Anything Political

[Brew 5,007]

Back from whom and who's skulls should we be cracking?

[LizzieM 9,272]

I don’t discuss politics but do browse through this thread when there’s nothing else interesting to read. 

But I have one question ......

Does voting Labour go hand in hand with being anti-Monarchy?  

 

[Brew 5,007]

Just listened to a fairy tale, some call it a manifesto:

 

£75bn to build 150,000 new council and social homes a year, within five years

( he said a million)

Introducing a "real living wage" of at least £10 an hour 

 

(which will simply raise the price of goods and services)

Reviewing the retirement age for people in hard manual jobs

(Why just labourers? do we not deserve to be treated equally?)

Introducing a second homes tax

 

(That should go down well, one Labour MP has three, two of them paid for by the taxpayer!)

Reversing inheritance tax cuts and imposing VAT on private school fees

 

(For the amount it will generate it's hardly worth the bother)

Giving EU nationals living in UK the automatic right to stay

(Fair enough if they have jobs)

Reinstating 3,000 bus routes that have been cut

 

(Who's going to pay for them?)

Free broadband for all, delivered by part-nationalising BT

 

( A sop pandering to the 'owt fer nowt' brigade Won't last long as a freebie once they realise how much it will cost)

A £3bn plan to offer adults in England free access to retraining

 

(As what? fine in principle but the devil will be in the detail)

A pledge to reduce all primary school classes to fewer than 30 children

 

( Some recent research says it not necessary)

An increase in the length of statutory maternity pay from nine months to a year

 

(OK, presumably the employer is going to be stuck with the costs)

Free personal at-home care in England for over-65s most in need of it

 

(Again who is going to pay for it?)

A pledge to renew the Trident nuclear deterrent and spend at least 2% of GDP on defence

 

(Ooo, one I agree with )

Reducing the voting age to 16

 

(No, it's too young, they are too naïve and impressionable, with a lack of life experience to make sound judgement.s) 

The reception was at best lukewarm from the audience the biggest applause came  in response to promises regarding the  NHS and even more so for free internet.

He will build a million new homes, where? and how much more farm land will we lose. We mentioned the Malthusian trap  not long ago this may hurry it along, we need more food producing land, not less.

Raising the minimum wages is all well and good and I agree their should be a minimum. All that will happen is the same as always the cost will be passed to the consumer so prices will rise.

Empowering tenants and setting rent controls. There is a lot of evidence rent control can have a negative effect and what exactly will he empower tenants to do?

He will create a million climate jobs along with a green and healthy economy doing what exactly.

I'm in two minds about nationalisation. The energy companies yes but I remember the shambles that was British Rail.

 

[radfordred 6,278]

After reading that Lizzy, I’m now standing saluting our Queen, for Queen & country. 

[Brew 5,007]

11 minutes ago, LizzieM said:

I don’t discuss politics but do browse through this thread when there’s nothing else interesting to read. 

But I have one question ......

Does voting Labour go hand in hand with being anti-Monarchy?  

 

 

I wouldn't have thought it was exclusively so Lizzie but I would hazard a guess that there are more republicans among their ranks than there are among the Tories.

[Jill Sparrow 9,664]

58 minutes ago, Brew said:

Just listened to a fairy tale, some call it a manifesto:

 

Wow!  Let me know when he's turning the water into wine (red, preferably, Tempranillo grapes) and I'll book a ticket.

[MargieH 7,423]

I quite like the Queen - she has done her job very well over the years..... and I agree with the broad principles of Labour!  

 

[philmayfield 5,503]

I'm a staunch republican but I tolerate the Royal family as they provide me with a constant source of amusement.

[DJ360 6,385]

9 hours ago, Brew said:

And so they should! The minute you start censoring what people can say and what people can hear you have lost. I would allow Farage and even Tommy Robinson to have their say provided they stay within the law.

 

It's not the fact that they get coverage.  It's the disproportionate amount they get. By your logic I should get on there weekly to deliver MY message..    There's one of them on QT every week, not to mention other coverage.  Their support and their electoral success does not warrant that level of exposure alongside far more electorally successful politicians.  With 'others', the BBC is remarkably adept at finding the ones who just happen to be associated with far right politics.  I'm astounded that you don't see it.

9 hours ago, Brew said:

Really Col?  

 

Yes. Really.

 

Wiki: 

Quote

In 2018, she separated from her husband and began a relationship with businessman and Brexit Party chairman Richard Tice.^[30]

 

 

9 hours ago, Brew said:

What's wrong with that? They are reporting the news of the day without commentary and allowing us to make our own minds up. How can they give an analysis without accusations of bias? It can't be done. I said before the Beeb is between a rock and a hard place and simply can't win.

 

It's wrong for the reasons I stated.  Govt view gets aired for free,  ... opposition view gets aired, .Govt view gets repeated.  2:1 ratio and no analysis.

[DJ360 6,385]

7 hours ago, LizzieM said:

I don’t discuss politics but do browse through this thread when there’s nothing else interesting to read. 

But I have one question ......

Does voting Labour go hand in hand with being anti-Monarchy?  

 

 

Not for me.  I have no problem with Madge.  She was landed with the job a bit sooner than she expected and even then only because her waster of an uncle couldn't hack it and bailed out dumping the job in her Dad's lap.  I genuinely believe she's done the job to the best of her ability and with considerable integrity.  I can't really say the same for the likes of her kids and others, but they mostly manage to stick to their brief of being neutral re: party political stuff.. so I'm not overly bothered by their presence.  A lot of the foreign tourism industry demands their continuing existence.

[DJ360 6,385]

9 hours ago, meeowed said:

 Every labour government since the war has ended in economic disaster and yet they go lemming like for more of the same meeowed

 

Not borne out by evidence.  Just a (Tory owned) media construct which has been repeated so often it's become 'true'.  I don't see the current economy exactly bouncing after 10 years of Tory cuts and mismanagement.. and the coming Brexit disaster is going to be such a paradise that the Govt. pushing it refuses to publish any of its economic forecasts.

 

9 hours ago, meeowed said:

How on earth you can think the BBC is right wing is beyond comprehension

 

As I said above, I don't think the BBC is right wing overall.. but its political coverage certainly favours the right, and most of its journalists are known to be right of centre in their own politics.

[DJ360 6,385]

7 hours ago, Brew said:

Just listened to a fairy tale, some call it a manifesto:

 

£75bn to build 150,000 new council and social homes a year, within five years

( he said a million)

Introducing a "real living wage" of at least £10 an hour 

 

(which will simply raise the price of goods and services)

Reviewing the retirement age for people in hard manual jobs

(Why just labourers? do we not deserve to be treated equally?)

Introducing a second homes tax

 

(That should go down well, one Labour MP has three, two of them paid for by the taxpayer!)

Reversing inheritance tax cuts and imposing VAT on private school fees

 

I don't care if they only achieve a fraction of the above.  As I've said numerous times.. it's the overall intent and the direction of travel which matters to me.  The Tories are offering nothing but a partial repair of the 10 years of unneccessary damage and suffering they've caused and still plan to continue with their asset stripping and theft of publicly owned assets.  No contest for me.

 

Re: Public Schools.  I wouldn't ban them, but I would remove any possible financial breaks.  I'd also seek ways to break the system by which their output seems to get unwarranted access to Oxbridge etc.  They can't all be that bright .. whatever cash they've had spent on them.

 

7 hours ago, Brew said:

Reinstating 3,000 bus routes that have been cut

 

(Who's going to pay for them?)

 

 

Who paid for them before?  My guess would be they were subsidised by local authorities, but since the Tories attacked local Govt spending it's become impossible.  Tory cuts again.  I had a shop owner moaning at me the other day that her shop wasn't profitable because 'the council' had put business rates up.  Doesn't seem to have sunk in that the Govt have cut local funding to the bone causing such issues.

 

7 hours ago, Brew said:

A pledge to renew the Trident nuclear deterrent and spend at least 2% of GDP on defence

 

(Ooo, one I agree with )

 

Me too.. but .errr.. who's going to pay for it? 

 

7 hours ago, Brew said:

I'm in two minds about nationalisation. The energy companies yes but I remember the shambles that was British Rail.

 

And British Rail was worse than the current mess?

[Brew 5,007]

3 hours ago, DJ360 said:

It's not the fact that they get coverage.  It's the disproportionate amount they get. By your logic I should get on there weekly to deliver MY message.

 

It has always been the incumbent that receives more coverage than the opposition, fact, Gordon Brown had more air time than Cameron.

Why do you need an analysis?  You must see why they restrict themselves as far as  possible to the facts. Anything more will bring cries of bias from those who disagree and praise from those who do.

You on TV? why not? If you had the same number of followers, if you engaged with the party, if you attended rallies and made speeches, if you get your self elected why not? You can even get on Question Time if you try hard enough ...  

 

3 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Yes. Really.

 

Earlier you said you could not get moralistic about Johnsons extra- martial affairs yet now you see fit to mention (in disparaging terms),someones private life. A journalist and a

nondescript  business man, both of whom choose to support Brexit. You even questioned why their relationship is not broadcast to the world through the BBC. So she left her husband, is that anyone's business but theirs? . Why and how is that  relevant to the discussion?  Why did she deserve to be pilloried and Boris does not?

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

don't care if they only achieve a fraction of the above

 

Hardly seems worth mentioning then if nobody believes it. However which fraction would you prefer, introducing an unfair division among the working population over retirement or council houses that cost £500,000 each? Clearly someone in the Labour party can't do simple arithmetic.

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Who paid for them before?  My guess would be they were subsidised by local authorities

 

Yes they were, but do you honestly think councils will reinstate them? Even if they are given money  they will quickly decide it's not viable and put it towards a new tram line or some other vanity project.

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Me too.. but .errr.. who's going to pay for it?

 

2% is the current spending level as well you know so there's no extra cost to the taxpayer over and above the present commitment. 

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

British Rail was worse than the current mess

 

Far worse, it's fine looking back at the romantic, golden age of steam, but take the rose coloured specs off and the image is somewhat less  than attractive. Old, slow and dirty rolling stock and huge amounts of taxpayers money to prop it up, far more than the present lot. They were not helped of course in that the rail unions were among the most bolshie.

Now along comes Corbyn sees the modernisation private enterprise has made, the new trains, tracks. stations and a modern IT infrastructure and thinks we'll have that.

Any system as big as the railways will always have room for improvement , I'm just not sure nationalisation is the way to do it.

[meeowed 314]

Until the manifesto is made legally binding these pie in the sky aspirations will continue from both parties   People have not forgotten Tony Blair his spectre still looms large over the labour party like the grim reaper    I am sure if Corbyn gains access to number ten his first press conference out side the door would resemble an episode of Jim Bowens bullseye  Look what you would have won   meeowed

[Jill Sparrow 9,664]

After the Dams Raids, it was suggested to Guy Gibson that he might forge a career in politics. Having given it some thought, he declined, saying that, "There is little more to politics than wisdom and sincerity." 

 

Perhaps things were different in 1943? Or perhaps he was a worse judge of people than his superiors thought.

[meeowed 314]

Corbyns visit to Birmingham didnt go to well did it   I think he touched a nerve  meeowed

[DJ360 6,385]

12 hours ago, Brew said:

Earlier you said you could not get moralistic about Johnsons extra- martial affairs yet now you see fit to mention (in disparaging terms),someones private life.

 

Yes. Because she is presented as a 'journalist' or whatever when the reality is that she's also deeply involved with Brexit by her acquaintances, including Tice.  I don't care who she sleeps with, but her political affiliations are part of the story.  The BBC need to be a bit more careful about such things.

 

I also said I didn't care about Johnson's affairs from a moral P.O.V., but I do when it comes to his relationship with someone to whm he provided public money.  Do you see the parallel?

 

12 hours ago, Brew said:

Hardly seems worth mentioning then if nobody believes it. However which fraction would you prefer, introducing an unfair division among the working population over retirement or council houses that cost £500,000 each? Clearly someone in the Labour party can't do simple arithmetic.

 

 

In all honesty, I wish that Labour would spend less time on inflated promises and more time countering the falsehoods about them propagated by he Tories.  These aren't my words.. but they sum up my view.

Quote

One thing that constantly baffles me is that Labour never fight back against the Tories economically. Why don’t they attack with the hard cold facts that the Conservatives have presided over two consecutive down-grades of the UK credit rating (AAA to AA to AA negative) and have increased the national debt year on year since 2010?

 

12 hours ago, Brew said:

Yes they were, but do you honestly think councils will reinstate them? Even if they are given money  they will quickly decide it's not viable and put it towards a new tram line or some other vanity project.

 

If councils are funded, and required, to do so.. then they will have no choice but to do so.  The Tories have no hesitation in cutting the Government funding element of local council funding whilst loading extra responsibilities onto them.  This topic is hugely significant, but barely gets a mention at present.

 

Also worth shouting loud and clear that what Laura Kuenssberg described this lunch time as 'a massively increased state', or words to that effect.. under Labour's plans.. actually is nothing of the sort, but in reality is simply a restoration of state funding and intervention. Even then, the UK %ge of GDP spent on public services will be well below the norm for civilised western countries.

 

12 hours ago, Brew said:

Far worse, it's fine looking back at the romantic, golden age of steam, but take the rose coloured specs off and the image is somewhat less  than attractive. Old, slow and dirty rolling stock and huge amounts of taxpayers money to prop it up, far more than the present lot. They were not helped of course in that the rail unions were among the most bolshie.

Now along comes Corbyn sees the modernisation private enterprise has made, the new trains, tracks. stations and a modern IT infrastructure and thinks we'll have that.

Any system as big as the railways will always have room for improvement , I'm just not sure nationalisation is the way to do it.

 

 

I think you are entirely missing the point.  Like many, I look back on the days of steam with affection and notstalgia, but I also recognise that after WW2 our rail system was outdated and shambolic.

However, I'm not comparing the current set up with the 1950s but with the period immediately before privatisation.. when the Inter City service was pretty decent and local trains worked.

 

It is clear to me that the whole privatisation stunt was  partially ideological but also, as with everything the Tories do to public services.. a deliberate mechanism to put public money into selected private hands.  Also, the facts show that the Public Money subsidy to the rail industry is no less, and most likely more.. than it ever was prior to privatisation.  There are admittedly some improvements, but Northern Rail. for e.g. is a disaster and all cross country services in the north are massively outdated, overcrowded etc.  Have you ever tried to get from say.. Leeds, to Liverpool? I reckon I could walk faster.  Or have you tried to get from the North west, to somewhere like Lincoln?  it's hopeless.  And as for Nottm. Station..  Least said I think..

Virgin Trains seemed to be pretty successful running the West Coast Mainlime with their Pendolinos.. yet they have been deprived of the contract and it's gone to God knows who. The East Coast Mainline ran very successfully as a public company and was making a profit, so naturally the Tories privatised it and it immediately went bad.

 

The Tory Rail Privatisation Project was always a massively over complicated exercise designed primarily to shift public money into private hands.  It has been mostly a complicated and costly failure.  I'm for re-nationalisation.

[DJ360 6,385]

6 hours ago, meeowed said:

Until the manifesto is made legally binding these pie in the sky aspirations will continue from both parties   People have not forgotten Tony Blair his spectre still looms large over the labour party like the grim reaper    I am sure if Corbyn gains access to number ten his first press conference out side the door would resemble an episode of Jim Bowens bullseye  Look what you would have won   meeowed

 

It's the Tories who are busily setting up fake websites etc., to try to undermine Labour.

It's the Tories who have spent ten years increasing public borrowing, attacking public services, attacking the poor and disabled, attacking the State Pension, attacking the NHS, failing to address the housing crisis which their policies have caused, failing to tackle child poverty, attacking education funding.. except where they have allowed schools to be sold off to bent 'managers', who have pocketed millions from 'academies', who have presided over crumbling roads and other infrastructure, who have turned this country from a World leading nation, to a laughing stock run by spivs, crooks and con men.

It's the Tories who have managed to lose the UKs 'Triple A' international credit status..... twice.

 

Fiscally responsible?  I should co co.  Bunch of crooks and thieves.  And now led by a lying crook who lied to Parliament, lied to the Queen and is known to have said 'f**k business'. 

 

Hardly a scintillating record is it?  And no.. the situation they inherited was not caused by Labour, but by the same international speculators and crooks they are now desperate to get into bed with again via their totally opaque and secret Brexit plans.

 

I'd sooner vote for the Monster Raving Looney Party.

[Stavertongirl 1,684]

Just now, DJ360 said:

 

I'd sooner vote for the Monster Raving Looney Party.

I could be joining you in that yet!

[DJ360 6,385]

51 minutes ago, meeowed said:

Corbyns visit to Birmingham didnt go to well did it   I think he touched a nerve  meeowed

 

It depends which Right Wing Tory Owned Newspaper you believe.

[Jill Sparrow 9,664]

The Monster Raving Loony party elected a moggie, named Catmando, as their joint leader. Catmando was a ginger and white Maine Coon, very handsome too. He spoke more sense than any politician I've ever encountered.

 

The Loonys also had an official named Tarquin Biscuit Barrel...at least, that is the abbreviated version of his name.

 

I have a cat named Tarquin and he's starting to resemble a biscuit barrel. Perhaps it's time for a little austerity in the food department?

[philmayfield 5,503]

I’ve always fancied having a Maine Coon cat but I can’t imagine our four would like it when it grows to it’s full size!

[DJ360 6,385]

If I recall correctly the MRLP had a candidate who changed his name by Deed Poll to (approximately) 'Tarquin Fin-tim-lin-bin-whin-bim-lim-bus-stop-F'tang-F'tang-Olé-Biscuit Barrel'.. which was if I recall correctly a name 'borrowed' from a Monty Python sketch.

 

I watched the results on TV that night, eagerly anticipating the returning officer's approach to the name.  I was devastated when the miserable so and so simply referred to him as 'Mr T Barrel'. Some people have no sense of humour.

[Jill Sparrow 9,664]

I know a couple of Maine Coons. They are big cats and very talkative!  They are also playful and highly intelligent. Nice moggies but need to be brushed and combed daily, which they don't always appreciate!

 

Ragdolls are also excellent house cats but, again, high maintenance where their coats are concerned.

 

Even larger are Norwegian Forest cats. Real characters. A friend has three of them.

[Brew 5,007]

38 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

Even then, the UK %ge of GDP spent on public services will be well below the norm for civilised western countries.

 

Actually they are about midtable and only a smidge behind the EU average. 

38 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

Yes. Because she is presented as a 'journalist' or whatever when the reality is that she's also deeply involved with Brex

 

She is presented as a journalist because that's what she is. Yes she is a staunch Brexiteer and make no secret of the fact. Her private life is no concern of your's, mine or anyone else.

Writing things like this is beneath you : with no indication that she's also presently 'banging' the deputy leader of the Brexit Party.

What's your motto? ...          'play the ball not the man'. 

 

45 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

I wish that Labour would spend less time on inflated promises and more time countering the falsehoods about them propagated by he Tories

 

And the difference between an inflated promise and a falsehood is? The both look like lies to me.

 

48 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

One thing that constantly baffles me is that Labour never fight back against the Tories economically

 

Because they can't, they don't have the ammunition.  The same quote mentions debt since 2010. Not fair, it's like me blaming Brown for the crash of 2008 when borrowing went totally out of control. We have talked of this so I'll not rehash it. The Tories came to power after Brown left them with a poison chalice. They didn't handle it well but,  the rise in debt started to slow.

 

56 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

If councils are funded, and required, to do so

 

They will, for a short time only.

 

58 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

This topic is hugely significant, but barely gets a mention at present.

 

Perhaps Col because it's only you and few others that consider it so and are concerned. Were it worthy of more attention I've no doubt it would get it.

 

You may well be right about the railways, I'm not sure. Whilst it's true the directors and their ilk in the nationalised industries became overnight millionaires on privatisation, the bulk of the money went to the treasury.