Jump to content
David

The Politics Thread 2019

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I'm sure nobody will be prepared to admit that Diane Abbott just made a maths mistake. A hugely embarrassing mistake, which she should and will have the pee taken over, but it was just a mistake over mental maths. 

All of you finding it funny - any of you ever made a maths mistake? Probably never on live radio, which is why this one gets remembered. 

A maths mistake that you correct or admit you don't actually know the answer to, sure.  

Repeated mistakes, as I dither through an interview clearly having no idea of any facts/figures what-so-ever.  Never.

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Yep I once had a tax bill of £80,000,000 but only paid £300,000. Hugely embarrassing but just a mistake.

Thank goodness I'm not in charge of government budgets.

Thank goodness she wasnt in charge of deciding what figure to put on the side of the bus...

Diane Abbott isn't in charge of government budgets either. We have a Tory government, you know, the mob who removed the 20,000 coppers from the streets in the first place.

Would you not consider it to be 'hugely embarrassing' that Boris is now having to promise to replace said coppers and is banging on about the Tory party being 'tough on crime' to anyone stupid enough to listen? 

Would you not consider it to be 'hugely embarrassing' that both Bungle and the current Home Secretary, the genius that is Priti Patel, voted for those cuts and are now having to perform marrive u-turns?

Let's be honest, we all know why the Derby city centre streets are overrun with swarthy drug-dealers, don't we? Ooops...

How embarrassing!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Diane Abbott isn't in charge of government budgets either. We have a Tory government, you know, the mob who removed the 20,000 coppers from the streets in the first place.

Would you not consider it to be 'hugely embarrassing' that Boris is now having to promise to replace said coppers and is banging on about the Tory party being 'tough on crime' to anyone stupid enough to listen? 

Would you not consider it to be 'hugely embarrassing' that both Bungle and the current Home Secretary, the genius that is Priti Patel, voted for those cuts and are now having to perform marrive u-turns?

Let's be honest, we all know why the Derby city centre streets are overrun with swarthy drug-dealers, don't we? Ooops...

How embarrassing!

No, police numbers were cut as part of austerity measures.

Now we are coming away from said austerity the government is investing in public services. 

Not really that hard to understand.

Your last point is becoming extremely boring and tiresome now, just pretend that you've had loads of likes for it and change the record. I'm on here to debate politics and am fed up of getting pulled into petty arguments with people who are unable or unwilling to have serious debate.

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

No, police numbers were cut as part of austerity measures.

The Tories cut police numbers by over 20,000. Where have I suggested it is or isn't as a result of austerity? 

Now we are coming away from said austerity the government is investing in public services. 

Make your mind up for God's sake! Has austerity forced the cuts or not and if not, why would the end of austerity lead to increased police numbers?

Not really that hard to understand.

It is hard to understand because your argument is utter tripe.

Your last point is becoming extremely boring and tiresome now, just pretend that you've had loads of likes for it and change the record. I'm on here to debate politics and am fed up of getting pulled into petty arguments with people who are unable or unwilling to have serious debate.

If you don't wish folk to respond to statements you make, don't post them. Same rules apply to you as anyone else, despite the fact you think you're a special case. You're not and I'll post whatever I see fit, especially when it concerns the kind of thinly-veiled bigotry which you argued vehemently yet utterly failed to support with any kind of evidence other than your standard, 'my own eyes' blather. 

As you've said yourself, it not really that hard to understand 🤷‍♀️

 

Edited by 86 Schmokes & a Pancake

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

No, police numbers were cut as part of austerity measures.

Now we are coming away from said austerity the government is investing in public services. 

Not really that hard to understand.

Now just a minute.....austerity or not isn’t a state of being, or an economic phenomenon. It’s a political decision.

Ask yourself why “austerity measures “ were necessary and you’ll probably come up with something about debt and deficit. And if you unquestioningly follow the Tory narrative you’ll ascribe the cause to mad reckless spending by Blair and Brown.

so where are we now? Still in annual deficit. Debt still rising. Economy shrink in q2 so we will even have less money going forward to spend.

so how, magically, are we “coming out of austerity “?  And even more magically, although austerity saved us all by cutting “spending “, now that we’re out of austerity-by some magical means - we can replace all that nasty “spending” on public services with “investing” in public services.

hurrah for Tory chancellors and Boris’ magical bus.......😂

it isnt hard to understand once you realise that it’s all a cynical political ploy and stop giving these charlatans any credit whatsoever.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Yep I once had a tax bill of £80,000,000 but only paid £300,000.

Do you live in Greece? 😎

I shouldn't worry about serious political debate ... the politicians ain't.

I'm just here for the emojiis me. 

 

🦔🦔

A hedgehog emojii, who knew?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

 

Ah now we are back to the good old 'bigot' insult.

Bore off.

Never thought I would sink to such depths as I believe in freedom of speech and like to read peoples views whether I agree with them or not, however, I have better things to do than keep rising to the bait of someone who is clearly anti English white males.

You're on ignore so do not waste your time responding. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

No, police numbers were cut as part of austerity measures.

Now we are coming away from said austerity the government is investing in public services. 

Not really that hard to understand.

Your last point is becoming extremely boring and tiresome now, just pretend that you've had loads of likes for it and change the record. I'm on here to debate politics and am fed up of getting pulled into petty arguments with people who are unable or unwilling to have serious debate.

Austerity was a political choice not a necessity.  There is a myriad of ways a government can raise or save money, choosing austerity is a way of making sure the least well off bear the brunt of a situation they had no blame in the first place.

 

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

 

More fake news! You seem to be suggesting that Abbott claims she can replace 10,000 coppers with a annual budget of as little as £300,000.

Didn't you claim to be an accountant at one point?

 

Jeeezus how embarrassing was that?

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Now just a minute.....austerity or not isn’t a state of being, or an economic phenomenon. It’s a political decision.

Ask yourself why “austerity measures “ were necessary and you’ll probably come up with something about debt and deficit. And if you unquestioningly follow the Tory narrative you’ll ascribe the cause to mad reckless spending by Blair and Brown.

so where are we now? Still in annual deficit. Debt still rising. Economy shrink in q2 so we will even have less money going forward to spend.

so how, magically, are we “coming out of austerity “?  And even more magically, although austerity saved us all by cutting “spending “, now that we’re out of austerity-by some magical means - we can replace all that nasty “spending” on public services with “investing” in public services.

hurrah for Tory chancellors and Boris’ magical bus.......😂

it isnt hard to understand once you realise that it’s all a cynical political ploy and stop giving these charlatans any credit whatsoever.

 

7 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

Austerity was a political choice not a necessity.  There is a myriad of ways a government can raise or save money, choosing austerity is a way of making sure the least well off bear the brunt of a situation they had no blame in the first place.

Yes, austerity is obviously a political choice but it only has to be used if there is a problem surely?

In hindsight it was either a bad choice or was used for too long.

To complete ignore the role Labour had in getting us to stage where austerity was even considered as on option though is unfair though I feel.

So now the Comservatives are beginning to reverse the austerity measures surely that is something to be happy about rather than another stick to beat them with?

It's no surprise Labour can afford more police on the streets if they are only going to be paying them somewhere between £30 and £8000 per year!

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

Austerity was a political choice not a necessity.  There is a myriad of ways a government can raise or save money, choosing austerity is a way of making sure the least well off bear the brunt of a situation they had no blame in the first place.

 

Well, the financial crash was the poor's fault though. If those poor Americans hadn't taken on homes way above their means, then the financial system wouldn't have been brought to it's knees by responsibly managing the risk.

Plus we had all those greedy disabled people living the life of luxury with their spare rooms. And all those extravagant youth services to help ungrateful kids from deprived areas, which meant there wasn't enough crime for a vastly inflated police force to deal with. Getting rid of both was the obvious solution.

Trouble is, both sides of the EU debate needed the votes of people screwed over by austerity. Would they vote for the main people who had screwed them over, or for the other side who pretended the problems were all caused by the EU/EU immigrants? The irony been that the Leave leaders despise the victims of austerity even more than the chief Remainers. Happy days.

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

So your whole argument is based on zero hours contracts and that means that workers rights are worse now than back then. Zero hour contracts do suit some people. Like I said things are not perfect but certainly better than they were before.. 

So food banks are a positive that we can chalk up to the tory government?  Exploitation of workers a good thing too?  Devaluation of the £ by 25% good for the working class.  You may be alright jetting around the world, complaining about airports, the irony is that most people don't earn the 'average' wage, which is £35k ish, last time I looked.  Didn't the tories come up with JAM's? Just about managing, bet there are more of them on here than ones that live in a bubble and feed unicorns.

My argument is more complex, unfortunately people only focus on singular points and can't see the bigger picture, or refuse to look beyond the end of their unicorn horns.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

 

Yes, austerity is obviously a political choice but it only has to be used if there is a problem surely?

In hindsight it was either a bad choice or was used for too long.

To complete ignore the role Labour had in getting us to stage where austerity was even considered as on option though is unfair though I feel.

So now the Comservatives are beginning to reverse the austerity measures surely that is something to be happy about rather than another stick to beat them with?

It's no surprise Labour can afford more police on the streets if they are only going to be paying them somewhere between £30 and £8000 per year!

I like the last point - very good! 😉

Labour had a role inasmuch as they implemented "light touch" regulation of financial services so basically handed over the keys and also entered into PFI deals that are an extremely expensive mechanism of funding what used to be called public spending but which would now be called "investment" 😉

But both of these traits were extensions of policy measures introduced by Tory administrations, so Labours real crime is one of perpetuating and extending flawed ideas. Both administrations are culpable.

"Austerity" or rather "cost reduction" measures are one way of trying to fill the gaps. Historically, other approaches have been to expand the income side of the national accounts. This can be by attempting to stimulate the private sector or "investing" in public works - or even by flogging stuff the government owns. The choice of approach is purely political and even under those very broad headings there are many choices to be made.

We now look forward to very uncertain times and in some possible scenarios, the deficit starts growing and significantly. The fact that SOME parts of the austerity package are being reversed when we haven't "fixed" the issues that austerity was supposed to address, I cannot applaud unless there is acknowledgement of mistakes made. But then I'm still waiting to hear May apologise for arbitrarily creating the conditions for the Windrush scandal.

I'm not beating the Conservatives for reversing - I am beating them for the bits they are NOT reversing (universal credit lives on), for not being honest about the implications of the choices they are taking on our behalf and for the cynical "messaging" that somehow all of this was "necessary" rather than a political design.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

Austerity was a political choice not a necessity.  There is a myriad of ways a government can raise or save money, choosing austerity is a way of making sure the least well off bear the brunt of a situation they had no blame in the first place.

 

I read a great definition of the Tory Austerity measures - maybe on here but it bears repeating -

Alexei Sayle - 'The definition of Austerity is the conclusion that the 2008 Banking Crash was caused by Wolverhampton having too many libraries'

 

😀🦔

Edited by WhiteHorseRam
Nearly didn't put an emojii in, that was a close call!!

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, McRamFan said:

My argument is more complex, unfortunately people only focus on singular points and can't see the bigger picture, or refuse to look beyond the end of their unicorn horns.

We need an IQ test for the right to vote. It's obvious that most people are just too stupid to be given a say in who rules them.

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

I like the last point - very good! 😉

Labour had a role inasmuch as they implemented "light touch" regulation of financial services so basically handed over the keys and also entered into PFI deals that are an extremely expensive mechanism of funding what used to be called public spending but which would now be called "investment" 😉

But both of these traits were extensions of policy measures introduced by Tory administrations, so Labours real crime is one of perpetuating and extending flawed ideas. Both administrations are culpable.

"Austerity" or rather "cost reduction" measures are one way of trying to fill the gaps. Historically, other approaches have been to expand the income side of the national accounts. This can be by attempting to stimulate the private sector or "investing" in public works - or even by flogging stuff the government owns. The choice of approach is purely political and even under those very broad headings there are many choices to be made.

We now look forward to very uncertain times and in some possible scenarios, the deficit starts growing and significantly. The fact that SOME parts of the austerity package are being reversed when we haven't "fixed" the issues that austerity was supposed to address, I cannot applaud unless there is acknowledgement of mistakes made. But then I'm still waiting to hear May apologise for arbitrarily creating the conditions for the Windrush scandal.

I'm not beating the Conservatives for reversing - I am beating them for the bits they are NOT reversing (universal credit lives on), for not being honest about the implications of the choices they are taking on our behalf and for the cynical "messaging" that somehow all of this was "necessary" rather than a political design.

Good, well thought out, response.

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, McRamFan said:

So food banks are a positive that we can chalk up to the tory government?  Exploitation of workers a good thing too?  Devaluation of the £ by 25% good for the working class.  You may be alright jetting around the world, complaining about airports, the irony is that most people don't earn the 'average' wage, which is £35k ish, last time I looked.  Didn't the tories come up with JAM's? Just about managing, bet there are more of them on here than ones that live in a bubble and feed unicorns.

My argument is more complex, unfortunately people only focus on singular points and can't see the bigger picture, or refuse to look beyond the end of their unicorn horns.

The original statement was that the current situation was worse that he could remember. I don't know how old GBoro is but worse than he can remember back to? Really? If you read what the replies were instead of knee jerk posting, you can see nobody has said it is perfect. Perhaps you would like to cut and paste a link from an obscure search engine that shows us all, when it was perfect, or even just better? I can remember 3 day weeks, power cuts, 15%+ interest rates on my mortgage. 

You really should read things twice before jumping in. 

https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/jump-in

Enjoy. That was Google by the way,, 

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said:

We need an IQ test for the right to vote. It's obvious that most people are just too stupid to be given a say in who rules them.

Agreed. Way too complex for the average person to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ariotofmyown said:

Well, the financial crash was the poor's fault though. If those poor Americans hadn't taken on homes way above their means, then the financial system wouldn't have been brought to it's knees by responsibly managing the risk.

Plus we had all those greedy disabled people living the life of luxury with their spare rooms. And all those extravagant youth services to help ungrateful kids from deprived areas, which meant there wasn't enough crime for a vastly inflated police force to deal with. Getting rid of both was the obvious solution.

Trouble is, both sides of the EU debate needed the votes of people screwed over by austerity. Would they vote for the main people who had screwed them over, or for the other side who pretended the problems were all caused by the EU/EU immigrants? The irony been that the Leave leaders despise the victims of austerity even more than the chief Remainers. Happy days.

I know your first couple of points are tongue in cheek but the public do have to take their share of responsibility.

People do try to live beyond their means.

But obviously with proper regulation this would not be so easy!

Share this post


Link to post

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.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.