zomgbbqftw
Banned
Labour largest party. Minority government.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.
- Thread starter Chinner
- Start date
Labour largest party. Minority government.
CyclopsRock
Member
Didn't the manifestos go out of the window almost immediately due to the coalition talks? No one can seriously believe that the Tories were capable of enacting their manifesto when they aren't the only party in government, surely?
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
I don't think the Lib Dems were going into the coalition as the ones banging a "LETS FUCK WITH THE NHS!!!" drum. It'd be political move of the century to somehow pin that on Clegg while Cameron gets to play a "my hands were tied!!" act.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
Tories largest party, minority government
that is assuming things keep going vaguely to the good as they have done the past few months
Currently I will vote tory. If Labour oust Ed, Ed & Yvette and put in Dmiliband, Alan Johnson or Alaistair Darling I may well vote Labour.
that is assuming things keep going vaguely to the good as they have done the past few months
Currently I will vote tory. If Labour oust Ed, Ed & Yvette and put in Dmiliband, Alan Johnson or Alaistair Darling I may well vote Labour.
Money, land, assets, right to return, right to hold office, right to do business. A creative (and un-beholden to the upper class
hah!
But frankly the scaremongering is pointless and leads to race-to-the-bottom moronic policies.
radioheadrule83
Banned
It's also the obvious battleground though. When it comes to this debate, whichever side you're on, the figures are so distrusted and the perceptions so powerful, that people will eat up all argument on it. Whether that perception is of workshy slobs, or the perception of someone who feels their family finances are under attack.
I'm all for reform, and I think a lot of people are, but people want to know that we're not setting up societal problems for ourselves, leaving people out in the cold... they want to see welfare providing a minimum quality of living for those on support. I personally think that means linking somehow to living costs, a living wage or minimum wage. At the last spending review over 40% of welfare spending was spent on the elderly, with only ~12% going to major out of work entitlement... that's just over half of the 21% that was spent supporting families with various credits and entitlements. So while I appreciate Balls routinely talks... balls... I do think the Conservatives spin welfare reform into a bigger saver than it can actually be, given they're not going to go too hastily after vote losers like letting the elderly or young children in society lose out. I do think they want to help people into work, of course they do, their next election depends on it -- but I do also think that some degree of it is about whipping up prejudice for political gain.
Cough....up coming triple dip recession....cough.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
Perhaps I'm being a bit dense, but this means little to me. How would this stop people emigrating?
If true I'll change my mind
but off the back of christmas, increased manufacturing and lowered unemployment, you think the next quarters figures are going to show negative growth? Is there an article you're basing that off?
I think you're largely correct with this although I think it would be a very slim majority, maybe 5-10 mp's. Meanwhile the Liberals will die in an election fire of biblical proportions. You may even see UKIP get a seat or two. Who knows for sure though. Today's service sector results have people talking of a triple dip recession and that will put us into uncharted waters.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
God I hope not, that'd probably force cameron to move to the right
Then I'd have to vote green or lib dem or something(assuming ed is still party leader of labour)
Service sector results today showed a drop in activity. That's not a good sign. Confidence in that sector is also at an 11 month low. It's the biggest sector in the UK and so any drop in it's activity is bad news. This is also coupled with the increased cost of government borrowing and a weakening in sterling. The last two bits suggest that the markets are saying "Hmm...this country doesn't look too good for growth".
Sir_Crocodile
Member
Ah, I hadn't been on the beeb today.
That sure as hell ain't good
That sure as hell ain't good
CyclopsRock
Member
That's all totally true, but only if you assume that the only way to save money is to cut benefits. In the last ~15 years, practically the entire increase in private sector employment has been taken up by immigrants, both from the EU and outside the EU. This isn't a "boo immigrants!" post - personally, I'm fully in favour of immigration. But it's hard to argue that in an era when businesses were growing and wages rising, that almost all of the new employment that occured did nothing to shorten our dole queues. Part of the problem isn't necessarily the amount of welfare that is given to those out of work (and, cruicially, those in work), but the manner in which it is given. The complicated systems of benefits, tax reliefs, rental assistance etc meant that it was possible that some people would find themselves in a position where taking a job (or a better paying job, or one with more hours etc) would actually decrease their income. This was fairly unusual, but seeing effective tax rates for those re-entering the workplace, or hoping to move up a notch (in other words, the poorest in society) at levels like 70 or 80%, it's not hard to see why the system makes it hard to justify getting work. It's not the people that are to blame, it's the system. With immigrants from both the EU and further afield, this isn't the case. They don't have this option available to them, and as such any employment is better than no employment, every single hour they work. The new system doesn't necessarily lower benefits - though if Osborne gets his way vs IDS, it may well be like that - but it's about phasing them out in a more linear way so that working is always worth it.
None of which does anything to alter the huge amount given to the elderly, but hey, baby steps.
Pie and Beans said:
I didn't realise you were talking about the NHS. I say that because a lot of the ideas - though obviously not the detail - was in the Tory manifesto already, and even the Lib Dems said they wanted to fairly radically restructure the NHS with the removal of PCT's.
One obvious example is gay marriage, which wasn't present in the Tory manifesto at all. But no one seems to point this out, as generally the people pointing out discrepancies between manifesto and action are, by and large, in support of this particular discrepancy.
CyclopsRock
Member
Quarterly growth figures are compared to the same quarter the previous year, not to the last quarter. Otherwise basically every 4th quarter would be a huge growth and every subsequent first quarter a terrible shrink.
Pretty much all his backbenchers are screaming for him too move to the right. Which of course would send the Tories into an epic election death spiral. Just look at some of the crazy crap they have proposed lately and imagine it to be even more bonkers.
The only reason the backbenchers want him to be more right wing is so that they can secure there jobs as MP's because their constituents hate europe etc. The more loony and right wing the better. Hence the rise in UKiP. Truely mad.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
whoops
Don't I know it
I sure as hell don't want a return to "are you thinking what we're thinking"
zomgbbqftw
Banned
UKIP are not going to win any seats. They have no ground game, they will not convert 10% in the poll to a single seat. It is actually why I support PR based voting as it will allow new parties to compete with the old guard and the Liberls can ditch the SDP.
CyclopsRock
Member
Satire works significantly better when it makes an actual point. Anyone that knows anything about IDS - from his time in the wilderness after his leaving the leadership, his think tank, his only taking the DWP role in 2010 and his refusal to stand aside in the latest reshuffle or be brushed aside in the Autumn Statement - would know that he genuinely believes in this stuff. It's very easy to naively paint any Tory, especially the minister for welfare and pensions, as some Dickensian villain, but in this case they really couldn't be further from the truth.CHEEZMO;46044961 said:
Sir_Crocodile
Member
You mean paint them as the kind of person that would call an honest hard working guy a pleb when they're not?
Surely no-one would do such a thing!
Well the difference is that Balls is confirmed scum, while IDS is scum in potentia
I guess we'll know in a couple of years which way it goes - it'll be key to the election result.
CyclopsRock
Member
Did you miss the part where the police's offering of what occurred is almost definitely fabricated?
Plus, even if he did, Prescott punched a guy. That doesn't mean Ed Miliband will.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
uh....that's the joke
CyclopsRock
Member
CyclopsRock
Member
That sounds terrifying. We're talking about the government of our country here, not some ego-maniacal executive board of the rotary club. Saying "If you leave the country, you're not allowed to come back, or seek to hold office"? Terrifying.
Delusibeta
Banned
Pretty much assuming Scotland doesn't vote in favour of independence, in which case the Tories would definitely have a shout.
Saying "if you abandon your responsibilities to the society which allowed you to succeed, you will be unable to continue to claim those privileges membership of said society bring" is terrifying to you?
Leaving this country for tax purposes should be the equivalent of abandoning your "UK" nationality.
Problem with legislation saying this is that then you have to ascribe a motive to their emigrating
If you're going to punishment emigrating for tax purposes then they'll just claim it is because tax haven country is so beautiful or family ties etc
Sir_Crocodile
Member
Plus no-one wealthy would want to come into the country.
Guerrillas in the Mist
Member
Looking at the current state of main political parties, I now think the Lib Dems made a catastrophic judgement in going into the coalition. They should have stayed independent in a minority government, and built on their success in the 2010 election. Instead they sold their soul and backtracked on their principle policies for a morsel of power and consequently destroyed themselves as a party. They could have replaced Labour as the main centre-left party.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
They also pledged to back boundry changes in return for an AV vote. They got their vote, failed miserably, then refused to honour their boundry promise.
Now, boundry change would help the tories most, so they've managed to take no damage from the u turn at all - but it's also a just thing. And yet they've thrown their toys out of the pram for party political reasons, not for whats best for the country
The "different" politics Cleggy promised us
CyclopsRock
Member
Yes, because what if you disagree? What if you think that taxing a certain amount is counter productive, or think that the government spends too much money blowing up brown people, or that you don't want your tax money going towards criminalising pot smokers? You're saying that if you disagree to how your tax is spent such that you don't wish to further fund then state, that it is fair that you are then banned from re-entering the country of your birth?
It is you that is saying I'm responsible for the government over-spending. That doesn't mean I am.
(Hypothetical 'I' - I have no intention of leaving).
radioheadrule83
Banned
Hypothetically (given such a zero tolerant rule would never happen ), yes. If you don't like paying what the democratically elected government of the day says you should pay you either stay and lobby them out at the next election or you should fuck off, not do all of your business here, and not come back unless you're prepared to play by the same rules as the rest of us.
That's a crude way of putting it, but that's the attitude I think everyone should have. Why stand for it? It should be socially abhorrent to operate here from atop a pile of money you stash abroad
We'd never deny a good/innocent citizen the right to return, but we're not all good citizens.
The Lib Dems blew it because of incompetent negotiating. It started off ok because they could look for areas of commonality to push ahead with(like scrapping of ID cards). However in the areas of difference they needed to look for compromises in every area. What they did instead was do a swap, where the Tories got some of their policies and the Lib Dems got some of theirs.
Of course Cameron was smart and gave in on the AV referendum, which in theory is a win on a massive issue(the voting system), but they lost the referendum(the Prime Minister campaigning against it, this was always the likely outcome, especially with AV not even being exactly being believed in by anyone even the Lib Dems) so in reality Lib Dems gained nothing.
Of course because the Lib Dems were the smaller party they got less of their policies. And with the Tories being so much bigger they got their way on policies they wanted the most like the NHS and Economy(yeah exactly, the big ones that really mattered)
Take tuition fees. The Tories wanted £9000, if Lib Dems compromised at say £6000 they may have got away with it, since they could say negotiations are necessary in a coalition. But by completely caving in they did a U-turn to the point where they completely undermined their own credibility. Outright lying actually brings the whole system into disrepute.
CyclopsRock
Member
If you don't like what the democratically elected government of the day is doing you should have the right to leave until such a time that they are doing something you like. Removing the right to return stops the latter half of that. Plus, should democracy really have that power? It's my country as much as it is yours - but, hypothetically, should 51% of the population be allowed to expel and ban you from these shores because of the colour of your shoes? If that is too flippant a reason, who decides what isn't a flippant reason? Surely not that same 51%?
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
The North bashing stuff is always the most astounding. Are the Tories hoping to instigate new ferocity into the North v South rivalry and hope the ensuing insane confusion could be played to their benefit? "Oh it was those Northerners nicking our money all along.."
The argument for the North's cost of living being 'less expensive' is met by every fucking big new project being South focussed such as public transport evolution, holding all of the focus from the Olympics regrowth/renewal of areas and so on.
Kids in school longer means more meals they need feeding for, more diverse days of lessons with over-stressed teachers and PE programs with less money. Its just a fucking joke.
The argument for the North's cost of living being 'less expensive' is met by every fucking big new project being South focussed such as public transport evolution, holding all of the focus from the Olympics regrowth/renewal of areas and so on.
Kids in school longer means more meals they need feeding for, more diverse days of lessons with over-stressed teachers and PE programs with less money. Its just a fucking joke.
CyclopsRock
Member
I can't tell if you two are genuinely trying to suggest that the cost of living in the North actually isn't more expensive, or if you just don't care that it is. It doesn't seem odd that two people on the same benefits in different parts of the country get different qualities of life? Salaries are adjusted across the country for the same reason.
Also, the UK didn't win the Olympics, London did. Where else are they going to build the trains? There are parts - basically everyone beyond Shoreditch - of East London that suffer shocking poverty,and their increased cost of living makes life harder for them, not easier. Besides which, such an enormous proportion of the population lives in the South and London that it is hardly surprising that it gets a giant chunk of the investment - building a system for a city of 8 million people is more complicated and expensive than 4 x 2million.
Also, the UK didn't win the Olympics, London did. Where else are they going to build the trains? There are parts - basically everyone beyond Shoreditch - of East London that suffer shocking poverty,and their increased cost of living makes life harder for them, not easier. Besides which, such an enormous proportion of the population lives in the South and London that it is hardly surprising that it gets a giant chunk of the investment - building a system for a city of 8 million people is more complicated and expensive than 4 x 2million.
And the North gave us nearly all our medals, if Greater Manchester had been a country it would have been 7th on the medal table.
If that's the Torys manifesto going into the next election and Labour can't beat them then they should be taken out and shot, if the Torys win one vote north of the Home Counties it's a failure.
Do you think that that's right? Do you think it's just? Don't you think that such adjustments might be exacerbating the differences in living standards between the North and South, further dividing the nation along economic lines? Why do you think this to be "right", if indeed you do?
Regarding the bolded - and you would wish such great poverty and suffering upon those of us in the North of England who have the misfortune of having to rely on benefits to survive...why, exactly? Because that's exactly what you're suggesting. Surely the solution to poverty in the East End is to give everyone a livable standard of pay/benefits? You don't make everybody else's portion bigger by taking bread from the mouths of the poor, no matter what your self-deluding "bootstraps" level of thinking might tell you.
As for the rest of your posts on this page...well. It's as if you and the Tories you love so much don't want to win the next election, which, quite frankly, would suit me down to the ground.
Yes, I mad. They want to take benefits money away from fat people? RAGE
EDIT: WTF, Zomg is banned? Never noticed that.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
I can't wait for the latest chapter that links it in with phillip shooting diana with a blunderbuss
I never see newspaper headlines these days, I went in Smiths the other day and had a glance for a laugh and it was the most depressing thing I have seen.
You can smell the desperation in the print rags to shift papers for ad revenue, every day the headline must generate fear / anger / rage to get the idiots to buy it, they are all as bad as each other. The Sun in particular is the most morally bankrupt organisation since the Gestapo.
When print news dies we will be better off.
You can smell the desperation in the print rags to shift papers for ad revenue, every day the headline must generate fear / anger / rage to get the idiots to buy it, they are all as bad as each other. The Sun in particular is the most morally bankrupt organisation since the Gestapo.
When print news dies we will be better off.
Dirtyshubb
Member
I agree completely, the depths to which our papers stoop to is disgusting.
The front cover of The Daily Mirror yesterday was a prime example, the main headline was Videogames can give you cancer and was basically saying that doctors have advised that playing video games for a long time increases your chance of getting cancer. Now of course videogames dont give you cancer directly, you had to read about half the article before they state that you can get it because being inactive for long periods of time can lead to obesity, which can lead to diabetes which can lead to tumours so technically it could lead to it but not directly and not the sole cause of it either.
I just couldnt believe my eyes when I read it, there really needs to be some sort of overhaul on our newspapers, they need to be held accountable for their disgusting tactics because its only going to get worse as they carry on dying off and desperately attempt to claw readers back.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
every now and then when she forgets to buy it I have to buy the express and take it round to my mum because she does the crossword.
buying it makes me feel dirty man
buying it makes me feel dirty man
Dr.NoiseWater
Member
What is this thread? Watership Down?