Jump to content

Recommended Posts

???? Wrote:

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

> Which is why it's agood election for Labour to

> lose - the Tories will be beaten with Cutters once

> gain and the LDs will be called 'tories'...I

> notice a sudden refreshed step in the likes of

> Balls, Milliband, Clarke etc this morning. The

> wiser and more visionary members of the Labour

> party know that this is a good election to have

> lost.



I would not necessarily be so confident if I were them. It was a long wait the last time. The economy will eventually improve despite current doom and gloom and its hard to win an election if you are in opposition when the economy eventually picks up a head of steam.

We shall see. I think there is a lot of old school malevolence in the tory party that would like to see this fail and Cameron will have to stand up against if indeed he has the genuine will to make this work and he?s not just playing games.


I think Clegg will face similar from some sections of the LibDems but not to the same extent.


If this works it will be testament to both their leadership capabilities.

Well...


Boris is helping his twin brother "Horace" in looking for a job, maybe Dave or Nick have some useful contacts


Any suggestions ?


I'm "Boris" http://www.madametussauds.com/SiteImages/Assets/1/Default-sidebysidepx.jpg ..and I'm "Hh h hhhhorace" ( he has a stutter BTW )




Personally, I think Boris is the more "identical" of the twins




W**F

ruffers Wrote:

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

> Indeed, although I'd be astonished if this

> coalition hangs together that long.


If it requires a majority vote of no confidence in the government then is there anything to prevent the two staying together.


Vince Cable is the one in the spotlight now after announcing a higher CGT rate and possibly a bank levy too, the whole City will potentially be up in arms. That's the most likely thing that will bring this coalition down, if he is castigated and its generally seen that the Tories would be better without him and Clegg. The Tories then call a general election as they think they can win a clear majority, after all who is going to vote Lib Dem ever again if you are really voting Tory? Increased majority for the Tories will follow next time.

For the sake of common sense and the good of the country I sincerely hope you are wrong on all those counts.


I?m sure the city?s propaganda machines are already starting to grind into action. It should be similar to the protests a while ago. You here the employees speaking about whichever truth they are currently being sold a few hours before it breaks as a news story somewhere.

I am not unhappy at the change of Government. Not because I support the Conservatives, but because I felt that the Labour Goverment was tired and had run out of new ideas. Change was needed for catharsis.


Gordon saved our arses during the economic crash - at huge cost BUT that was required.


Questions have to be asked about why he introduced deregulation to the City that allowed the City institutions and high street banks to become inter-twined in such a way the bank account holder on the street was threatened by exotic and toxic financial instruments dreamt up in the city and based on dodgy loans given to poverty stricken Americans to buy over-priced badly built homes; but then, only Vince Cable was pointing out the stupidity of this.

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> Marmora Man Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > bequeathes a damaged

> > economy, the highest national debt and fiscal

> > deficit ever.

>

> What would the tories have done differently? There

> was a world-wide recession, lots of countries are

> in the same boat. I actually think that GB did an

> OK job of keeping the economy afloat.

>

> > left in disgrace after taking the country into

> two major

> > wars - losing the lives of over 500 British

> > servicemen and women.

>

> The Conservatives supported the war too, though.

> Only the lib dems were opposed to it, as I

> recall.

>

> By all means, pull Labour up on their failures -

> but try to do so objectively...


Jeremy - don't really want to get into tit for tat arguments but ........


1. Other countries were / are affected by the global financial crisis but not many (if any) had already built up a major deficit by funding so much of gov't spending by debt.


2. Yes Tories voted for the war - but they didn't write the dodgy dossier on which much of the parliamentary decision was based and, generally if Tories send troops to war they are given full support and back up. The Falklands was a war no one anticipated but all stops were pulled out to fund all necessary actions and equipment to back up the military - even to the extent of converting SS Canberra over a weekend to take helicopters and act as a hospital ship.

Actually a few countries had already over-borrowed before the crisis (Greece being the obvious example) but I take your point.


The dossier was totally lacking in substance... regardless of who cooked it up, anyone who agreed it was a basis for war is not without guilt!

jenny1840 Wrote:

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

> i think surely the biggest cock ?


You say this in jest Jenny, however, much like an iceberg, 2/3 of the biggest cocks are hidden.


In reality they are even bigger cocks than they seem.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • On what basis do you object to the economy spend numbers in the report and describe it as "extremely unlikely"? Is that objection based on data or is it vibes-based? Where does this estimate of "50-100 vehicles" come from? The objectors:supporters ratio doesn't speak volumes. Planning applications of this sort always receive objections from various curtain twitches and NIMBYs. It doesn't mean those objections are well-founded or sensible. The planning officers and councillors need to consider the issue objectively, not just count the letters. It's not a public vote. Saying the building is "out of character" is meaningless out of context. It's an unusual building on an unusual infill site. It's not supposed to be a model for future development across Dulwich as a whole.  We are in the middle of a housing crisis. London desperately needs more housing units. This is an opportunity to get a whole bunch of them on a small, unloved industrial site on top of a transit hub. Not building it because people like the Dulwich Society complains it's "visible" is crazy.
    • Not if someone wheels over it with a pram or a heavy footed person steps on it and it hasn't been tied up or is tied but explodes everywhere. Yuk! Agree we definitely need dog poo bins back again, particularly near Peckham Rye park, along Crystal Palace Road, and by Goose Green.
    • I would also like to thank James Barber for his full outline. Given what seem to be clear mistakes in interpretation of the plans by Southwark Council planning officers, there seems to have been a lack of due diligence. 
    • Many charity shops still take and sell CDs! Many people buy them! Locally, both the Mind shop and the Vision shop sell CDs. Possibly others who I've forgotten.  If memory serves, the Oxfam shop in Herne Hill does as well, though it sells them at a higher price than most charity shops. My partner is constantly looking through charity shop CDs, and delighted when he finds music he likes! Please don't bin them!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...