Are you now more likely to vote for REFORM (the party)

[Decisiondecisions]

NC for this and apologies if Q already asked. My quick search yielded no result.

Reform plan to undo the reversal of 2 child cap benefit. Are you now likely (or more likely) to vote for them? There have been endless threads about the welfare bill.

Yeah you will. You will go away. Rich coming from someone who called me a jew hater because I'm left wing. Go take a stare into your own void

It would be a cold day in hell before I voted reform.

Jeez just looked at the Restore party - each and every new right wing party seems more toxic than the last. Hardly surprising that Elon Musk is backing and funding this new rotten bunch.
These men (and it is mostly men in these parties) are fuelled by hate and creating division. What times we live in.

Not in a million, billion, trillion years !!

They are awful but the plus side is that the vote will be split between them and Reform.

I'm sorry if you misunderstood my comments, at no point did I describe you as a Jew hater and have no evidence to believe or think that you are. I simply explained that there is a current of anti semitism within left wing politics.

Accusations of anti semitism in the Labour Party are "well known", the difference is that I am able to evidence it with the following link:

A guide to Labour anti-Semitism claims https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45030552

I don't vote Labour. Sorry if you took that from my posts but I've not voted Labour for well over 15 years

Stop being so dramatic. The problem with the Internet and what is supposed to be in the Epstein files is that anyone can post anything and say it's true. I have no idea of what's true and what isn't true anymore in what happened on Epstein's island.

Who asked you to wade in -anyway out. Much better things to do this evening

Again sorry if you misunderstood my post, I never said that you were a Labour voter and I have no evidence to suggest that you are or were a Labour voter.

I simply stated that there was a current of anti semitism within left wing politics.

The Labour is generally seen as a left wing political party which is why I posted the link from the BBC on anti semitism and the Labour Party.

There is also accusations of anti semitism in the Green Party, another left wing party. Again I am happy to post evidence in support of this point:

Greens promise action over antisemitism allegations https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cle0e0y4pyxo

Lastly for sake of clarity I am not implying that you voted for the Green Party or ever had.

DEI is an American term. It has no relevance to UK companies. We do talk about EDI, but the positive discrimination you seem to be alluding to in your example with the football team would be against employment law. Specifically, the Equality Act.

So "the left" (very general term but I think I know who you mean in this case) can talk about equality of outcome/positive discrimination all they like. But they are prohibited from tilting the play field through discrimination by the Equality Act. Yet strangely it's not "the left" saying they want to get rid of it. It's Reform that do. Which sort of suggests it's Reform who are more keen to make discrimination legal in practice than the progressive left.

And as someone who is 'of the left' I absolutely do not want to see positive discrimination in the sense that a less able/qualified person is promoted solely because of their background or skin colour.

But it is still the case that the opposite happens - the best qualified and most able person doesn't get the opportunity, for a whole host of reasons. An obvious one is access to opportunities in prestigious companies - these tend to go to young people from privileged backgrounds because their families can fund unpaid or very low paid internships in places like London. This means that companies miss out on young people who may well be more qualified and talented, so nobody wins. Schemes to bring talented young people from outside the traditional pool in benefit everyone - and the economy. But PP seems to oppose that kind of thing, even though it's about finding the best person. I really do wonder why that is.

And meanwhile we get Suella Braverman, now in Reform, using the term 'cultural Marxism', which is widely condemned as an antisemitic trope, but you don't mention that. Strange...

Yes, the current law isn't perfect (no laws are) but it does a pretty good job of allowing companies to take those sort of steps while also preventing practices that I think many people in the UK would feel was unfair. Yay.
I swear some people think the law in America is the law everywhere. But wanting to get rid of UK legislation because stories of positive discrimination in America (real or invented) make you angry is just crazy.

Fuck no. I'd vote conservative before that bunch of grifters.

I wouldn't dream of voting for Reform U.K. and their stance on the two child cap doesn't make one iota of difference.

Low paid or no pay internship do indeed place an unfair advantage on those young people who have parents able to fund them. I would wholeheartedly support outlawing unpaid or under paid internships to be replaced with paid internships - after all it is employment they are offering which should in turn be paid at market rates (otherwise it's slave work).

I would also insist on them being publicly advertised.

Lastly most of the initiatives to support people from minority or disadvantaged backgrounds into professional jobs are indeed London focused. More can and should be done to extend such initiatives to other parts of the UK.

Agree 100%. But that is not what Reform want.. Nigel Farage has openly said he is fine with employers being allowed to discriminate on sex, skin colour etc. I don't understand how any rational person could support that. It's bad for the economy to stifle talent through racism, sexism, ageism etc.

That is not what my understanding of what Farage has said (but happy to receive evidence of otherwise).

What has been said by Braverman is a commitment to get rid of the Equality Act 2010. Zia Yusuf who is more than a bit brighter than Braverman was questioned on Newsnight about it and said that a new act would be introduced that retained all the protections of the Equality Act 2010. This clearly begs the question of what is the point then other than a name change of the Act.

What is your understanding of Nigel Farage's 2015 claim that he thinks employers should be allowed to discriminate against people because of their nationality? He has said he stood by it as recently as last Monday. So he's in favour of employers being allowed to employ a second rate British person over a better qualified and talented non-British person - great for the economy. And this at a time when Trump is driving talent out of the US, and the UK should be scooping up its share of that talent.

I'm not British. And every job I've had here in the UK I have had because I was the best candidate for the job. Why would anyone support allowing stupid nationalism to be prioritised over what is actually best for business?

Farage is low life and I'd never ever vote Reform no matter what.

So he's in favour of employers being allowed to employ a second rate British person over a better qualified and talented non-British person - great for the economy.

Do you sincerely believe that any employer would chose a second rate candidate in favour of British person?
And what exactly do you mean by non-British? an immigrant who requires a visa? or non-white British?

Don't vote for them then 🤣🤷‍♀️

I think the lifting of the cap will increase the number of children born into families that are scraping by on benefits.

I will reflect your sentiment
"legislate in favour of more inequality based on some spurious and ideological moral grounds." to say I think expecting tax payers/ the public purse to keep picking up the tab for people to have more and more children is spurious and ideological. People not on benefits are not given a raise for having more kids. They decide if they can afford them. To put it bluntly I think you are encouraging a greater number of kids to be born into shit circumstances.

Why are parents not responsible for their children rather than the government?

I used to take my son to a Sure Start on a poorer estate (approx 13 years ago). One young/vulnerable mum attended from the estate and everyone else was a degree educated middle class mum that drove in from the surrounding areas for the 50p music group with their Ella's kitchen lunch pouches.

I'm not suggesting having facilities is not worthwhile but it didn't reach the target group much from what I saw. Perhaps other areas had more success.