To feel worried about the future? (Election related)

[Abc123def]

I’m incredibly sick of the society we’re living in. It’s bleak and horrible. When you hear about the millions of children in poverty and over 130000 people who have died as a result of austerity it makes me so sad.

My dh and I are working 4 jobs between us just to be able to save up for a house, whereas my elder siblings managed to buy in the 90’s when everything was cheaper with tiny deposits. No matter how we save, house prices keep rising and our “25%” deposit figure keeps getting bigger.

I feel deflated and feel like there’s no hope. Liars and cheats are the winners in this world. Hard working people get nothing. I’m probably feeling over emotional but the thought of another 5 years of tories fills me with terror.

Another typical thread of comparing with others who seeminy had it so much better. It's easy to compare ourselves with a, selected group of peoe. It's easy to only see the good things they had and ignored the bad

But even they had it better, so what! It was a new era, end off. I bet no-one compared themselves with those who faced the war and think how great life is compare to them.

OP, you're doing fine. You'll get on the ladder one day. Maybe later than you'd wish but statistically, you're also likely to workonger, so might be better off financial over the course of your life time.

On the contrary, it looks like Jeremy is talking shit once again

The sections in question, pointed out specifically in the coverage, are more than clear. Conway is the one talking shit

BJ's plans to screw NHS terrify me. People are happy to have free medical care and yet still vote Conservative. Ridiculous!

There are no plans of BJ to "screw the NHS". You must be reading the wrong material. Look at the facts instead and don't give in to Labour propganda.

On the documents Corbyn produced today the Financial Times (which is very anti Tory, and seems to be supporting the Lib Dems, silly FT), says:

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.ft.com/content/cc2176f3-f434-3bfa-adcd-99240da491de" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.ft.com/content/cc2176f3-f434-3bfa-adcd-99240da491de</a>

Philip Georgiadis 3 hours ago

An early look at the document

Jim Pickard reports:

Out of the 451 pages there only seem to be a few relevant paragraphs.

• On page 41 it says that the US is not keen on warning labels on food.

• On page 43 it repeats the US desire to improve the “media narrative” on chlorine-washed chicken.

• On page 119 there are some words hinting at the US desire for longer drug patents.

That’s pretty much it....quite thin material when you boil it down to the essentials."

Yanbu, but in reality, none of them can do the job. They are morally bankrupt liars who will throw anyone under the bus if they need to. They don't care, none of them do.

Are you honestly just taking some FT journalist’s word for that?

It seems at least some of the unredacted version has been sat on Reddit for a month. Certainly many of the highlighted quotes match those reported in the press today, and the reddit thread has been plugged by various sources including even Kuessenberg.

If these are confirmed to be the genuine documents, which should become apparent quickly they absolutely prove that the Tories cannot be trusted, that no deal Brexit has an obvious purpose and motivation, and that those media sources trying to minimise the contents are liars.

www.reddit.com/r/worldpolitics/comments/dkzlfc/officialsensitive_great_britain_is_practically/

We will just have to agree to disagree. There is an awful lot in the press at the moment on both sides which is misleading.
I trust the British people to deliver the right result in Decmber. May the best man win.

We don’t though do we, since the documents are right there. Care to comment on them?

What is it with the Labour Party and dodgy dossiers? Looks like Corbyn learned at least one trick from Blair!

Oh dear. Getting desperate there, Cendrillon.

Have you bothered to read it yet?

but in reality, none of them can do the job True I think we should adopt the Chinese system. Only joking

True I think we should adopt the Chinese system. grin Only joking

At least decisions would get made quicker.

It’s the Tories who are good at dodgy dossiers - or their repression.

Have you bothered to read it yet?

Read this and weep:

The YouGov MRP (which provided the most accurate prediction last time, although it slightly underestimated the Tory seat total):

#GE2019 seat projection, MRP model:

CON: 359
LAB: 211
SNP: 43
LDEM: 13

via @YouGov

Conservative majority of 68.

You can stuff your dodgy dossiers!

You should be worried if labour get in. They:
Started selling off the nhs
Changed pension age for women for the worse
Bankrupted the country

Craft74 it was John Major's government who raised women's pension age from 60 to 65 in 1995.

Labour only raised it one year to 66 subsequently.

And you can stuff your polls. At this stage they’re as informative as tea leaves.

And you can stuff your polls. At this stage they’re as informative as tea leaves.

How large a Labour majority are you predicting then?

I’m predicting nothing. Speculation is a fools’ game.

But you think a hard-left Labour Party and a socialist leader are so irresistible to the public. So surely they must win a majority of seats, or at least the biggest share of the popular vote, right?

No, of course we can trust the Tories on the NHS, what, wait £9.2 billion and Hancock broke his promise?!
And Craft74, you only joined mumsnet like 5 mins ago to agitate on these threads. That, or you had to change your user name to disassociate yourself from previous vitriolic remarks.

www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/21/private-firms-nhs-budget-matt-hancock-promise?CMP=share_btn_fb&fbclid=IwAR2V2zN_sKb6LDJJpFTAN572Q8bvVNH9TdDL2Bb3NFV0tpCPLi3-gzbXE24

I totally agree with you op. I'm terrified, but if you want to do something, campaign with your local labour party. You can do anything from delivering a few leaflets to canvassing in the marginals. An hour here and there really helps and the people on the doorstep haven't decided yet. It's still all to play for. Or donate a tenner. The Tories have billionaires and the media, but we've got millions of people who can contribute.

But you think a hard-left Labour Party and a socialist leader are so irresistible to the public.

Do I?

Do I?

Well, yes, unless your many hundreds (thousands?) of posts in favour of Corbyn and Labour's awesomeness this election have been some kind of performance art

p.s. If it is, I think you deserve a place in the Tate Modern. It's experimental, avant-garde, and totally impractical...

So on those documents just take one example - data protection laws. The UK has enacted the Data Protection Act 2018 which is in force and ensures GDPR continues in the UK after Brexit. The document linked above quotes this - is there anything wrong with this in a discussion paper? The Eu/ US already have special data proteciton arrangements known as the Privacy Shield which US companies can sign up to and if they do then data can be transferred between US and EU; if not the the other current means of lawful export apply eg consent, model clauses etc.

The biased Reddit quote says:

"The United Kingdom will also be asked to reconsider their policy towards legal protection of personal data. Cooperation is out of the question while GDPR stands in the way of American corporations like Facebook and Google".
That sentence of course isn't true and under GDPR facebook and Google have no difficulties operating the EU. It is true that GDPR has meant that some US newspapers do not allow EU readers to read them on line but many have moved to a GDPR type of consent already and US states are already starting to bring in GDPR rules - eg think California is first and New York has has it on the cards.

The reddit page then quotes this from the paper:

" RT also explained that the US has had some specific concerns with how GDPR is being implemented. The EU has acknowledged GDPR has a global impact and other countries are going to have opinions.

RT stated that the US will want to engage with the UK on the best approach around its future international transfers model, but understands there are still internal discussions in the UK on this. The US are proponents of APEC-CBPR model which is based around individual companies rather than whole legal systems [...] The UK and US could work together on an inclusive system [...] A mapping exercise took place mapping CBPR against the EU corporate rules system, and it was discovered that while there were differences, they were not as extensive as one would presume. Some countries have used the same set of information to get both approvals under both systems [...]


It would be useful to understand the impact on companies of unintended consequences of bringing GDPR in to play on hybrid data.""

The Binding Corporate Rules referenced above is part of GDPR already -some companies choose to have their internalk data rules individually approved by the ICO instead of joining the US/EU privacy shield or instead of using another method of lawful data export under GDPR.

I just don't see how on that issue the reddit criticism stands up as valid.

The UK and US will negotiate things. That is all it is saying.

It would be useful to understand the impact on companies of unintended consequences of bringing GDPR in to play on hybrid data."