The Politics Thread 2019

[Stive Pesley]

4 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said:

As somebody once said 'The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.'

And as I always counter - the problem with capitalism is that eventually all the money ends up in a handful of billionaires offshore tax havens

[GboroRam]

6 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

I think she has been hung for the real stuff. Benghazi alone was enough.

"Despite persistent accusations against President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Susan Rice, ten investigations — six by Republican-controlled congressional committees — did not find that they or any other high-ranking Obama administration officials had acted improperly."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Benghazi_attack

[Norman]

4 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

And as I always counter - the problem with capitalism is that eventually all the money ends up in a handful of billionaires offshore tax havens

What are these nex tax rules? How are they going to be implemented and what knock on effect will that have on investment? 

Amazon do nothing wrong under current laws. So what is this easy solution? 

[Ramshankered]

33 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

You obviously didn't read the rest of the article then

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50427369

Kind of feels like you make your mind up based on the fact "labour promised it - must be bad"

It does seem a very British way - what's that? It will improve the lives of millions? No no -far too expensive...

I think they are to be applauded for their ambition TBQHWY

The Conservative party: "We can thrive!" "We'll going to invest LIKE NEVER BEFORE to make Britain BETTER"

Also the Conservative party when Labour come out with something genuinely ambitious: "NOT THRIVE LIKE THAT" "WOAH THERE NELLY - WE CAN'T AFFORD THIS!"

NOTE: Aware they literally didn't use those words. I'm paraphrasing. 

[Norman]

5 minutes ago, Ramshankered said:

The Conservative party: "We can thrive!" "We'll going to invest LIKE NEVER BEFORE to make Britain BETTER"

Also the Conservative party when Labour come out with something genuinely ambitious: "NOT THRIVE LIKE THAT" "WOAH THERE NELLY - WE CAN'T AFFORD THIS!"

NOTE: Aware they literally didn't use those words. I'm paraphrasing. 

Think it's more:

Conservative: let's go down the pub for a meal and a few pints, love. 

Labour: still out at 2am spending in the local strip club tapping the Bank card on the machine with little care. 

Greens: walk down to the pub, no vegan option, walk home in the rain caused by global warming. 

Lib Dems: wait until 5pm before cancelling the whole thing. 

[Uptherams]

1 hour ago, Van Wolfie said:

I think HS2 is a massive vanity project and that it should be scrapped. Spending a fraction of the cost on better regional connections between cities and cross-country would IMO be a far better investment than just trying to get everyone to London a bit quicker.

I'd invest the rest in long term low carbon energy (tidal/nuclear) instead of importing EU and Russian gas & getting the French & Chinese to build our power stations.

How come BT has never appeared on the Labour list of potential nationalisation targets until last night?. It just feels like an ill thought out and somewhat desperate bribe.

I'd invest it in ports across the UK and Tesla supercharger infrastructure all around the UK. Business grants for more cycle schemes and adoption of decentralised power supply and battery storage. 

[GboroRam]

[bigbadbob]

7 hours ago, GboroRam said:

I don't want Clinton anywhere near the UK.  Agree

Tusk passing judgement on Brexit - well he would, wouldn't he? That's sort of his job. No it's not

 

[Curtains]

26 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I think you will find waiting lists could be directly proportional to population increases. 
 

4.The UK’s population continues to grow, but at a slower rate than previously 

The UK population has grown year-on-year since 1982 as seen in Figure 1. The 2018 mid-year population estimates release showed that the population of the UK reached 66.4 million, up from 66.0 million in mid-2017. This population growth marks an increase of 0.6%, or an addition of 395,000 people, between mid-2017 and mid-2018 – the same rate of population growth as in the previous year. Growth in the years to mid-2017 and mid-2018 were slower than in any year since mid-2004. 

Despite the recent slowdown in population growth rates, the UK population is set to increase further still. The 2016-based national population projections showed that the projected population surpasses 70.1 million by mid-2029 and reaches 72.9 million by mid-2041 – increases of 5.5% and 9.7%, respectively, from mid-2018.

[Rev]

1 hour ago, Curtains said:

I think you will find waiting lists could be directly proportional to population increases. 
 

4.The UK’s population continues to grow, but at a slower rate than previously 

The UK population has grown year-on-year since 1982 as seen in Figure 1. The 2018 mid-year population estimates release showed that the population of the UK reached 66.4 million, up from 66.0 million in mid-2017. This population growth marks an increase of 0.6%, or an addition of 395,000 people, between mid-2017 and mid-2018 – the same rate of population growth as in the previous year. Growth in the years to mid-2017 and mid-2018 were slower than in any year since mid-2004. 

Despite the recent slowdown in population growth rates, the UK population is set to increase further still. The 2016-based national population projections showed that the projected population surpasses 70.1 million by mid-2029 and reaches 72.9 million by mid-2041 – increases of 5.5% and 9.7%, respectively, from mid-2018.

Depends where the population growth comes from, doesn't it?

If it comes from an increased birthrate amongst the native population, and increased longevity of the same group, then funding will inevitably be stretched, but the government will have these predictions well in advance and can plan accordingly.

If it comes from immigration, then the vast majority of population increase should be fit and well, provide no burden on our healthcare system and in fact prove positive to our financial position.

[Norman]

18 minutes ago, reverendo de duivel said:

Depends where the population growth comes from, doesn't it?

If it comes from an increased birthrate amongst the native population, and increased longevity of the same group, then funding will inevitably be stretched, but the government will have these predictions well in advance and can plan accordingly.

If it comes from immigration, then the vast majority of population increase should be fit and well, provide no burden on our healthcare system and in fact prove positive to our financial position.

The birth rate is 1.8 per woman, from us natives, no? 

Paying a few thousand each in tax doesn't cover the infrastructure necessary for such sharp increases in population, surely? 

From prisons, to hospitals, to schools, to GPs, to housing, to roads, to the rail network? 

[Curtains]

11 minutes ago, reverendo de duivel said:

Depends where the population growth comes from, doesn't it?

If it comes from an increased birthrate amongst the native population, and increased longevity of the same group, then funding will inevitably be stretched, but the government will have these predictions well in advance and can plan accordingly.

If it comes from immigration, then the vast majority of population increase should be fit and well, provide no burden on our healthcare system and in fact prove positive to our financial position.

Does that mean an infinite pot of money is needed .

How can you judge how well people will be as regards clean living and eating well etc .

How many flu epidemics can you predict etc etc .

Its all relative and the NHS will always be under pressure 

[maxjam]

35 minutes ago, reverendo de duivel said:

Depends where the population growth comes from, doesn't it?

If it comes from an increased birthrate amongst the native population, and increased longevity of the same group, then funding will inevitably be stretched, but the government will have these predictions well in advance and can plan accordingly.

If it comes from immigration, then the vast majority of population increase should be fit and well, provide no burden on our healthcare system and in fact prove positive to our financial position.

Birthrate is 1.8 for English nationals.  2.1 is needed to remain stable, therefore our population should be shrinking.

The elderly have increased from about 15% of society to about 20% of society in the past 40 years.

NHS spending rapidly started to increase under Tony Blair's open borders government.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/tony-blair-admits-did-not-realise-many-migrants-would-come-uk/

Around 300,000 people moved to the UK just last year that have never paid into the system.  Doctors waiting rooms are more crowded, hospital waiting lists are longer.  We throw more and more money at the NHS every year but it simply can't cope with the volume of people wanting to use it. 

Corbyn wants to throw vast sums at the NHS to keep it free for everyone.  He also wants to keep our open borders.  I say pick one. 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/14/corbyn-says-labour-will-not-put-an-arbitrary-target-on-immigration

 

[uttoxram75]

Theres no doubt the cost of healthcare will continue to rise. The debate is whether its better under public control where any surplus can be reinvested or whether private companies take huge profits out of that pot that go at best to shareholders, at worst to offshore tax havens.

[Rev]

13 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Birthrate is 1.8 for English nationals.  2.1 is needed to remain stable, therefore our population should be shrinking.

The elderly have increased from about 15% of society to about 20% of society in the past 40 years.

NHS spending rapidly started to increase under Tony Blair's open borders government.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/tony-blair-admits-did-not-realise-many-migrants-would-come-uk/

Around 300,000 people moved to the UK just last year that have never paid into the system.  Doctors waiting rooms are more crowded, hospital waiting lists are longer.  We throw more and more money at the NHS every year but it simply can't cope with the volume of people wanting to use it. 

Corbyn wants to throw vast sums at the NHS to keep it free for everyone.  He also wants to keep our open borders.  I say pick one. 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/14/corbyn-says-labour-will-not-put-an-arbitrary-target-on-immigration

 

I'll be honest, I only replied to @Curtains in the vain hope he'd post up a Celine Dion video in reply.

Your information is very informative though so thanks!

Out of interest, what figure have the Conservatives pledged to keep migration down to?

 

[Norman]

1 minute ago, reverendo de duivel said:

I'll be honest, I only replied to @Curtains in the vain hope he'd post up a Celine Dion video in reply.

Your information is very informative though so thanks!

Out of interest, what figure have the Conservatives pledged to keep migration down to?

 

Boris wouldn't play 'the numbers game' when asked today. 

[Rev]

1 minute ago, Norman said:

Boris wouldn't play 'the numbers game' when asked today. 

Fools errand really, as it has been for years. 

[Norman]

8 minutes ago, uttoxram75 said:

Theres no doubt the cost of healthcare will continue to rise. The debate is whether its better under public control where any surplus can be reinvested or whether private companies take huge profits out of that pot that go at best to shareholders, at worst to offshore tax havens.

It's not really the debate though, is it? 

Because nobody had said they are going to privatise the NHS. 

The debate is why it is being run into the ground. Is it because of funding? Because @maxjam 's post seems to suggest it might be population that is the problem. Or a very sharp rise in a short period of time that infrastructure will struggle to keep up with. 

I think the debate is really about immigration. 

[Rev]

1 minute ago, Norman said:

It's not really the debate though, is it? 

Because nobody had said they are going to privatise the NHS. 

The debate is why it is being run into the ground. Is it because of funding? Because @maxjam 's post seems to suggest it might be population that is the problem. Or a very sharp rise in a short period of time that infrastructure will struggle to keep up with. 

I think the debate is really about immigration. 

I think the debate should be about the failure to plan and prepare for immigration, rather than the immigration itself.

[maxjam]

7 minutes ago, reverendo de duivel said:

Out of interest, what figure have the Conservatives pledged to keep migration down to?

Haven't the foggiest tbh, apart from headlines I'm trying to avoid as much as I can until the Election gets nearer.  Everything is so depressing lol.

Found this on the BBC though;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50427894