The UK

[Baldeee]

As a "sort of" labour supporter from the UK, Regan was a worry for me as were Bush Snr and Jr, especially Jr BUT they had a dignity a sense of duty that is not on Trumps radar at all, he does not care.

It's the absence of decorum befitting the highest office in his land.
Both personally and in the way he enacts his policies.
His policies may be unpopular, but that is the way of politics.
People can vote out the party he represents at the next chance they get, if that is their desire.

In the UK the people at the top at least try to act with a sense of decorum and respect for the office they hold.
Some fall short.
Johnson could have done with far more, for example, but instead fell back, but to a far lesser degree than Trump, onto his chaotic personality.
That said, Johnson also had the good sense to resign, following numerous scandals and decisions as leader.
The things that gave cause for that resignation, however, back in 2022, would not have moved the dial one iota in the US.
Because we hold our politicians to a higher standard, and we generally hold them far more accountable.

 

[Baldeee]

I'm not for allowing drug addicts and the homeless to sleep on sidewalks and in the parks (as is common in Seattle).

I'm not for allowing it either.
Most in the UK are not.
But where do you propose they go, when they have nowhere else?
Are you for providing support and shelter for them, in an effort to get them off the street?
Or are you simply for penalising them?
A case of "I don't care, as long as it's not spoiling my view!"?
Making something like that illegal, for example, and punishing them, solves the issue for those who already have and want their view to be unspoiled, but does little to nothing for those actually experiencing homelessness.

In the UK we generally do not want to see people sleeping rough on the streets.
For all the obvious reasons.
Rather than deeming it illegal (which it had been since 1824 under the Vagrancy Act), the current government has formally abolished it.
Thus decriminalising it.

Rough sleeping to be decriminalised after 200 years

The Government has confirmed it will repeal the outdated Vagrancy Act 1824 by Spring next year, to ensure rough sleeping is no longer a criminal offence.

www.gov.uk

This had been on the cards since the previous government.
That is not to say that we are happy with people sleeping rough.
Only that we don't feel one should also add to the burden of such people by making it a criminal offence.
Instead we try to help them at source, and prevent rather than simply sweep out of view.
We provide funding for endeavours and programs to help them off the street.
All while not adding further problems, such as a criminal record, on to those most vulnerable.
It seems... the most humane approach.
Also likely more effective, and cost-efficient.

 

[Pinball1970]

Johnson could have done with far more, for example

He sprang to mind but as you said, not in Trump's league.

 

[Roosters for ever]

A case of "I don't care, as long as it's not spoiling my view!"?
Making something like that illegal, for example, and punishing them, solves the issue for those who already have and want their view to be unspoiled, but does little to nothing for those actually experiencing homelessness.

That's his problem. I call it the "Fuck you, I'm alright Jack" mentality.

 

[C C]

RECENT UK NEWS TOPICS

MPs reject Parliament 'drinking culture' claim
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g7jegrk68o

Two MPs have denied a claim that there is a culture of excessive drinking in the House of Commons. New Green Party MP Hannah Spencer, who won the Gorton and Denton by-election in February, said some politicians even drink alcohol between voting on key issues. However, speaking to the BBC's Politics North West programme, Labour MP for Oldham WestJim McMahon said he had never seen anything amounting to "drunkenness".

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Polanski stands by concerns over police response to Golders Green attack
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/polanski-stands-concerns-over-police-101601973.html

Zacl Polanski apologised on Friday for "sharing a tweet in haste" after he reposted a message on X accusing officers of "repeatedly and violently kicking a mentally ill man in the head when he was already incapacitated by Taser". Communities Secretary Steve Reed said it was "shameful" that Polanski was "still questioning the police's response". [...] Labour minister Reed said: "Polanski's apology clearly means nothing given he continues to denigrate the actions of our brave police officers."

Green Party leader Zack Polanski condemns 'vile antisemitic caricature' in The Times
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-zack-polanski-condemns-vile-antisemitic-caricature-times

Green Party leader Zack Polanski has accused The Times of publishing "a pretty vile antisemitic caricature" of him [...] The cartoon shows Polanski with a hooked nose, kicking police officers who are arresting Essa Suleiman, a 45-year-old Somali-born British national accused of stabbing two Jewish men in Golders Green, a neighbourhood of northwest London with a large Jewish population...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

London and Spain stand together, pushing for progressive, internationalist politics
https://leftfootforward.org/2026/05/188037/

Sadiq Khan met with the Spanish prime minister Pedro Sánchez this week, two of Donald Trump’s most outspoken critics. Their talks focused on closer cooperation between London and Spain, the future of the UK’s relationship with the European Union, and the growing challenge of populist politics across Europe.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Starmer pleads with Labour Party to back him amid potential leadership challenges
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/keir-starmer-labour-party-mps_uk_69f73c5fe4b0ed2b90e257a7

Keir Starmer has urged the Labour Party to support him as expectations of a leadership challenge rise. [...] While Peter Mandelson was sacked in September over his links to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the former Labour peer’s appointment has continued to haunt the prime minister.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Reform candidate brands Banks' comment racist
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clypnwljxl2o

A social media post by prominent member of Reform UK Arron Banks was racist, a Welsh election candidate for the party has said. James Evans said it was wrong and became the first Reform UK figure to call it racist. [...] Banks hasn't responded to a request for comment but had said previously that it was a "joke" and Plaid Cymru had "lost their sense of humour". Plaid Cymru said "racism has no place in Wales or society".
_

 

[Seattle]

I'm not for allowing it either.
Most in the UK are not.
But where do you propose they go, when they have nowhere else?
Are you for providing support and shelter for them, in an effort to get them off the street?
Or are you simply for penalising them?
A case of "I don't care, as long as it's not spoiling my view!"?
Making something like that illegal, for example, and punishing them, solves the issue for those who already have and want their view to be unspoiled, but does little to nothing for those actually experiencing homelessness.

In the UK we generally do not want to see people sleeping rough on the streets.
For all the obvious reasons.
Rather than deeming it illegal (which it had been since 1824 under the Vagrancy Act), the current government has formally abolished it.
Thus decriminalising it.

Rough sleeping to be decriminalised after 200 years

The Government has confirmed it will repeal the outdated Vagrancy Act 1824 by Spring next year, to ensure rough sleeping is no longer a criminal offence.

www.gov.uk

This had been on the cards since the previous government.
That is not to say that we are happy with people sleeping rough.
Only that we don't feel one should also add to the burden of such people by making it a criminal offence.
Instead we try to help them at source, and prevent rather than simply sweep out of view.
We provide funding for endeavours and programs to help them off the street.
All while not adding further problems, such as a criminal record, on to those most vulnerable.
It seems... the most humane approach.
Also likely more effective, and cost-efficient.

That just means that the authorities can't get them off the streets. How is that helpful? Find more affordable land on the outskirts of down, build shelter, protection and provide food and then force them off the streets.

Help those willing to accept help, protect the majority population and have the legal authority to proceed with such a program. To do anything else is to continue with the status quo. That hasn't worked for decades. Just look at San Francisco.

 

[Roosters for ever]

You cannot trust a damn thing that comes out of his mouth.

Seattle or the convicted felon President?
Or both?

 

[billvon]

That's his problem. I call it the "Fuck you, I'm alright Jack" mentality.

I'm alright, Jack, just keep your hands off of my stack. And don't give me that do-goody-good bullshit!

 

[Seattle]

I'm alright, Jack, just keep your hands off of my stack. And don't give me that do-goody-good bullshit!

I fly floatplanes, parachute, live in San Diego, have rental property, went to MIT but I'm one of the good ones.

 

[Seattle]

Seattle or the convicted felon President?
Or both?

Rooster "I don't think, I emote but I'm one of the good ones"

 

[billvon]

I fly floatplanes, parachute, live in San Diego, have rental property, went to MIT but I'm one of the good ones.

It's a song lyric.

 

[TheVat]

Pink Floyd. Better bash them, too, Seattle. They're, y'know, more of that Limey stagnation and underperformance.

 

[Seattle]

It's a song lyric.

You compose the song and I'll sign away my lyricist right. Donate the proceeds to the poor if you would like.

 

[Seattle]

Pink Floyd. Better bash them, too, Seattle. They're, y'know, more of that Limey stagnation and underperformance.

The UK used to be productive, for periods. Welfare state and productive isn't the best mix though.

 

[billvon]

Pink Floyd. Better bash them, too, Seattle. They're, y'know, more of that Limey stagnation and underperformance.

By the way, which one's Pink?

 

[Seattle]

By the way, which one's Pink?

Floyd.

 

[exchemist]

I fly floatplanes, parachute, live in San Diego, have rental property, went to MIT but I'm one of the good ones.

You can do all those things and be one of the good ones, if you show some empathy with those less fortunate than yourself and are prepared to act in some way to give them a hand up.

It is those who sit in their comfortable houses counting their money and thinking only about the stock market instead of their fellow man who are the bad ones. You have a whole political class of such people in the United States, people who try to salve their guilty consciences by the conveniently self-serving fiction that the operation of free market capitalism enables everyone to thrive and that those who fail to thrive must therefore be morally at fault - and thus deserving of no help.

One of the big differences between Europe, including the UK, and the USA is the acknowledgement in Europe of a largely hereditary class system that tends to hoard wealth and confer advantage on its members from generation to generation. This comes from history of course: the monarchies, the nobility, the "landed gentry" etc. This recognition of the innate unfairness of the circumstances into which people may be born, i.e. through no fault of their own, led to the idea of noblesse oblige, by which members of the fortunate classes were and are encouraged to realise they have a duty to help those less fortunate. This sentiment has informed European politics for generations and is in part what led eventually to the welfare state.

By contrast, the American Dream envisages a land of opportunity in which, having shaken off the shackles of the bad old class-ridden Europe, with its monarchs, lords and knights, everyone is free to make it, through their own virtuous application and hard work. That was always bullshit of course, because of slavery and the still grudging acceptance of people who come from slave heritage. But race aside, we can also see with ever-growing clarity how extreme wealth has become so heavily concentrated in a few hands, enabling them to buy political outcomes nakedly and thereby create a vicious circle perpetuating the same concentration of wealth. Nevertheless the fantasy of the American Dream is a great way for comfortable, complacent, self-centred people to feel virtuous while ignoring the plight of the poor.

 

[Roosters for ever]

Rooster "I don't think, I emote but I'm one of the good ones"

Like i said, and like I'll keep on honestly answering when you come up with bullshit like...

I'm not a Trump support, a "brazen" liar, nor am I "obnoxious".

Regarding what Trump is doing, I haven't commented on most of it

That effectively you are a supporter of a proven lying convicted felon, and that you are no better then the average German citizen remaining silent when Hitler started his murderous campaign.
So yes as a result you do seem like what the highlighted text claims.
"If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck."

 

[exchemist]

By the way, which one's Pink?

And did we tell you the name of the game Boy? We call it riding the gravy traaaaaaeeeeeeeeeeen.

 

[Baldeee]

That just means that the authorities can't get them off the streets. How is that helpful?

No, it doesn't just mean that the authorities can't get them off the streets.
The authorities would like them off the streets, for the obvious reasons.
They do get them off the streets (although mixed results across the country).
However, they don't want to also inflict them with the stigma of a criminal offence simply for being a vagrant.
Making it criminal is like kicking someone when they are down.

Find more affordable land on the outskirts of down, build shelter, protection and provide food and then force them off the streets.

Shelters already exist, and people are encouraged to make use of them.
The government prioritises prevention, and moving them into actual housing rather than long-term shelters.
The government, alas, still fail to build sufficient housing stock for the population, and have done for a long time.
It still doesn't mean one should make vagrancy itself a criminal act.

Help those willing to accept help, protect the majority population and have the legal authority to proceed with such a program. To do anything else is to continue with the status quo. That hasn't worked for decades. Just look at San Francisco.

Councils already have the legal authority to deal with the problem as they see fit.
It still doesn't mean that we should criminalise sleeping on the streets.
Police can and do still intervene if there are safety concerns (e.g. anti-social behaviour, tresspassing, obstruction etc).
Authorities can also get involved if there are welfare concerns.
The move in the UK is away from criminalising what they are (i.e. vagrants) to focusing on what they might be doing.
The UK has a surprisingly good support system.
But we struggle for housing stock.
That's the big issue here with regard this matter.