan toon said:

Red 4 said:

Murph7355 said:

Red 4 said:

Who says people on zero hour contracts are happy ?
Most people would prefer a steady job with full employments rights.
Lots of people take what they can get.
It is that simple. Like you.

People on them, from the study done not so long ago.

As you keep noting to others, plenty of info on the net. Go educate yourself

Now, where is the study that shows most people prefer a steady job with full employment rights?

Here's a study that directly contradicts you.
I'm not the one who needs educating.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/05/ze...

Come on Red 4, you've shared an actual article there and from The Guardian, that won't be acceptable. All you need to say is something like "people prefer proper jobs with paid holidays, plenty of info on the net, go educate yourself."

Nope, that’s too long. Something like “Zero contracts win” is better. Remember, three word slogans are all you need. No substance, no questions, no interviews, just three word slogans.