[Archived] The General Election 2015

[Paul]

What would you say is behind it, I can't think of any logical reason.

I think it is fair to say that the working man/woman could be of any political persuasion in the UK

Yes, quite agree. I think thenodrog is looking to use whatever definition GAV gives to trip him up at some point. Wouldn't be the first time.

Strange you should say that Paul because "being talked down to" is precisely how many of your posts come across and what get's under one's skin.

You're entitled to your opinion whether or not I agree with it is my choice. I could equally express what irritates me about other contributors posting styles but chose not to. It doesn't add to the discussion.

I'll add in my defence my words and sentence construction are chosen quite carefully as I'm fully aware of how some posters will take an opportunity to manipulate or reinterpret others postings. It probably doesn't help but sadly has been necessary on here for a very long time.

[Gav]

Strange you should say that Paul because "being talked down to" is precisely how many of your posts come across and what get's under one's skin.

I must be missing something here.

Knowing Paul on a personal level I can assure you you'll not meet a more down to earth, level headed chap Al and more importantly a dedicated Rover to boot.

[Mike E]

Funnily enough I've had several emails with Jake Berry discussing issues in the treatment of deaf people at Royal Bburn and he's been wonderfully responsive and engaging. Not a 'Tory' attitude at all.

He's discussing with the health minister whether it'd be worth allowing people to have relevant hearing aid adjustment software on home PCs to save the time, cost and anguish to both parties of making a hospital appt leaving a person fully deaf until they are seen.

If allowed it would give hearing aid users ownership of their machines rather than feeling at the mercy of a person with a piece of paper that says MSc on it.

[Biddy]

Yes, quite agree. I think thenodrog is looking to use whatever definition GAV gives to trip him up at some point. Wouldn't be the first time.

I actually don't think that is the case at all. There have been many discussions during the election itself where the Left wing supporters trotted out ".... will affect the working class/man/woman/person" or "the working class/man/woman/person will be worse off". Gordon (and I on occasion) have asked for a clarification of this terminology as I ( and as you state yourself), would class myself as "working class" but I felt I would not be adversely affected by whatever point they were making. So the term "working (insert term here)" is far too broad and needed clarifying. Something no one seemed to be able or willing to do.

[Al]

Yes, quite agree. I think thenodrog is looking to use whatever definition GAV gives to trip him up at some point. Wouldn't be the first time.

You're entitled to your opinion whether or not I agree with it is my choice. I could equally express what irritates me about other contributors posting styles but chose not to. It doesn't add to the discussion.

I'll add in my defence my words and sentence construction are chosen quite carefully as I'm fully aware of how some posters will take an opportunity to manipulate or reinterpret others postings. It probably doesn't help but sadly has been necessary on here for a very long time.

As you say I'm entitled to my own opinion, as are you. If I met you personally my impression could be completely different but I can only interpret the words I see before me.

[Gav]

I actually don't think that is the case at all. There have been many discussions during the election itself where the Left wing supporters trotted out ".... will affect the working class/man/woman/person" or "the working class/man/woman/person will be worse off". Gordon (and I on occasion) have asked for a clarification of this terminology as I ( and as you state yourself), would class myself as "working class" but I felt I would not be adversely affected by whatever point they were making. So the term "working (insert term here)" is far too broad and needed clarifying. Something no one seemed to be able or willing to do.

I actually gave a definition of working class several times and each time it was more of less ignored, so eventually you give up and hope that the people asking are just being difficult for the sake of it and really know what working class is.

[Biddy]

I actually gave a definition of working class several times and each time it was more of less ignored, so eventually you give up and hope that the people asking are just being difficult for the sake of it and really know what working class is.

As far as I remember, you gave a definition that was loose and would encompass the likes of me, an ordinary working person. The statements of how evil the Tories were or are going to be did not fit the wide definition of "working class" hence us asking who is the "working class" that would be affected. As Gordon says above, the loose definition of "working class" in this era would also include exec's on £100,000 + or even £1m+. These people still work to pay the bills.

*apologies if you made a more focused definition and I missed it in the melee of other posts.

[jim mk2]

Tell you what Jim. If the Labour party can redefine the term ' working man' that they trot out so often (and which no one and I mean NIO ONE appears able to define) and represent that chap then I might even vote for them. Lets not forget at this point that most of 'the rich' which you see as convenient milch cows are also in the 'working man' category. In fact rather more so. tbh I'd wager most people who continue to work beyond 65 are self employed business men.

Working man in this context I would take to mean ordinary people who work for wages, especially low wages, including unskilled and semi-skilled labourers and their families.

[thenodrog]

As far as I can recall I haven't contributed to this thread since before the general election and then only briefly. Consequently I'm not quite clear about the attempt to drag me in to the discussion. I've reached the conclusion the half dozen or so more vocal right wing posters on BRFCC, and quite often in the real world, are quite swift to resort to insult and derogatory language. This post from thenodrog being a prime example. Overall I see little point in attempting debate when the eventual outcome is clear - insulting language - which is why I now avoid these discussions much of the time.

Just as an aside I have noted your frequent requests for GAV to define the "working man." Might I suggest he is no different from the "working mother" example you use in your post. Simply these are people who work. I agree to define Thomas the Tank Engine as sexist is daft, it is though sexist to define a woman by whether or not she works and is or is not a mother. Women work, men work. I no more think of myself as a "working father" than my wife sees herself as "working mother." Why would you wish to differentiate? Unless of course it is to suggest "working mothers" are in some way superior to their partners - given the attitudes which hold sway in some households I can imagine how that might be.

Whatever one's political views the world has moved on, and with respect, I'd suggest it is yourself and a number of others who hold views rooted in the past regardless of whether we are talking left, right or centre politics.

You quite obviously haven't watched the clip from the link that I provided. Big mistake because your supercilious tone must now be rather embarrassing to you. The term 'working mother' are not my words they are hers. That is how she chose to actually describe herself. Do try not to shoot the messenger Paul.

As for you ancient, embittered pinko's telling others to move on and not live in the past !!! You must be avin a laff!

[thenodrog]

Yes, quite agree. I think thenodrog is looking to use whatever definition GAV gives to trip him up at some point. Wouldn't be the first time.

NOPE. I HIGHLIGHT IT COS ITS A TIRED OLD TERM THAT HAS LITTLE RELEVANCE IN TODAY'S SOCIETY. JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY WHO WORKS FOR A LIVING CAN CLAIM TO BE 'WORKING CLASS'. WHETHER THEY RECEIVE REMUNERATION AS A SUPERMARKET SHELF STACKER OR A TRADER IN THE STOCK EXCHANGE IS IRRELEVANT.

I EVEN POINTED OUT THE FOOLISHNESS OF CONTINUALLY HAMMERING THE WEALTHIER MEMBERS OF OUR SOCIETY (THOSE WITH THE BROADEST SHOULDERS IS ANOTHER POLITICAL STRAP LINE WHICH GRATES WITH ME) WHEN I GAVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF THE AMOUNT OF TAX PAID INTO THE NATION'S COFFERS BY A CHAP EARNING 15K AND ANOTHER EARNING 120K WHEN I OUTLINED TO YOU THAT THE LATTER PAYS MORE TAX IN A SINGLE YEAR THAN THE FORMER DOES IN HIS LIFETIME.

You're entitled to your opinion whether or not I agree with it is my choice. I could equally express what irritates me about other contributors posting styles but chose not to. It doesn't add to the discussion.

I'll add in my defence my words and sentence construction are chosen quite carefully as I'm fully aware of how some posters will take an opportunity to manipulate or reinterpret others postings. It probably doesn't help but sadly has been necessary on here for a very long time.

YOU DIDN'T CHOOSE YOUR RESPONSE TO ME CAREFULLY AT ALL. YOU DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER TO WATCH THE LINK THAT I PROVIDED BEFORE EAGERLY JUMPING IN WITH BOTH FEET!

I actually don't think that is the case at all. There have been many discussions during the election itself where the Left wing supporters trotted out ".... will affect the working class/man/woman/person" or "the working class/man/woman/person will be worse off". Gordon (and I on occasion) have asked for a clarification of this terminology as I ( and as you state yourself), would class myself as "working class" but I felt I would not be adversely affected by whatever point they were making. So the term "working (insert term here)" is far too broad and needed clarifying. Something no one seemed to be able or willing to do.

There's at least two questions which NEVER get answered on here Biddy.

1. Define the term 'working class'.?

2. Which top quality manager do you think would come to BRFC if we sack GB?

[thenodrog]

I actually gave a definition of working class several times and each time it was more of less ignored, so eventually you give up and hope that the people asking are just being difficult for the sake of it and really know what working class is.

Could you find that again gav? I've just done a search using the terms

working class

all words

content

gav

icbinf

posts

and the search engine came up with nothing relevant.

[thenodrog]

Working man in this context I would take to mean ordinary people who work for wages, especially low wages, including unskilled and semi-skilled labourers and their families.

So anybody on a salary is not a working man in your opinion?

The rest of your opinion is just nonsense. Piffle in fact and eliminates the likes of nurses, members of the military, teachers, police officers etc etc etc from describing themselves as 'a working man'. Just as an aside Jim I've a feeling that after a career in journalism that you have in fact just eliminated yourself as a member of the working class.

Oh... how about your mate next door who you informed us is a the tax dodging builder. Is he working class?

[jim mk2]

There's at least two questions which NEVER get answered on here Biddy.

1. Define the term 'working class'.?

One definition would be it is a social group that consists of people who earn little money, often being paid for only the hours of days they work, and who usually do physical work.

So anybody on a salary is not a working man in your opinion?

The rest of your opinion is just nonsense. Piffle in fact and eliminates the likes of nurses, members of the military, teachers, police officers etc etc etc from describing themselves as 'a working man'. Just as an aside Jim I've a feeling that after a career in journalism that you have in fact just eliminated yourself as a member of the working class.

Oh... how about your mate next door who you informed us is a the tax dodging builder. Is he working class?

In the context of which the question was asked it is correct. You can't keep shifting the goalposts - as other people have pointed out.

[thenodrog]

You have just described your builder mate next door again and precluded yourself. When in a hole as they say.

Plus 'one definition' surely there can only be one definition otherwise it's a worthless exercise.

Working class is finished, you need to come up with something else to describe people who vote Labour.

[jim mk2]

Your turn then - define working class and working man.

[yoda]

Is it not anyone who gets paid by someone else for doing something, seems fairly straight forward to me.

[jim mk2]

There's some interesting stuff if you look around the internet.

According to a British Sociological Association convention, there are now 7 social classes in Britain. At the bottom is the “precariat", typically shopkeepers, drivers and cleaners who represent 15 per cent of people in the country and lack “any significant amount of economic, cultural or social capital”.

The categories in between are: established middle class; technical middle class; new affluent workers, traditional working class and emergent service workers.

Precariat: This is the most deprived class of all with low levels of economic, cultural and social capital. The every day lives of members of this class are precarious.

Traditional Working Class: This class scores low on all forms of the three capitals although they are not the poorest group. The average age of this class is older than the others.

Emergent Service Workers: This new class has low economic capital but has high levels of 'emerging' cultural capital and high social capital. This group are young and often found in urban areas.

Technical Middle Class: This is a new, small class with high economic capital but seem less culturally engaged. They have relatively few social contacts and so are less socially engaged.

New Affluent Workers: This class has medium levels of economic capital and higher levels of cultural and social capital. They are a young and active group.

Established Middle Class: Members of this class have high levels of all three capitals although not as high as the Elite. They are a gregarious and culturally engaged class.

Elite: This is the most privileged class in Britain who have high levels of all three capitals. Their high amount of economic capital sets them apart from everyone else.

[thenodrog]

How about somebody who simply works for a living whatever the remuneration?

[yoda]

How about somebody who simply works for a living whatever the remuneration?

Give Jim his due, it is an impressive list,

some people can complicate an iron ball

[thenodrog]

Precisely. Best advice I can give to anyone is 'keep it simple'.

How about Taxpayer and None Taxpayer? That way priorities should be given to those who pay most tax. There appears to be a strong movement supporting the opposite around these parts. Actual Tax payers taking priority over tax evaders and none taxpayers for the likes of NHS treatment and housing lists etc would make a refreshing change.

[yoda]

Precisely. Best advice I can give to anyone is 'keep it simple'.

How about Taxpayer and None Taxpayer? That way priorities should be given to those who pay most tax. There appears to be a strong movement supporting the opposite around these parts. Actual Tax payers taking priority over tax evaders and none taxpayers for the likes of NHS treatment and housing lists etc would make a refreshing change.

That is pretty good Gordon, it also takes care of those that live of investments as they pay tax on interest

[ultrablue]

I think you are missing the point here:

Phrases such as "working man" and "working class" are not used because they define any particular group. It is not an objective term. As jim has pointed out, the sociologists are pretty much agreed the old class model is unsuitable to describe British society.

But terms like 'working class' are still used, because they are focused-group tested buzz words that are known to be as inclusive as possible to potential voters. Labour voters clearly self identify with and respond well to monikers with 'work' in them. 'Honest' is another Labour buzzword.

For the Tories it's 'First' 'fair' and 'economic'.

Defining 'working man' or 'working class' is about as useful as defining 'an exciting film' or 'a good looking woman'. It means different things to different people, but still we know we all want them.

[Gav]

Nobody seems to have mentioned benefit claimants as being part of the working classes. At some stage during your working life as a member of the working classes you’ll be lucky not to have to call on benefits to help you get by and nothing wrong with that.

Plenty of good honest hard working families rely on working tax credit to subsidise their incomes, the Tories are going to cut this benefit from 26k to 23k I believe.

[thenodrog]

Nobody seems to have mentioned benefit claimants as being part of the working classes. At some stage during your working life as a member of the working classes you’ll be lucky not to have to call on benefits to help you get by and nothing wrong with that.

Plenty of good honest hard working families rely on working tax credit to subsidise their incomes, the Tories are going to cut this benefit from 26k to 23k I believe.

Got it in one gav. Any reliance on benefits is something which must be discouraged before it becomes an addiction and a way of life. Benefits should be a temporary fix and not a way of life. They must be policed properly and not be wide open to abuse.

A story for you.... We had a husband and wife who worked for us a decade or so ago. Menial tasks and minimum wage stuff. They had one daughter at school and wild horses couldn't get them to do more than 16 hours per week because it would have impacted on their benefits. Most aggravating when illness and such stretched our business. Anyway once their daughter left school they were absolutely incensed when they had their benefits cut. tbh their anger and indignation that the state should cut their hand outs was a joy to behold. Within a month they had both found jobs that paid better but with less sociable hours. They could / should have done this off their own bat years earlier and no doubt would have but for their hand outs paid out of honest peoples best endeavours.

[Gav]

I know many people that rely on working tax credit to survive, these are people with low paid full time jobs, beats sitting at home wasting away on full benefits doesn't it?

These are good honest people that want to work, don't get paid very well, and need working tax credit, would you rather them just pack in working and go on full benefits?

Of course you wouldn't so they're in the equation.