Super David Cameron's Key Note Speech Today

[Southover Street Seagull]

What an UTTER binfest. Cracking reading.

Vote GREEN

If we had PR in the UK I probably would in the next General Election.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Nope, try again.

postman

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

postman

Right firm but wrong job!

 

[otk]

Tories believe in the re-distribution of wealth

Unfortunately, in an upward direction

 

[NMH]

Not as such I think they are keeping their cards to their chests at the moment.

Except when he said "thank God for Margaret Thatcher".

That's enough for me, and I wouldn't care if he walked on water for the rest of the speech he'll never get my vote.


"we will need to do some things that will be unpopular, but I am ready"

Yes indeedy, raising the interest level so the wealthy will be able to buy loads of nice cheap foreclosures will be DASHED unpopular, but he IS ready.

Now you know why he criticizes labour but DOESN'T say what he intends to do - because he intends to screw so many people on the lower wage bracket that he'd lose the election hands-down. Why else wouldn't he reveal his "unpopular" intentions?

 

[NMH]

is that an admission that as yet the Tory party have tabled no real policies?

Not as such I think they are keeping their cards to their chests at the moment.

Exactly. They wouldn't get any VOTES from most of the population if they told them how they are going to be screwing them!

 

[larus]

Blimey and I agree with a lot of points in your post!

I still think MT could have subsidised the industries whilst re-training the employees to do other work, rather than encourage the wholesale closure of factories, mines and shipyards, thus stopping the huge unemployment problem of the 80's. In other words rather than spend money on dole handouts in unemployment black spots you could have spent the money on retraining and subsidising industry, making the environment that the people who got laid off a far better place to live in.

I am in a trade union and mine has not opposed digital assistants (bar code readers) being introduced in my industry.

There was probably intransigence on both sides. The problem with left/right politics is that too often views are polarised, and discussions become slanging matches and macho bull-shit.

I do remember one thing clearly from the Leyland days. There was a strike because Leyland had the audacity to sack workers on the night-shift who were caught sleeping. The reporting was that this was an accepted practice, and not a one-off occurance.

As for the shipywards, they were supported to a limited extent with government contracts for Naval vessels, but the commercial contracts were 'all' going to Korea due to the cheap labour. We just couldn't compete.

The miners strike, I must admit that I don't understand the cause of the dispute. I seem to remember it being down to wanting to close uneconomic pits. All I remember is being totally anti Scargill, and what he stood for. IMO, confrontational and not willing to negotaite.

The view which is frequently espoused on here is that left-wingers are cuddly, caring people, and right-wingers are selfish, slimey scum. I am right-wing (by that I mean that I agree with a capitlist economy), as I feel as though by providing individuals with the incentive to succeed, you will create a more dynamic economy. This in turn will generate more wealth and allow more essential services to be provided.

I think that the NHS should be privatised (i.e companies are encouraged to get involved and invest and, gasp, make a profit). However, the delivery is funded by the state and is free at the point of delivery. I think that private should be a top-up to the NHS and not seperate.

I feel as though individuals should be encouraged to see the welfare state for what it was intended to be, a safety net for when you fall on hard-times, and not a way to lead your life.

We have tough choices to make as a society going forward; we are an aging population and this will lead to more financial demands from the older generation on the working population.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

The view which is frequently espoused on here is that left-wingers are cuddly, caring people, and right-wingers are selfish, slimey scum. I am right-wing (

Q.E.D.

 

[clapham_gull]

Hey lets go the whole Hog and rename NSC " The Labour Party Forum ".

But it isn't. Any poll on here will show that the majority of the members are Tory supporters, even the young ones.

What's wrong with Tories these days, they do seem to have an inferiority complex.

 

[larus]

Q.E.D.

Meaning ?

 

[clapham_gull]

Hilary Benn (Holland Park, son of a peer)

Even you know that's very unfair and doesn't tell the full story or why his grandfather(?) was awarded it in the first place.

Naughty boy.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

There was probably intransigence on both sides. The problem with left/right politics is that too often views are polarised, and discussions become slanging matches and macho bull-shit.

I do remember one thing clearly from the Leyland days. There was a strike because Leyland had the audacity to sack workers on the night-shift who were caught sleeping. The reporting was that this was an accepted practice, and not a one-off occurance.

As for the shipywards, they were supported to a limited extent with government contracts for Naval vessels, but the commercial contracts were 'all' going to Korea due to the cheap labour. We just couldn't compete.

The miners strike, I must admit that I don't understand the cause of the dispute. I seem to remember it being down to wanting to close uneconomic pits. All I remember is being totally anti Scargill, and what he stood for. IMO, confrontational and not willing to negotaite.

The view which is frequently espoused on here is that left-wingers are cuddly, caring people, and right-wingers are selfish, slimey scum. I am right-wing (by that I mean that I agree with a capitlist economy), as I feel as though by providing individuals with the incentive to succeed, you will create a more dynamic economy. This in turn will generate more wealth and allow more essential services to be provided.

I think that the NHS should be privatised (i.e companies are encouraged to get involved and invest and, gasp, make a profit). However, the delivery is funded by the state and is free at the point of delivery. I think that private should be a top-up to the NHS and not seperate.

I feel as though individuals should be encouraged to see the welfare state for what it was intended to be, a safety net for when you fall on hard-times, and not a way to lead your life.

We have tough choices to make as a society going forward; we are an aging population and this will lead to more financial demands from the older generation on the working population.

I was told of a story and I don't know if it was true that management at BL whipped up a strike just so that they could slow down production for a week or two as they had manufactured too many cars! As I said not sure if it true.

But with the shipyards surely it would have been better to have subsidised them for 5 to 10 years and in the meantime retrain the workers so that eventually you could have closed down or reduced the yards without massive unemployment.

Surprisingly I was pro Scargill, what he said came true all nearly all the pits were closed. It was confrontational but then you could argue that both he and Thatcher were, remember she sent in the Met Police. Scargill's biggest mistake was not balloting all the NUM members to strike and instead doing regional ballots instead of national ones.
As again with what I said about the shipyards the government should have continued to subsidise the pits until they could retrain the workforce for other industries or worked with the workforce to modernise the pits to keep the pits running.

I am as you probably guessed left wing, but not ultra left, I still think we need capitalism but I feel it needs to kept in place by many socialist ideas. People need to aspire to a bit of wealth but should also have the basic necessities in life and excellent efficient public services too.
I for instance do not agree with any public service being in private control, all public services should be owned by the state and be set rigourous targets to ensure their efficiency. If they make money this would be ploughed back into the particular service in investment projects or could be used to give the public cheaper services.

I totally agree with you about the welfare state, it should be there to help people, but people should not become dependent on it when it is not necessary.

 

[larus]

I was told of a story and I don't know if it was true that management at BL whipped up a strike just so that they could slow down production for a week or two as they had manufactured too many cars! As I said not sure if it true.

But with the shipyards surely it would have been better to have subsidised them for 5 to 10 years and in the meantime retrain the workers so that eventually you could have closed down or reduced the yards without massive unemployment.

Surprisingly I was pro Scargill, what he said came true all nearly all the pits were closed. It was confrontational but then you could argue that both he and Thatcher were, remember she sent in the Met Police. Scargill's biggest mistake was not balloting all the NUM members to strike and instead doing regional ballots instead of national ones.
As again with what I said about the shipyards the government should have continued to subsidise the pits until they could retrain the workforce for other industries or worked with the workforce to modernise the pits to keep the pits running.

I am as you probably guessed left wing, but not ultra left, I still think we need capitalism but I feel it needs to kept in place by many socialist ideas. People need to aspire to a bit of wealth but should also have the basic necessities in life and excellent efficient public services too.
I for instance do not agree with any public service being in private control, all public services should be owned by the state and be set rigourous targets to ensure their efficiency. If they make money this would be ploughed back into the particular service in investment projects or could be used to give the public cheaper services.

I totally agree with you about the welfare state, it should be there to help people, but people should not become dependent on it when it is not necessary.

I can empathise with your views. The frustrating thing is that most people probably are slightly left/right of center. The language used to score points is venemous, when in reality, most people probably want the same things.

I can see why many find the concept of essentail services being in private control, but I feel as though the money spent in these services in often used inefficiently. I want good state education, a good, efficient, modern NHS available for all, irrespective of the ability to pay. I do accept that there will always be better services in the private sector, but that's a fact of life. There will always be rich and poor, it's just a case of ensuring the poor are protected, but the system is robust enough that it shouldn't be abused. (Who am I kidding eh ).

For every success store (BA being an example), there are always others where private enterprise has failed.

Success/ambition is a double edged sword. It drives people/companies to be creative and resourceful, but with others it can cause them to be dishonest. This is not a right/left wing issue, but a human trait.

 

[larus]

As for the issue about the miners and Leyland, I won't disagree as I don't know for certain. Probably the truth is somewhere in-between.

 

[Buzzer]

But it isn't. Any poll on here will show that the majority of the members are Tory supporters, even the young ones.

What's wrong with Tories these days, they do seem to have an inferiority complex.

Not sure about that. I think it's the level of debate by the left (especially on this thread) that's geared towards class. And the fact that the left wingers seem the most vocal. Especially towards the "Tories have no policies and theie policies are shit" line that seems to be quite popular.

Even you know that's very unfair and doesn't tell the full story or why his grandfather(?) was awarded it in the first place.

Naughty boy.

Yep. It's a fair cop. I did stretch things there AND Holland Park is a state school albeit the ponciest, poshest state school in Britain. Neither him nor his father can be described as part of the lumpen proletariat though.

 

[ROSM]

Bearing in mind that the purpose of the speech was not to aim it at those in the hall but to persuade those at home (i.e. me) it didn't really do the trick.

Okay perhaps I'm not a normal cameron sympathiser - I will never forget his part in the ITV digital fiasco that nearly wiped out league football in England. But whether I trust him or not is not really the issue - it needs to be can I trust the party as a whole.

Well on the basis that apart from Osborne and Hague, no other member of the shadow cabinet is either memorable or known, is what concerns me. During the rise of new labour, everybody could name at least 8 of their front bench spokesman - cook, straw, beckett, harman, short, prescott, brown, meacher, field etc. We may not have liked them, but we knew them because they had something to say.

The same for Thatcher's rise in the late 70s. To try and link the current tory party to that is neither accurate or reasonable - most of the first Thatcher cabinet had had previous ministerial experience. Apart from Hague now, that is it.

As for the playing to the Daily mail audience re Health and safety, he was doing a grand job (teachers not able to put plasters on grazed knees etc) until he mentioned the bit about police checks before allowing foreign exchange visits which I think if most people actually sat down and thought about it, is actually not as stupid an idea as he was trying to state. But of course, in Cameron's middle england, they dont really have to see exchange students as they let the maids look after them in the outhouse.

 

[Buzzer]

and still we get the pathetic class war jibes. Tell you what all you class warriors - keep the snidey comments coming if it makes you feel better. Out in the real world it doesn't seem to matter

 

[User removed 4]

We're still the 6th largest manufacturing country in the world.

The Unions f***ed so much of the manufacturing in the country due to the constant strikes on the '70's. That's when the manufacturing was hit.

Also, it's not down to jobs in manufacturing, it's down to output. We need to be efficient by our use of technology, as we can't throw cheap labour at it, as per China, India etc.

But, hey-ho, don't let economic reality affect your prejudice.

Also, Labour's been in power for 10 years, and what have they actively done to encourage manufacturing? Please enlighten me, as I genuinely cannot think of anything.

quality post.

 

[User removed 4]

By destroying the manufacturing base we had in this country and turning us into a serviced based economy. Also setting up the YTS, letting firms take youths on the cheap and then getting rid of them without a guarantee of a job at the end of the two year period.

so they didnt actively set out to destroy apprenticeships as you implied ?

 

[ROSM]

and still we get the pathetic class war jibes. Tell you what all you class warriors - keep the snidey comments coming if it makes you feel better. Out in the real world it doesn't seem to matter

why class war - it was a statement on reality. If i am sending my son abroad, i need to trust that they will be safe and looked after. In the uk that is achieved by a police check. what's wrong with that? But exchange's aren't really your average comprehensive these days are they?