Double Post
I think she’s just not as Cunning as the rest of them and that shows as being slow to reply.
Not wishing to defend any of them. But some people just aren't loud, brash, quick thinkers. Doesn't mean they're thick, jus that they're more likely to consider the options available and make a decision rather than go on their gut. Or in Boris's case, just throw out some latin and say nothing. Someone who's good at PMQ's might well be the person you want if it comes to pressing the nuclear button. But it's not the person you want running the country the other 100% of the time.
I see that in the latest opinion poll the Labour lead over the Tories has surged to 4%
https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/1550073634752004097
But some people just aren’t loud, brash, quick thinkers.
Unfortunately that's not what she was saying on R4 this morning. She was saying she dives straight in, bulldozing the job. Sometimes weds to tell herself to stop and take a minute. The "bulldozing" the job worries me most.
Either way it’s making the case for passport controls at Gretna more likely
Save me a space on the A Ark would you?
he was saying she dives straight in, bulldozing the job. Sometimes weds to tell herself to stop and take a minute.
Great. A PM with ADD.
Crikey, these two candidates really lack leadership quality.
I think there should be a GE just for a bit of fun, how bad can it get?
I bet Max Headroom the Unicorn Rider Keir Starmer is rubbing his hands with glee simply by thinking of the prospect of winning the next GE, and to install himself as the next PM.
Either way it is Not a good time to be PM (all of them will not last while sanctions are on).
I've absolutely no idea why Leave voters are often accused of being racist bigots...
Not everyone who voted Leave is a racist, but all the racists voted Leave.
Edit: Trying to post an image of Farage's Breaking Point poster, but this rather quaint ancient forum won't let me do it. I'm sure someone else can do the honours.
Whilst it's fun to quote Will Self the reality is that many Tory politicians, for example, voted Remain. The idea that none of them could be described as racist is absurd
I've got no idea why anyone reasonable, without an agenda, would deny that there was a strong racist motivation behind Leave.
It is a commonly accepted fact for those of independent thought without an agenda to push.
Wasn't the quote Billy Bragg's to start with in any case?
Unfortunately that’s not what she was saying on R4 this morning.
IME there's a strange fetishization of "leaders" over "managers".
Which means we end up with leaders 50% of us don't like, badly managing the country.
I’ve got no idea why anyone reasonable, without an agenda, would deny that there was a strong racist motivation behind Leave.
You said all racists voted Leave. Most Tory MPs voted Remain, the idea that none of them could be described as racist is daft, especially as apparently most of the UK is racist.
Bigotry undoubtedly played a significant part in the referendum, it doesn't mean that you can place all racists in one camp and all non-racists in another. Plenty of EU supporters are racists and strongly support the EU's racist attitudes towards migrants and asylum seekers.
I’ve absolutely no idea why Leave voters are often accused of being racist bigots…
Because that is the only way to vent their anger by using "virtue signalling". Nahhh ... people are people and you will find all sorts on all sides.
Not everyone who voted Leave is a racist, but all the racists voted Leave.
That's quite a claim.
I’ve got no idea why anyone reasonable, without an agenda, would deny that there was a strong racist motivation behind Leave.
You just need to accept that the world is not perfect.
IME there’s a strange fetishization of “leaders” over “managers”.
Leaders lead. They don't necessary know how to manage.
Which means we end up with leaders 50% of us don’t like, badly managing the country.
Managers manage. They don't necessary know to lead.
Most people simply equate leaders as managers vice versa.
At the end of the day you either have someone who can lead or manage but you cannot have both. If you think they can change ... think again and think hard. Can you change?
Oh well, I must be mistaken.
No correlation at all between racism and Leave.
And bears don't shit in the woods either.
Oh well, I must be mistaken.
No correlation at all between racism and Leave.
And bears don’t shit in the woods either.
Nobody knows if you are mistaken or not.
You are the only person that know yourself while the others are irrelevant.
As long as you are happy with your own views that's good enough.
I think there should be a GE just for a bit of fun, how bad can it get?
In the words of the late James Bond.......
"If we don’t do this ... there’ll be nothing left to save." 😉
Purely hypothetically: what would happen if the dirt about to be dished forces both of them out of the race?
Does the whole thing start again?
I bet Boris is going through their bins right now
Tax cuts for who? Borrowing needs paid back – by who?
Everyone who is currently suffering from the increase in the cost of living. Income tax, VAT, fuel duty, all could be reduced to mitigate the increase in the cost of living. Who would make up the shortfall? Well, in a word, the rich. They should be paying a lot more tax towards the effort to control inflation. The economy needs to contract to rebalance supply and demand to bring down inflation, and the burden of that should fall on those who can afford it.
And as for borrowing, it doesn't need to be paid back (not in a real sense), because that would cause an even bigger recession that the one which is going to be caused by inflation. Borrowing is required to support public services while the economy contracts and will be needed to boost growth once inflation is under control.
Well, in a word, the rich. They should be paying a lot more tax towards the effort to control inflation
Which group are you describing as "the rich" ?
Assuming they are paying their taxes and not running some avoidance scam or directing their money offshore, then they are already paying more tax than the next person. Why should they have to foot the bill ?
Someone on £100k is paying £33k in tax
Someone on £30k is paying £6k
Both getting the same piss poor services. £30k person is already getting more bang for their buck if you want to look at it that way
The person earning £100k is also probably spending a lot more in the economy , thus paying more VAT and all the other taxes than the other.
Don’t worry folks. Andrea Leadsome is on channel 4 news saying she supports Instagram Liz’s tax cuts idea
So with revered, world-renowned economic minds like that endorsing it, we can all rest easy.
Assuming they are paying their taxes and not running some avoidance scam or directing their money offshore, then they are already paying more tax than the next person. Why should they have to foot the bill ?
Someone on £100k is paying £33k in tax
They're paying more tax because they earn a lot more.
And they take more resources. It's technical necessity to pay more tax at the high end. For a start it helps control inflation which keeps the worth of their money high.
Don’t worry folks. Andrea Leadsome is on channel 4 news saying she supports Instagram Liz’s tax cuts idea
Well we don't have the detail do we so it's tricky to know either way.
Some taxes need cutting and some will need to rise.
To balance the economy rather than the books.
Someone on £100k is paying £33k in tax
Someone on £30k is paying £6k
I’m talking about people who earn a lot more than 100k and have millions in untaxed assets. Even then though your example is ridiculous. People on 100k should pay a lot more tax than those on 30k, so the figures you quote (assuming they’re correct) are about the right balance. Or are you suggesting people on 100k need financial support from the govt? Good luck with that.
rone
Free MemberWell we don’t have the detail do we so it’s tricky to know either way.
The one that sticks out is where she's going to cut corporation taxes to tackle the cost of living crisis. Basically policy setting by randomised fridge magnet poem.
OTOH Sunak is getting right down to the important business of appealing to individual swing voters with his wind farm ban. Just in case anyone was feeling a bit agrieved about us getting a new PM with totally new policies and manifestos based on the vote of .29% of the population, now we're getting to the point where not even most of that .29% are very important- the ones that count, are the ones that have strong opinions on wind farms,or other easily targeted issues.
And they take more resources
Probably not, most wealthy people don't rely on the NHS, state education or social care for a start, and probably dont need social services in the same way either.
People on 100k should pay a lot more tax than those on 30k
And they do both as a percentage of income and obviously in absolute terms. The problem is people who earn this sort of money have seen their share of the tax burden rise and rise.
Good luck going after the properly wealthy, they have the resources to be one step ahead, doesn't mean they shouldn't pay more but it's not a short term answer.
And as for borrowing, it doesn’t need to be paid back
I think that's called stealing, idiotic thing to say. We could default but the implications of that are not good, if nothing else are the lines of credit you so like to rely on will disappear over night.
I’m talking about people who earn a lot more than 100k and have millions in untaxed assets.
Millions is just like a drop of water in the ocean.
I think you need a lot of billions, a lot more and ideally trillions.
It's the likes of the big multi nationals that irk me, Starbucks,amazon etc.
I'd have Rishi pegged at the start of this but now I'm not sure!
Probably not, most wealthy people don’t rely on the NHS, state education or social care for a start, and probably dont need social services in the same way either.
Any private UK Consultant will have a wealth of experience gained in, The NHS.
Their UK staff will come from a pool of labour educated by, public education.
On Social Services I grant they may not have a direct need.
The very rich are not separate from the rest of us and rely upon us for their comfortable way of life.
I see the dirty tricks have begun....
https://twitter.com/cathynewman/status/1550138610346754048?t=dNz_ggXlH8hy8PPDsLZ0lA&s=19
Dazh wants fuel duty cutting, but at the same time applauded sky rocketing costs of aviation as we need less people flying???
Anyway - this is the way of the future. Increasing population, decreasing resources. So the one thing you can guarantee is that the top 2% will fight very hard to hang on to the 50 odd percent they own (whatever it is nationally or globally). And they'll keep conning the 98% to enable it with nasty populism like Brexit/Trumpism etc. And they'll win.
I see the dirty tricks have begun….
Is it "dirty tricks" or is it simply Channel 4 doing what you might expect them to do as an investigative news provider and scrutinising a candidate who has aims of becoming PM?
I saw the Channel 4 News segment and I didn't get the impression of dirty tricks. For example they interviewed Sunak supporters who claimed that he had won a scholarship to Winchester because of his humble background, they then showed an old interview with Sunak parents suggesting that they had paid for the school fees.
Nobody knows if you are mistaken or not.
You are the only person that know yourself while the others are irrelevant.
As long as you are happy with your own views that’s good enough.
No.
There is truth and there is falsehood. Statements like the above are out of the Surkov playbook as exemplified by Putin, Trump, Farage etc.
No.
There is truth and there is falsehood. Statements like the above are out of the Surkov playbook as exemplified by Putin, Trump, Farage etc.
I don't read any of them or know them persoally so I don't know what they think.
As long as you are happy with the claim that's good enough for everyone to know.
Claim and express as you see fit because that's your belief and nobody is going to take that away from you.
Life is short and with the blink of an eye we cease to exist.
Will Wragg…
My wordThat’s some list but this one’s possibly the
Funnily enough will wragg was the lies me that complained to the police about the whips blackmailing people
That with the Pincher & elphicke stuff lends credence to the truss stuff
I see the dirty tricks have begun….
The fun thing is the right wing nuts will be ranting and raving, as they always do, about how the MSM is so nasty and opposed to the right wing missing that its their fellow right wingers handing the ammo to the media and begging them to use it.
Good recent example is the ones ranting about Mordaunt when it was basically the mail which favoured other candidates launching attack after attack on her and the rest of the media occasionally reporting anything particularly amusing.
about how the MSM is so nasty and opposed to the right wing
Funny how it was all an establishment conspiracy when it was Corbyn being destroyed by the press being fed by other Labour members, and totally unfair.
Funny how it was all an establishment conspiracy when it was Corbyn being destroyed by the press being fed by other Labour members, and totally unfair.
It's the mail going after Sunak & Corbyn
Tbh I don't know if Sunak is dirty enough to play this game
Hmmmm. Liz intends to borrow money to finance a cut in corporation tax.
Given this countries track record, what do we think that the savings from paying less corporate tax will be spent on?
A) increased investment in skills, training and technology to increase productivity
B) increased dividends to shareholders
just been watching Mick Lynch on BBC Newscast.
Whether you support his politics or his union's strikes, how refreshing to hear someone answering the question.
Funny how it was all an establishment conspiracy when it was Corbyn being destroyed by the press being fed by other Labour members, and totally unfair.
The only slight flaw in your hilarious comment was that everyone vaguely on the left did comment on how it was the loony centrists who were busy feeding ammo to the press.
The subtle difference being that in Mordaunts case she did have some support from some parts of the press whereas for Corbyn bar some support from the mirror he got zilch since the guardian in particular was rather worried about the idea of actually have someone left wing vs a nice safe liberal.
Speaking of which its been kinda quiet about the forensic lawyer Starmer failing the basic job of a lawyer and asking a question he didnt know the answer to or rather starting a inquiry.
Hmmmm. Liz intends to borrow money to finance a cut in corporation tax.
Given this countries track record, what do we think that the savings from paying less corporate tax will be spent on?
A) increased investment in skills, training and technology to increase productivity
B) increased dividends to shareholders
C) Liz leaves the (metaphorical) suitcase with the cash in on the (allegorical) bus, and no one gets anything.
Well, according to the allegorical bus, we're now £350m a week better off. So one metaphorical suitcase shouldn't be a problem.
Ah hard working Rishi, with that scholarship, you know the other one where your parents actually pay for you to go to a public school 🙂
And that interest free loan that we all get from our parents to start our own property portfolio.
It’s the lies that get me,the fact they go to great effort to craft the hard working got a scholarship self made man lie when it’s just family money being splashed.
And that interest free loan that we all get from our parents to start our own property portfolio.
But with a clause that any profit made must be given back to the parents, nice.
I don't care that he had a privileged upbringing, how many Tory MPs didn't. The problem is the lies, or delusion, that his upbringing was humble or in any way normal, i.e. a very expensive private school costing more per year than many people earn is not 'normal'
I think that’s called stealing, idiotic thing to say. We could default but the implications of that are not good, if nothing else are the lines of credit you so like to rely on will disappear over night.
None of this is true.
A country with monetary sovereignty can't default.
How does a currency issuing government steal from itself?
The government doesn't have lines of credit for sterling. It's a currency issuer and owns the BOE.
The national debt has only had payments made to it a handful of times in the last 70 years.(government rarely due surplus) It just doesn't happen as the economy isn't designed to operate this way.
Once more: the government doesn't need to borrow to spend. And the 'borrowing' is technically bond issuance matched to the deficit. This money is paid by private sector for them to store funds in a safe place with the government.
The national debt is effectively a running total of all money spent into the economy by the government that hasn't been taxed back.
The government can always make good on payments to the bonds. And they can choose to not even to not even issue them
It's not necessary for spending or tax cuts.
It’s not necessary for spending or tax cuts.
Forgive my ignorance, but who’s receiving the £19bn a month interest gov.uk is being charged then, and where does that money come from? (As announced on yesterdays news)
Forgive my ignorance, but who’s receiving the £19bn a month interest gov.uk is being charged then
Savers. The national 'debt' is simply all the money in the economy sitting in bank accounts. You want to be paid interest on your savings don't you? Without that 19bn a month you wouldn't get it.
and where does that money come from?
The 'magic money tree'.
Maybe that’s where everyone will spend the money from their tax cuts?
A country with monetary sovereignty can’t default.
How does a currency issuing government steal from itself?
Worked well in Zimbabwe, should be fine....
If it was all so simple loads of countries would do it, the few nutcases that tried (Zimbabwe, Venezuela etc.) Didn't do so well. The local currency plummets in value vs others, not a problem if you are your own little trade island but we certainly aren't. As Russia has found out recently others may refuse to take your worthless local currency as it's not stable.
If it was that easy don't you think Johnson the unprincipled populist would have done. Please stop with magic money tree and we don't have to pay debt back, we do. As I understand it most of our borrowing is quite short term, because we have a good credit rating we are able to borrow again to pay off the last round. The moment we start wantonly issuing currency or default, our credit status goes to junk, debt comes due, we default and the rest of the world sends us back to pre industrial times.
'Savers. The national ‘debt’ is simply all the money in the economy sitting in bank accounts'
No, not really. A lot is owned by Pension funds, rest , other investors.
Pension funds are specialised savings instruments with taxation advantages owned by the workforce and managed by professionals. AKA savings.
Hold up there, "looney centrists" ? What now? Has politics become so binary that if you aren't hard right or hard left, you are the lunatic fringe now?
Has politics become so binary that if you aren’t hard right or hard left, you are the lunatic fringe now?
On here, yes.
Thankfully, in the real world, not so much - although there have been worrying blips over the last few years.
Hold up there, “looney centrists” ? What now? Has politics become so binary that if you aren’t hard right or hard left, you are the lunatic fringe now?
The term "centrist" doesn't mean what you might reasonably expect it to mean.
It is used by right-wingers who lack both the guts and the honesty to admit to what they are.
For very obvious reasons right-wingers often don't like to admit to what they are so they come up with terms such as "centrist" to describe themselves. Many people, including myself, are happy to indulge in their nonsensical terminology.
Blairites, for example, might call themselves centrists but everyone knows that they are simply repackaged right-wingers.
Hold up there, “looney centrists” ? What now?
And once again another thread is derailed by the same achingly tedious few and their yawn-inducingly predictable hobby horse.
Absolutely.
Can't we end this thread with the word "Truss" and a scream emoji, and send the usuals back to fulminate in the safe quarantine of the starmer thread?
We're all doomed. Happy friday everyone.
To be fair, If a GP and a pharmacist didn’t have a combined income to pay for a Winchester place, the country truly was in a terrible state.
the same achingly tedious few and their yawn-inducingly
Can't you confront the yawn inducing tedium by posting one or two of those 3 photos from a 1970s film that you have been posting for the last 15 years, when you can't think of anything constructive to say?
I'm sure that a few pictures would make the thread less boring.
Please stop with magic money tree and we don’t have to pay debt back, we do.
@rone has explained it many times. I have posted the Richard Murphy thread which also explains it. People have recommended that you read 'The Deficit Myth'. Please read at least one of these sources and then see if you still want to post such things.
Richard Murphy - https://twitter.com/richardjmurphy/status/1337737606688333826
The Deficit Myth - https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/45731395-the-deficit-myth
Here's a critique of MMT for balance
https://www.cato.org/cato-journal/fall-2019/modern-monetary-theory-critique
The problem with this recommended reading is that they are the views of individuals trying to argue for a position. Is there any article (or book) that gives a balanced view of MMT with economists arguing for and against?
By the way, I've only just realised that Magic Money Tree was presumable a meant as a joke term for Modern Monetary Theory 🙂
EDIT: Thanks @nickc That came in while I was typing
The problem with this recommended reading is that they are the views of individuals trying to argue for a position. Is there any article (or book) that gives a balanced view of MMT with economists arguing for and against?
By the way, I’ve only just realised that Magic Money Tree was presumable a meant as a joke term for Modern Monetary Theory
MMT is not a position - all critiques get this wrong.
MMT is a description of a modern bank system / government spending for countries with central banks.
How you utilise it is down to political will left or right.
You can't really argue for or against it. It's how the system works currently.
Just think about this one simple fact: the government created 450billion for pandemic. Out of thin air. Without taxation to pay for it. They then used Q/E to buy back the bonds. Job done.
They just accelerated normal operations.
All the data is there.
I'm conscious I'm dragging the debate sideways but you just need to know the Tories (and Labour) are lying to you about government spending. And lack of money.
Don't know about the rest of it but I'm still amused that Ernie and Chewy aligned on the previous page.
Ernie and chewkw are the same person...
Thanks @rone I'll avoid derailing this thread any further too and do a bit more reading on the subject.
I'm aware that politicians from both sides are lying to me. That's their job after all. The job of a politician is to get elected and they do this by telling stories. The side that tells the best story wins and gets to enact the laws that they think are best. The laws don't have to relate to the stories though 🙂
Ernie and chewkw are the same person…
which is brad pitt and which is edward norton?
@roverpig it's fine! All central to this debate. But I don't want to take over.
Watch this for simple MMT
They're Helena Bonham Carter and Meatloaf
Its up to you to decide which is which 😀
MMT is a description of a modern bank system / government spending for countries with central banks.
Indeed; it is a description of how the economy works, there are others that theorise that it doesn't work in the way the proponents of MMT think it does. Such is economic theory.
You can’t really argue for or against it. It’s how the system works currently.
It's just an economic theory, of course you can critique it. To think that every other theory of economics is invalid is just nonsensical.
The ‘magic money tree’.
AKA The Public.
If it was all so simple loads of countries would do it, the few nutcases that tried (Zimbabwe, Venezuela etc.) Didn’t do so well.
If you are talking about QE or creating more money, it works within certain parameters, and you have to have the foundations to do it. If you don't have them but try it anyway, that's when you get runaway inflation AIUI.
I’m still amused that Ernie and Chewy aligned on the previous page.
Probably not as amused as me. It is pretty self-evident that you can't claim that no Remainer is racist, so the idea that all racists voted leave is obviously nonsense. So self-evident in fact that even Chewy apparently managed to work it out.
Some people would do well to think for themselves before parroting Will Self.
Some people would do well to think for themselves before parroting Will Self.
Educate yourselves, sheeple!
I’m afraid that us brainless thoughtless drones, slaves as we are to the military-industrial complex, having out thoughts spoon-fed to us by Rupert Murdoch, can only but dream of having the wisdom and insight of our forum revolutionaries whose intelligence puts them in a far superior league to us
And they wear their moral superiority so lightly, with such good grace and humour, without being remotely patronising, sanctimonious, hectoring or condescending
There seems to be a real push for Liz Truss, what are people seeing in her that i've missed, yes Rishi is upper class, he's had bad press, but at least he's still working in the realms of reality, not offering make believe tax cuts that'll just have a knock on elsewhere, more than likely at the bottom of the chain, i know he's not a favourite of the right wingers for his political beliefs, but still, Truss will have those MPs out of a job in 2 years time.
Truss just worries me, more than Boris ever did, and that's without her ever really having the ability to do something seriously harmful to the country by herself.