geekyank.bsky.social
Global Citizen who believes that all cohabitants of our planet have equal rights. I also believe in unity, love and Linux.
I love all animals but especially dogs & in particular the ones that have owned me.
Journal: https://techb0lt.github.io/index.html
216 posts
290 followers
289 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
What's been happening without hope is not working either and is killing planet, killing industries and killing hope. Hope does make for better Commerce to average citizens than what is on offer or if it continues, what will be on offer if red is replaced with Turquoise.
comment in response to
post
This clearly isn't enough to even retain their core vote base seeing as the results are today.
There has never been a better case for a ruling party to bring in proportional representation than the results of this by-election.
comment in response to
post
Why people will vote reform via @peterjukes.bsky.social
comment in response to
post
It is not but each to his own. I can vouch for the benefits of a non-UPF diet that I have seen in my own health markers and diabetes control ever since I moved away from UPF.
comment in response to
post
Just the thought of these makes me shudder.
comment in response to
post
Yeah I am fairly certain pretty much all who voted Labour will support these moves and not showing that intent is what's causing current perception that nothing has changed as per the article. They must act before they have nowhere to go but down.
comment in response to
post
True. Pultocrats are very good at playing the three dimensional chess while rest of us struggle with snakes and ladders.
comment in response to
post
I reckon you meant "negligible". That we won't know until its done and bear in mind it's the data analysis created by billionaires so its hardly reliable. The benefit is it will show intent and will place labour closer to working people and erode support of crazy party.
comment in response to
post
United left and center left, promise referendum on brexit / single market and unite with smaller parties to bring forth referendum on proportional representation.. shows intent of change while testing waters.
comment in response to
post
For start stop with cuts to benefit and raise the tax on billionaires by a mere 1.5%. The furore will be huge but markets will not tumble. Influx will allow for investment. Make waves about undoing small pockets of privatisation visibly and aggressively for which bebefit is felt instantaneously.
comment in response to
post
They should play like they have nothing left to lose which is the reality IMHO. Doing that will allow them to operate on the turf right knows nothing about and as things will change for better it will buy 5 more yrs. Its a gambit they have to take. Stop dealing in agenda set by Reform.
comment in response to
post
Thats the thing though... they are not doing a balancing act, they are playing scared and trying to win votes they can't and in doing so loosing what they have. Again it all comes down to intent... the fight they are scared of is happening now and they are losing.
comment in response to
post
Neither is best, Former is better but with no intent on display it is not the case. They are trying to appear to fix but by not taking obvious steps are alienating voters who lent them the vote on a mandate of change that is not forthcoming. They are paving way for the conman.
comment in response to
post
All comes back to Intent or more precisely the lack of it.
comment in response to
post
You are right people should not yet they do because "rich" are good at making the "not rich" believe they are at par thereby channeling hate towards those on benefits while aligning with the billionaires. To bring that cultural change you mention requires the majority labour is currently wasting.
comment in response to
post
I read it somewhere that problem is in the way oligarchs play the system to make moderately well to do people believe they are rich and will be impacted by the changes to taxation.
Fact is, no one, not one single person needs nor can they justify having billions as bank balance.
comment in response to
post
You do realise that manyatimes it's not a choice. I am a tax payer in highest bracket and I do believe that my tax money is not well utilised by privatising public assets, letting inequality fester to give right wing numbnuts an opening while we let the most vulnerable in our society suffer.
comment in response to
post
This is so true.
comment in response to
post
In pandering to the worst instincts of ignorant bigots Labour are losing far more than they stand to gain. The kind of numbskull who likes this regressive nonsense is still going to vote Reform. Meanwhile anyone with any sense is wondering where to go. It makes no sense 🤦🏽♀️
comment in response to
post
I don't disagree with that assessment but given something was stretched in one direction, Bringing it back to normal requires pulling in opposite direction. Irrespective, the low hanging fruit of Single Market or making investments in publicly owned infra, will generate growth and show intent IMHO.
comment in response to
post
Them being voted in with a large majority is giving that chance. They then deciding to not even show intent is on current leadership. This is serious problem as the right wing nut case is waiting to bag in a lot of dugruntled voters, avoiding that requires investment in public owned infra. Intent?
comment in response to
post
Hmm.. I saw something on LinkedIn the other day which seemed like an incel intro course; some guy talking about his definition of masculinity and how boys and males are impacted by current system. I was thinking at the time why LinkedIn of all places to spread this vile rhetoric.
comment in response to
post
Haha...good one... we have "God Mode activated" going for past three generations and is sure to be used by the next one. 🤣😂
comment in response to
post
🤣😂
comment in response to
post
Whoa... and Music thinks he has got it bad at 3.5 when I call him puppy all the time.
comment in response to
post
🤣😂
comment in response to
post
It occured to me earlier today that to make sense of those policies requires an assumption on part of one trying to do so: "That the policy maker is a rational human being"
In this case that assumption is clearly not true. It is impossible to make sense of the senseless.