***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 4 *****
Continuing discussion.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 6 Apr 15 at 00:50
|
Possibly the best way to start this thread:)
www.thepoke.co.uk/2015/03/30/new-cassette-boy-mash-holds-punches/
UKIP doubters need to FF to 1:25 .
|
>> You'll have to do better than that.
>> No, don't think so. It fits.
Yawn.... so you *really* think I'd advocate hanging people who are mentally unwell?... or you are naturally argumentative, just like having the last word and being generally unpleasant?
|
I'm not sure it matters, but I'm a little confused.
WP thinks that there a couple of narcissistic sociopaths in the forum. (curious as to who)
Zero thinks WP would like to hang them (Didn't understand, but thought was prob supposed to be funny)
WP thinks Zero will have to do better (this is where I got lost - better at what?)
And Zero thinks it fits (what fits?)
|
|
All got a bit down to playground level, best to move on IMHO
|
>> WP thinks.... (curious as to who)
Whomsoever the cap fits.
>>
>> Zero thinks WP would like to hang them (Didn't understand, but thought was prob supposed
>> to be funny)
I took it to mean that Zero vehemently disapproves with my stance on capital punishment, so bunged in a dig about my supposed thoughts on dealing with the mentally unwell, albeit I strongly suspect he doesn't really think that.
>>
>> WP thinks Zero will have to do better (this is where I got lost -
>> better at what?)
I thought he'd need to do better to get me worked up about it.
>>
>> And Zero thinks it fits (what fits?)
Re-iterating his first remark trying to get a reaction, probably to deflect some of the flack he's getting from his ridiculous stance with the doctor, who let's face it is considerably more likely to know what he is talking about in this area.
Last edited by: Westpig on Mon 30 Mar 15 at 16:32
|
I should have taken Commerdriver's advice.
|
>> I should have taken Commerdriver's advice.
>>
Always room for a first I guess.
|
>> are naturally argumentative, just like having the last word
What like you are now you mean? As far as hanging goes, not sure who you are prepared to have topped after you said that the odd miscarriage of justice was acceptable.
|
>> What like you are now you mean?
Oh yes, I love a good debate or a spat.
As far as hanging goes, not sure who
>> you are prepared to have topped after you said that the odd miscarriage of justice
>> was acceptable.
Bit of a twist in words there.. again.
I have never said a miscarriage in justice is acceptable and am happy to state they are always unacceptable... however what I have said is if there is inevitably the odd miscarriage in justice and someone innocent died, it would need to be balanced against how many who needed to die did so within that system.
So, say 1,000 murderers are sent to their maker and thus prevented from harming anyone else and 1 innocent unnecessarily is sent to his, is that acceptable?
I'd say 'yes' and wish to have as failsafe a system as we can get, to prevent the 1... but wouldn't rule the system out in case the '1' happened.
It's called 'looking at the bigger picture'.
|
>> It's called 'looking at the bigger picture'.
Is it! - Thank you, I always wondered what that really meant.
|
|
Yes, I thought he said some miscarriages are inevitable, not acceptable Zero. No system can be perfect. We're such a cartload of monkeys...
|
|
I see the SNP and the Greens are constantly banging on about ganging up with Labour to keep the Tories out. The SNP are regarded with contempt south of the border and the Greens are no more than a bunch of fringe party fruitcakes. I could see this whole thing irking the English electorate and blowing up spectacularly in Labours face, and costing them a good few seats.
|
>> I see the SNP and the Greens are constantly banging on about ganging up with
>> Labour to keep the Tories out. The SNP are regarded with contempt south of the
>> border and the Greens are no more than a bunch of fringe party fruitcakes. I
>> could see this whole thing irking the English electorate and blowing up spectacularly in Labours
>> face, and costing them a good few seats.
What are you on about?
If the party of nil deficit and immigration in tens of thousands, no ifs no buts, were widely regarded as credible none of this would matter. They are not so it does.
The SNP seem to me, and I suspect others, to be Scottish Labour with a bit more bite. They're going to pick up seats from LDs as well though.
It's clear listening to election coverage that the Greens are gaining traction way beyond fruitcake territory. They won't get many seats because of FPTP but in sooe places they're neck/neck with Lib Dems.
Labour don't quite know what do about this but I don't think the SNP/Green/Labour interface features much in calculation of average English (or Welsh) voter.
|
I'm more eco than most but the Greens definitely top the fruitcake league. I can't believe they will get anywhere even in share of vote.
I may as well just vote for David Gauke as I am in South West Herts, for the forgotten pleasure of being on the winning side :)
|
>> I may as well just vote for David Gauke as I am in South West
>> Herts, for the forgotten pleasure of being on the winning side :)
Chris Heaton-Harris will win Daventry by 15k or so whatever. Bu**ered if I'm voting for him though; spoil the paper or tactical vote for LD?
Might volunteer to do some leafleting or Sally Keeble in the town seat she's in with a chance of winning back.
|
I live in a ward which is bluer than blue. Never had a Con share of the vote of less than 49%. UKIP will garner about 9% at most. Funnily enough the greens had their % share slashed in half last time out - down to 1.2%
Being a safer than safe Tory seat, I don't bother to vote, will do this time out tho, just to do my tiny wee bit to slap down the UKIP %
|
"It's clear listening to election coverage that the Greens are gaining traction way beyond fruitcake territory. "
Sorry. I read the Green manifesto.Anyone - but anyone - who votes Green believes in money trees and is economically pig ignorant and is definitely a nutter.
Any Party which is "happy to see GDP fall" - their words not mine - and then promises to make the poor better off is appealing to idiots..because any semi sentient person can see the illogicality in such a position.
"Written by the economically illiterate for village idiots" is a kind .description
|
>> Any Party which is "happy to see GDP fall" - their words not mine -
>> and then promises to make the poor better off is appealing to idiots..because any semi
>> sentient person can see the illogicality in such a position.
So the 'logicality' of free market libertarian economics and constant growth is unassailable?
|
>> So the 'logicality' of free market libertarian economics and constant growth is unassailable?
I know that may seem an anathema to a dyed in the wool state control and support from cradle to the grave communist like you. The problem is you see, you can only "redistribute" wealth from those who have earned it to those who haven't, by actually allowing wealth creation in the first place. We, the redistributed from, call it growth.
|
.
>>
>> So the 'logicality' of free market libertarian economics and constant growth is unassailable?
>>
No, of course not.
But if the cake is not growing and the population is (the UK's is forecast to grow to 70 million) it does not take any genius to see that the slice of the cake for everyone will get smaller. The Greens also support unlimited immigration. So that 70 million forecast may be too small.
And remember they also support import controls on products made using excessive CO2 emissions. So I assume that means all imports from China will be banned. That will of course raise inflation on many goods.
So that confirms my choice of the words "idiots" for Green supporters. So full of contradictions they make Ed Balls appear an economic colossus.. which takes some doing :-)
Oh and BTW the latest polls show Green support falling .. not rising.. (5% average now).. And UKIP is down to 12% average...
|
>> So that confirms my choice of the words "idiots" for Green supporters.
Obviously it does in your mind but that doesn't make it a universal unchallengeable truth. I've no doubt he dyed in the wool free marketeers on here will laud you with green thumbs but what the hell......
|
So that confirms my choice of the words "idiots" for Green supporters.
>>
>> Obviously it does in your mind but that doesn't make it a universal unchallengeable truth.
>> I've no doubt he dyed in the wool free marketeers on here will laud you
>> with green thumbs but what the hell......
>>
I rest my case...
|
Bromp, do you seriously see the Green Party as a viable solution to something?
They're complete buffoons. "Happy" to see GDP fail? What sort of grown up comment is that?
This is not to say that somewhere in their arguments are not some valid points, but as a party?
And that's nothing to do with wanting a free market or not, that's related to looking at a group of people with a ridiculous approach.
|
>> They're complete buffoons. "Happy" to see GDP fail? What sort of grown up comment is
>> that?
I haven't the time now to read their policies in detail but a scan of what they say about GDP suggests something rather more nuanced. They're not alone in questioning whether a constantly inflating GDP is the sole or best method of measuring economic, never mind social, progress.
www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/31/abandon-gdp-growth-at-all-costs-green-party-furore
|
>>They're not alone in questioning whether a .....
Questioning is one thing, "happy to see GDP fail" is another.
|
>> But if the cake is not growing and the population is (the UK's is forecast
>> to grow to 70 million) it does not take any genius to see that the
>> slice of the cake for everyone will get smaller. The Greens also support unlimited immigration.
As below, GDP is not unchallengeable as the legitimate measure of cake size.
The ' Happy to See GDP Fall' quote is not susceptible to Googling.
Do you know the source/quote?
|
>>Do you know the source/quote?
Sorry, no, I can't find it either.
|
>> Sorry, no, I can't find it eithe
The question is probably for madf who seems to be first to use the phrase.
|
"EC201 To this end, the Citizens' Income (see EC730) will allow the current dependence on economic growth to cease, and allow zero or negative growth to be feasible without individual hardship should this be necessary on the grounds of sustainability. (see PB104-106)
policy.greenparty.org.uk/ec.html
|
>> "EC201 To this end, the Citizens' Income (see EC730) will allow the current dependence on
>> economic growth to cease, and allow zero or negative growth to be feasible without individual
>> hardship should this be necessary on the grounds of sustainability. (see PB104-106)
>>
>> policy.greenparty.org.uk/ec.html
Somewhat more nuanced than 'happy to see GDP fall'?
|
>> Somewhat more nuanced than 'happy to see GDP fall'?
Not much!
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 31 Mar 15 at 22:48
|
>> >>
>> It's clear listening to election coverage that the Greens are gaining traction way beyond fruitcake territory. They won't get many seats because of FPTP but in sooe places they're neck/neck with Lib Dems.
>>
>>
Any traction the Greens gain will disappear in a puff of smoke once the electorate look beyond their cuddly "Save the planet" image and start scrutinising their policies. Zero growth economy (The unemployed will love that), abolition of the armed forces, no football matches against countries with dubious human rights records (ie half the world, so no more tournaments of any sort). And doubtless even more on the list if you look at their manifesto.
|
>> countries with dubious human rights records (ie half the world, so no more tournaments of
>> any sort). And doubtless even more on the list if you look at their manifesto.
The problem is, that no-one reads the green manifesto. They assume its Green so has to be good for the world.
|
>>
>> The problem is, that no-one reads the green manifesto. They assume its Green so has
>> to be good for the world.
>>
So who votes for a newish party without checking out what's in their manifesto?
Only the naive and nutters..
QED
|
They have a point re economic growth; if only it implies geometrically increasing consumption of finite resources and is not indefinitely sustainable.
I think it is probably also true that wealth is not a proxy for human happiness.
Unfortunately there's one big drawback. If you want to trade with the rest of the world, you have to get them to join you in your idyll. Especially if, like Britain, you can't just sell them regular slices of some seemingly boundless natural resources so you will hit the buffers even quicker.
The Soviet Union didn't aim to have far lower GDP/capita than the rest of the developed world, but that is what it ended up with.
The US knew that the Soviets were inefficient, ans estimated that they must be spending 25% of GDP to keep up in the arms race. Following perestroika and glasnost, that estimate was revised to 75%. They would in fact quite soon have reached the (impossible) point where it would have had to be 100% had the old ways continued. The Soviet Union therefore was brought down by economics, not political pressure which was only the symptom.
It's a merry-go-round. If it stops suddenly, we'll all fall off.
|
|
If the Greens were totally honest, they would say we have too many people and suggest population control. That would make resources more sustainable..
|
That would make resources more sustainable..
Not human resource it wouldn't.
|
Yes, it would.
If the resources that humans need last longer, then so do the humans.
|
Of course in the long term and talking globally you are right. However in the immediate and medium future a reduction in the U.K. birth rate only exacerbates the problem we already have of an ageing population unable to support itself economically.
|
>> Of course in the long term and talking globally you are right. However in the
>> immediate and medium future a reduction in the U.K. birth rate only exacerbates the problem
>> we already have of an ageing population unable to support itself economically.
If we spent less money on the NHS, then we have the benefit of a higher mortality rate for the elderly, a lower survival rate for the new borns, and therefore less use of natural resources.
Yet the greens want to spend billions more on the NHS?
|
>> in the immediate and medium future a reduction in the U.K. birth rate only exacerbates the problem we already have of an ageing population
I know what, we could bring in people from other countries to balance that.
|
|
Exactly so but that does not reduce the UK population.
|
|
Well as population gets older the death rate will presumably rise.
|
|
The ageing population problem is one that fixes itself given time.
|
It doesn't take an economic colossus like Ed Balls to realise that allowing foreign students to stay, work, and live in the UK makes more financial sense that funding their early life and development (as well as any state support their parents received while bringing them up as children).
In fact there is a better economic case for keeping other countries' students than letting Brits themselves breed.
|
Taken to its logical conclusion, we should pay all our OAPs to live in Spain. (nearly 300k Brits there already so they will feel at home.)
Job done, problem solved,..
|
|
and moan about the EU and migrants.
|
>>we should pay all our OAPs to live in Spain. (nearly 300k Brits there already so they will feel at home.)
Up to 32° in some parts of AndalucÃa today.
Just saying.
|
>> there is a better economic case for keeping other countries' students than letting Brits themselves breed.
Quite right Lygonos. People from other countries are very often from 'hard working families', not useless ignorant malevolent native slags spawning feral nippers who will live for ever on benefits.
Means test, sterilization... what's wrong with that?
Actually it's so obvious that the world is overpopulated that I fear nazi measurs will have to be imposed worldwide. Otherwise there will be horrible population wars.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Tue 31 Mar 15 at 19:07
|
|
Most wars are about resources, there will be plenty of them to come.
|
>> It doesn't take an economic colossus like Ed Balls to realise that allowing foreign students
>> to stay, work, and live in the UK makes more financial sense
You mean our politicians might have to explain that populist gestures don't actually work like people think/are led to believe?
Cutting tuition domestic students fees or sending foreign students home the day their course finishes doesn't make economic sense........
ooodathortit.
|
There appears to be a degree of cross-party consensus on this issue in Holyrood.
|
Our voter bumf arrived today.
It isn't a matter of choice for me or for most people. I'll vote Labour as I always do, whatever toerag they have as our local candidate. I think Labour will win by a small margin, perhaps in a sort of coalition with some other bunch of deadbeats. All my fingers are crossed, more or less plaited in fact.
Cameron has done himself and the Cons no favour by panicking over UKIP.
He needs to roll up his shirtsleeves and take his coat off. And use foul language like my parliamentary hero Tony Blair.
:o}
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Tue 31 Mar 15 at 20:24
|
>> It isn't a matter of choice for me or for most people. I'll vote Labour
>> as I always do, whatever toerag they have as our local candidate. I think Labour
>> will win by a small margin, perhaps in a sort of coalition with some other
>> bunch of deadbeats. All my fingers are crossed, more or less plaited in fact.
I have a theory.
I think the current fairly high percentage of UKIP intending voters will have a fair chunk haemorrhage back to Tory when push comes to shove.
The fact that a present Tory govt (of sorts, obviously they are sharing things with the Lib Dems) has such high ratings when they don't usually at this time bodes well.
SNP shenanigans can only help the Tories, not Labour
Lib Dems have had it.
Greens might do better with some disgruntled Labour voters, but that again helps the Tories.
So I predict an outright Tory win, but not of a great margin.
I do hope so. Time will tell.
|
|
Jeez, last week I thought you were right about something, this week I've gone a step further and now I'm hoping you're right about something.
|
>> I have a theory.
I'm not sure that holds much water WP. Looks more like Tory wishful thinking.
The election is likley to be decided in a handful of marginal constituencies. If you're in Devon C or SW your vote will have about same influence as mine in Daventry.
Agree UKIP vote is sliding but not clear where those votes came from or where they are going. They've given Labour a nasty fright in at least one recent byelection. They'll hang onto Clacton but lose Rochester. Anything else is guesswork.
The Tories ratings v Labour are much same as last time. If they were riding high they'd be where Mrs T was in 83 or LAbour in 2001. The recovery is too late to affect most people and fall in inflation is almost wholly down to oil etc.
The SNP are positioning themselves for a hung parliament. No more 'shenanigans' than might be expected of a minor party likely to have a hand on balance of power. It's a UK election so the English have no right to get offended by such presumption (which is what it seems to come down to). Do you think English Labour voters will swing to Tory so as to keep a Labour dominated minority govt out of power? If the polls are right they'll be in similar position to LD's last time and no more of a threat to democracy. Don't forget too that they will benefit from any extent to which Lib Dems have 'had it' - several Lib Dem strongholds are in Scotland.
|
>> It's a UK election so the English have no right to get offended by such presumption
>>
Where English matters are concerned, ie votes which will not affect people living in Scotland then people have every right to be offended, upset or whatever term you choose, by SNP votes being used to change things for England & Wales alone.
Only someone blinded by partisan party allegiance could believe that members elected for Scottish seats should be able to vote for or against laws which do not affect Scotland.
I know it is legal but it is against any sort of morality.
I am, as you know, Scottish and live in the south of England.
I do not, incidentally, see any party, or indeed any party leader standing at this election who would come near to being worthy of being elected.
|
>> I'm not sure that holds much water WP. Looks more like Tory wishful thinking.
I am basing my theory on:
- Tory percentages in the surveys are quite good when you consider they have been in power (ish).. and...
- there is IMO a significant chunk of UKIP's potential voters who have indicated their preferences in surveys, but who may well vote Tory when it comes down to it, because to do otherwise only lets Red Ed in.
So in other words the Tories may well have a fall back vote.. which they didn't have last time, because the Lib Dems were more to the fore.
It is only a theory of course and it may well be Tory wishful thinking, we shall see.
|
>> So, say 1,000 murderers are sent to their maker and thus prevented from harming anyone
>> else and 1 innocent unnecessarily is sent to his, is that acceptable?
>>
>> I'd say 'yes' and wish to have as failsafe a system as we can get,
>> to prevent the 1... but wouldn't rule the system out in case the '1' happened.
So one like this would be OK?
www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/04/alabama-death-row-anthony-ray-hilton
A man spent 28yrs on death row for a crime he didn't commit. Mercifully he'd not gone to the chair or lethal injection when his case was finally reconsidered.
And I'd guess the error rate in UK during the IRA's outrages, judging by those acquitted years later, would have been far higher than 0.1%.....
|
>> So one like this would be OK?
I did clearly state that none of them like this were 'o.k'.
My point (that I am explaining yet again) is a balance between the odd miscarriage of justice and dispatching those that really need to be got rid of to properly defend the vulnerable in our midst.
Some people seem to think that the potential for a miscarriage of justice outweighs the needs of the truly vulnerable when preyed on by beasts... I do not.
|
This is a bit silly really;
Since there is no perfect system, it is inevitable that someone will be mistreated by the system. Doesn't matter what the system is, it'll happen.
Not only is that a fact, it is a price that almost certainly has to be paid, and ought to be acceptable.
The alternative is the question of how many murderers, rapists or pedophiles are you prepared to let walk free and offend again to avoid killing/imprisoning that one innocent?
At least with imprisoning you can let them go, but its still not good to be in the slammer for 30 years.
Let us also remember that this particular person was found to be not provably guilty, not found innocent - there is a difference.
I think one has to accept that there is a price of any law - whether that be the punishing of an innocent or the releasing of a guilty.
|
|
Little bit worrying that we keep agreeing on things No FM2R.. but exactly how I feel.
Last edited by: Westpig on Sun 5 Apr 15 at 09:23
|
Ok let me start by stating categorically that I'm not taking any stance here, just asking a question. Is that absolutely clear, because I'm really not here for an argument but I am interested in how those who do have a strong opinion square this one away?
Let's take a scenario where capital punishment is once again permitted by law. Your son or daughter or indeed you yourself finds themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time and somehow gets wrongfully accused and convicted of a capital crime.
Does their execution fit into the category of "acceptable" in the pursuit of the greater good or is it a travesty of justice?
|
Of course not Humph, when you substitute someone you know into any political process then it becomes so much more personal and you don't have the option of making a non emotional decision about it.
Even taking things to the opposite extreme, zero hours contracts, these are there for a reason and can be justified etc etc. Substitute that it is your child on one who can't get a mortgage, can't get to rent a flat, can't get a car loan to get the car to get him to work because he has no contracted hours, it suddenly becomes so different.
I am a big fan of "lock them up" because while they are inside they can't do us any harm. I recently had a lengthy conversation with someone who was locked up and his life in there and when he came back out was horrendous. OK, do the crime, do the time is fair enough but when you walk out the gates and find that your family don't want you, you have nowhere to stay and you have no chance of a job, it takes a helluva inner strength to overcome that and try and re start rather than just getting dragged down into a life of more crime.
Must be a better option that, longer term, is also the better option for all concerned.
|
>> Let us also remember that this particular person was found to be not provably guilty,
>> not found innocent - there is a difference.
No there isn't. Innocence isn't tested.
|
For those of you who see me as "hard right" you may be surprised to read that I'm in the "don't know" camp on this one.
I dare say if a member of my family was subject to a crime, carrying capital punishment, my view would change, but as it is I'm swinging to the stance as whether it is right to give the "state" power to kill a person, coolly and clinically.
Mind you given the horror stories coming from the USA states which do have capital punishment, it seems that current methods are, to say the least, definitely NOT cool or clinical.
It does seem a shame, nevertheless, that the manufacturers of Nembutal - practically guaranteeing a peaceful and humane passing, have refused to supply Governments/States whose statutes allow capital punishment.
|
>> It does seem a shame, nevertheless, that the manufacturers of Nembutal - practically guaranteeing a
>> peaceful and humane passing, have refused to supply Governments/States whose statutes allow capital punishment.
I'm more surprised they can't produce it in the US.
|
Nembutal used to be available on the dark web, but with the shutting down of Silk Road it's not apparently available.
This site agorahooawayyfoe.onion only easily available using Tor browser and after registration, does have some "interesting" stuff for sale (Payment in Bitcoins required)
|
|
I mean available to US governement and states, I would have thought it something capable of being made and sold in the US through 'normal' channels.
|
>> I mean available to US governement and states, I would have thought it something capable
>> of being made and sold in the US through 'normal' channels.
>>
Were I ever to face a death penalty my choice would be by firing squad. It's instant and a rather noble way to go.
|
>> Nembutal used to be available on the dark web, but with the shutting down of
>> Silk Road it's not apparently available.
>> This site agorahooawayyfoe.onion only easily available using Tor browser and after registration, does have some
>> "interesting" stuff for sale (Payment in Bitcoins required)
>>
Purely for interest & information and shock horror cries, ;-) here is a screen cap of a random page from the Agora site.
i115.photobucket.com/albums/n297/penfro/Agora_zps58pjvhsi.jpg
|
|
What do vets use to euthanise pets?
|
>>What do vets use to euthanise pets?
A suitably large dose of this stuff I should imagine: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentobarbital
|
"A suitably large dose of this stuff"
Thanks. Nembutal appears to be just a trade name for a formulation of that active ingredient.
|
>>No there isn't. Innocence isn't tested.
Of course there is a difference, don't be silly. Whether it is tested or not is separate topic about which I made no comment.
|
...I went to see my Mom today, she has a vote in the general election. She has dimentia, she doesn't know who I am, or where she is but she has a vote in the general election.
Questions will be asked where and how she is planning to vote when I visit her again tomorrow.
It's a joke, as is voting in Europe. I can't vote where I currently work in a general election because I'm a non-national (ausländer is the term I believe though I'm somehow eligible for taxes), I can't vote in the UK because I have been outside the country too long but my mother with dimentia gets a vote as does everyone who has registered who is not a UK national.
Yeah! I get to pay taxes with no say in how any of the money is spent...Go democracy ! Tell me where I sign up to get some.
|
|
If you're outside the UK so much, why are you paying UK taxes? Or did I miss something?
|
Doh, I worked it out. Bit slow, sorry.
Having said that, does the right to vote in the UK go away when you've been away more than a certain amount of time?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 1 Apr 15 at 00:01
|
About 8 years in my experience.
Funnily enough if you can't vote you don't pay tax does not seem to apply. We'll still have your money regardless whether you get any say or not. I can't understand why politicians don't understand why the general public do not trust them. Strange !!!
Maybe I should rob a bank in Germany then I'd get a vote there because for some reason prisoners human rights stack way above a tax payers rights to any voice in how the taxes they contribute may be spent is a priority for the EU...
Last edited by: gmac on Wed 1 Apr 15 at 00:14
|
"Ed Miliband’s difficulties may only be beginning, rather than ending, on May 8th. Left wing Labour MP John McDonnell warned on Monday that he and “30 to 40†other backbenchers would vote against a Labour Budget if it involved spending cuts.
There is by this point no doubt that a rebellion of this kind (and, probably, even half that size) would scupper any chance of carrying a Budget, regardless of whether Labour had a small majority, were in a coalition, or were a minority government with support of other parties. A government unable to win a vote on its own Budget would face crisis of legitimacy: unless it could prove it had the support of the Commons, it would likely fall.
Miliband and Balls will not put forward a spending plan for the next parliament that does not include a serious reduction. These cuts are likely to be top-ended towards the first few years, allowing for a different strategy towards the next election. The IFS says under Labour plans cuts could cease as soon as next year."
tinyurl.com/pbprvbk
|
A selective quote there madf.
The article goes on to suggest that the proposers of this motion have a track record for being less than credible. Furthermore, newly elected backbenchers are unlikely to rebel at all, never mind march into the 'wrong' lobby on a matter so important.
Headstrong rebels are though a problem for any government with little or no majority. John Major had all sorts of trouble in latter stages of 92-97 govt - mostly over Europe. That rift remains as strong in the Tory party now as it was then. If Cameron (or any likely replacement) leads a minority govt after 07 May there will be backbench rebels trying to influence timing/terms of the EU referendum so as to get an out vote at earliest opportunity.
|
>> A selective quote there madf.
>>
>> The article goes on to suggest that the proposers of this motion have a track
>> record for being less than credible. Furthermore, newly elected backbenchers are unlikely to rebel at
>> all, never mind march into the 'wrong' lobby on a matter so important.
Sorry did not mean to be selective: but long cut'n'pastes tend to put people off.
I do think that if Labour form the next Government they will struggle very badly and the next economic crisis - which will happen when interest rates rise - will test them severely.
It is all eerily similar - in political context only - to the 1970s. That ended very badly for Labour. History of course does not repeat itself exactly if at all!
|
>> It's a joke, as is voting in Europe. I can't vote where I currently work
>> in a general election because I'm a non-national (ausländer is the term I believe though
>> I'm somehow eligible for taxes), I can't vote in the UK because I have been
>> outside the country too long but my mother with dimentia gets a vote as does
>> everyone who has registered who is not a UK national.
For clarity voters in UK General Election must be UK nationals, citizens of the Irish Republic or, subject to conditions, certain commonwealth countries. The franchise for European and local elections though is somewhat wider.
www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/177884/Who-can-register-to-vote.pdf
Unless somebody tries to 'steal' her vote by post or proxy your Mother's situation is, to be honest, a red herring. OTOH, older folks who have mild dementia might still feel inclined to 'do their civic duty' and all efforts should be made to facilitate that.
The numbers thus voting are unlikely to affect the outcome in a LA ward election, never mind a GE.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 1 Apr 15 at 10:06
|
"Labour could raise taxes for hundreds of thousands of middle-class professionals after the next election by lowering the threshold for the 40p rate, Ed Balls has suggested.
In an interview the shadow chancellor repeatedly refused to rule out changing the point at which the higher rate of tax kicks in, saying he had to be "honest" with the public that there was still a £90 billion deficit to pay off.
His comments raise the prospect that Labour could lower the threshold for the 40p rate, which is currently £41,865, potentially dragging hundreds of thousands more people into it."
tinyurl.com/nz5fbht
|
>>saying he had to be "honest" with the public that there was still a £90 billion deficit to pay off.
Which is not very honest is it? The DEFICIT is the ongoing overspend. The DEBT that this is building up to is now £1.5 Trillion or thereabouts. We are nowhere near even beginning to live within our means, let alone pay down some of the debt - which is costing something like £50 billion / year to service IIRC.
|
If he plans to lower the 40% threshold, he'll also lower the 50% threshold - which is the level to which he will raise the 45% rate..
Tax and spend.. where did I hear that before?
|
>> His comments raise the prospect that Labour could lower the threshold for the 40p rate,
>> which is currently £41,865, potentially dragging hundreds of thousands more people into it."
>> tinyurl.com/nz5fbht
>>
That's possible, alternatively he might keep it there and scrap the future above inflation rise in the threshold that Osborn announced in budget.
|
|
The prospect of dragging even more of my pension into the higher tax band is not going to endear the Labour party to me or a good number of others either.
|
"The prospect of dragging even more of my pension into the higher tax band"
Ah, CG, you must have worked for Norwich Union?
|
Briefly. I left them whenI was 24. They pay me a pension of £23.82 per month
|
>> That's possible, alternatively he might keep it there and scrap the future above inflation rise
>> in the threshold that Osborn announced in budget.
They will raises taxes again for those on average and above wage, its all part of wealth distribution.
|
So who's winning?
From where I'm sitting, how do I vote SNP in Northamptonshire?
|
|
I'd forgot about this, worth turning the tv on for?
|
>> I'd forgot about this, worth turning the tv on for?
No.
It's like Question Time only more so.
|
|
Turning into a political shouting match.
|
The debate I'd like to see;
Each leader questioned for half an hour on their party's policies. An independent panel sitting watching and scoring them on whether they actually answered each question rather than just filibustered their way through it. For example, "Are you going to raise VAT?" has only three possible answers, yes, no, or we don't know till we see how the economy pans out during the next parliament.
It would force all the parties to put their cards on the table so we knew exactly what they stood for or expose them for just spouting the bullcrap they thought the electorate wanted to hear if they gave non committal answers - which they all do at the moment.
|
They won't and they can't telling us the truth.If they did nobody will turn up to vote.
|
>> >> I'd forgot about this, worth turning the tv on for?
>>
>> No.
>>
Thought not.
|
|
I went to yoga instead and stood on my head. Made more sense and a lot more interesting than politics...
|
|
I was in the pub with my bestest mate from 5pm. I then went to my proper local with my second bestest mate. Got home late. Made a bacon sandwich. Glad I'm working today. It's raining. Again. Glad I missed the political show. What election?
|
>> I was in the pub with my bestest mate from 5pm.
Yes its funny that, I* often used to get lumbered with new "bestest mates" around 5pm after an afternoon down the pub. Common enough to get another one between then and closing time as well.
* memory gets hazy, I suppose its possible I may have attached myself to someone as their new bezzie, rather than the other way round.
|
The Guardian has been running a 'Blind Date' column for some years. Volunteers matched by the paper's folks.
Now trying a variant where opposing politicos are put together. First up Chief Sec to Treasury Danny Alexander (Lib Dem) and Finance Spokesperson Stella Creasey (Lab):
www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/03/political-blind-date-danny-alexander-stella-creasy
|
|
If it came to a coalition, I wouldn't mind getting into bed with Plaid Cumru (based on last night's showing).
|
|
Voice like a bandsaw if it's the one I'm thinking of.
|
I don't think it's her voice he's interested in,
;-)
|
Nah, phwoar innit... them Welsh birds, hidden depths...
How Green was my Valley, sex book of the 1830s...
|
|
Reminded me of that Welsh one from Hi De Hi...
|
"Nah, phwoar innit... "
I wouldn't have had you down as a Viz-reader, AC.
|
|
Oh dear, I now remember Sharon (or was it Tracy) applying purple leg blotch from what must have been, an industrial sized bucket.
|
>> Nah, phwoar innit... them Welsh birds, hidden depths...
Mutton, dressed as lamb.
|
|
Of course they should be allowed to go and fight in Syria...........
|
|
We don't need them now and don't want them back.
|
They should all me made to publish budgets for the next 5 years, each with 3 levels of performance - economy below target, on target and above target and these should be verified by an independent body against promises and manifestos so at least we get an idea of what the taxes and spending are going to be. We need to be able to budget as well!
I am having difficulty liking the current lot as I lose the entire child benefit allowance as an only worker but two people earning almost twice as much as me together get to keep it - plus they get two tax allowances - does not seem fair!
The current lot have also allowed some tax allowances to be transferred from a non tax payer to a tax payer only if they are lower rate payers. This has the effect of reducing differentials - again - totally unfair as I have worked my socks off to earn the salary that I am on. Why can't my other half transfer the same element of her unused allowance to me just because I am a higher rate payer!?
Last edited by: zippy on Sun 5 Apr 15 at 16:12
|
Why can't my other half
>> transfer the same element of her unused allowance to me just because I am a
>> higher rate payer!?
>>
I would imagine if there is any spare money for tax cuts it's given to those on least rather than those that have more first.
|
>>I would imagine if there is any spare money for tax cuts it's given to those on least rather than those that have more first.
I know, it's just annoying and I was having a vent!
Though if I am paying £30k in tax should someone who is paying £1k in tax get a discount before me because this is what is in place with the current system!?
|
>> I know, it's just annoying and I was having a vent!
>>
>> Though if I am paying £30k in tax should someone who is paying £1k in
>> tax get a discount before me because this is what is in place with the
>> current system!?
>>
I'll assume it's another question you already know the answer to :)
Last edited by: sooty123 on Sun 5 Apr 15 at 18:15
|
|
Just for clarification - I don't pay £30k per year in tax, it just feels like it sometimes!
|
Election promises. Read all about it! - Volume 3 - sherlock47
