Home Politics & Debate
At The Mix, we want to make our services as helpful as we can. To do this, we’d love to ask you a few questions about you, your visit to The Mix and its impact. It should take only about 5-10 minutes to complete. Take this survey and get a chance at winning a £200 Amazon voucher​.
Come and join our Support Circle, every Tuesday, 8 - 9:30pm! Sign up here
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

What unpopular opinions do you have?

13233343537

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Fiend_85 wrote: »
    I don't care about things that intimidate men.

    Are you talking about vibrators from the other thread or...? :-P
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah, it's what started me off.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Fiend_85 wrote: »
    Yeah, it's what started me off.

    If you are talking about not caring about vibrators, I think it's an unusual thing to not care about (hence the :-P)

    If you mean you don't care about what things 'men' don't like.. I don't think that's particularly unusual is it? I'm not really sure on your angle.

    Though then again, I don't have a problem with vibrators but am a man. I don't know what that says about me.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Mostly I don't care if something that I do as a woman that's entirely legit makes a man feel intimidated. Being a lesbian, don't care if you (for the purposes of the post, you=men) are intimidated. Having a "mans" job don't care. Earning my own money, making my own choices, watching porn, using sex toys and having a nicer car. Don't care.

    Women have worked fucking hard to get some equality, it's still not all there, so if you are intimidated, take your man vagina and pack it with sand somewhere the fuck else.

    </militant feminism>
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I agree with you really. But as a guy with all my privilege (though I do lose quite a chunk being below average height) perhaps I don't see it as an unpopular opinion that women are people with rights?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't see how they can be a threat. It's not like women all over are going to stop having sex with men to stay in with their vibrators every night. It's just a toy. It reminds me of the scene in Fight Club where he goes into her apartment and sees the dildo on the side and she goes 'Don't worry, it's not a threat to you'
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ShyBoy wrote: »
    I agree with you really. But as a guy with all my privilege (though I do lose quite a chunk being below average height) perhaps I don't see it as an unpopular opinion that women are people with rights?

    good.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Fiend_85 wrote: »
    good.

    Great stuff!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    shyboy wrote: »
    great stuff!

    [Mock Rage]I'm Glad We Agree[/Mock Rage] :grump:Old Mad
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Abu Qatada shouldn't be deported.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G-Raffe wrote: »
    Abu Qatada shouldn't be deported.

    I was actually thinking that today. I loathe the man. I want him gone. But the fact he isn't, in a kind of twisted way, is the best endorsement of our justice system for a long time. That, in spite of being one of the most despised men in the country with the full weight of the government against him, our legal system will not buckle.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G-Raffe wrote: »
    Abu Qatada shouldn't be deported.

    He shouldn't be deported for saying bad things. He should be extradited to face trial if his human rights are not infringed.

    That's not to say I wouldn't kick him repeatedly in the kidneys if I met the fucker though.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ShyBoy wrote: »
    I was actually thinking that today. I loathe the man. I want him gone. But the fact he isn't, in a kind of twisted way, is the best endorsement of our justice system for a long time. That, in spite of being one of the most despised men in the country with the full weight of the government against him, our legal system will not buckle.

    That! It's the whole evidence gained through torture could be used in a case against him. We either accept torture or we don't, there is no middle ground.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I can't get as angry as I'd like over Abu because a) he's a pantomime villain and b) all I hear when someone says his name is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=marc_v4FaT8

    Also, I'm intimidated by dildos. If any of you had been subjected to my fevered, ill co-ordinated pin-pricking you'd know why.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G-Raffe wrote: »
    That! It's the whole evidence gained through torture could be used in a case against him. We either accept torture or we don't, there is no middle ground.

    Huzzah for our legal system, and also for living in a country where he hasn't just been "knocked off"
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm not sure if this is unpopular or not... But i don't think the older generations being subsidised by younger generations is fair.

    Fact is all of us will have to pay pension contributions and that's fine. But people who are retiring now, who didn't pay into a pension, are basically getting a big bump up to the same level. My HR manager has paid serps all her life for nothing now. That could have been a mortgage on a buy to let.

    Obviously she will be retired soon and get her pension, that she has actually paid in for. But everyone she ever worked with who didn't put anything away is going to get the same pension paid for by the younger generations instead.

    The reason it's 'ok' though is because pensioners are untouchable politically, whereas youngsters are irrelevant in our current democracy.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Are you talking about taking the state pension away from pensioners?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Are you talking about taking the state pension away from pensioners?

    That's never going to happen, nor should it, there are people who don't earn enough to pay into a private pension scheme. But, it's not absurd to suggest getting your state pension later in life, if you can live to 90 why should you retire at 65? Neither is it absurd to start looking seriously at cuts to pensioner benefits when cuts are being made so drastically against other vulnerable areas of society, like the disabled.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No, I'm saying how the state pension is increasing whilst people who paid into the 'second' pension are losing it... So everyone ends up on the same. This makes it simpler for you and me to understand which is good. But in order to afford the increase in pensions, everyone who works now will be forced to pay in the extra bit that was previously a choice.

    Essentially, whether or not you worried about your pension for the last 40 years or just bought 5 buy to let properties... The government has your back. This will be paid for by increases in contributions from current workers.

    The big flaw of course is that this new model will eventually be unaffordable. So we will pay in the higher pension contributions but the system will collapse by the time we are of pension age.

    Doesn't seem fair to me that we are subsidising them when they had a whole working life to build up an adequate pension.

    Www.if.org.uk has some more information if you're interested.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You're not going to get any argument from me that pension ages should be pushed back: the Department for Work & Pensions (benefits & pensions) is our governement's biggest spend. That's where most savings can be made.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes, but they do need to be made by cutting pensions not benefits to those unable to work. The DWP are effectively demonising the chronically unwell and disabled.
    I think that pensions and cold weather payments should be means-tested. It's obscene that millionaires get state pensions and can't give it back to the state. Ester ransen spoke a few months back on newsnight about it and she said that hers goes straight to charity as she doesn't need it. But not all rich people are that benevolent.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm all for assessing people's eligibility to take tax payers' money, too.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You're not going to get any argument from me that pension ages should be pushed back: the Department for Work & Pensions (benefits & pensions) is our governement's biggest spend. That's where most savings can be made.

    I thought it was the military
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I thought it was the military

    DWP is three times the MoD spend, IIRC.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I agree with the idea that pensions should be means tested and also so sound retirement age, because there seems to be a very generalised retirement age, but what about people who can and want to work longer, but may feel pushed out by employers or those who are a bit younger but have age susceptible diseases.
    There's a theory of ageing called the activity theory, which believes being active keeps people healthier and alive longer and personally i believe if people are given a more open choice about working rather than such a guided one it could effect them in a positive, as i know many older people who have told me it was only after they finished working and because more socially secluded that they started to get ill and mentally deteriorate. Because although at some point i do believe all people (except the rare cases) will follow the disengagement theory because inevitable health deterioration and begin to prepare for death. But i also believe when people are retired and made to feel like this have to leave a job it may speed up the process somewhat.

    That is my personal opinion anyway, the idea of pensions mean tests made me think of it :p
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    In what way is there a generalised retirement age?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The government shouldn't be handing out tax payers' money (and then borrowed money on top of that) to anyone who doesn't need it, be that pension or benefit. I've heard arguments that it'd be more expensive to put in comprehensive means testing than it would be to just hand the money out regardless. But I find that hard to believe, especially if you use that data to start assessing people's eligibility for the whole raft of packages that the government deals with.

    I feel ambivalent towards the issue in general. A strong and healthy welfare state is of paramount importance to a strong and healthy society - platitudinous I know. However, as with most things, it's a double-edged sword. It's also a topic that produces some of the most unhelpful and lazy rhetoric, especially toward people who believe inefficiencies can be found - wheelchair users being forced down t'pit, springs to mind.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You have to admit though 'efficiency savings' aren't really a policy choice. It's like having three phone plans, 500 minutes for £20, 100 minutes for £10, or 100 minutes for £20.

    The choice is between spending more and getting more, or spending less and getting less. I don't think anyone would choose spending more to get less.

    I support means testing to a degree, but it is very easy to evade it. I have found through personal experience, those who are 'savvy' get a large benefit, those who are desperate and not savvy get caught out. It actually makes the system work in reverse.

    A universal benefit or income would be my eventual solution, as it makes it completely transparent, is fair to everyone and removes the social stigma.

    The pensions issue is a peculiar one because pensions are increasing, regardless of your previous contributions, which is being paid for by cuts that affect younger people more (family benefits etc.)

    I don't think that's fair really. Increases in pensions should be funded by increases in property taxes. LVT ideally.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ShyBoy wrote: »
    You have to admit though 'efficiency savings' aren't really a policy choice. It's like having three phone plans, 500 minutes for £20, 100 minutes for £10, or 100 minutes for £20.

    The choice is between spending more and getting more, or spending less and getting less. I don't think anyone would choose spending more to get less.

    I must misunderstand you here, dude. It sounds like you're trying to tell me you think that the DWP is a well-oiled, fine-tuned, low tolerance machine that's humming along in an efficient and streamlined manner? You can't be telling me that. Anyone who's come into contact with the public sector know it's the most bloated, lumbering and inefficient machine man's ever created. About 50% of my friends work in the public sector and to a man they've all got stories of inefficiencies that would make your eyes water.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ETA: I'd love to go for a beer with you at some point. I reckon we're probably a lot closer in outlook and ideology than our discussions on TS would indicate! :D
Sign In or Register to comment.