Forum menu
Oh right. I haven’t followed your exchange with Ernie, have no interest in doing so, and believe that he is perfectly capable of speaking for himself. Frankly, it’s a bit weird that you want me to pass judgement, but maybe it’s all part of the pile on you’re imagining.
You actually commented on it, about 5 posts later. That must have been hard without following it.
Why's it weird, to want to correct mistakes? Do you think he was just mistaken or do you think he embellished to make the story worse than it was?
I can’t even remember what it was about !
Careful now: if we keep quoting each other we might be accused of bullying.
I can’t even remember what it was about !
Handily I've provided plenty of references. Bottom of p42, my challenge was on p43, about halfway down.
Yeah but we are on page 48 now.
Edit : Okay I'll have a look.
You actually commented on it, about 5 posts later. That must have been hard without following it.
You'll have to show me. I genuinely have no idea what you're on about.
Why’s it weird, to want to correct mistakes?
You have already said that I'm an internet random. Why would you solicit my opinion on your exchange with a different internet random? If you don't think that's a bit odd, we can agree to disagree.
For avoidance of doubt, I don’t think you have secret meetings and have made a decision to gang up
On the contrary, you should see the chat on the STW revolutionary whatsapp group. 🙂
Yeah but we are on page 48 now.
Yes. You've been doing deny, deflect, deride for 6 pages now. But it's OK, we're here now. Here's a link, make it even easier.
https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/uk-government-thread/page/43
You have already said that I’m an internet random. Why would you solicit my opinion on your exchange with a different internet random?
I don't have an issue with your opinion on that, the facts are there, easy to read and assimilate. I don't know whether to believe you in your assertions about the inner workings of government, you've been inaccurate on some of your content so far. But you don't need 'credentials' to answer the question about whether you think Ernie was being deliberately misleading.
Of course, not calling out clear misdirection could be interpreted as a bit, IDK - partisan. But you're not a group, you're all individuals so you've no confidences to betray.
Blimey it was 4 days ago! This:
Labour in apparent disarray over Thames cleanup plan
Yeah you didn't agree with my comment or you thought I was lying or something. And I don't think you liked the Guardian headline either.
Okay fair enough. I think it might be time to let it go now, no?
But you don’t need ‘credentials’ to answer the question about whether you think Ernie was being deliberately misleading.
Again, I don't know and am not going to bother finding out because I don't care. I really don't understand why you want me to adjudicate on this matter.
Of course, not calling out clear misdirection could be interpreted as a bit, IDK – partisan
Would it make it easier if I just agreed with whatever you're on about?
On the contrary, you should see the chat on the STW revolutionary whatsapp group. 🙂
I've told you who I work for.... I know exactly what you've been posting; I've got a print out in front of me 😉
Would it make it easier if I just agreed with whatever you’re on about?
LOL ! That is exactly what was going through my mind. 🙂
Yeah you didn’t agree with my comment or you thought I was lying or something. And I don’t think you liked the Guardian headline either.
Okay fair enough. I think it might be time to let it go now, no?
Not quite. Didn't agree with your comment because it (they - there were two) were blatantly not true. You took what was written and converted it into something else. Why?
Ransos - noted, frustrating as it's such a simple question but I'll put you down as No Comment, and form my own opinion about why not.
Ransos – noted, frustrating as it’s such a simple question but I’ll put you down as No Comment, and form my own opinion about why not.
Gosh, I'll just have to find a way to cope. Perhaps you can find someone else to take the bait and play your game of taking sides.
LOL ! That is exactly what was going through my mind. 🙂
You quoted me again! You do realise that opinions are going to be formed?
Is it just me or is everyone on the last page a bit inebriated?
It's probably you.
Edit : I am a teetotaler but I think this page would have probably made more sense to me after two or three pints.
I don't think it's possible to be a bit inebriated...
Hang on though: if me, Ernie and dazh are seen to be in disagreement, what does this mean?
Definitely me!
Anyway back on topic. Rachel Reeves smelling the coffee and betraying the lie of everything she's said for the past two months...
"lets just change the rules" 😀
Opinions were formed a while ago. You're just reinforcing them now.
Perhaps you can find someone else to take the bait and play your game of taking sides.
Why you wouldn't want to be on the side of truth and fact I don't really get, but free choice.
if me, Ernie and dazh are seen to be in disagreement, what does this mean?
That you've hatched a cunning diversionary tactic on your 'secret' whatsapp group. I've got the screenshot in front of me.
Opinions were formed a while ago. You’re just reinforcing them now.
I'm devastated.
Why you wouldn’t want to be on the side of truth and fact I don’t really get, but free choice.
I'm on the side of being entirely indifferent to your spat with Ernie.
It wasn't a spat ! As far as I recall I didn't even argue with Jon.
You can't be indifferent in the fight for truth; if you're not with me, you're against me.
It wasn’t a spat ! As far as I recall I didn’t even argue with Jon
Fair point: he does seem keen to generate one. He has opinions and everything.
Looks like the preposterous 5 year 'debt' rule might get a tweak.
(debt must be falling as a share of the economy by the fifth year of the forecast.)
It never made any sense at all. Because it's a) based on a 5 year 'forecast' b) cleverly could be their last year c) you can't really increase GDP without enlarging government 'debt' over the long haul - the two things mirror. d) the economy is currently stagnating/declining and if growth is the aim then you have to spend much much more.
Basically this is mostly all that is stopping the Labour party being sensible about investment.
A self-inflcited economic wound.
Let's hope.
I am not sure what might be 'factually incorrect' in this FT opinion piece but it certainly paints a Labour government in quite a crisis.
https://archive.li/2024.09.24-050043/https://www.ft.com/content/213fc4e9-e941-4676-913c-5aaebb1a6c83
Dips into thread....
Observes prolonged, tangental, pedantic bickering.
....Bye for now
I wish labour ministers would dial down the shouting a bit at conference. Reeves doing a passable Scargill yesterday, now we have Cooper ranting and raving about the riots. You'd think they'd be in more of a celebratory mood rather than all this fire and brimstone stuff. Watching conference is like being told off by an authoritarian headmistress, it's quite terrifying.
Dips into thread….
Observes prolonged, tangental, pedantic bickering.
….Bye for now
Buyers remorse disguised as Centrist cool-aid?
Fair enough but there's nothing pedantic about working through the political hope pinned on the Labour party.
Always the same on here. Pages and pages of Tory implosion - hysterics and accepted consensus. Truss thread is still turning itself inside out for instance.
Scrutiny and criticism of the Labour party - pedantic.
Labour have made a complete mess at the start by any metric.
We're simply reflecting that.
Whereas yeah - a Centrist sits on the sidelines working through narrow ideas defined by failed Tory rule as a Labour plan.
Dips into thread….
What's worse, lighthearted bickering/banter or posting a 'I'm too sexy for this thread' comment?
What’s worse, lighthearted bickering/banter or posting a ‘I’m too sexy for this thread’ comment?
Definitely the first one. Shame as it's an important subject, well worth discussing but it is impossible in this thread.
The same half dozen people utterly unwilling to change their minds saying the same thing over and over.
If you can make the effort to post that ^^ you can make the effort to comment on the FT article which I linked at the bottom of the previous page.
And then maybe this thread would stay on topic, no?
now we have Cooper ranting and raving about the riots
Cooper was spot on. In tone as well as content. Call out the racists, call out the arsonists, stop flouncing around them as people with “legitimate concerns”. The government supporting the police, supporting the judiciary. The public standing up for those under attack, and welcomed for doing so passionately by a key minister. No “enemies of the people” jibes at people working in the legal system. No attacks on the police for doing their job from this politician. No claims of double standards because violent racists are facing the full force of the law. No blaming this on immigrants. No “both sides” when it comes to the riots.
I've not been very active on the thread lately but for me at least that's a good sign, I'm generally happy with things.
Overall happy at the direction of travel but I'm keen to hear what the budget brings. I'm unlikely to agree with everything announced of course but I want to see a clear divergence from where the Tories were talking us.
Largely positive results in ending perpetual strikes and yes, the ongoing nursing dispute will be resolved, totally confident of that.
Books being cooked as widely predicted on here to find £50 billion down the back of the sofa to fund public services etc.
Attempting to claw back fraudulent covid contact monies.
Ambivalent towards winter fuel payments (I expect some sort of rowing back from that but we'll see) and very sceptical about clamping down on benefit "fraud".
Politically naive to take money for clothing, birthday party etc. They should know better and we deserve better. They need to learn swift lessons from that as it's not acceptable, within the rules or not.
That said, if Starmer decided to ride to work every day on a bike he would still be on the front page of the Express as his £1k bike "costs not than most people's cars!!" or whatever, whether he paid for it or not. All the more reason not to give them ammunition.
If the GE were held tomorrow I would still vote the same way and I still have to pinch myself occasionally as I still can't quite believe the Tories are finally out of power.
(Other people's mileage may vary on all off the above!)
If you can make the effort to post that ^^ you can make the effort to comment on the FT article which I linked at the bottom of the previous page.
I would, but someone has commented on the article via the website already with my thoughts, which they states 'Apologies but is there a story here? Heavy on conjecture, low on facts'.
“lets just change the rules” 😀
The treasury are normally v keen to write down debt as quickly as they can. The BoE QT rules are currently moving to 'get rid' of debts quicker or within a shorter time frame than perhaps is necessary - it's not completely arbitrary, but if the "rules are changed" to write them down over a longer period (or let bonds naturally come to their end) could 'save' the treasury billions in payments, which could instead be used for investment/spending.
It's what you wanted remember? More money to be spent.
It’s what you wanted remember? More money to be spent.
Absolutely. I just find it amusing that despite her hawkish rhetoric and talk of black holes and balancing the books she's been forced to do what everyone from a left leaning perspective told her to do in the first place. It's a victory I guess.
It’s what you wanted remember? More money to be spent.
You'll put them off their pessimistic stride (yeah right) ;o)
I’m glad the sausages got a mention.
https://Twitter.com/johnthe92611772/status/1838573387343433734?s=46&t=1lK7Dw1b6RqGJyvufO-trQ
Is that the wurst moment of the conference?
It’s a victory I guess.
praise indeed.