Jump to content

Recommended Posts

aquarius moon Wrote:

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

> If there are only two choices (which there are), would it be Labour or Conservative?



I've said it before and I'll say it again... there is really sweet FA difference.



> Oh, and isn't it strange that so many people here have so many opinions about things that don't

> really concern them?


> And then there's the fox hunting ban........


Surely by your definition, you'd have to be a fox to be allowed an opinion on that one?

Anyone else watching QT?


So far, Cameron has pretty much failed to answer any questions, but done it rather brilliantly. Miliband was savaged and pretty much has ruled out deals with anyone bar the Lib Dems. So unless he's going to u-turn on those pledges, his chances of PM are going to be practicably nil.

Pampered home-counties boy? Wow, why not tell me what you really think Dave. I think making it personal is a bit unnecessary.


I also don't see why, whatever your background, you cannot have an opinion on Conservative party policies for those at the bottom of society.


I think your idea that the disabled should simply become "consumers" to help themselves is frankly laughable. Thousands rely on state financial support to simply get by. And yet you belittle that.


And I'm not an Ft subscriber either but if that's their leader comment on how Cameron is committed to tackling inequality you might want to check out who the chief leader writer is for the FT. Hint: he went to oxford and was in the bullingdon club at the same time as someone with my initials.

I can read the FT article perfectly well and it makes a lot of sense....but maybe I in some facist posh boy conspiracy too *sighs. Back in the real world the article actually critics the Tories and is saying it supports a continuation of the Current coalition (as I do). If it mattered here, as in it was a marginal I would vote Tory (for the first time in my life) over Labour but it isn't and I'll either not vote or vote LD.


I think Milliband has run by far the most effective campaign but I think the Labour Party's tone on wealthcreation, the Rich and big business is at best naive thinking from a man and party that really wants to try what France has and take us back to the 70s or at worst populist rubbish...a bit of both. sadly in a global world which is pulling millions out of poverty we have to compete unless we think we can run a modern health service with an ageing population as some sort of pop up option funded by craft beer sales we need global investment and an enterprise culture. Labour increasingly looks more left wing - intervention, politics of envy, business bashing. Also many 'progressives, claim to liberal is quite frankly laughable it( the left) is by nature authoritarian, interventionist and top down on economics and social issues and smearing and shouty at opponents or pretending things aren't true if they go against the 'progressive' bible - see Rotherham or more recently Tower Hamlets...open minded my arse. I'd have them over UKIP but that's all.

Ps left wing pin ups like Krugman and Pinkerty. Krugman back in 2010'was ranting on about the sure to come mass unemployment in the UK. Still waiting. I think Pinkerty (Sp?) book is good and interesting but very western orientated in terms of the effect of globalisation and wealth and also carries the implicit assumption that wealth equality is morally right end of. Interestingly Pinkerty in the Observer a few weeks back was completely honest about the failure of the high tax rate in France in increasing revenue......so look forward to that Ed. the top 1% of earners in the UK contribute 12% of income tax revenue by the way so we do genuinely need to be a bit careful with that particular ' not pulling their weight' ,not in it together' populist nonsense .....

Loz Wrote:

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

> Anyone else watching QT?

>

> So far, Cameron has pretty much failed to answer

> any questions, but done it rather brilliantly.

> Miliband was savaged and pretty much has ruled out

> deals with anyone bar the Lib Dems. So unless

> he's going to u-turn on those pledges, his chances

> of PM are going to be practicably nil.


It would be done on a vote by vote basis.


That's not an agreement - and is pretty democratic.

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> Didn't catch question time debates last night but

> hear Milliband ruled out coallition with SNP.

> That's the end of his chances of being PM then.




It's panning out for Miliband as I expected

Minority government leader - no agreements



Even if Cameron forms the first government - Milliband puts

vote of no confidence on a free vote and then set up as PM

with all small parties voting as they want.

Loz Wrote:

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

> Anyone just see the mid-30's 'yoof' bloke on This

> Week. Finest crash and burn I've seen on TV in a

> long while.


Do you mean his Iraq and Suez blunder?


Superb the way they all had to correct him on the facts and then he got all truculent with "I've not come here for a history lesson".


Seems like a true aspiring politician as in why would you ever let the truth get in the way.

adonirum Wrote:

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

> Loz Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Anyone just see the mid-30's 'yoof' bloke on

> This

> > Week. Finest crash and burn I've seen on TV in

> a

> > long while.

>

> Do you mean his Iraq and Suez blunder?

>

> Superb the way they all had to correct him on the

> facts and then he got all truculent with "I've not

> come here for a history lesson".

>

> Seems like a true aspiring politician as in why

> would you ever let the truth get in the way.


Why did the idiot think this generation is special because of Iraq/Afghanistan

In the 80s we had the Cold war, numerous proxy wars and the Falklands.


and as someone on Twitter told me .. The Cod War.


He got a kick up the arse as he left (verbally) :)

Miga I think you're confusing Marxist theory with marxist practice.


To be completely clear I think large parts of Tory policy on welfare especially is pretty unpleasant and am very uncomfortable with the demonisation of benefit claimants whilst plenty of affluent pensioners ( and that,s the majority of them presently) get mass state subsidies they don't need but in the modern world the welfare state and provision of health and education need reforming or we will go bust. The Tories at least acknowledge this even if their execution isn't always right? If labour wins by the way they will either break their supporters hearts or the country...or maybe both. I completely support the Tories education policies a continuation of the excellent initiatives started by New Labour and which are finally turning our state education standards round quite dramaticallyand yet Red ED is going to reverse much of these as his union backers oppose reform.


Miles away from its working class origins, The Labour Party is increasingly a niche party for the public sector unions, the client state and , of course, the 'useful idiots' of Hampstead and Islington - discuss

If that's the case ????, why are they still voted for by northern, working class communities across the north-west (Manc, 'Pool etc) and the north-east (Newcastle, Sunderland, etc) and midlands (Brum, Notts, Derby etc).


I think those folk might object to being lumped in with your mythical Hamstead/Islington dinner party crowd.

Lower turnout rates and defections to other parties aside ( see also Scotland) it's just tribal loyalty. Their great grandfathers founded the Labour Party in the face of horrendous social inequality, living conditions and employment practices. That Labour Party helped right those wrongs and was stacked full of these same people.This labor party? A bunch of white collar public sector union apparatiks and North London policy wonks with naive lefty ideas about patronising hand me down 'progressiveness'. You think it truly represents them in a meaningful way?

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

    • Why on earth is there so much interest, and negativity, after a 100 days of a Labour government when we had 1000s of days of dreadful government before this with hardly a chat on this Website?  What is it that is suddenly so much greater interest? Here's part of a list of what they have done in a 100 days - it's from a Labour MP so obviously there is some bias, and mainly new Bills so yet to deliver/put into law.  This reminds me of the US election where the popular view was that Biden had achieved nothing, rather than leading the recovery after Covid, a fairer tax system, housing, supporting workers, dealing with community unrest following high profile racist incidents,  So if we think Starmer is ineffective and Labour incompetent then we are all going to believe it? I do feel sick after seeing Clarkson on Newsnight, playing to the gallery.  Surely Trump must have a high profile role for him on the environment and climate change  
    • Hi looking for a shed for my allotment. Can pick up
    • But do you not understand how tough farming is, especially post-Brexit when some of the subsidies were lost and costs have increased massively yet the prices farmers can charge has not? On the BBC News tonight they said pig farming costs had gone up 54% since 2019, cow farming costs up 44% and cereal costs up 43%. The NFU said that the margins are on average 0.5% return on capital. Land and buildings are assets that don't make money until you sell them...it's what you do with them that makes money and farms are struggling to make money and so many farms are generational family businesses so never realise the assets (one farmers on the news said his farm had been in the family since 1822) but will have to to pay tax for continuing the family business. On another news item tonight there was a short piece saying the government has said that 50,000 more pensioners will be forced into relative poverty (60% of the average income) due to the Winter Fuel Allowance removal which will rise to 100,000 more by 2027. James Murray from the Treasury was rolled out on Newsnight to try and defend that and couldn't. You can't give doctors 20%+ and push more pensioners into poverty as a result.  The problem for Labour is the court of public opinion will judge them and right now the jury is out after a series of own-goals, really poor communication and ill-thought-out idealogical policies. And don't ever annoy the farmers.....;-)  
    • That % of “affected” doesn’t mean they are all in deep trouble.  It means this will touch on them in some small way mostly - apart from the biggest farms  it’s like high rate tax earners taking to the street when Osborne dragged child/benefit claimants into self assessment.  A mild pain  the more I read, the more obviously confected it is. Still - just as with farage and his banking “woes”, a social media campaign is no barrier to the gullible  what percentage of farms affected by Brexit and to what degree compared go IHT?  Or does that not matter? Thats different money is it? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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