General Election/UK Politics

[pete0]

12 minutes ago, RPG said:

Well, you are of course entitled to your point of view, but I assure you I have been indoctrinated by nobody, am very much my own man and your 'brainwashing' comments are exactly what I would expect from someone who can't separate reasoned thinking from jaundiced agenda.

It's a fact tories increase debt more than Labour. Do you dispute that? 

You've already been told so. As such what reasoning can you use to justify the inaccurate nonsense you've been spouting? 

[MikeO]

41 minutes ago, pete0 said:

As such what reasoning can you use to justify the inaccurate nonsense you've been spouting?

It was in the Daily Mail so must be true....or not.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/

[pete0]

https://m.facebook.com/hastingsandryelabour/photos/a.626431314110459/2944046419015592/?type=3&source=48

 

[Palfy]

5 hours ago, pete0 said:

https://m.facebook.com/hastingsandryelabour/photos/a.626431314110459/2944046419015592/?type=3&source=48

 

Don’t blame him for that Pete he was told to say that by the his or the civil servants, well that will be his excuse anyway

[Chach]

19 hours ago, RPG said:

Public borrowing has to be paid back in one form or another. Labour learned (or rather, didn't learn) that the hard way  in the 1970's.

I really don't see you you can make this claim while you're denying to provide a definition of what money is and how it's created.

Comparisons to the 70's when the UK was on the gold standard are spurious to say the least.

[Chach]

19 hours ago, RPG said:

The Civil Service has various contingency, disaster and emergency plans ready to go. Always have had. But it does need ministerial approval to put them into action. In that regard I have to agree with Palfy.

I'm a public servant so very across the way things work, the average person would be amazed at how little changes when the government does. They will have their election commitments which in the grand scheme is typically fiddling around at the edges, the vast majority is BAU.

[Chach]

2 minutes ago, RPG said:

So how do you defend Brown's post gold standard fiscal dealings then?

Government debt as a proportion of GDP under Brown was lower than the previous Tory government, government spending as a % of GDP has been constant since the war.

[pete0]

23 hours ago, pete0 said:

It's a fact tories increase debt more than Labour. Do you dispute that? 

You've already been told so. As such what reasoning can you use to justify the inaccurate nonsense you've been spouting? 

@RPG

You not gonna admit you're tory ethics and beliefs you were taught are wrong?

Remember they said there's no magic money tree, well they've just plucked £13 billion out their arse pocket. If they were capable of doing this then why have we suffered 10 years of austerity. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-nhs-debt-matt-hancock-press-conference-briefing-a9443926.html?fbclid=IwAR2XIs36SZtWzlUKueIjZeVRoP25Kb4zJwPzPd_6hwifdmz2I1G6j9tgL4c

Edit: Corbyn was right. 

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/coronavirus-crisis-we-will-come-to-learn-jeremy-corbyn-was-right-2526507?fbclid=IwAR3nZ39NkesAU_cybfm51SHyF-iX9e_CFNVau39p7pwapQtE3sqhOi26z2I

9 hours ago, RPG said:

That's defending him? As Chancellor, Brown inherited a strong economy and low unemployment and he trashed them both in a cynical attempt to buy votes - which also failed. Even Blair later admitted that Brown had failed. Worse, that he knew he would fail!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/aug/31/tony-blair-gordon-brown-disaster

We haven't even touched on how he destroyed pensions yet. But being a public servant I suppose you still have your very generous taxpayer funded pension scheme to look forward to in retirement.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/may/12/public-sector-pensions-100k-rise-threefold

Other than a tory sheep everyone and their dog knows the economy was fucked by the American loans. Any how debt was lower under Blair and Brown than the following tory governments. Baffling that the government with the economy making more money and the company making more profits increased debt... Homelessness and poverty. Shame on anyone who has their ideals. 

[Chach]

20 hours ago, RPG said:

1) That's defending him? As Chancellor, Brown inherited a strong economy and low unemployment and he trashed them both in a cynical attempt to buy votes - which also failed. Even Blair later admitted that Brown had failed. Worse, that he knew he would fail!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/aug/31/tony-blair-gordon-brown-disaster

We haven't even touched on how he destroyed pensions yet. But being a public servant I suppose you still have your very generous taxpayer funded pension scheme to look forward to in retirement.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/may/12/public-sector-pensions-100k-rise-threefold

1) There's nothing in that Guardian article where Blair trashes Brown's performance as Chancellor. ( You're going to need more evidence that a news article link to demonstrate Brown's fiscal policy wrecked both employment and the economy too by the way)

2) Nice attempt at an ad hominem there, but pension schemes in Australia are mandated under law whereby ones employed contributes 9.5% on top of your salary into you fund. Private or public sector.

[Palfy]

4 hours ago, RPG said:

So, you are in Australia, yet I get flak for commenting on UK Issues from Dubai and told that I I should regrain from comments as I am not directly affected, while you are twice as far away from UK as me. Classy!

 

But he’s right Blair never criticised Brown as a chancellor, on the contrary Blair always recognised Brown as a good chancellor. 
Blair and Brown fell out near the end of Blair’s role as PM, which led to him saying he didn’t think Brown would make a good PM, he didn’t and couldn’t say Brown was a poor chancellor because the evidence was there to disprove it, and you surely can’t be trying to blame Brown for the world banking crisis that effected every country in the world. 

[Palfy]

That was a tax on dividends to make the rich who were paying themselves a punitive amount through PAYE then paying themselves thousands of pounds in share dividends at taxable rate of only 10%.
A loophole that had to be closed taxation has to be fair and the rich shouldn’t be allowed to take advantage of loopholes that 95% of the population can’t, unless of course you are in the 5% you might not agree. 

[pete0]

On 01/04/2020 at 20:03, pete0 said:

It's a fact tories increase debt more than Labour. Do you dispute that? 

You've already been told so. As such what reasoning can you use to justify the inaccurate nonsense you've been spouting? 

 

On 02/04/2020 at 19:12, pete0 said:

@RPG

You not gonna admit you're tory ethics and beliefs you were taught are wrong?

Remember they said there's no magic money tree, well they've just plucked £13 billion out their arse pocket. If they were capable of doing this then why have we suffered 10 years of austerity. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-nhs-debt-matt-hancock-press-conference-briefing-a9443926.html?fbclid=IwAR2XIs36SZtWzlUKueIjZeVRoP25Kb4zJwPzPd_6hwifdmz2I1G6j9tgL4c

Edit: Corbyn was right. 

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/coronavirus-crisis-we-will-come-to-learn-jeremy-corbyn-was-right-2526507?fbclid=IwAR3nZ39NkesAU_cybfm51SHyF-iX9e_CFNVau39p7pwapQtE3sqhOi26z2I

Other than a tory sheep everyone and their dog knows the economy was fucked by the American loans. Any how debt was lower under Blair and Brown than the following tory governments. Baffling that the government with the economy making more money and the company making more profits increased debt... Homelessness and poverty. Shame on anyone who has their ideals. 

@RPG

Third time of asking. 

[pete0]

 

[pete0]

2 minutes ago, RPG said:

Yes to your first question/insult.

 

No to your second question/propaganda

Not good enough rpg. Give an explanation. Show your true colours. 

The fact you ignored it twice and then third time of asking gave that pathetic response says everything. 

[pete0]

Just now, RPG said:

I have always shown my true colours since I joined this board.

That's 4 times now you've been too weak to admit your wrong or give an explanation why. 

[pete0]

4 minutes ago, RPG said:

No, its as many times as you like that I choose not to engage with a foul mouthed lout. Learn some manners.

Foul mouthed? Now you're just making excuses. You're an embarrassment. You spout nonsense and when asked to back it have no reply. Just goes to show you now realise it's evil but you're too stubborn to admit you've been misled/miseducated. Well that or you are an evil little man. 

[pete0]

 

[MikeO]

2 minutes ago, RPG said:

No, its as many times as you like that I choose not to engage with a foul mouthed lout. Learn some manners.

The political threads were opened again after a hiatus after things got nasty. You'll undoubtedly see me as "protecting" someone who I largely agree with but I see no evidence of a "foul mouthed lout" in anything pete has posted. If you want to make an official complaint use the report button and it'll be discussed.

For now if these threads get abusive again they'll be closed.

[Matt]

https://youtu.be/YahC2BXVyAQ

[Palfy]

8 minutes ago, Matt said:

https://youtu.be/YahC2BXVyAQ

I’m pleased Starmer got elected he’s definitely got a big job on his hands to unite the Labour Party, but I think he will be a lot more palatable to voters than Corbyn was. 
The rebuild is on and the future doesn’t look so bad, I’ve got high hopes for him and wish him well. 

[markjazzbassist]

For the non English help us out how is stamer different From Corbin and what are his pros and cons

[Romey 1878]

21 minutes ago, markjazzbassist said:

For the non English help us out how is stamer different From Corbin and what are his pros and cons

He’s closer to being blue than red. 

[MikeO]

29 minutes ago, markjazzbassist said:

For the non English help us out how is stamer different From Corbin and what are his pros and cons

 

7 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

He’s closer to being blue than red. 

I don't know much about him to be honest, comes across a bit weak though.

[Romey 1878]

Just now, MikeO said:

 

I don't know much about him to be honest, comes across a bit weak though.

He won’t last long if you ask me. 

[Palfy]

16 minutes ago, markjazzbassist said:

For the non English help us out how is stamer different From Corbin and what are his pros and cons

He is not left of left and knows how to engage with people, he will be a breath of fresh air after Corbyn, not that I disliked Corbyn he just struggled to be engaging with people which did him no favours and the right wing press crucified him because of it, even though he had some good policies. 
Starmer was a leading lawyer for human rights and when he talks you want to listen, he won’t be a push over when it comes to PMs question time Boris has now got a very intelligent adversary who’s going to bring him to task and turn the tide for Labour. 

[Palfy]

25 minutes ago, MikeO said:

 

I don't know much about him to be honest, comes across a bit weak though.

Strange I don’t see him as weak, I see a well rounded and grounded person, who is intelligent enough to know the pens mightier than the sword, I think Boris is in for a hard time by someone who is more switched on than Corbyn was. 

[MikeO]

2 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Strange I don’t see him as weak, I see a well rounded and grounded person, who is intelligent enough to know the pens mightier than the sword, I think Boris is in for a hard time by someone who is more switched on than Corbyn was. 

As I said I don't know much about him just going on his demeanour really, hope I'm wrong and you're right.

[MikeO]

He still doesn't convince me at all; body language/tone just not statesmanlike (though who in the World is just now I know). Saying the right words but sounds like he's reading a script, which he obviously is; the trick when reading a script is to sound like you're not and he doesn't do that for me. Prove me wrong Mr Starmer.

 

[Palfy]

3 hours ago, MikeO said:

He still doesn't convince me at all; body language/tone just not statesmanlike (though who in the World is just now I know). Saying the right words but sounds like he's reading a script, which he obviously is; the trick when reading a script is to sound like you're not and he doesn't do that for me. Prove me wrong Mr Starmer.

 

If he doesn’t turn the Labour Party round I dread to think what will become of Labour as credible power in this country 

Mike without wishing to appear rude I hope you’re concerns about him prove to be unfounded, or we shall live the rest of our lives in the shadow of a Tory government, now how depressing is that thought. 

[Palfy]

Having watched him on the Andrew Marr show this morning I feel confident he will connect with the country, I know he won’t have everyone’s backing in Labour particularly the far left of the Party, but he has the backing of the union’s who generally stoke the far left. 
I hope we see the return of some of the MPs who left the under Corbyn if we see that happening it will send a clear message to Labour voters who left or remained, that Labour are once again are united and the country needs a strong united Labour Party, even if you are a Tory or Liberal, we need accountability and not governments that are so powerful they do what they want without redress when they get it so wrong.