Vote: What /Who will you be Voting for Election ?

[Earl Aelfheah]

I'm voting for my dining room chair. It is both suitably strong and stable, which focus groups have reliably informed me are the key attributes voters are looking for.

[red devil]

It's classic 'repeat a mantra often enough and people will eventually believe it' tactics. The Tory MP for the Isle of Wight who's just stepped down after making some anti-gay comments even included it in his resignation statement...

"In the forthcoming election I will be supporting the Conservative candidate to ensure the strong and stable leadership of Theresa May is returned to Downing Street."

[Earl Aelfheah]

I remember Cameron promising stability too. That worked out marvellously.

[Alan Medic]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/bbc-question-time-audience-member-oxford-strong-stable_uk_59026cade4b05c39767d4ad2

Let there be grown ups. The repetition is so obvious that I'm not actually sure people will start believing it.

[Lordship 516]

What Strong & Stable Conservative government has given us so far:

NHS - crisis

Education - crisis

Care system - crisis

Prison system - crisis

Housing & homelessness - crisis

Roads - crisis

Public debt - all time high

Brexit plan - is there one?

Deficit reduction - abandoned

Inflation increasing [& much more to come]

Real incomes falling

Crisis ad infinitum...

Strong & Stable Crisis..!

QE has been shown to be helpful to the economy but the main beneficiaries have been the banks & the top 5% wealthy families who received 40% [boE analysis] of the inputs through an increased value in their holdings. Banks bought gilts from ?investors? & sold them on to the BoE taking a guaranteed cut in the middle - money for old rope. Little or none of this increased money ?trickled down? to the rest of the economy with the banks holding on to their gains to boost the reserves on their balance sheets & the wealthy just holding on to their revalued assets as usual. QE has been a Banks? & Rich Peoples? QE - none of their famous ?trickle down? neoliberal economics worked here - the money was safely tucked away for their rainy days.

John Mc Donnell?s proposition would enable a state investment bank issue bonds directly to the Bank of England & use the QE moneys for the purposes of rebuilding infrastructure generally for the good of all the nation - indirectly a People?s QE; not so-called ?helicopter money? going directly into the pockets of all the population but available to enhance benefit for all society through better/more hospitals, schools, care facilities & so on. This would boost the real economy, improve many lives across all social classes & provide many jobs increasing tax receipts & reduce benefits spending whilst at the same time providing good education outcomes for lots of people.

I will vote for Labour as there is a reasonable chance that many lives will be made better, it cannot be any worse than the May/Hammond proposals. I believe Corbyn has it within him to rise to the job - he has shown himself quite capable in handling the internal crises so far - & McDonnell has the gritty backbone to tackle the economy & Brexit. A rampant May is just a proposition too far - a frightening distasteful person. Britain deserves better.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Don't Answer Questions

Dont do Debates

Dont do Policy

Vilify Jeremy Corbyn

Repeat strong and stable over and over and over again

For this, Lynton Crosby gets paid hundreds of thousands of pounds. 🙄

[jaywalker]

I think we have to accept that this is being internalised by large swathes of the electorate. Children expect to be told how the world is: a strong leader who will help them. It is a disaster (neither opposition party leader can counter this at all, they were selected as personality types recognisable by adults).

[Loz]

Lordship 516 Wrote:

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

> I believe Corbyn has it within him to rise to the job - he has shown himself quite

> capable in handling the internal crises so far

Yes, he's really turned Labour into a smooth-running machine.

[Loz]

Lordship 516 Wrote:

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

> John Mc Donnell?s proposition would enable a state investment bank issue bonds directly to the Bank

> of England & use the QE moneys for the purposes of rebuilding infrastructure generally for the good

> of all the nation - indirectly a People?s QE; not so-called ?helicopter money? going directly into

> the pockets of all the population but available to enhance benefit for all society through

> better/more hospitals, schools, care facilities & so on.

That sound good, but how does he propose to make the QE books balance? QE isn't just the magic creation of money - like any fractional-reserve created money it has to balance, so creating money will also create a debt that must be repaid (and the created money thus destroyed).

In the last QE this was done by mostly buying back government bonds with a bit of buying corporate bonds. What McDonnell is proposing sounds like just printing money. I believe the last government to try that was the Weimar Republic and that really didn't end well.

Lets face it, if just creating QE-style money was the solution for new hospitals, schools, etc, all governments would do it.

[Lordship 516]

Loz Wrote:

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

> Lordship 516 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I believe Corbyn has it within him to rise to

> the job - he has shown himself quite

> > capable in handling the internal crises so far

>

> Yes, he's really turned Labour into a

> smooth-running machine.

Corbyn has been attacked by various groups in society but they all acknowledge that he is an inherently decent person. He has rolled with the punches and many have stood by him including the Labour MPs who wanted to get rid of him [& still probably do]. The media, financial institutions & neoliberalists don't like the prospect of their world being upset by any reversal of their huge grab of all the resources of the country [world] & forcing the vast majority of the population into a machine for delivering never ending unearned income [rents & interest etc]into their coffers.

Corbyn in charge supported by others such as McDonnell [who was a successful administrator in the GLC] is capable of bringing about change such as collecting taxes from delinquent offshoring corporations & running the country for the benefit of the human population as opposed to benefiting the few well-connected oligarchs & the globalized corporations that they are embedded with.

May & her maniacs will deliver a nightmare for the UK for the foreseeable future. Maintaining a drive for the advancement of the neo laissez faire commercialization/financialization of society that has so far devastated our NHS, schools, prisons, care system etc. & the conservative answer to all of this is a surreptitious drive to privatize as much as they can as quickly as they can. The private [often offshored] companies take all of the upside but the state [you & me] take all of the risk as evidenced in the aftermath of the 2008-09 economic/financial crisis. We paid for the banks & other operators that were all deemed to be 'too big to fail'. They take the profits, we take the loss.

Only a radical labour government can reverse this & paradoxically Brexit would allow them to cut through much of the neoliberal mess that has been foisted on society with the UK being freed from EU control. Every cloud has that silver lining.

Vote for Corbyn & give him a chance because we have no chance with May & her maniacs.

[Loz]

Lordship 516 Wrote:

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

Wolfie Smith would have been proud of that last post.

> Vote for Corbyn & give him a chance because we have no chance with May & her maniacs.

Hmm. Vote for May and her swinging cuts that mess up things today or vote for Corbyn and his free-spending madness that will mess things up tomorrow. And get the stupidity that is Brexit whichever way?

Vote for May, who can flip her opinion at will, or Corbyn, who can't even govern his own party and would be out of his depth in a puddle?

See, I don't want a radical government of any flavour. I want someone with some common sense to lead us away from the mess we are in and protect us from the mess we are heading towards.

Corbyn is not the solution. Sure the UK patient is sick, but the last thing it needs is 'radical' open-heart surgery performed by a naturopath.

So, no thanks. I'll vote for the Lib Dems. And before you say the Lib Dems cannot win government on their own, well neither can Labour at the moment.

[Lordship 516]

Loz Wrote:

> That sound good, but how does he propose to make

> the QE books balance? QE isn't just the magic

> creation of money - like any fractional-reserve

> created money it has to balance, so creating money

> will also create a debt that must be repaid (and

> the created money thus destroyed).

Fractional banking is happening on a daily basis; QE is in balance currently & can also be in the future by way of issuance of long term bonds at a rate that is controllable. Of course it will have to be paid back over time but the benefits will accrue to society now & prime the economy & benefit social structure by provision of much needed social assets such as housing, hospitals, care facilities etc. The alternative is PPP which sucked value out of the economy or more taxation that burdens mostly the working population. Collect fair taxes from the offshored corporations & eliminate tax-schemes that have no social value.

>

> In the last QE this was done by mostly buying back

> government bonds with a bit of buying corporate

> bonds. What McDonnell is proposing sounds like

> just printing money. I believe the last government

> to try that was the Weimar Republic and that

> really didn't end well.

The last QE programs bought gilts from the commercial banks who in turn bought them from financial institutions; the banks were facilitated with a guaranteed arbitrage which resulted in a gift from us to their balance sheets where it stayed. The sellers of the gilts were institutions including the 'family offices' who were & are asset rich. The result was an uplift in the value of stock market values - essentially a market on artificial financial steroids. We are paying for all of this & have nothing to show for it whatever.

The reference to the Weimar Republic is silly as they just actually printed paper notes without any structuring or planning. QE can be structured, balanced & productive.

>

> Lets face it, if just creating QE-style money was

> the solution for new hospitals, schools, etc, all

> governments would do it.

Governments are doing it. China has maintained their economy since 2008 by the issuance of $5 trillion - this has been the main driver of their devaluation of the RMB [yuan] & supported a vast program of infrastructure development which in turn supported their primary economic industries - energy, cement, steel etc. in the face of falling exports. They rode out the great depression for their population of 25% of the world & are well placed to capitalize on any upturn due to their restructured economy & productive resources.

Most western governments have shied away from it because of their obsession with neoliberal economics that the banks, financial institutions & globalist institutions have thrust on society over the last 70 years through a surreptitious regeneration of 19th centuary laissex faire promoted by the wealthy to remove any government interferance on their rampant accumulation of wealth by any means possible. This all started from Chile where the Chicago Boys brought the Friedman ideas & Pinochet championed their ideology - the main reason Thatcher shielded him when he was arrested here. They further succeeded through Reagan & Thatcher whose policies [continued by Tory Blair] resulted in widening inequality as they negatively impacted the wages, benefits and working conditions that we can see affecting us today & have pervaded all society by the corruption & hijacking of capitalism recast in their image to the point whereby it is the global corporations that are instructing governments how they will govern.

That is why our national institutions are failing - it needs correction & the conservatives will never deliver fairness or relief from our predicament. Neo liberalism is a misnomer - there is little liberal about it except to allow the globaalists to do what they wish; it is akin to global financial faschism where the globalists have wiped out the rest of society & turned us into a neo-feudal populace locked into recurring monthly subscriptions for just about everything that they in turn package as financial products that they buy & sell between themselves in never ending game of monopoly. For them we are no longer people but consumers that pay what they term 'receivables' that they buy & sell like cattle used to in days gone by.

VOTE CORBYN for our future. They will make some mistakes for sure & will need some time to get up to speed but we will have the chance to escape from our silent but ever collecting masters. Labour can & will bring back democracy unfettered by globalization - May & her clowns will just apply a bigger stick to our backs.

[Lordship 516]

Loz Wrote:

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

> Lordship 516 Wrote:

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

> -----

>

> Wolfie Smith would have been proud of that last

> post.

I'll ignore that remark - I'm happy to indulge your whimsy.

> > Vote for Corbyn & give him a chance because we

> have no chance with May & her maniacs.

>

> Hmm. Vote for May and her swinging cuts that mess

> up things today or vote for Corbyn and his

> free-spending madness that will mess things up

> tomorrow. And get the stupidity that is Brexit

> whichever way?

You overplay the 'free-spending' pejoritave. Much of what McDonnell advocates would sit well with prudent governance but the popular media & their city fathers don't like the overall message whereby they will be required to pay their fair share so of course he is being demonized.

>

> Vote for May, who can flip her opinion at will, or

> Corbyn, who can't even govern his own party and

> would be out of his depth in a puddle?

For a person who is not in control of his own party he has done admirably well - he was faced with a huge rebellion of mainly Blairists & ambitious MPs who he has managed to bring into line & keep them there. The puddle reference is worn out by now - why nor use 'couldn't run a bath' instead - haven't seen that in a long time.

> See, I don't want a radical government of any

> flavour. I want someone with some common sense to

> lead us away from the mess we are in and protect

> us from the mess we are heading towards.

I think Corbyn & co will be quite common sensical - they will be faced with stark realities with the public debt at the highest level ever - as a gift from the recently retired [for now] Rt Honourable George Osborne & his looney economics.

> Corbyn is not the solution. Sure the UK patient

> is sick, but the last thing it needs is 'radical'

> open-heart surgery performed by a naturopath.

Unfortunately we do need some radical treatement of our economy - not to the level of open heart surgery but a recwersal of kow-towing to the globalists, taking back control of not only our borders but of all the activities including economic & financial activities that happen within those borders. May will not give us that - she along with Hammond, the Clown & others will march us relentlessly onwards into the mouth of more & more privatization & globalization where they take the profit & we take the losses.

> So, no thanks. I'll vote for the Lib Dems. And

> before you say the Lib Dems cannot win government

> on their own, well neither can Labour at the

> moment.

I agree with that as a strategy - a coalition of Labour/Lib Dem might offer us the best of all solutions; prevent Attila May grabbing absolute power & emasculate Johnson [maybe get another editorial job..?] & his Tory Boys for the foreseeable future - we might have a chance for a reasonable result for a fairer society.

[Jules-and-Boo]

You'll probably remember the last time the country was sick of the Tories and voted tactically - Tony Blair became our new PM. I remember how excited people were.

I can assure you, with a weak leader like Corbyn, Blair will e sniffing around for any opportunity. And he's an evil man.

So I will be voting doubly tactically.

[Loz]

Lordship 516 Wrote:

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

> Loz Wrote:

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

> > Lordship 516 Wrote:

>

> > Wolfie Smith would have been proud of that last post.

>

> I'll ignore that remark - I'm happy to indulge your whimsy.

Yes, sorry for that. It was unfair.

> > > Vote for Corbyn & give him a chance because we have no chance with May & her maniacs.

> >

> > Hmm. Vote for May and her swinging cuts that mess up things today or vote for Corbyn and his

> > free-spending madness that will mess things up tomorrow. And get the stupidity that is Brexit

> > whichever way?

>

> You overplay the 'free-spending' pejoritave. Much of what McDonnell advocates would sit well with

> prudent governance but the popular media & their city fathers don't like the overall message

> whereby they will be required to pay their fair share so of course he is being demonized.

I don't think I do. Much of Labour's 10 pledges require a lot of money. I'll wait and see when they release figures with the full manifesto but I really can't see how they are going to make it all add up. Even the Beeb has noticed that Corbyn has spent the money he's proposing to raise from increasing corporation tax five times. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-39720085

> > Vote for May, who can flip her opinion at will, or Corbyn, who can't even govern his own party and

> > would be out of his depth in a puddle?

>

> For a person who is not in control of his own party he has done admirably well - he was faced

> with a huge rebellion of mainly Blairists & ambitious MPs who he has managed to bring into

> line & keep them there.

That's damning with faint praise.

He's lead Labour to stupendously low support and approval rates and he's been a thoroughly useless leader of the opposition. He's failed to oppose the Tories pretty much at all. They've given him so many open goals to go for, but Corbyn has preferred to read out emails 'from Martha of East Grinstead who is having trouble paying her gas bill'. He's been thoroughly ineffectual.

And, like May, he was thoroughly deceptive about his 'support' for remaining in the EU.

> > See, I don't want a radical government of any flavour. I want someone with some common sense to

> > lead us away from the mess we are in and protect us from the mess we are heading towards.

>

> I think Corbyn & co will be quite common sensical - they will be faced with stark realities with the

> public debt at the highest level ever - as a gift from the recently retired Rt Honourable George

> Osborne & his looney economics.

Well, you and I will have to agree to disagree as to Corbyn and McDonnell's common sense. And that's not even mentioning the reality-free zone that is Diane Abbott.

And you can't really have a potshot at Osborne's deficit, as bad as it was, when you know full well that Corbyn and McDonnell will balloon it much further.

> > Corbyn is not the solution. Sure the UK patient is sick, but the last thing it needs is

> > 'radical' open-heart surgery performed by a naturopath.

>

> Unfortunately we do need some radical treatement of our economy - not to the level of open heart

> surgery but a recwersal of kow-towing to the globalists, taking back control of not only our

> borders but of all the activities including economic & financial activities that happen within

> those borders. May will not give us that - she along with Hammond, the Clown & others will march

> us relentlessly onwards into the mouth of more & more privatization & globalization where they take

> the profit & we take the losses.

It's funny you should complain about pejoratives above and then write that paragraph. I suspect if the economy was running fine, you'd still be hard pressed to say something nice about the Tories. And if the Tories were in the utter mess that Labour is now in, you wouldn't be so forgiving.

See that's where you and I differ. I fear and like both the Tories and Labour in fairly equal measures. I can happily (and unhappily) live under either. But Corbyn is further left than May is right and so, as a centrist, I actually think he is more dangerous.

And that is Labour's big problem, because I am exactly the sort of person they need to convince them to vote for Labour again if they want to govern (and whether they actually do is questionable in itself). I'm a centrist who used to vote for Labour, but now won't. Going all radical lefty might please the Momentum crowd, but it won't win them elections. And they just don't seem to understand that.

> > So, no thanks. I'll vote for the Lib Dems. And before you say the Lib Dems cannot win government

> > on their own, well neither can Labour at the moment.

> I agree with that as a strategy - a coalition of Labour/Lib Dem might offer us the best of all

> solutions; prevent Attila May grabbing absolute power & emasculate Johnson & his Tory Boys for

> the foreseeable future - we might have a chance for a reasonable result for a fairer society.

I'm hard pressed to decide which I'd prefer the Lib Dems to govern with; I just want them there as a controlling influence. As someone once said, the Lib Dems give the Tories a heart and Labour a brain.

[ploberman]

Come on chaps.....

I said settle down.

This will be my 15th General Election and I will vote the same as I always have.

[????]

Thankfully, I think the country is more sensible than Social Media - anyone who thinks Corbyn and his bunch would end up with anything other than and economy going the way of Venezuela is a deluded idiot. This isn't a City Ruse - Danny Blanchflower, once beloved of Corbynites, has said he's given up with Labour's Fairy tale marxist economics, Pinkerty hasn't been contacted by them despite his high profile launch 15 months ago. Interestingly our resident 'economist' is outed as an ardent socialist too rather than the objective and scientific voice of the expert...he also seems to have a poor understanding of QE.

[Lordship 516]

Loz Wrote:

> I don't think I do. Much of Labour's 10 pledges

> require a lot of money. I'll wait and see when

> they release figures with the full manifesto but I

> really can't see how they are going to make it all

> add up. Even the Beeb has noticed that Corbyn has

> spent the money he's proposing to raise from

> increasing corporation tax five times.

> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-39720085

I too would like to see their plans & budgets. I would also look for how they are going to treat the offshoring of tax - this cold yield substantial tax. Google, Facebook, Starbucks are as trapped as the UK is in this scenario and are unlikely to leave if they are subjected to a fair tax like all companies that do business in the UK. Losing revenue is not a realistic option for any internet company just because they have to pay tax & Starbucks & the like have the same problem. Thet won' cut off their nose to spite their face. The potential increased revenue is substantial. Ireland & other tax mitigating countries will lose but that is their problem - they have had a good run. I would also like to see the tory proposals.

> He's lead Labour to stupendously low support and

> approval rates and he's been a thoroughly useless

> leader of the opposition. He's failed to oppose

> the Tories pretty much at all. They've given him

> so many open goals to go for, but Corbyn has

> preferred to read out emails 'from Martha of East

> Grinstead who is having trouble paying her gas

> bill'. He's been thoroughly ineffectual.

>

> And, like May, he was thoroughly deceptive about

> his 'support' for remaining in the EU.

He made no secret of his stance - I don't particularly support the man but regard him as the only available alternative to May & her lot.

> Well, you and I will have to agree to disagree as

> to Corbyn and McDonnell's common sense. And that's

> not even mentioning the reality-free zone that is

> Diane Abbott.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on Abbot - a nonsense person of no value whatever.

> And you can't really have a potshot at Osborne's

> deficit, as bad as it was, when you know full well

> that Corbyn and McDonnell will balloon it much

> further.

Anyone can have a potshot at Osborne - he was mad & totally incompetent - it is a poor measure of the Treasury mandarins that they allowed his excesses without any apparent attempt to rein him in.

> See that's where you and I differ. I fear and

> like both the Tories and Labour in fairly equal

> measures. I can happily (and unhappily) live

> under either. But Corbyn is further left than May

> is right and so, as a centrist, I actually think

> he is more dangerous.

I hold no brief for Labour or Tories nor for any ideology. I am a pragmatist & support social justice - we need solutions today & not fluffy promises about tomorrow and the great future. The Tories [including Blair] have set this country up in a manner that legislates against the vast majority of the population. They believe that they are entitled to their gains at the expense of others & congratulate each other on their success that has been achieved on the backs of hard working people.

> And that is Labour's big problem, because I am

> exactly the sort of person they need to convince

> them to vote for Labour again if they want to

> govern (and whether they actually do is

> questionable in itself). I'm a centrist who used

> to vote for Labour, but now won't. Going all

> radical lefty might please the Momentum crowd, but

> it won't win them elections.

I agree with you somewhat. However, I believe that were Corbyn to get the PM position the Momentum group would be forced to accept a change that would allow the Labour government considerable leeway to manage the economy. Lets see what will the result be.

> I'm hard pressed to decide which I'd prefer the

> Lib Dems to govern with; I just want them there as

> a controlling influence. As someone once said, the

> Lib Dems give the Tories a heart and Labour a

> brain.

For me I just hope beyond hope that May will falter & a reasonable alternative will result. She was harsh & unyielding in the Home office & has proven herself to be quite stupid and hard in her approach to just about everything.

She has also demonstrated that she prefers to work alone and deliver orders rather than seek consensus.

Merkel & co will take no nonsense from her & even if she gets a majority it will have no affect on their responses to her. In Europe she has made no friends & she does need to have people who can ease the way for the UK. On the other hand her empathy with the less well off in society is non-existent apart from wordy statements but her inclinations point to more . She has reneged on helping health, care, education etc. & helped the rich as usual for a shire Tory - if she is returned with a majority she will only double down on this sadistic path of cuts that impact the less well off in society.

Conservative/LibDem won't work again - she would just screw them around. Lab/LibDem would work for me.

[jaywalker]

It is looking like the widely carried criticism of the robotic stupid and childish Conservative mantras is beginning to bite. Unfortunately for the deluded ones, social media now carries much sway (those who don't have any access to it tend not to vote). Those being patronised will wake up to the bad dream they had been part of. I will be glad if people then start saying to the governing classes "grow up, or we won't vote for you".

[Lordship 516]

???? Wrote:

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

> Thankfully, I think the country is more sensible

> than Social Media - anyone who thinks Corbyn and

> his bunch would end up with anything other than

> and economy going the way of Venezuela is a

> deluded idiot. This isn't a City Ruse - Danny

> Blanchflower, once beloved of Corbynites, has said

> he's given up with Labour's Fairy tale marxist

> economics, Pinkerty hasn't been contacted by them

> despite his high profile launch 15 months ago.

> Interestingly our resident 'economist' is outed as

> an ardent socialist too rather than the objective

> and scientific voice of the expert...he also seems

> to have a poor understanding of QE.

Danny Blanchflower was a super footballer but a failure as a manager. David ['Danny']Blanchflower is a pretty good economist but has always been very critical of those who don't agree with him - a better research analyst & lecturer than a pragmatic economist. He made an early good call for interest rate reductions.

As for me being a 'socialist' - nothing could be further from the actuality; I support the ideal of capitalism but within a social justice context. I am against being taken for a ride by any ideology - tory or labour. I see the need for a re-balancing of society where the rich pay their just share of tax on their gains, both on capital & income; where the less well off are given a reasonable chance of education, housing & health care; where all companies pay their fair share of taxes locally [in the UK] for the privilege of earning profit from doing business in the UK; where the poor & needy are not regarded as the dregs of society because they haven't been slick or informed enough to get advantage over others - if this makes me a socialist then I must be; however, I won't be flying/saluting the red flag any time soon or laying any flowers at Marx's tomb.

As an econometricist, I am a journeyman analyst, paid to give advice & trying to make sense of what is happening in the economic malestrom that surrounds us.

With regard to QE of various colours - I understand well enough but to outline QE fully would take many hours of rabbiting on - what I do understand is that QE in western economies has only benefited the already well-off few at the top & rewarded banks that would have otherwise failed their stress tests without the unearned bonanza that QE brought them. We are all paying the price for their gains.

We need a change.

[Earl Aelfheah]

???? Wrote:

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

> Thankfully, I think the country is more sensible

> than Social Media - anyone who thinks Corbyn and

> his bunch would end up with anything other than

> and economy going the way of Venezuela is a

> deluded idiot

Let's see what austerity, Brexit and the break up of the union (courtesy of the Conservatives) does to our economy. I think we'll look back and see the successful European countries who followed a more balanced, progressive, social democratic model and rue the day we elected these Randian fundamentalists.

[jaywalker]

I love the Downing Street 'we do not recognise the description' mantra, paraded every time reality bites - in this case the incredulity of the EU negotiating team in the face of May's rigidity and stupidity.

We have heard that mantra before. I fear we will hear it again.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Strong and stable government? Or a divided and incompetent Conservative administration which has placed the country in constitutional chaos.. https://infacts.org/may-cheek-claim-strong-stable-leadership/

[JohnL]

jaywalker Wrote:

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

> I love the Downing Street 'we do not recognise the

> description' mantra, paraded every time reality

> bites - in this case the incredulity of the EU

> negotiating team in the face of May's rigidity and

> stupidity.

>

> We have heard that mantra before. I fear we will

> hear it again.

What Junker said (however much he likes a drink) sounds

like it has the ring of truth about it.

Whatever the costs of Labours budget it's dwarfed by the

costs of a hard Brexit IMHO.

[JohnL]

Lordship 516 Wrote:

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

> With regard to QE of various colours - I

> understand well enough but to outline QE fully

> would take many hours of rabbiting on - what I do

> understand is that QE in western economies has

> only benefited the already well-off few at the top

> & rewarded banks that would have otherwise failed

> their stress tests without the unearned bonanza

> that QE brought them. We are all paying the price

> for their gains.

>

> We need a change.

I prefer the helicopter method if you want people to spend :).

It looks like inflation is rising fast now due to Brexit though.