Anag Ram Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 14 minutes ago, GboroRam said: Don't confuse Darling, Blair and Brown with the current Labour leadership. I don't know. I think they would fit in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GboroRam Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 Just now, Paul71 said: Although while I am not about to go searching I am willing to bet the name Margaret Thatcher has been mentioned more than once during recent activity on here. I don't think so, to be honest. But then again, Boris, May, Cameron and Major all were spectacularly awful in their own way, we don't need to go back that far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 3 minutes ago, Paul71 said: You are right, that historical leaders and ideals should not impact how a party or current leadership is viewed today. Although while I am not about to go searching I am willing to bet the name Margaret Thatcher has been mentioned more than once during recent activity on here. Yes but that was because of the illegal wars she started rather than fiscal policy I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GboroRam Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said: Yes, to pay to import all of the food, fuel and medicines that run dry after Brexit... And I would mock your short sightedness in 10 years, pointing out the value has gone up loads. Possession of shiny metal is admirable but I'd rather sell it than cut support for the poorest in society. Depends if people dying is a price worth paying for increasing your return on gold investments. I'm not saying that Brown did a good job with the economy, but I can see why you might cash in during the tough times. Easy in retrospect to call it as a mistake. I'm not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 5 minutes ago, GboroRam said: And I would mock your short sightedness in 10 years, pointing out the value has gone up loads. Possession of shiny metal is admirable but I'd rather sell it than cut support for the poorest in society. Depends if people dying is a price worth paying for increasing your return on gold investments. I'm not saying that Brown did a good job with the economy, but I can see why you might cash in during the tough times. Easy in retrospect to call it as a mistake. I'm not sure. Yeah fair comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRamFan Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 On Thatcher: https://dissidentvoice.org/2013/04/margaret-thatchers-criminal-legacy/ She was so paranoid, she feared leaving the country, because people wanted to arrest her and charge her with a litany of crimes. Now she is dead, it can be brushed under the political carpet. She was a monster and destroyed many lives, including British Soldiers, for her own political gain. How quickly people forget the damage she has done, both home and abroad. Shoot to kill, where in any part of the real world is that right? The British Army could randomly shoot someone for absolutely no reason and suffer no consequence. PS not ignoring or not responding, been all over Europe recruiting electrical engineers, because can't find British ones to get the jobs done. Back out there on Monday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramesses Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 13 hours ago, Paul71 said: I think so but its a difficult question because we all are affected differently I asked a question on here a few days ago to a labour Voter what would labour had done different in 2010 had they won the election. The pot was dry we know that. What was the answer? I am not a clever enough person to say. Would labour have introduced austerity, what was the alternative, if there was what proof is there it would work? I applaud Gordon Brown, his actions prevented a much worse scenario, but it was short term, what was the ideal long term solution. I couldn’t even remember what the proposed Labour alternatives were (it was nine years ago) or if there was any ‘proof’ that the Labour proposal, or some alternative to austerity, might have worked. However, it’s an interesting question and I thought I would see what I could dig up... It looks like the Labour alternative to the Cameron/Osborne austerity proposals in 2010 were a mixture of targeted tax rises, cuts to low priority spending, and an emphasis on trying to support future growth in the economy by maintaining public investment given that borrowing rates were very low and given the serious reductions in private investment and consumer spending following the banking crisis. That was the easy bit. The hard part was finding ‘proof’ that this alternative would work. However, if you search for what economists have been saying about the economic data there’s a relatively common conclusion that austerity has not really ‘worked’ in the way that was expected (with increased confidence about public finances leading to increased private investment leading to more prosperity and so on). At this point even the conservative party seem to be distancing themselves from their association with austerity given it is no longer such a vote winner. I did come across some formal academic papers comparing the economic performance of countries that took the austerity route with those who took an alternative (non-austerity) route and their conclusion was that the alternative route was the better option. I think that if you are genuinely interested about finding the best answer to your specific ‘proof’ question then it probably lies in there somewhere - but I’ll leave that to you as I’m not an economist, some of those papers are very complicated, and I couldn’t find a decent summary. What did seem clear, and was mentioned by quite a few articles in the area, was that the difficult 'double dip' recession under Cameron/Osborne and the subsequent negative impact on economic recovery was caused both by their austerity cuts and by ‘fears of their austerity proposals’ which impacted on private investment and consumer spending. That seems to be one of the main problems with austerity – if governments are focused on austerity and don’t take the lead in spending then consumers, businesses and private investors remain nervous, lack confidence, and don’t invest. In fact that’s the main conclusion I’ve taken away from reading all this stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cstand Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 58 minutes ago, McRamFan said: On Thatcher: https://dissidentvoice.org/2013/04/margaret-thatchers-criminal-legacy/ She was so paranoid, she feared leaving the country, because people wanted to arrest her and charge her with a litany of crimes. Now she is dead, it can be brushed under the political carpet. She was a monster and destroyed many lives, including British Soldiers, for her own political gain. How quickly people forget the damage she has done, both home and abroad. Shoot to kill, where in any part of the real world is that right? The British Army could randomly shoot someone for absolutely no reason and suffer no consequence. PS not ignoring or not responding, been all over Europe recruiting electrical engineers, because can't find British ones to get the jobs done. Back out there on Monday. Why do left wing people think it is right that terrorists can randomly shoot, bomb innocent civilians, police and Armed Forces then care more about the terrorists than the victims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 2 hours ago, GboroRam said: I don't think so, to be honest. But then again, Boris, May, Cameron and Major all were spectacularly awful in their own way, we don't need to go back that far. I am not sure I agree Major was spectacularly awful. Certainly left the economy in a healthy state for the new labour government and also laid the foundations for the good friday agreement which in itself was an achievement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteHorseRam Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 9 minutes ago, cstand said: Why do left wing people think it is right that terrorists can randomly shoot, bomb innocent civilians, police and Armed Forces then care more about the terrorists than the victims. You have a two part statement there ….. Part one - 'Why do left wing people think it is right that terrorists can randomly shoot, bomb innocent civilians, police and Armed Forces' - in the main they don't, maybe some rolly-eyed Corbynistas/Trots do, but none of the 'left wing people' I encounter ever have. Part two - 'then care more about the terrorists than the victims' - They don't. I think you can mistake some people's search for the truth and a wish for our forces to be adhering to a code/ROE for a bias against the army/police. We have to impose some rules on ourselves if we want to be seen as the 'good guys', and follow up if the rules get broken. But those rules have to be policed and judgements made by individuals who know the reality of battle. and people who are agenda free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 Don’t worry everybody know one outside Derbyshire reads this forum and Derbyshire always mostly stays the same in all seats. Corbyn and Sturgeon Alliance that’s going to really work. Defecit increased and no chance of leaving the EU UP THE RAMS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GboroRam Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 31 minutes ago, cstand said: Why do left wing people think it is right that terrorists can randomly shoot, bomb innocent civilians, police and Armed Forces then care more about the terrorists than the victims. I think maybe left wing people probably accept our role in causing the terrorism in the first place, and can empathise without supporting the cause of the terrorist. And of course we recognise that terrorist is a label. Anyone here remember the young Conservative view of Nelson Mandela? Thats right, he's a terrorist. Their slogan was "hang Nelson Mandela". The line between terrorist and hero is down to popular support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cstand Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 8 minutes ago, WhiteHorseRam said: You have a two part statement there ….. Part one - 'Why do left wing people think it is right that terrorists can randomly shoot, bomb innocent civilians, police and Armed Forces' - in the main they don't, maybe some rolly-eyed Corbynistas/Trots do, but none of the 'left wing people' I encounter ever have. Part two - 'then care more about the terrorists than the victims' - They don't. I think you can mistake some people's search for the truth and a wish for our forces to be adhering to a code/ROE for a bias against the army/police. We have to impose some rules on ourselves if we want to be seen as the 'good guys', and follow up if the rules get broken. But those rules have to be policed and judgements made by individuals who know the reality of battle. and people who are agenda free. True it's more the extreme left wing people but Labour is more extreme left wing now unfortunately. Yes Armed Forces should have rules of engagement but within that criteria they should have the right to shoot to kill if the situation arises and then report the incident as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 45 minutes ago, cstand said: Why do left wing people think it is right that terrorists can randomly shoot, bomb innocent civilians, police and Armed Forces then care more about the terrorists than the victims. I don't think they do. Not in general. It is very easy to draw a conclusion that Corbyn was/is a terrorist sympathiser, only he knows really if he was/is his reasons for his connections with sinn fein and IRA members can be explained away as working towards a peaceful resolution. Diane Abbott on the other hand was vocal in her support for terrorists, i know she claims that is a life time ago and it was but i am not sure that excuses it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRamFan Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 44 minutes ago, cstand said: Why do left wing people think it is right that terrorists can randomly shoot, bomb innocent civilians, police and Armed Forces then care more about the terrorists than the victims. There where terrorists on both sides. Thatcher turned a blind eye to the Unionist death squads. A lot of innocent people got killed, on both sides of the divide, that bitch made it worse for both sides. I am not left wing, yet again another poster who just assumes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Ram for All Seasons Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 1 hour ago, cstand said: Why do left wing people think it is right that terrorists can randomly shoot, bomb innocent civilians, police and Armed Forces then care more about the terrorists than the victims. They don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 26 minutes ago, Paul71 said: Diane Abbott on the other hand was vocal in her support for terrorists, i know she claims that is a life time ago and it was but i am not sure that excuses it. Despite aplogising numerous time you can get get hounded out of presenting the oscars for a 10 year old tweet. Meanwhile this could be our future Home Secretary but because she's changed her hairstyle now so its all water under the bridge... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/28/diane-abbott-under-fire--afro-remark-questioned-about-ira Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcfan1 Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 The increasing of corporation tax by 7 percent is so so stupid... many small businesses are gonna be ducked by this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bwash_Ram Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 Trump reduced corporation tax and income tax and their economy is booming, record number of jobs with wages rising. Lowest unemployment levels among minorities in American history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcfan1 Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 Removing the dividend too frombusiness..? Wtf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.