UK Politics

[Honey Honey]

The boisterous millenials are in the audience again. Wooping as Corbyn comes out.  

[The Artful Dodger]

There are literally toothless simpletons going 'bomb them' on this.

[Honey Honey]

That was pretty badly handled by Corbyn. Very pompous and not leader like.

[The Artful Dodger]

It's quite sad seeing the literal cretins asking the 'R U IRA' questions, these people are mentally feeble.

[Honey Honey]

His IRA history poses questions about his moral compass, we know it had nothing to do with peace. As James O'Brien said, Corbyn was back in the day a wrong-un and gives off the impression that he doesn't feel disgusted by what they were doing.

 

[The Artful Dodger]

Bollocks. He was completely right, he shouldn't be ashamed of supporting a united Ireland and condemning the murdering British occupation as much as IRA terrorism. If the scorn of James O'Brien is the result then so be it.

[Honey Honey]

I think you've missed his point and focused on just one of his early sentences which has annoyed you (about not being public in the 80s).

Many people are fine with or couldn't give a shit about whether there is a united Ireland or not. What does bother people are those who don't use the normal social control mechanism of disgust and stigmitisation in their actions towards murdering terrorists. 

You might think that Corbyn's answer every time he is questioned where he mentions other terrorism and acts is right, but it comes across insincere, as deflecting from that stigmatisation because of the way he frames his language, the sentence choices are abysmal and ensure that he never has to stigmatize the one group hes being asked to, something that anyone who isn't a wrongun could do with ease. That is why this still exists, that is why it keeps coming up. People don't believe him. James O'Brien doesn't believe him. Good smart people dont believe him, it's breaking down trust, it's costing his image and it's not just some daily mail cretin thinking. 

This could and should have been buried when he first became Labour leader. 

In those with pro-IRA inclinations such as Corbyn, his words sound fair and right. In the minds of people who are against the IRA and against the acts of the British government those words coming from someone being questioned for being pro-IRA come across as dodging the issue and reaffirm their thinking that he was on the side of a stigmatized immoral group.

It's an election faux pas that either Corbyn is committing out of stubbornness or because he's surrounded himself by like minded ignorance.

[Fairy In Boots]

On 6/1/2017 at 8:07 PM, RandoEFC said:

Paragraph 1: Fair argument, but it's an age old one. Labour argue that public spending leads to spenders having more money which bolsters the economy which yields more tax which helps you pay off the government debt. It works in theory, whether or not it works in practice remains to be seen.

Paragraph 2: Neither here nor there. Likewise, I expect a lot of furious teachers, nurses etc. across the country if May gets back in.

Paragraph 3: If the Brexit deal is shite, which it probably will be realistically regardless of Corbyn or May, trading from the UK will not be beneficial. Any large company which sells a lot of products to EU member countries will get hit massively by any deal which doesn't see us strike a beneficial deal on trade tariffs. May might try to keep them around by cutting corporation tax again which the Tories will pay for by strangling the public sector even more.

Paragraph 4: Not from Liverpool but have spent some time working there. I currently work near Preston. According to this page, the UK foreign-born population has risen from 7% to 13.5% since 1993. So across the country, on average, you're looking at a couple of extra kids per class due to immigration. Visit the website School Cuts, for a projection of the impact of Tory cuts as an equivalent of how many teachers each school will lose and tell me that will have a smaller impact on class sizes than immigration.

Something I'm genuinely interested in is this - if you wouldn't bring skilled people in as immigrants and you wouldn't invest in education to ensure we produce skilled workers in the UK, who is going to keep the country afloat in 20, 30, 40 years' time?

Ok Paragraph 1: Key word is public spending. I just don't see what you're not getting with this and the defecit. When you spend on the public sector, it's an expenditure that you won't recoup. You need a strong robust private sector to provide a surplus of fund via taxation to power an economy.

Let's say the average public sector wage is £30k, the government have to pay this individual, and what they get back from it is roughly 25% of £20k through taxation and then 20% of the money that person spends on various goods within the UK. How is this a good economic plan? i explained it down the pub to some bloke yesterday like this

"say I have £100 in my pocket and i'm going to give you £10 a week every week from now on but to fund it i'm going to tax you £5. meaning i'm running at a deficit of £5 a week so after 20 weeks I have £0 and I can't make you're £10  payment next week. But i don't want to stop your money because you've become accustomed to it and i want you on my side. So I borrow money so I can keep up our arrangement and keep you sweet, the problem is the money i've borrowed I have to now pay back and I have to pay interest on. So the £100 i've borrowed runs out faster because i'm paying you your £5 and the bank that i've borrowed from my repayments, so when i run out after say 11-12 weeks I borrow more again and my repayments go up as does my debt so I run out sooner. This keeps going on and on so i'm borrowing to repay my repayments until eventually I get to a point where i'm totally fucked."

This n a nutshell is  the economic policy of the Labour party.

Now i've massively simplified here and there's a certain bump you get with public servants spending in the private sector, but as it shows above it can only work if's a supplement to a robust healthy private sector. The Tories have adopted a tactic of borrowing to sustain tax cuts in the hope this will provide stimulus to grow the private sector. There's always a risk with this that private corporations will take the piss and greed will see them wriggle out of as much tax as they can, they're essentially gambling that it will grow and income will overtake expenditure and they can service the debt. Repaying this debt is hampering us because if we didn't have to pay it there would be more to allocate to public policies. The Tories I agree need to do more here, they need to stop the abuse, but  it's catch 22 going after the bankers because we're so financially dependent on that sector that we risk biting the hand that feeds (depressing I agree, i'm no lover of profiteering,it's very different from profit). The policy of just cutting tax is working in areas but not massively and needs tweaking, HS2 going in the bin and allocating this money to lending to small businesses would be far better.

We seem to be caught in a cycle of mas spending then mass cost cutting to redress the mess, then mass spending and so on

Paragraph 2: Jez taxing £80k but not £70k because he earns £73k says it all to me, no different from any socialist leader ever on that regard. "We're all in this together" and "all animals are equal, although some are more equal than others" springs to mind. I'm reminded of Abbot sending her Kids to private school and I can't help but laugh at your "neither here nor there" comment.

Paragraph 3: The EU has took a huge hit with Brexit, we're the second largest contributor and standards will drop because like the Public sector analogy above more require funds than put in. We won't give 100 billion unless whoever in charges has a complete fucking meltdown and they'll never get elected again if they do. Anyway we buy more than we export with the EU so although some companies will find things difficult if they rely on EU access it will hurt Germany, France, Italy and Spain more if they lose our consumer base.  It will be choppy as we readjust for 5-10 years but we're to wealthy a consumer base for the rest of the world not to ignore. We'll be fine, my company a Japanese firm has already invested more saying we need to be more independent from the European central hub we use, our market share is to important to worry about the EU's posturing. We'll be fine long term, it's the smaller individual states of Europe i worry for as they're swallowed up to be part of the EU superstate which shows no sign of being democratic in the slightest.

Paragraph 4: Yep i agree we need funding if the size is increasing, I'm not adverse to funding if it's a decent return of investment. We're not though as we attempt to make savings which makes it all the more idiotic to keep accepting low unskilled immigration. I'm not anti immigration, if it's clearly regulated and those accepted have skills we need then welcome. I'm also with you i'd rather train my own, apprenticeships would be another incentive i'd fund instead of HS2 as well. On immigration, how many second and third generation migrant kids are struggling to compete with low unskilled migrants coming in to? I'm ostracized somewhat for my very dim view of Islam on this forum, how many of those Muslim kids in cities like Brum or that estate next to Deepdale are working? Statistically not many are, coupled with the ideology not having many prospects must be a great tool for the radical recruiters.

9 hours ago, True Bender said:

Not sure if 4chan.org/pol/ post or British tabloid journalism.

I've noticed you and Gonzo are playing pat each others bum with your +1's awe the embers of a budding romance.

21 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said:

His IRA history poses questions about his moral compass, we know it had nothing to do with peace. As James O'Brien said, Corbyn was back in the day a wrong-un and gives off the impression that he doesn't feel disgusted by what they were doing.

 

He does my head in normally but he's on the money there, what's a back bencher with no clout doing going back & forth for meetings?

It's almost like the time he took cash from Palestinians to go visit Assad, oh wait he did. Our friends from "hamas" 

15 minutes ago, The Artful Dodger said:

Bollocks. He was completely right, he shouldn't be ashamed of supporting a united Ireland and condemning the murdering British occupation as much as IRA terrorism. If the scorn of James O'Brien is the result then so be it.

Lennon is the correct avatar for you, he was a bitter lefty cunt. I'm half Irish my old man grew up in the streets of Donnybrook Dublin, I fully support a united Ireland but that's a democratic decision for the people of Ireland to make not with nail bombs in British pubs & shopping centers. A powder keg of sectarian violence and tension with gangs of nothing more than criminals masquerading as patriots with paramilitary style organisation and policing that as an occupying force is a massively different set of circumstances. Granted incidents happened and thats always regrettable but it's not on par. You're typically self loathing of Britishness though, which begs the question why don't you fuck off if it's so bad?

[6666]

The state of right wingers crying because Corbyn doesn't want to use nuclear weapons. LMAO. Rupert Murdoch has really done a number on these clowns.

[Harry]

The Economist has endorsed the Lib Dems.

https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21722855-leaders-both-main-parties-have-turned-away-decades-old-vision-open-liberal?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/thebritishelectionthemiddlehasfallenoutofbritishpolitics

[Panflute]

On 6/1/2017 at 9:01 PM, Fairy In Boots said:

Love how I'm labelled xenophobe in this discussion by those supporting a man from a party with a well documented anti Semitic problem which he bribed the investigator to gloss over. 

 

This is why conservatism is so fucking lame. It's a big contest of who kisses the most Jewish ass in public.

[Inverted]

I hardly think he'll care about that headline.

First, I don't think there are more than a few hundred thousand Jews in the UK. Second, far as I know they've always been a pretty strong Tory vote. They can say it's because of Labour anti-semitism all they like, but tbh I'd think it's more to do with Jews being more likely to fall into the economic classes that normally vote Tory, being more likely to be self-employed or own a business, and the Tories being more likely to pander to religion. Third, I think most of the UK's Jewish population is in London, where Labour are pretty far ahead of the Tories anyway. 

[Honey Honey]

They're not ahead in the two London constituencies with a high Jewish population, a remain vote and a current Tory MP with majority of about 3-4k. These are places Labour need to be targeting to turn over to remove the Tory majority.

 

Apparently Corbyn has not been going to marginal seats around the country because the local Labour party in these places don't want him anywhere near their campaign 

[Fairy In Boots]

2 hours ago, Panflute said:

This is why conservatism is so fucking lame. It's a big contest of who kisses the most Jewish ass in public.

I think there's a difference between pandering and outright anti Semitic behaviour to be fair. All parties pander to specific communities for votes. I'm against this across the whole political spectrum, I don't like the Tories creeping up Saudi arse either. 

There's definitely a problem within Labour and Corbyn's rabid followers, often when Jewish journalists have asked him questions the comment sections are littered with Corbyn supporters spouting hate. 

In other news I saw this earlier. 

A quick check on ONS pretty much confirms it. 

[God is Haaland]

What is an international financial crisis?

What is latency?

[Fairy In Boots]

36 minutes ago, True Bender said:

What is an international financial crisis?

What is latency?

Yes they were still running at a deficit during the boom years, pretty stupid in a Keynesian economic system. Plus any government worth it's salt would have taken a good look at why the banks were booming and why the housing market was booming and planned accordingly. Labour didn't they just kept thinking "ah more money for the NHS" which suggests they got lucky with the boom rather than it was by design. To be fair to Labour they weren't the only government asleep at the wheel.

[Honey Honey]

11 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Yes they were still running at a deficit during the boom years, pretty stupid in a Keynesian economic system. Plus any government worth it's salt would have taken a good look at why the banks were booming and why the housing market was booming and planned accordingly. Labour didn't they just kept thinking "ah more money for the NHS" which suggests they got lucky with the boom rather than it was by design. To be fair to Labour they weren't the only government asleep at the wheel.

If you haven't got speculative assets and vote for the modern Tory party you might as well just go out back and shoot yourself in the face.

Conservatives were once proud fiscally disciplined savers and champions of the sole trader. Thatcher turned them into undisciplined gambling addicts, property speculators and stocks and shares investors. It has created a beast that pressures the Tory party into propping up their diminishing returns via government and Bank of England policy. 

There's no move that saves everyone. You can't complain when Labour emerge with Corbyn like policies because it is a direct response from those whose well-being was treat as collateral damage to save Thatcher's gambling losers.

[Panflute]

2 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

I think there's a difference between pandering and outright anti Semitic behaviour to be fair. All parties pander to specific communities for votes. I'm against this across the whole political spectrum, I don't like the Tories creeping up Saudi arse either. 

There's definitely a problem within Labour and Corbyn's rabid followers, often when Jewish journalists have asked him questions the comment sections are littered with Corbyn supporters spouting hate. 

lol who cares

[Fairy In Boots]

58 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said:

If you haven't got speculative assets and vote for the modern Tory party you might as well just go out back and shoot yourself in the face.

Conservatives were once proud fiscally disciplined savers and champions of the sole trader. Thatcher turned them into undisciplined gambling addicts, property speculators and stocks and shares investors. It has created a beast that pressures the Tory party into propping up their diminishing returns via government and Bank of England policy. 

There's no move that saves everyone. You can't complain when Labour emerge with Corbyn like policies because it is a direct response from those whose well-being was treat as collateral damage to save Thatcher's gambling losers.

 You're sounding very Peter Hitchens all of a sudden. I agree though, I'd abandon the Tories for a more traditional sound fiscal policy party of their old ilk pretty quickly. 

[Storts+]

I like to read this thread, but that's about it - last thing I want to do is debate politics 

I can't wait for Thursday to be over. 7 day weeks for the past 6 weeks, final push now, personally still not confident that upturn in national polling is translating to the ground in marginals. 

[Honey Honey]

54 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

 You're sounding very Peter Hitchens all of a sudden. I agree though, I'd abandon the Tories for a more traditional sound fiscal policy party of their old ilk pretty quickly. 

Too late now, trapped. 7 years of Zero Interest Rate Policy. The Japanese have had 22 years and still counting. It's a trap that needs radical reform.

You can't be a saver anymore or you will lose money. That is insane.

[Fairy In Boots]

1 hour ago, Storts said:

I like to read this thread, but that's about it - last thing I want to do is debate politics 

I can't wait for Thursday to be over. 7 day weeks for the past 6 weeks, final push now, personally still not confident that upturn in national polling is translating to the ground in marginals. 

O you think they'll knife him when he loses? 

[Storts+]

15 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

O you think they'll knife him when he loses? 

Depends on the overall outcome seat wise I think 

[Fairy In Boots]

1 hour ago, Storts said:

Depends on the overall outcome seat wise I think 

I think they've rallied round as it's election time, 6 months down the line you'll still have the same dissenting groups. Rumours are he's a organisational nightmare and thats why he goes through staff, his loyalty to ex conquest Abbott is staggering 

[Fairy In Boots]

2 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

Too late now, trapped. 7 years of Zero Interest Rate Policy. The Japanese have had 22 years and still counting. It's a trap that needs radical reform.

You can't be a saver anymore or you will lose money. That is insane.

Yeah you're right, it needs investment in a few sectors, we need to diversify our economy to sort it out.