Anything Political

[philmayfield 6,107]

1 minute ago, Beekay said:

Do they threaten to put you in a whicker man then Phil? Or point pitchforks at your pint.

'Witchcraft is not uncommon in these parts' - it do be said!

[DJ360 6,720]

25 minutes ago, LizzieM said:

I don’t sneak away from the site but I rarely read any of the ‘political’ comments.  I’m not interested, I accept that a few members have very strong views but  I don’t agree with the majority of posters who shout loudest and it is boring me to tears.   However, thankfully,  I have the choice .......  just you lot carry on. 

 

Happy Birthday Liz!!

 

And yes.. this thread, just like any other on the site, is optional.  Members are entirely free to participate, or not.  We're just having a discussion on the affairs of the day... 

 

[Beekay 5,133]

More power to yer elbow DJ., must be a bloody big soap box you've  got, judging by the size of yer posts. Thought I'd  got lost and stumbled on " War and  Peace". All tooo deep for me.

[FLY2 10,108]

Here we go !

[DJ360 6,720]

I very nearly said 'Just my opinion'.. but I stopped myself just in time. 

[DJ360 6,720]

5 minutes ago, Beekay said:

More power to yer elbow DJ., must be a bloody big soap box you've  got, judging by the size of yer posts. Thought I'd  got lost and stumbled on " War and  Peace". All tooo deep for me.

 

Unfortunately.. politics isn't a simple as some would have you believe. 

[benjamin1945 16,139]

13 minutes ago, Beekay said:

. All tooo deep for me.

And me Barrie,,shall we talk about Park Tavern United football team instead? Lol,

[Beekay 5,133]

Actually Ben, after your posts re above, had a look on Google maps and would not have recognised it at all. B.

[benjamin1945 16,139]

Its each to his own,,i like politics a bit,,used to like football a lot,,

But mainly i enjoy waxing lyrical now,,,

As Col says we don't have to read owt,,

We not interested in,,

I like "a little bit of this,,and a little bit of that"" song there,,where's carni?

[DJ360 6,720]

This is important stuff...

 

This:

Quote

Now, back to the Brexit referendum.

In a parliamentary democracy like the UK’s, laws are made by elected representatives of the people, according to rules of play that have been established after long consideration. Members of Parliament almost never agree about anything. That is why they are there in the first place. Their job is to turn issues inside out, to deliberate endlessly, and – finally – to find careful compromises that take the diverse opinions of the voters into consideration. Thus, parliamentary democracy is a way – a ritual, almost – to ensure that various groups within society are not at each other’s throats.

A referendum, in contrast – if it is not carefully managed and accompanied by rational debates, such as those that recently took place in Switzerland and Ireland – revolves around the sentiments of the masses. It is a snapshot, because – look at Tarrenz – this sentiment can easily be manipulated and is as changeable as the weather. Moreover, it undermines the parliamentary process. Instead of reconciling groups in society, it sets them against each other. In the Brexit referendum, 51.9 percent of voters excluded the other 48.1 percent. Since then, there has been no way back and no way forward. Whatever happens, someone always shouts “that is undemocratic!”

Now, Boris Johnson wants to force his way forward using some perfectly legal tricks to completely side-line parliamentary democracy for a few crucial weeks.

What is at stake here is neither EU membership nor national sovereignty, but the essence of parliamentary democracy.

 

Which I've taken from This:  https://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_bewitched_by_brexit_referendums_and_modern_democracy

 

Interesting read.

[Brew 5,404]

45 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

The economy was recovering and Osborne could have chosen to stimulate it

 

Not going to accept that or any notion that there is a plot to deliberately cripple the economy. I'm astonished you believe it. Virtually every country that suffered in the crash chose austerity as a fiscal strategy, they chose to cut spending, why? because it's the sensible thing to do. You cannot spend your way out of debt. The economy in my view was not recovering, it was merely glossed over.

The left winger McDonnell criticised Brown, in Parliament,  blaming the policies for leaving the UK at risk of 'serious depression'. He said the government failed to recognised the seriousness of the situation, something Brown later admitted to. 

 

In the period 97 to 06 tax rose by 51% which contributed to a slowing of the growth rate.

Public debt and Govt liabilities rose to 129% of GDP

He crippled the pension funds. Public sector pension liabilities now stand at over a TRILLION pounds - £40,000 per household

97 to 08 UK went from 13th to 5th largest budget deficit in the world

and it can be argued that his policies created the benefits trap

 

I'm not snatching figures out of the air these facts are  easily found on the 'net.

I didn't claim Brown caused the crash I said his 'prudent policies' were paid for with money we didn't have, unprecedented public borrowing. His much vaunted 'light touch' fiscal regulation  proved to be false and was a strategy that left any subsequent government with little room for manoeuvre.

 

China is far right? I'm afraid it's only you who thinks so Col. A quick Google and of millions of hits not one even hints at China being anywhere near.

'a Government which suppresses all dissent and all political opposition.  That's far right in my book.'...      Well that 's also far left in mine.

 

Whether Russia and China are democratic or not is rather my point, big business doesn't give a damn so long as there are profits to be made.

[benjamin1945 16,139]

2 hours ago, Beekay said:

Actually Ben, after your posts re above, had a look on Google maps and would not have recognised it at all. B.

 

What you mean Barrie ?

[carni 10,094]

3 hours ago, benjamin1945 said:

 

I like "a little bit of this,,and a little bit of that"" song there,,

 

'And you shake your Bum, La La La La ...La La La La La'. where's carni?....Never far away benj.

[benjamin1945 16,139]

Nice one carni.........hope you ok mi-duck......i'm coming biking with you and Chris soon......having a few probs and more tests etc,,,,,but i have been on my bike every morning for the last 3 or 4 weeks......now up to 5 miles per session and feeling a lot better for it.......so itwill soon be    ''riding along on my Pushbike honey'''.........''you look so pretty.'''.........

[DJ360 6,720]

4 hours ago, Brew said:

Not going to accept that or any notion that there is a plot to deliberately cripple the economy. I'm astonished you believe it. Virtually every country that suffered in the crash chose austerity as a fiscal strategy, they chose to cut spending, why? because it's the sensible thing to do. You cannot spend your way out of debt. The economy in my view was not recovering, it was merely glossed over.

 

But that wasn't the whole argument at the time and there were many voices opposing Austerity.. and not just from the 'left'.  In fact many economists pointed out that Osborne and others were using a simplistic 'household economy' model which simply didn't truly reflect real world economics.  For instance, interest rates were so low that it was an ideal time to borrow in order to fund infrastructure projects (for e.g.) which would in turn stimulate employment , which would create wealth and spending power which would... etc.  And yes it's true that many countries adopted Austerity, but they all abandoned it.. and sooner than the UK did.

 

There are very strong arguments to support my assertion that Osborne's ideological use of Austerity actually delayed our recovery.  I didn't say.. or I certainly didn't mean, that he deliberately crippled our economy.  I'm just convinced that he was incompetent in his beliefs and his policy.  Add that to his ideological opposition to any public spending that wasn't expressly aimed at making himself or his fellow travelers very rich and you had a perfect storm leading to the misery inflicted needlessly on many entirely innocent people.

 

I'm not going to rehearse it all here.. but you may wish to read this from a few years ago.:  https://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion

 

From which:

 

Quote

t’s true that you can’t run big budget deficits for ever (although you can do it for a long time), because at some point interest payments start to swallow too large a share of the budget. But it’s foolish and destructive to worry about deficits when borrowing is very cheap and the funds you borrow would otherwise go to waste.

At some point you do want to reverse stimulus. But you don’t want to do it too soon – specifically, you don’t want to remove fiscal support as long as pedal-to-the-metal monetary policy is still insufficient. Instead, you want to wait until there can be a sort of handoff, in which the central bank offsets the effects of declining spending and rising taxes by keeping rates low. As John Maynard Keynes wrote in 1937: “The boom, not the slump, is the right time for austerity at the Treasury.”

All of this is standard macroeconomics. I often encounter people on both the left and the right who imagine that austerity policies were what the textbook said you should do – that those of us who protested against the turn to austerity were staking out some kind of heterodox, radical position. But the truth is that mainstream, textbook economics not only justified the initial round of post-crisis stimulus, but said that this stimulus should continue until economies had recovered.

What we got instead, however, was a hard right turn in elite opinion, away from concerns about unemployment and toward a focus on slashing deficits, mainly with spending. Conservatives like to use the alleged dangers of debt and deficits as clubs with which to beat the welfare state and justify cuts in benefits.

Part of the answer is that politicians were catering to a public that doesn’t understand the rationale for deficit spending, that tends to think of the government budget via analogies with family finances. When John Boehner, the Republican leader, opposed US stimulus plans on the grounds that “American families are tightening their belt, but they don’t see government tightening its belt,” economists cringed at the stupidity. But within a few months the very same line was showing up in Barack Obama’s speeches, because his speechwriters found that it resonated with audiences. Similarly, the Labour party felt it necessary to dedicate the very first page of its 2015 general election manifesto to a “Budget Responsibility Lock”, promising to “cut the deficit every year”.

 

And I've long thought that totalitarian 'one party' governments are 'Far Right', whatever they might call themselves.  There's really little practical difference between China and Russia in terms of their approach to political freedom.  Both use the means they are most comfortable with,..or practised at.. to stifle dissent.  You can easily conceptualise it as a circle in which the extremes of left and right meet at the same point.

 

Whether you want to use the term left, right or whatever, I'd argue that the most socially and politically free societies are Western Democratic Pluralist ones such as most of those in Europe, parts of the former Commonwealth etc., and to a maybe lesser extent the US..with it's childish fear of collectivism.  Most of the rest.. are very far from free, including much of South America, most of the Middle and Far East, much of Africa etc.

[DJ360 6,720]

And on a brighter note.. it seems to be very much Parliament 1, Boris O, after the first vote.

 

His bluster and waffle  in the house today is exactly what we should expect from someone whose self regard and ambition far exceed his ability and eloquence

 

Rees-Mogg was seen arrogantly lounging on the front benches and it seems 'called out' for it by the excellent Caroline Lucas.

 

Boris has threatened so hard, that we now have the irony of Boris trying to emulate Churchill and at the same time having to ''deselect' Churchill's Grandson for opposing him.

 

Boris is toast.

 

 

 

We aren't out of the Far Right Brexit Lunacy Woods yet.. but today has been a good day. 

 

Of course.. the execrable Daily Mail has a different. and rather desperate sounding alternative take..

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html

 

.which trots out the usual 'traitor' rubbish and accuses Boris' opposition of trying to 'wipe out' Brexit.. which of course is just not true.

Only 'no deal'. is opposed in the house.

 

 

[Brew 5,404]

It’s true there was dissent from some quarters about austerity – but only from those that were not in a position of responsibility and objected mainly on principle. Everyone who did have a say chose austerity to tackle the problem. Yes Osborne was from the Micawber School of economics where his 2:1 in modern history didn't really prepare him for his job as chancellor. I don’t think he was ideologically opposed to public spending.  He did make some effort to stimulate the economy, the Northern Powerhouse was his initiative – he just wasn’t very good at it.  Aside from that he’s not known as a good guy, he attacks people not policies.

I’m familiar with the circular route of money and the multiplier effect but also know it takes a minimum of 18 months for the economy to react. If the projects you are going to use are not ready to roll it will take much longer, plus there is always the possibility it won’t work the way you want it to. Neither Brown nor Osbourne had the luxury of time.

When Gordon took the reins the UK net borrowing was in minus figures, we were paying off billions more than we were borrowing. Within three years his prudent fiscal policies had reversed that and we borrowed an average 37 Billion pounds a year until he gave up the post.

 

The quote is interesting and he is one of the top economists but at the end of the day it’s Krugman’s opinion, his hypothesis, he’s never put it to the test nor has any government.  He has also advocated free markets, supply and demand to control land use and sweatshops as better than unemployment, He is also highly critical of European labour laws…

He did praise Gordon Brown but as a person not his handling of the crisis.

 

[notty ash 370]

There were lots of signs that the austerity policy was more than just good housekeeping. There was much mention in Conservative circles of eliminating red tape and reducing the footprint of government, both at a local and a national level. The extreme of this was possibly Northamptonshire County Council, who once proposed (but never carried out) the idea of having just a minimalist head office, with all services outsourced to private enterprise. There was also a stealthy but huge shift in overall government funding from other regions to the South East. Even Cameron seems to have been taken by surprise by the extent of this when he complained about the withdrawal of local bus services in Oxfordshire, apparently totally unaware of the extent to which his own chancellor had taken money out of Oxfordshire's budget.

[jonab 1,644]

Contempt of Parliament??

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49578400

[philmayfield 6,107]

Most of us feel like that towards Parliament at the present time! They are talking some sense in Parliament this afternoon though about not leaving without a deal. Unfortunately deal or no deal wasn't on the agenda at the time of the vote and the ill informed electorate just voted 'out' because they didn't like being 'ruled' by Europe. It's deeper than that but that's the simplistic interpretation!

 

[DJ360 6,720]

@Brew

 

We're just going to have to agree to differ on Austerity.

 

@philmayfield

 

Pretty much 'in one'.  40 years of lies and misinformation about the EU spewed out by the likes of the DM, followed by the Big Red Bus of Lies. 

 

And we are now at such a pitch that we have two alternative 'Democracy' camps.  Those who think that democracy is enshrined in a single vote on a single issue after a bent campaign, and those who prefer the Democracy defended by Parliament for 800 years.   I've even seen people on Facebook calling for the abolition of Parliament...  God help us all....

[jonab 1,644]

Where's the execrable Noel Edmonds to oversee this Deal Or No Deal shenanigans?

[philmayfield 6,107]

He's behind the scenes manipulating Mister Blobby!

[Stavertongirl 1,719]

Does this mean Parliament is now going to “negotiate” the deal? It will be a bit like a trade union going into negotiations with employers but taking strike action off the table before negotiating. Got a feeling it will be a case of there is a deal on the table take it or leave it. 

 

[DJ360 6,720]

Meanwhile, and much more importantly.  Johnson is clearly very rattled because his MINORITY Govt. was unable to ride roughshod over Parliament and the rights and freedoms it has ensured for us for hundreds of years. So, in order to avoid being held to account in the future.. he is trying to sneak very dangerous changes past us, hidden away on page 48 of the Tory Manifesto.  If you vote for this.. you run the real risk of allowing a minority Govt to force through changes against the will of Parliament, and therefore against the true repository of Democracy in the land.  This is not just technical or theoretical satuff.. this is really, really dangerous and anti democratic.

 

Whatever you feel about Brexit.. please remember that Johnson was NOT 'blocked' by Parliament.. he was unable to bully his way though because he did not have an elected majority in Parliament.. and he tried to get around this by breaking the law.

Difficult to copy and paste this from the Tory website.. but 've highlighted most of the dangerous stuff in red.  If it doesn't worry you.. you should be worried....

 

Quote

 

https://assets-global.website-files.com/5da42e2cae7ebd3f8bde353c/5dda924905da587992a064ba_Conservative 2019 Manifesto.pdf

 

48 Once we get Brexit done, Britain will take back control of its laws. As we end the supremacy of European law, we will be free to craft legislation and regulations that maintain high standards but which work best for the UK. We want a balance of rights, rules and entitlements that benefits all the people and all the parts of our United Kingdom.After Brexit we also need to look at the broader aspects of our constitution: the relationship between the Government, Parliament and the courts; the functioning of the Royal Prerogative; the role of the House of Lords; and access to justice for ordinary people. The ability of our security services to defend us against terrorism and organised crime is critical. We will update the Human Rights Act and administrative law to ensure that there is a proper balance between the rights of individuals, our vital national security and effective government. We will ensure that judicial review is available to protect the rights of the individuals against an overbearing state, while ensuring that it is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays. In our first year we will set up a Constitution, Democracy & Rights Commission that will examine these issues in depth, and come up with proposals to restore trust in our institutions and in how our democracy operates. We will make it easier for British expats to vote in Parliamentary elections, and get rid of the arbitrary 15-year limit on their voting rights. We will maintain the voting age at 18 – the age at which one gains full citizenship rights. We will ensure that no one is put off from engaging in politics or standing in an election by threats, harassment or abuse, whether in person or online. We will champion freedom of expression and tolerance, both in the UK and overseas.  To support free speech, we will repeal section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2014, which seeks to coerce the press. We will not proceed with the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry. We will ensure redundancy payments can be clawed back when high-paid public servants move between jobs. We will improve the use of data, data science and evidence in the process of government. decision of the British people in the 2016 referendum – has opened up a destabilising and potentially extremely damaging rift between politicians and people. If the Brexit chaos continues, with a second referendum and a second Scottish referendum too, they will lose faith even further. It is only by getting Brexit done that we can start the necessary task of restoring public trust in government and politics: We will get rid of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act – it has led to paralysis at a time the country needed decisive action. We will ensure we have updated and equal Parliamentary boundaries, making sure that every vote counts the same – a cornerstone of democracy. We will continue to support the First Past the Post system of voting, as it allows voters to kick out politicians who don’t deliver, both locally and nationally. We will protect the integrity of our democracy, by introducing identification to vote at polling stations, stopping postal vote harvesting and measures to prevent any foreign interference in election

 

Quote