General Election 2017

[nicko31]

Because I believe they are the only party who can run the economy, and is the fairest party for everyone. And without a strong economy, there can be no extra money to fund the things that badly need funding in this country,

Because I think the Labour party is no longer relevant. The only reason IMO why they have gone so far to the left, is because moving more to the right, merges them into the Tories, which is what and how Blair won in 1997.

Because I don't agree with spend spend spend policies of Labour, because in the end the monies got to come from somewhere.

Personally I think the EU is the biggest evil we have ever seen, and now we are coming out, we can generate more wealth and taxes for the country, which in turn pays for the social care, poverty stricken children, and the NHS. I think a few years after Brexit, this country will have a massive surplus, and spending on those things the left want at the moment will be possible, buy until then its batten down the hatches, and see out the storm.

When this happens, I think Labour will be even more irrelevant, but we do need something in opposition to keep the government in check, and at the moment as much as the lefties want to dream, we do not have it.

Sounds likes we're heading for Utopia. I guess the £350m / week for the NHS wasn't actually a lie, no one mentioned timelines

 

[Tubby-McFat-Fuc]

Are you aware that Labour governments borrow less and pay back more of the national debt that conservative governments?

I am aware of a book written that makes this claim, but I also loved this reply to it which I will copy and paste here


"Really interesting analysis, thank you Richard! I am very surprised the figures tell such an unequivocal story – and that Labour hasn’t picked up on this before.

To check the (somewhat disingenuous) argument that your analysis is skewed by the Conservatives having to borrow because of deficits inherited from Labour and Labour free-riding on hard-won Conservative surpluses – could you give a statistic of how often each party has inherited surpluses or deficits, and what they add up to?

It might be difficult to quantify how long the lag between a government’s policies being implemented and their effect being measurable might be. Are the numbers altered if instead of counting each election year towards the party that held government for most of it, you always count it towards the incumbent? What if you count the first year of a new government towards the stats of the previous one? Of course if you consider too long a lag period, the analysis will become meaningless, as policies may take different amounts of time to take effect, but if most of the Conservatives’ borrowing or Labour’s saving occured in their latter years in government, that would really strengthen your case.

I would love to see if there is any support for the idea of the Conservatives having to clear up Labour’s mess when you also consider government changes other than 2010."




To which Richard the author replied. No time, sorry.

SO Maybe you can take up the fight and explain the stats and facts behind your comment.

Does make you wonder why the Labour party have not picked up on this and sung it from the rooftops. Maybe the current Labour leadership is even more incompetent than we give them credit for.

 

[Tubby-McFat-Fuc]

Ah, a clever retort. "He's said something that proves my point entirely wrong, I'd best go with an insult rather than actually address the issue".

You've been learning from Theresa May well.

SO Cherry, see my other reply directed at you above. Ignore the insult, and address the issue then?

 

[beorhthelm]

additional £8bn ayear for NHS... that got to please everyone right? more than was said to be needed (figure of £6bn for such and such by the institute of somewhere i seem to recall). same waffle on housing as Labour though, want to build lots new homes, but dont say how they will enable that (and protect green belt to boot). appear to lift the rule on councils building.

 

[Tubby-McFat-Fuc]

Sounds likes we're heading for Utopia. I guess the £350m / week for the NHS wasn't actually a lie, no one mentioned timelines

Well it depends how you read it. Whether or not we send £350m a week is irrelevant for this point, it didn't say send £350m to the NHS did it? We send the EU £xxx million a week, lets fund our NHS instead. You're saying it said fund the NHS by £xxx a week, the bus sign didn't.

But anyway, my point about leaving the EU has nothing to do with what we pay the EU budget now. As soon as we are out of the EU we will have more control over how we raise and regenerate taxes.

The sooner money stops leaking out of the country, and we can control taxes better, the more we can raise and the more there will be for social care, police, NHS, education etc. Its not going to happen overnight, its going to take a generation, but it will happen.

After all if we all believed the Remains side doom and gloom, the currency would be worthless, the stock market would crash, and a swarm of locust would have eaten us all by now.

As it stands, as a time of high uncertainty, the pound is gaining back a lot of its losses on the dollar and is getting stronger and stronger week by week, and the stock exchange is booming. Something suggests that we may just prosper outside the EU after all.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Christmas has come early for the right wing press. Looks like the Tories have ditched Leverson 2 from the manifesto

https://www.ft.com/content/3ec7f94d-c175-39b7-814a-5e91c4cb05a8

Looking after her friends:

"Given the comprehensive nature of the first stage of the Leveson Inquiry and given the lengthy investigations by the police and Crown Prosecution Service into alleged wrongdoing, we will not proceed with the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press. We will repeal Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2014, which, if enacted, would force media organisations to become members of a flawed regulatory system or risk having to pay the legal costs of both sides in libel and privacy cases, even if they win."

Channel 4's moving too:

" Channel 4 will remain publicly owned and will be relocated out of London."

 

[simmo]

JC is the bloke who always takes the 'other' side, cos it marks him out as being a bit different, or aloof, or maybe intellectual. You know the type, always slag off the Albion cos football should be a working mans game played by passionate northerners like Sunderland. The kind of guy who wants Lancashire to beat Sussex in the County Championship even though they were born and bred in Haywards Heath and have lived in Horsham for the last 20 years. Is part of the 'anyone but England' brigade. More worrying is that Jezza would probably support Mars in a game of nuclear war against the Earth, such is his desire to be 'a bit different'.

That is Corbyn in a nutshell....he always wants to take the other person's side....and yet the thing is what he cannot see is that the other side are as bad and in many cases worse (eg IRA/Hamas) than the side he opposes, he sees no evil in them, yet sees all evil in say British troops, Israel as examples.....an utter hypocrite.

When it comes to British troops/IRA I know whose side I and the majority of British people are on and it is different to Corbyn's. That is (just) one of the reasons, he is going to be trounced at the upcoming election. (I have never been in the forces by the way, but I am proud of our British service men and women and what they do, unlike Corbyn who wants to be our Prime Minister!)

 

[drew]

Well it depends how you read it. Whether or not we send £350m a week is irrelevant for this point, it didn't say send £350m to the NHS did it? We send the EU £xxx million a week, lets fund our NHS instead. You're saying it said fund the NHS by £xxx a week, the bus sign didn't.

But anyway, my point about leaving the EU has nothing to do with what we pay the EU budget now. As soon as we are out of the EU we will have more control over how we raise and regenerate taxes.

The sooner money stops leaking out of the country, and we can control taxes better, the more we can raise and the more there will be for social care, police, NHS, education etc. Its not going to happen overnight, its going to take a generation, but it will happen.

After all if we all believed the Remains side doom and gloom, the currency would be worthless, the stock market would crash, and a swarm of locust would have eaten us all by now.

As it stands, as a time of high uncertainty, the pound is gaining back a lot of its losses on the dollar and is getting stronger and stronger week by week, and the stock exchange is booming. Something suggests that we may just prosper outside the EU after all.

Out of interest what exactly was wrong with the economy in 2007, ten years after Labour came to power? No doubt you will refer to lack of regulation that may or may not have prevented the impending 'global' crisis but that is irrelevant if you can't demonstrate that the Tories would have imposed tougher regulations or even predicted the impending problems.

 

[wellquickwoody]

Like a £72.50 passport? That's the thing with ID - a lot of people who don't have any, also don't have a lot of money.

Where did you read that then, or are you just assuming that there will not be a cheaper option to be made available?

 

[nicko31]

Looking after her friends:

"Given the comprehensive nature of the first stage of the Leveson Inquiry and given the lengthy investigations by the police and Crown Prosecution Service into alleged wrongdoing, we will not proceed with the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press. We will repeal Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2014, which, if enacted, would force media organisations to become members of a flawed regulatory system or risk having to pay the legal costs of both sides in libel and privacy cases, even if they win."

Channel 4's moving too:

" Channel 4 will remain publicly owned and will be relocated out of London."

Looks like Murdoch has the Tories in his back pocket once again. Channel 4 have clearly been digging too deep in the Tory party, so need to be punished

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Terrible Labour Party, will never vote for them ever again, they really messed this country up. Labour need free movement, because it's the only sodding votes they will get. Fooled once never again.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Where did you read that then, or are you just assuming that there will not be a cheaper option to be made available?

Like a national ID card?

 

[ManOfSussex]

Labour need free movement, because it's the only sodding votes they will get.

Apart from Irish, Maltese and Cypriot citizens, EU nationals don't vote Labour in a general election - they don't vote at all.

 

[wellquickwoody]

Like a national ID card?

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe it could be FREE to those who want to vote, that would be OK wouldn't it, or have you something against free photo ID?

 

[5ways]

double post.

 

[5ways]

http://imgur.com/a/vh7cl

if you care about growth, the deficit or your young family members know this one line will cost us us £75bn a year by 2030.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe it could be FREE to those who vote, that would be OK wouldn't it, or have you something against free photo ID?

There's no details as yet - I'm sure that will come in time when it gets brought to parliament. It would strike me as little odd to introduce a new form of ID just for this though, not to mention very costly and controversial like the National ID Card idea was that got dropped all those years back, when we have current forms of photo ID available, which some people don't have due to the cost.

 

[wellquickwoody]

There's no details as yet - I'm sure that will come in time when it gets brought to parliament. It would strike me as little odd to introduce a new form of ID just for this though, not to mention very costly and controversial like the National ID Card idea was that got dropped all those years back, when we have current forms of photo ID available, which some people don't have due to the cost.

This might negate the cost issue, time will tell.

 

[nicko31]

Terrible Labour Party, will never vote for them ever again, they really messed this country up. Labour need free movement, because it's the only sodding votes they will get. Fooled once never again.

Yeah bloody Labour, without them we'd be pure bred Anglo Saxon, a master race.

 

[beorhthelm]

There's no details as yet - I'm sure that will come in time when it gets brought to parliament. It would strike me as little odd to introduce a new form of ID just for this though...

why have you invented a new policy. "...a form of identification must be presented before voting". nothing about a new form of identification, there's plenty of other forms, like all those accepted for opening bank accounts for example.