• This topic has 6,282 replies, 176 voices, and was last updated 4 years ago by kelvin.
Viewing 40 posts - 1,921 through 1,960 (of 6,291 total)
  • 2019 General Election
  • dannyh
    Free Member

    Plus a lot of people are racist to some degree. They may not openly admit it but when given some options that appeal to their inner racist they like them. The options are made up and not based on fact of course but that is where the stupidity comes in and they just believe it.

    Better known as populism.

    Totally this.

    I am hearing a lot about friends of friends and family members of people who are not frothing at the mouth, street fighting racists in the Classic image.

    They tend more to be people whose lives aren’t working out as they want them to (generally due to circumstances that are now beyond their control, but weren’t in the past). Instinctively they find it easier to blame someone else than have a look in the mirror where most of the reasons lay.

    Too many cars cramming into the town in the morning? It is due to Asians as they never walk anywhere and have eight cars to one family.

    Job opportunities not there even though you have never really knuckled down either at school or later and did boring shit like professional qualifications? Positive discrimination is to blame. ‘They’ favour everyone but ‘real’ English people.

    The media in this country is very very good at manipulating these people.

    When Rees Mogg sounds off about Grenfell it is not a mistake. A lot of the people he is trying to court have an underlying feeling that the residents of Grenfell largely ‘should not be in this country anyway’.

    These are the times we live in. This country is in managed decline. It makes it very easy to prey on people who think the world owes them a living.

    stevextc
    Free Member

    For the rest of your quotes. The takeaway here is our governments have a)underinvested and b)when they did bother investing wasted a lot of it. Thats not an argument for privatisation but better government.

    I’m most certainly not for privatisation of the NHS …. the problem is practically binary.
    The Tory’s under invest but Labour then invests but wastes a lot…
    The Tory’s will NEVER invest in the NHS … so that leaves Labour actually trying to rationalise and invest more wisely however this is not something they are comfortable with saying.

    jjprestidge
    Free Member

    binners

    Subscriber

    To be honest I’m quite happy with the situation as it stands, where the amount of damage any one party can do is severely curtailed. Its actually been quite funny watching ‘World King’ Joris Bohnsons impotent rage at his inability to actually do anything

    The worst thing that can happen IMHO is anyone getting an overall majority. Nobody in UK politics could be trusted with one, on account of the fact that they’re all mental! Luckily there seems to be a vanishingly small chance of that happening

    I think you’re right there. My business partner likened the prospect of a Tory or Labour majority to a choice between being hanged or shot.

    JP

    binners
    Full Member

    Would sir like his huge shit sandwich on brown or white bread?

    molgrips
    Free Member

    The underlying problems are poor business practices

    British business mostly focus their efforts on cost cutting – which is always detrimental to the service or goods they provide.

    rone
    Full Member

    British business mostly focus their efforts on cost cutting – which is always detrimental to the service or goods they provide.

    Yep. Race to the bottom. Not really increased profit if all you’re ever doing is cutting and cutting until you can’t function.

    I say this as business owner myself.

    molgrips
    Free Member

    I’ve been on countless projects that have been buggered up by cost cutting.

    dannyh
    Free Member

    Not really increased profit if all you’re ever doing is cutting and cutting until you can’t function.

    Depends how much you are taking out and how short term your view is.

    The Tory way is to grab it all now and screw the consequences.

    dovebiker
    Full Member

    We also have some pretty arcane Treasury rules where any savings delivered by Government departments can’t be re-invested, but have to be returned to the Treasury and ‘spend-to-save’ initiatives are discouraged. I’ve worked on a number of Government programmes where we spend years developing solutions, applying for funding, co-investment from industry, getting it approved for 5-10 years with promise of more to find the whole thing abandoned after a couple of years because a new administration or minister wants to re-direct it elsewhere. The short-termism of recent Governments is what has deprived investment in many areas and in fact if it wasn’t for EU money we’d be a lot worse.

    Northwind
    Full Member

    stevextc

    Member

    Yet other European countries manage… France has had environmentally energy to spare with it’s nuclear program.

    EDF are an interesting example to choose. Mostly because it’s not privatised. Much like the trains, when we talk about privatisation in the UK it often means “nationalisation, just with a different nation than us”. I mean, I like the French but exactly what is it that makes us think we couldn’t possibly run a public nuclear power industry ourselves but the French can run it for us? So much so that we nationalised British Energy then sold it to the French.

    And trains, people say Britain can’t run a nationalised train service but we can have Abelio, Kelios and Arriva run chunks of ours at a profit- why are the Dutch, French and Germans so much better at nationalised rail that they can run ours and we can’t?

    It’s a weird bit of british exceptionalism to think that we suck at these things and that just about every european government would be better at running our critical services than we can be.

    Waderider
    Free Member

    Can I just jump into to say todays headlines where the Tories are being attacked for not responding to the flooding promptly is really ripping my knitting.

    All parties need to be responding better to anthropomorphic climate change, the individual weather event is a passing side show.

    Unimpressed.

    dovebiker
    Full Member

    Can I just jump into to say todays headlines where the Tories are being attacked for not responding to the flooding promptly is really ripping my knitting.

    Well, the Tories since in Government have cut Environment Agency staff by 20% – reap what you sow

    kelvin
    Full Member

    Well done Tim Walker. We just need his party, and the party of the candidate he stood down for, to wake the **** up.

    binners
    Full Member

    As today’s reports of HS2 costs set to escalate yet again (presently 88 billion) it seems the Tory party is intensely relaxed ( to borrow the Abu Labour parlance) about spiffing money up the wall (to borrow the Borisism) as long as it’s going to their mates.

    Rip the floor out from underneath the public sector, but when it comes to your mates multi-million quid bills for ‘consultancy work’ that’s all fine.

    Remind me how many tens of millions of public money he spent on his ‘garden bridge’ that the evaporated into the ether?

    kelvin
    Full Member

    I don’t think Johnson is keen on HS2 at all, is he? It’s a vote loser in his own seat, and plenty of other Conservative seats. Hopefully he’ll look long term and push ahead with it still.

    rone
    Full Member

    Well done Tim Walker. We just need his party, and the party of the candidate he stood down for, to wake the **** up.

    Don’t know why he did this before the Thursday cut off as I understand – allowing another candidate to be selected?

    (I think there’s a battle going at national level versus local level here with the selection of candidates.)

    tjagain
    Full Member

    but Labour then invests but wastes a lot…

    Cite? Evidence? In my time in the NHS nothing has wasted ( that I have seen) anything like as much money as the tories fake market. that has added at least 10% to costs for zero benefit – its actually a detriment as it makes strategic planning more difficult

    rone
    Full Member

    but Labour then invests but wastes a lot…

    Is that old chestnut still doing the rounds?

    All you have to do is look around and see how the Tories have managed to spend so much whilst delivering so little in the period of austerity.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Steve XTC – yes the NHS performs poorly on some indicators – now look at what is spent by other countries on health and compare it to us. Not seen the numbers recently but even at the peak of labours cash injuecton it still ranked a few % behind other counties. We spend IIRC just under 10% of gdp. US 20% EU average is around 12% Germany spends around 14% IIRC

    Labours time in power it went up from under 8% of gdp to around 10% – and the improvement was huge

    I ain’t gonna waste my time actually looking at the numbers for someone who puts it down on ideological grounds without evidence as is clear

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Oh go on – here is some numbers
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_per_capita

    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.CHEX.GD.ZS?end=2016&start=2016&view=map

    We get poorer results ( only in some areas) because we do not pay enough – and in England after the tories reforms admin cost went from 8% to 20% again IIRC

    rone
    Full Member

    Good old Jozza.

    jjprestidge
    Free Member

    It’s a weird bit of british exceptionalism to think that we suck at these things and that just about every european government would be better at running our critical services than we can be.

    Unfortunately, we did suck at those sorts of things. Almost every nationalised industry in the UK was shockingly bad, and I say this as someone who opposed privatisation of natural monopolies.

    Just think back to British Leyland, British Rail et al if you don’t believe me.

    JP

    kelvin
    Full Member

    As I said @rone they need to wake the **** up, as do Labour, and do what needs doing to keep Johnson’s seat count down.

    raybanwomble
    Free Member

    Lib Dems are stuck really, they can’t be seen to be uniting with labour if they want to try and steal some soft tories. Corbyn is so toxic that anyone who is seen to be aligned with him get’s hurt if they are trying to take centrist voters.

    frankconway
    Full Member

    HS2 review is too little and too late; deputy chair claims he has been marginalised and his views ignored – intends to publish his own report.
    Totally unnecessary project with a London centric bias.
    There needs to be and should have been a significant spend on rail infrastructure in the northern poorhouse to turn it into the northern powerhouse.
    Back to HS2 and current estimated cost of £88billion; £33 billion, then £56billion – if it keeps on like this it won’t be long before we’re talking about big money.
    Massively over budget with, undoubtedly, worse to come; will be late; too much committed to pull the plug; has drained infrastructure spend from elsewhere; reinforces London bias.
    What a mess.

    binners
    Full Member

    If you watch the recent despatches programme on HS2 all the rail experts were unanimous. It’s going to end up as 150 billion plus commuter line into London. It’ll be stopped at Birmingham, so the whole ‘northern powerhouse’ thing will be exposed as the total bollocks it always was. HS2 will never get north of the midlands

    And while they spaff another 150 billlion on top of cross-rail tens of billions overspend, the reality of rail travel for users outside London and the south east looks like this

    But apparently rail nationalisation would be a bad thing? Well I suppose it might be if you live in the South East

    RustySpanner
    Full Member

    Totally this.

    When Rees Mogg sounds off about Grenfell it is not a mistake. A lot of the people he is trying to court have an underlying feeling that the residents of Grenfell largely ‘should not be in this country anyway’.

    These are the times we live in. This country is in managed decline. It makes it very easy to prey on people who think the world owes them a living.

    This is why the right have an easier job than the left.
    It’s far easier to pander to greed and ignorance than it is to ignite the spark of altruism and appeal to people’s better nature.

    We’re back in the ’30’s now.
    It’s only going to end one way.

    What caused this shift?

    Thatcherism.
    Greed is good. The cult of the individual, the deliberate creation of an easy to blame underclass and the demonisation of the disenfranchised.

    Evil, hateful ideology that has now gained so much momentum it cannot be stopped.
    A nation of selfish, greedy individuals, ready to sacrifice those most in need to get an inch or two nearer the trough.

    deadlydarcy
    Free Member

    Unfortunately, we did suck at those sorts of things. Almost every nationalised industry in the UK was shockingly bad, and I say this as someone who opposed privatisation of natural monopolies.

    Just think back to British Leyland, British Rail et al if you don’t believe me.

    Taking this and Northwind’s post to which it’s replying…someone humour me. As when I arrived here from Ireland, privatisation was well underway, and I wasn’t a big user of trains so I don’t really remember the days of BR.

    Were “we” shit at railways? If so, why so? If not, why not? I’m sure I remember some uni mates doing some inter-railing and saying how awesome it was to travel around Europe on the train but that was compared to the national Irish operator, CIE, which was a **** joke. That aside, I don’t hear many extolling the halcyon days of BR or is that just everyone looking through Maggie coloured glasses (accepting that it was Major’s government which passed the Railway Act…I think)?

    So what made us so shite at railways and the rest of Europe so good? And why do we now yearn for nationalisation because the rest of Europe does it so well? How come they didn’t privatise to our level?

    [Apologies for thread diversion.]

    rone
    Full Member

    At first this looks like a shit idea, and it still looks like a shit idea after taking it in but the most successful film scrips feature flawed characters that people can relate to.

    It’s embarrassing but this is part of his allure unfortunately.

    Emotion not facts is driving everything.

    Hopefully Labour will get Ken Loach to direct one of their films like he did previously.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    British real had suffered many years of underinvestment before privatisation

    We had great innovative stuff ready to be used but tory ideology meant it was never put into service – look into the ATP / tilting trains for one example

    Stevextc – got any evidence to back your assertions on the NHS? Or do you now I have give you the numbers accept that poor NHS performance is down to the tories underfunding and waste on the fake market?

    tjagain
    Full Member

    The limp dems reaction to Tim Walker is very telling is it not?

    3 other local limp dems on the candidate list in that constituency are also refusing to stand. If they national limp dems impose a candidate from outside then the local activists are not going to campaign for the imposed candidate

    But no – the national party are more concerned with fighting labour than with stopping tories.

    kerley
    Free Member

    What caused this shift?

    Thatcherism.
    Greed is good. The cult of the individual, the deliberate creation of an easy to blame underclass and the demonisation of the disenfranchised.

    Evil, hateful ideology that has now gained so much momentum it cannot be stopped.
    A nation of selfish, greedy individuals, ready to sacrifice those most in need to get an inch or two nearer the trough.

    Yep, that was the start of it. Our main hope is the young who were not around back then and should be looking at the state we are in and doing something about it. Currently they are still outnumbered so a few years yet.

    outofbreath
    Free Member

    I think the Libdems have no choice but to contest Canterbury.

    If they don’t they’re effectively saying they think Labour are a Remain party. If they think that then the Libdem USP evaporates.

    As it happens Labour aren’t a remain party IMHO. At best they’re a referendum party and with a 50/50 split that referendum is a coinflip. Given their leadership are Brexiteers of 40 years standing and they have some policies that arguably aren’t even legal within the EU it seems even more of a stretch to describe Labour as a Remain party.

    Finally I think there’s a lot to be said for voters having all three choices available to vote for: Leave, Revoke or Referendum. I’d be livid if I was denied the chance to vote for Revoke.

    In terms of the result the Remain Torys will be going to the Libdems so I don’t buy the logic that the Libdems standing will cost Labour the seat, quite the opposite.

    kelvin
    Full Member

    That all ignores how FPTP works, outofbreath. Having “all three options” in a seat so often just lowers the vote count needed for the Conservatives to win that seat.

    At first this looks like a shit idea

    I thought he was a better actor than that… it looks so practised and contrived… I honestly thought one of his big skills was making this stuff look natural.

    outofbreath
    Free Member

    That all ignores how FPTP works, outofbreath. Having “all three options” in a seat so often just lowers the vote count needed for the Conservatives to win that seat.

    The second paragraph is my main point. You can’t set yourself up with the USP of being the the true Remain party and then fail to contest a seat which is a split between two parties that aren’t really remainy at all. I really don’t see a choice for the Libdems, they have to stand a candidate. (Of course they can stand a rubbish candidate and not campaign very hard in the seat.)

    stevextc
    Free Member

    Northwind …

    EDF are an interesting example to choose. Mostly because it’s not privatised. Much like the trains, when we talk about privatisation in the UK it often means “nationalisation, just with a different nation than us”. I mean, I like the French but exactly what is it that makes us think we couldn’t possibly run a public nuclear power industry ourselves but the French can run it for us? So much so that we nationalised British Energy then sold it to the French.

    And trains, people say Britain can’t run a nationalised train service but we can have Abelio, Kelios and Arriva run chunks of ours at a profit- why are the Dutch, French and Germans so much better at nationalised rail that they can run ours and we can’t?

    It’s a weird bit of british exceptionalism to think that we suck at these things and that just about every european government would be better at running our critical services than we can be.

    I don’t think it’s so clear cut… there is perhaps some British exceptionalism but I think it relates to the history of business/industries and other European countries have their own exceptions.

    EDF, GDF (now Engie) and Orange/France Telecom were pretty crap in France from a consumer PoV… and much more successful exported.. whereas TGV/SNCF were always streets ahead.

    kelvin
    Full Member

    You can’t set yourself up with the USP of being the the true Remain party and then fail to contest a seat which is a split between two parties that aren’t really remainy at all.

    If opposition parties don’t/can’t change their tactics for key seats, rather than attempt a whole UK approach for this campaign, Johnson is laughing.

    Del
    Full Member

    It’s a weird bit of british exceptionalism to think that we suck at these things and that just about every european government would be better at running our critical services than we can be.

    No, it’s a result of the way that the rail system was carved up such that it allowed profits to be privatised and liabilities to be nationalised. Any operator ought to be able to appear a success if the game is rigged in your favour.

    Unfortunately, we did suck at those sorts of things. Almost every nationalised industry in the UK was shockingly bad, and I say this as someone who opposed privatisation of natural monopolies.

    Just think back to British Leyland, British Rail et al if you don’t believe me.

    As someone else posted, if you take a shit business on it’s arse, nationalise it but don’t fundamentally change it, it’s still going to be a shit business on it’s arse.

    If you think we can’t effectively run a nationalised business look at the recent history (15 years or so ) of the East Coast Line. Quite pertinent.

    outofbreath
    Free Member

    If opposition parties don’t/can’t change their tactics for key seats, rather than attempt a whole UK approach for this campaign, Johnson is laughing.

    I’m arguing the “can’t” angle. I’m making no judgement beyond that.

    The two main parties can’t do any kind of deal, and the Libdems can only (maybe!) get away with deals in very specific circumstances.

Viewing 40 posts - 1,921 through 1,960 (of 6,291 total)

The topic ‘2019 General Election’ is closed to new replies.