The Politics Thread 2019

[McRamFan]

Good explanation 

 

[Van der MoodHoover]

19 hours ago, Curtains said:

You make some good points. 

Austerity wasn't nice I agree but the problem was overspending.

The more a country borrows the more interest they pay and the national debt never goes down.

Inflation is increased by overspending 

Printing money is not the answer either.  

No Curtains. Factually incorrect on this occasion.

It is because the solution that was applied is to REDUCE spending that everyone assumes that spending was the problem (and Labour do have form in that regard).

The problem was the collapse in government income (through corporation tax receipts) as huge bank profits went "pop".

It's like changing your job to one that pays half as much as your old one. Do you

a) reduce your spending (living standards)

b) use savings to maintain your standard of living (if you have any)

c) ask your partner to go to work as well to up your income?

 

either would "work" to balance your budget, but in the country's case it has no savings (only debts...….run up by governments of BOTH colours) and Maggie flogged off our assets (sorry, invited the country to participate in a "privatisation boom").  So austerity it was!

[Stive Pesley]

6 minutes ago, maxjam said:

fixed that for you

Fair point (once I realised what you'd added! it's annoying that the new Quote squisher makes FTFY jokes less obvious)

It's always been the case that the best deal for both sides (in terms of trade at least) has been no Brexit. It always defied logic that we could somehow easily get a better deal than EU membership brings. If that were do-able then every country would leave.

[alexxxxx]

18 hours ago, maxjam said:

Because its not really Brexit is it.  You are allowed to vote against one Brexit deal whilst still being pro-Brexit.

The real problem is May had two years to sort this out and presented only one (bad) option (apart from no deal and they keep blocking that).  I'm pro-leave but I'd knock that deal back as well.

But it is Brexit. It is leaving the European Union.

This is what I don't understand by the ERG lot and many brexiteers who don't seem to grasp that all agreements require rights and responsibilities alongside some sort of dispute resolution mechanism.

[Anon]

Our brave police have conspired with the Ecuadorians to break international law and arrest Julian Assange inside the embassy where he was claiming asylum. He's charged with skipping bail on a case that was so paper thin and obviously concocted that it has since been dropped completely, so he should be fairly swiftly released, or maybe we'll extradite him to the US like the weak, despicable ducking quislings we are?

[Van der MoodHoover]

24 minutes ago, Anon said:

Our brave police have conspired with the Ecuadorians to break international law and arrest Julian Assange inside the embassy where he was claiming asylum. He's charged with skipping bail on a case that was so paper thin and obviously concocted that it has since been dropped completely, so he should be fairly swiftly released, or maybe we'll extradite him to the US like the weak, despicable ducking quislings we are?

for the price of a couple of truck loads of chlorine washed chicken to quell the natives?

[Anon]

3 minutes ago, HantsRam said:

for the price of a couple of truck loads of chlorine washed chicken to quell the natives?

The art of the deal at it's finest. It's a big test for Trump if Assange does end up state side. A significant proportion of his support base comes from people disillusioned with neocon world policing. There will not be blanket support for his prosecution.

[GenBr]

20 hours ago, GboroRam said:

Without trying to address everything at once, I'd like to pull this up for attention. 

1. EU27 citizens are net contributors to the nation's coffers. Mainly healthy, working age people who pay tax and don't burden the NHS by being ill people.

2. Nothing says the UK has to accept immigrants who have no means of supporting themselves beyond (if memory serves) three months. The fact that the UK government does not do anything about this is not the fault of the EU. 

3. The lack of affordable housing is down to lack of investment over decades by successive governments. To blame immigrants is unfair. What's the percentage of immigrants in this country?

For all the reasons people voted to leave the EU, and there are some valid ones, Immigration has got to be the most ridiculous one. There is a far larger net increase of the non EU immigrants into the country than there is of EU immigrants - leaving the EU won't change that. Everyone is an immigrant at some stage - they integrate more and more as you go down the generations until you can't tell the difference.

20 hours ago, McRamFan said:

After WWII Churchill almost bankrupted this country and we have struggled since.  Thatcher schismed the country into the poor north and the yuppie south east.  Please go read history, not written my your hard right gammons.

You are missing the point, again, I have stated I have no faith in either main parties, in fact, I would send May and Corbyn out, hand in hand, in a coronal shower.

Its a little unfair to blame Churchill for the money problems we had during the total collapse of the Empire and with the huge debts we had after WW2. Frankly I think whichever party Labour or Tory was in charge for the years following WW2 it was going to be a tough task to manage our decline and both of them struggled until Thatcher came along. You can argue for or against Thatcher and certainly she wasn't perfect, but the years following her Prime Minister stint were certainly better than those preceding it. Issues like stopping the subsidies to the mines and other industries were unavoidable - it would have happened eventually regardless.

I do like the fact that you don't identify with a single party though - I believe it is foolish to nail your flag to one of them forever in perpetuity. Both have made mistakes in the past, but I believe you can only judge them on what they do now, which doesn't really give us a great deal to go on.

20 hours ago, Curtains said:

So you have no party then. 

Neither do I. I do not support the policies of any current party. Currently my only option is to ruin my ballot paper - I am not voting for any party if I do not support them.

 

[Curtains]

1 hour ago, HantsRam said:

No Curtains. Factually incorrect on this occasion.

It is because the solution that was applied is to REDUCE spending that everyone assumes that spending was the problem (and Labour do have form in that regard).

The problem was the collapse in government income (through corporation tax receipts) as huge bank profits went "pop".

It's like changing your job to one that pays half as much as your old one. Do you

a) reduce your spending (living standards)

b) use savings to maintain your standard of living (if you have any)

c) ask your partner to go to work as well to up your income?

 

either would "work" to balance your budget, but in the country's case it has no savings (only debts...….run up by governments of BOTH colours) and Maggie flogged off our assets (sorry, invited the country to participate in a "privatisation boom").  So austerity it was!

Nothing to do with the housing market and Northern Rock for over lending and going bust then. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Rock

[Van der MoodHoover]

36 minutes ago, Curtains said:

Nothing to do with the housing market and Northern Rock for over lending and going bust then. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Rock

indeed it is - but THAT is nothing whatsoever to do with Labour government overspending, but societal demand to live in a house and watch it constantly increase in value for ever......and ever.......

 

Now what you CAN have a legitimate moan at the Labour government for is for re-designating certain forms of spending as "investment" (new schools, hospitals and suchlike) and then launching into PFI deals that will saddle the country with repayments for years to come. All of which hides the total cost of those programs.

 

What we don't get from ANY politicians is sufficient honesty to make informed choices. Hence endless spin and pretence that you can have something and there is no cost to anyone, ever - clearly nonsense. You want something to happen eg a nice new navy. Well, theres a cost. SOMEBODY is going to have to pay.

[1of4]

1 hour ago, Anon said:

Our brave police have conspired with the Ecuadorians to break international law and arrest Julian Assange inside the embassy where he was claiming asylum. He's charged with skipping bail on a case that was so paper thin and obviously concocted that it has since been dropped completely, so he should be fairly swiftly released, or maybe we'll extradite him to the US like the weak, despicable ducking quislings we are?

The Ecuadorian government having rescinded his asylum status. He would then be asked to leave and be returned back to the country he arrived from . They then allowed British law enforcement agencies to enter their embassy, so Assange could be escorted out of their domain and back in to British sovereignty. Where he was duly arrested by the police.

Nothing different to him being removed from Ecuador under an extradition warrant. So where was there any breaking of international law.

[Anon]

10 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

The Ecuadorian government having rescinded his asylum status. He would then be asked to leave and be returned back to the country he arrived from . They then allowed British law enforcement agencies to enter their embassy, so Assange could be escorted out of their domain and back in to British sovereignty. Where he was duly arrested by the police.

Nothing different to him being removed from Ecuador under an extradition warrant. So where was there any breaking of international law.

This is true. I didn't realise the Ecuadorian ambassador had invited the police into the embassy.

[ramit]

39 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

Nothing different to him being removed from Ecuador under an extradition warrant. So where was there any breaking of international law.

As i understand it, asylum once granted cannot legally be cancelled

[Ghost of Clough]

7 minutes ago, ramit said:

As i understand it, asylum once granted cannot legally be cancelled

It's only revoked in rare circumstances.

 

“violated repeatedly, clear cut provisions of the conventions on diplomatic asylum of Havana and Caracas.

“Despite the fact he was requested on several occasions to respect and abide by these rules.”

“He particularly violated the norm of not interfering in the internal affairs of other states.”

https://inews.co.uk/news/julian-assange-arrested-wikileaks-founder-ecuadorian-embassy-asylum-ecuador/

[SSD]

9 minutes ago, ramit said:

As i understand it, asylum once granted cannot legally be cancelled

Yet the police have arrested him for a previous crime back in 2012, it's only until now they have proceeded to carry out the arrest. Unless the bloke broke Ecuadorian laws which allows their government to cancel the asylum? 

[cstand]

3 hours ago, GboroRam said:

Damn those EU maniacs for, er, agreeing to what we wanted. Despicable bar stewards.

March 29th has gone they should have kicked us out simple as that. 

[GboroRam]

10 minutes ago, cstand said:

March 29th has gone they should have kicked us out simple as that. 

I suppose you are right in one sense. The EU have more understanding of what's going on than the government. Might be better to let them make the decisions. 

But how does that sit with the whole "sovereignty" issue? 

[SSD]

21 minutes ago, cstand said:

March 29th has gone they should have kicked us out simple as that. 

Exactly. Why are the EU all of a sudden having a change of heart giving us the extended deadline? Thought they weren't going to renegotiate? Tusk was adamant the EU was done talking with the UK. Hopefully with the EU still wanting a settlement with the UK, they'll be more flexible with the negotiations. Because it's clear the folks in parliament will be at a stalemate for the foreseeable future, winding everyone up.    

[GboroRam]

Just seen this work of literary art on Facebook 

an less it's Anna soubry she just a horrible walking brain dead zombie remainer it about time some one put her back in her brain dead box permanently along with Mr bersco and we would all be happy off not having to listen there verbal ******** that comes from them there even worst than listening to brain dead zombie remainers who still have not stopped throwing out there dummies like the big babies they are we the BREXITERS would of exsepted the result but there still carrying on like a little child in a toy shop who throw a tantrum when they can't get there own way so they should lean to grow up like us the BREXITERS who are grown ups and watching these adult little babies still throwing there dummies grow up will you ???????????????????

[Chester40]

1 minute ago, GboroRam said:

Just seen this work of literary art on Facebook 

an less it's Anna soubry she just a horrible walking brain dead zombie remainer it about time some one put her back in her brain dead box permanently along with Mr bersco and we would all be happy off not having to listen there verbal ******** that comes from them there even worst than listening to brain dead zombie remainers who still have not stopped throwing out there dummies like the big babies they are we the BREXITERS would of exsepted the result but there still carrying on like a little child in a toy shop who throw a tantrum when they can't get there own way so they should lean to grow up like us the BREXITERS who are grown ups and watching these adult little babies still throwing there dummies grow up will you ???????????????????

Boris Johnson really should have better grammar than that.  He makes some good points though.