FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > SPOILER alert. Good new about the UK
SPOILER alert. Good new about the UK
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"or an Election round the corner. People are skint, living off of credit. Dont matter how you sex it up or who you blame they are all the same."  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You might be skint, credit etc...but these are independent figures. Not government or party figures. UK grew more in last year than Germany has in the last 4. There are nearly 2 million more jobs now than in 2010. There are more zero hours contracts now. True...but less as a proportion of the total. Yorkshire created more jobs last year than France, Italy and Spain combined. These are all easily checked facts....so yes OP. Let's celebrate UK. Getting back on track and finally heading in the right direction (generally at least)" How naive can you get! Independent usually means the board of directors are old Etonians that have been given a helping hand into their privileged position by the powers that be. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You might be skint, credit etc...but these are independent figures. Not government or party figures. UK grew more in last year than Germany has in the last 4. There are nearly 2 million more jobs now than in 2010. There are more zero hours contracts now. True...but less as a proportion of the total. Yorkshire created more jobs last year than France, Italy and Spain combined. These are all easily checked facts....so yes OP. Let's celebrate UK. Getting back on track and finally heading in the right direction (generally at least)" Low quality private sector jobs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Employment down.. They sanction people so that artificially lowers the figures. Food banks are increasing. Working people are claim tax credits.... So no.. Its not accurate.." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You might be skint, credit etc...but these are independent figures. Not government or party figures. UK grew more in last year than Germany has in the last 4. There are nearly 2 million more jobs now than in 2010. There are more zero hours contracts now. True...but less as a proportion of the total. Yorkshire created more jobs last year than France, Italy and Spain combined. These are all easily checked facts....so yes OP. Let's celebrate UK. Getting back on track and finally heading in the right direction (generally at least)" True nobby but it doesnt mean people are better off. The company I work for get contracts because they are the cheapest not the best.My pay is good but a lot in the firm are on rubbish contracts and are struggling . This is happening all over the country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Employment down.. They sanction people so that artificially lowers the figures. Food banks are increasing. Working people are claim tax credits.... So no.. Its not accurate.." Also people on work programmes are not classed as unemployed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You might be skint, credit etc...but these are independent figures. Not government or party figures. UK grew more in last year than Germany has in the last 4. There are nearly 2 million more jobs now than in 2010. There are more zero hours contracts now. True...but less as a proportion of the total. Yorkshire created more jobs last year than France, Italy and Spain combined. some people will beleave anything there told These are all easily checked facts....so yes OP. Let's celebrate UK. Getting back on track and finally heading in the right direction (generally at least)"  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You might be skint, credit etc...but these are independent figures. Not government or party figures. UK grew more in last year than Germany has in the last 4. There are nearly 2 million more jobs now than in 2010. There are more zero hours contracts now. True...but less as a proportion of the total. Yorkshire created more jobs last year than France, Italy and Spain combined. These are all easily checked facts....so yes OP. Let's celebrate UK. Getting back on track and finally heading in the right direction (generally at least)" Don't forget too that Labour opposed each and every measure proposed by the coalition government and they predicted economic catastrophe and massive unemployment. Their model is the one that Hollande has failed with in France. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"or an Election round the corner. People are skint, living off of credit. Dont matter how you sex it up or who you blame they are all the same." Truth....  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is true that the economy is growing but who benefits from that growth when a Tory government is in charge is debatable. Who suffers to create that growth is also debatable. So as they say, every silver lining has a cloud OP. "Well, you had two comparable countries with two equally comparable debt problems in 2010. France and the UK. France chose a route that was being championed by Labour here in the UK and is exactly the road that Labour would have taken us down given the choice. Britain chose a different strategy and we voted in sensible austerity. Today, France is in tatters. President Hollande is the most unpopular French President in living memory and his socialist economy is in abject meltdown. Meanwhile here in the UK we are living and breathing again and our economy is well out of recession. The irony here is that you have people both sides of the Channel moaning about how tough life is. The question is all about morality. Do we accept that as individuals, families and as a nation we should live within our means or do we expect everything and someone else to foot the bill? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are right everyone should live within their means, that's common sense isn't it. It's a lovely theory too. The problem is there are lots of people who will exploit others so they have lots more means. This leaves whole sections of society living in uncertainty, on a minimum wage (which isn't the same as a living wage). We can assume you are a Tory voter from your comments and we can also assume your motto for living is "I'm alright Jack". While our economy is growing it would be great if wealth was better distributed, that's all I am saying." @ "I'm alright Jack"
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are right everyone should live within their means, that's common sense isn't it. It's a lovely theory too. The problem is there are lots of people who will exploit others so they have lots more means. This leaves whole sections of society living in uncertainty, on a minimum wage (which isn't the same as a living wage). We can assume you are a Tory voter from your comments and we can also assume your motto for living is "I'm alright Jack". While our economy is growing it would be great if wealth was better distributed, that's all I am saying." What I am saying is that these threads are always about moaning and complaining and we never get to celebrate good news. When good news does come along you have a steady procession of doomsday preachers stating all of the reasons why it is not really good news and that we are all fucked, the country is fucked and the end of the world is just around the corner. What do we really want? Day after day of bad news stories so that we can all have a collective moan? My wife and I were both victims of the worldwide recession but we chose to see it as an opportunity rather than a crisis and we are now both doing OK after a period of instability. If that means i'm alright Jack... then so be it. I personally feel it more helpful and materially beneficial to seek out the good rather than the bad and find opportunity instead of a reason to complain. Having a positive attitude to life and living does not mean that you can't understand what is going on in life. It just means that you look for positives instead of taking the easier route and finding faults and being negative about things. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What a load of tosh. Five years of Hell to be back where we started. I can tell you for nothing that we haven't seen much of a recovery up here." You should have voted for Independence then. You could have been free from the Barnet formula and supporting yourself on oil sales. That would be working really well. How would you be paying for all the freebies that the SNP offer without the tax revenue? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"or an Election round the corner. People are skint, living off of credit. Dont matter how you sex it up or who you blame they are all the same." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is true that the economy is growing but who benefits from that growth when a Tory government is in charge is debatable. Who suffers to create that growth is also debatable. So as they say, every silver lining has a cloud OP.
Well, you had two comparable countries with two equally comparable debt problems in 2010. France and the UK.
France chose a route that was being championed by Labour here in the UK and is exactly the road that Labour would have taken us down given the choice. Britain chose a different strategy and we voted in sensible austerity.
Today, France is in tatters. President Hollande is the most unpopular French President in living memory and his socialist economy is in abject meltdown. Meanwhile here in the UK we are living and breathing again and our economy is well out of recession.
The irony here is that you have people both sides of the Channel moaning about how tough life is.
The question is all about morality. Do we accept that as individuals, families and as a nation we should live within our means or do we expect everything and someone else to foot the bill?". You fundamentally don't get the system!. Living within your means sounds very noble but we live in an economic system that requires perpetual growth and debt. Were currently experiencing deflation because the money supply is contracting, it's contracting because 1 banking reforms haven't gone through. 2 people are paying off debt, the more debt people pay off, the less credit is available, when money supply starts to contact prices fall, it's basic supply and demand!. Now you seem to always use the personal attack of moaning or whinging. It's neither I'm simply pointing out to you that your political philosophy of Tory great labour bad is as flawed as labour good Tory bad! Now I'm just a simple gas fitter who's worked for himself for 20 years, I've done alright and lived within my means more than anyone due to my personal green obsession  .
But I've never done it all on my own by pulling up my boot straps and mucking in, although yes I've done that, but behind me all the way was society... teachers, parents, wife, children, uncles, grants, schemes, education, the NHS, apprenticeships and boss,s.
Without them I wouldn't be where I am today and that's why I'm a socialist and more than happy to pay more tax | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Because the news would never lie to us......" When it suits it does | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Figures released today are from the independent body - Office for National Statistics. Not government manipulation or spin! And in fact these are the revised figures - so are more "actual" than the initial estimate figures released. This growth is coming from consumer spending and confidence. When you hear Ed Balls waffling on about how bad the Tories have been in the last 5 years, and how much better Labour will be - i just don't see it - especially when he will not answer the most basic question: how are you going to do it? " The plan was the Hollande plan. Unfortunately, it didnt work. The worst thing though is that they are committed (as was Hollande) to lift the top tier of tax to 50% and to increase Corporation Tax. This is simply envy politics designed to win over the traditional Labour voter showing them that "the rich" will pay. Unfortunately, as was seen in France recently and many years before by successive labour governments - an increased tax level reduces the amount of tax collected and the result is that those most motivated by the movement to "tax the rich" will actually end up paying more to pick up the shortfall. "Taxing the rich" is a particularly pernacious populist motivation because the end result has always been worse for the treasury with a reduction in collectable tax revenue. In other words, the polar opposite result of the intention and the shortfall is then collected from everyone else by hidden tax rises on all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"an increased tax level reduces the amount of tax collected and the result is that those most motivated by the movement to "tax the rich" will actually end up paying more to pick up the shortfall. " This is not always true. Depends how you tax the rich and by how much you increase the rates. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Figures released today are from the independent body - Office for National Statistics. Not government manipulation or spin! And in fact these are the revised figures - so are more "actual" than the initial estimate figures released. This growth is coming from consumer spending and confidence. When you hear Ed Balls waffling on about how bad the Tories have been in the last 5 years, and how much better Labour will be - i just don't see it - especially when he will not answer the most basic question: how are you going to do it? The plan was the Hollande plan. Unfortunately, it didnt work. The worst thing though is that they are committed (as was Hollande) to lift the top tier of tax to 50% and to increase Corporation Tax. This is simply envy politics designed to win over the traditional Labour voter showing them that "the rich" will pay. Unfortunately, as was seen in France recently and many years before by successive labour governments - an increased tax level reduces the amount of tax collected and the result is that those most motivated by the movement to "tax the rich" will actually end up paying more to pick up the shortfall. "Taxing the rich" is a particularly pernacious populist motivation because the end result has always been worse for the treasury with a reduction in collectable tax revenue. In other words, the polar opposite result of the intention and the shortfall is then collected from everyone else by hidden tax rises on all." . If the system is created by the wealthy to serve the wealthy, then they will always have a way to dodge tax, Jimmy Carr was dodging tax when his tax rate would have been around 30pc ... That's less than mine, the people with money hidden in Swiss accounts were dodging tax at around the same, if your wealthy in this country, there's absolutely no need to pay tax at more than 30pc, there's hundreds of legal tax loop holes allowing that figure or less. During ww1 and ww2 the tax for the wealthiest was around 90pc and they all paid it willingly because they had no option because of the war!. It's got nothing to do with rich or poor everybody would dodge tax if they could.... That's why there tax LAWS | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Figures released today are from the independent body - Office for National Statistics. Not government manipulation or spin! And in fact these are the revised figures - so are more "actual" than the initial estimate figures released. This growth is coming from consumer spending and confidence. When you hear Ed Balls waffling on about how bad the Tories have been in the last 5 years, and how much better Labour will be - i just don't see it - especially when he will not answer the most basic question: how are you going to do it? The plan was the Hollande plan. Unfortunately, it didnt work. The worst thing though is that they are committed (as was Hollande) to lift the top tier of tax to 50% and to increase Corporation Tax. This is simply envy politics designed to win over the traditional Labour voter showing them that "the rich" will pay. Unfortunately, as was seen in France recently and many years before by successive labour governments - an increased tax level reduces the amount of tax collected and the result is that those most motivated by the movement to "tax the rich" will actually end up paying more to pick up the shortfall. "Taxing the rich" is a particularly pernacious populist motivation because the end result has always been worse for the treasury with a reduction in collectable tax revenue. In other words, the polar opposite result of the intention and the shortfall is then collected from everyone else by hidden tax rises on all.. If the system is created by the wealthy to serve the wealthy, then they will always have a way to dodge tax, Jimmy Carr was dodging tax when his tax rate would have been around 30pc ... That's less than mine, the people with money hidden in Swiss accounts were dodging tax at around the same, if your wealthy in this country, there's absolutely no need to pay tax at more than 30pc, there's hundreds of legal tax loop holes allowing that figure or less. During ww1 and ww2 the tax for the wealthiest was around 90pc and they all paid it willingly because they had no option because of the war!. It's got nothing to do with rich or poor everybody would dodge tax if they could.... That's why there tax LAWS" It is not about dodging tax it is about the Treasury collecting taxes from the big hitters who pay the vast proportion of our tax revenues. A couple of hundred of the top Executives going non dom and a couple of hundred companies moving their office of domiciliation to Ireland would have a catastrophic effect on the tax revenues collected in this country (as happened in France). The tax paid by the 95% is largely irrelevant because those individuals in the 95% make up a tiny amount of the revenue. Bob the Builder might pay another £2,000 a year whereas Simon the Chief Exec might be in for a £1,000,000 extra tax hit. A big Company being hit for an extra £10,000,000 in CT is also going to force a re-consideration. This is a big motivation to change country of domiciliation for tax purposes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Figures released today are from the independent body - Office for National Statistics. Not government manipulation or spin! And in fact these are the revised figures - so are more "actual" than the initial estimate figures released. This growth is coming from consumer spending and confidence. When you hear Ed Balls waffling on about how bad the Tories have been in the last 5 years, and how much better Labour will be - i just don't see it - especially when he will not answer the most basic question: how are you going to do it? The plan was the Hollande plan. Unfortunately, it didnt work. The worst thing though is that they are committed (as was Hollande) to lift the top tier of tax to 50% and to increase Corporation Tax. This is simply envy politics designed to win over the traditional Labour voter showing them that "the rich" will pay. Unfortunately, as was seen in France recently and many years before by successive labour governments - an increased tax level reduces the amount of tax collected and the result is that those most motivated by the movement to "tax the rich" will actually end up paying more to pick up the shortfall. "Taxing the rich" is a particularly pernacious populist motivation because the end result has always been worse for the treasury with a reduction in collectable tax revenue. In other words, the polar opposite result of the intention and the shortfall is then collected from everyone else by hidden tax rises on all.. If the system is created by the wealthy to serve the wealthy, then they will always have a way to dodge tax, Jimmy Carr was dodging tax when his tax rate would have been around 30pc ... That's less than mine, the people with money hidden in Swiss accounts were dodging tax at around the same, if your wealthy in this country, there's absolutely no need to pay tax at more than 30pc, there's hundreds of legal tax loop holes allowing that figure or less. During ww1 and ww2 the tax for the wealthiest was around 90pc and they all paid it willingly because they had no option because of the war!. It's got nothing to do with rich or poor everybody would dodge tax if they could.... That's why there tax LAWS It is not about dodging tax it is about the Treasury collecting taxes from the big hitters who pay the vast proportion of our tax revenues. A couple of hundred of the top Executives going non dom and a couple of hundred companies moving their office of domiciliation to Ireland would have a catastrophic effect on the tax revenues collected in this country (as happened in France). The tax paid by the 95% is largely irrelevant because those individuals in the 95% make up a tiny amount of the revenue. Bob the Builder might pay another £2,000 a year whereas Simon the Chief Exec might be in for a £1,000,000 extra tax hit. A big Company being hit for an extra £10,000,000 in CT is also going to force a re-consideration. This is a big motivation to change country of domiciliation for tax purposes." . Most uk tax revenue comes from indirect tax! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Most uk tax revenue comes from indirect tax!" What has that got to do with the motivation to up sticks if your personal or corparate tax bill increases? It is irrelevant for us mere mortals but for those at the top (who pay most of the tax collected) it is no big deal for them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just a warning to those who prefer to moan, bellyache and complain through their life that the following link contains good news about Britain and our economy. Apologies in advance to those who prefer bad news stories and look to blame the Romans, or the Nazi's, or Mrs Thatcher, Tony Blair. UK's economic growth for 2014 revised up http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32126975 Celebrate good news, be positive, be happy and optimistic for the future... Britain is back!" maybe you should tell that to the 1000s of people who have lost there homes and businesses | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Most uk tax revenue comes from indirect tax! What has that got to do with the motivation to up sticks if your personal or corparate tax bill increases? It is irrelevant for us mere mortals but for those at the top (who pay most of the tax collected) it is no big deal for them." . Because you were attempting to make out that the 95% should be grateful to the 5% for keeping them.... I was pointing out that more revenue is collected indirectly than directly, If you add up the numbers the 95% pay more than the 5% in tax... Way more | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Figures released today are from the independent body - Office for National Statistics. Not government manipulation or spin! And in fact these are the revised figures - so are more "actual" than the initial estimate figures released. This growth is coming from consumer spending and confidence. When you hear Ed Balls waffling on about how bad the Tories have been in the last 5 years, and how much better Labour will be - i just don't see it - especially when he will not answer the most basic question: how are you going to do it? The plan was the Hollande plan. Unfortunately, it didnt work. The worst thing though is that they are committed (as was Hollande) to lift the top tier of tax to 50% and to increase Corporation Tax. This is simply envy politics designed to win over the traditional Labour voter showing them that "the rich" will pay. Unfortunately, as was seen in France recently and many years before by successive labour governments - an increased tax level reduces the amount of tax collected and the result is that those most motivated by the movement to "tax the rich" will actually end up paying more to pick up the shortfall. "Taxing the rich" is a particularly pernacious populist motivation because the end result has always been worse for the treasury with a reduction in collectable tax revenue. In other words, the polar opposite result of the intention and the shortfall is then collected from everyone else by hidden tax rises on all.. If the system is created by the wealthy to serve the wealthy, then they will always have a way to dodge tax, Jimmy Carr was dodging tax when his tax rate would have been around 30pc ... That's less than mine, the people with money hidden in Swiss accounts were dodging tax at around the same, if your wealthy in this country, there's absolutely no need to pay tax at more than 30pc, there's hundreds of legal tax loop holes allowing that figure or less. During ww1 and ww2 the tax for the wealthiest was around 90pc and they all paid it willingly because they had no option because of the war!. It's got nothing to do with rich or poor everybody would dodge tax if they could.... That's why there tax LAWS It is not about dodging tax it is about the Treasury collecting taxes from the big hitters who pay the vast proportion of our tax revenues. A couple of hundred of the top Executives going non dom and a couple of hundred companies moving their office of domiciliation to Ireland would have a catastrophic effect on the tax revenues collected in this country (as happened in France). The tax paid by the 95% is largely irrelevant because those individuals in the 95% make up a tiny amount of the revenue. Bob the Builder might pay another £2,000 a year whereas Simon the Chief Exec might be in for a £1,000,000 extra tax hit. A big Company being hit for an extra £10,000,000 in CT is also going to force a re-consideration. This is a big motivation to change country of domiciliation for tax purposes." . It's the equivalent of saying a poorer person should be able to choose which country in Europe he buys his fags in, his booze in, his petrol in, his insurance in so he can minimise his tax while still benefiting from living in the uk.... Of course there's laws to stop the poorer person doing this. I'd assume but can't prove its because poor people don't make tax laws | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"yes any sign of 'recovery' is good news, however that others don't feel your optimism or for whatever circumstances are not as well off as you doesn't make them 'whingers or perpetual moaners..' that's a strange outlook.. also there are two or more sides to every story and all economic news needs to be looked at in the whole not just one aspect.. how many of these 1.9 million jobs are zero hours or so poorly paid that the earners are still in receipt of tax credits..? and how many would have been created in any 5 year period..? good job we dont have a 1.5 trillion National debt lest it may not be so rosy.. " This ! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"yes any sign of 'recovery' is good news, however that others don't feel your optimism or for whatever circumstances are not as well off as you doesn't make them 'whingers or perpetual moaners..' that's a strange outlook.. also there are two or more sides to every story and all economic news needs to be looked at in the whole not just one aspect.. how many of these 1.9 million jobs are zero hours or so poorly paid that the earners are still in receipt of tax credits..? and how many would have been created in any 5 year period..? good job we dont have a 1.5 trillion National debt lest it may not be so rosy.. " People on zero hours contracts make up around 2% of the workforce. It is widely available public information. This means that out of every 100 jobs - 2 are zero hours contracts. Included in this figure are people that have two or even three jobs with zero hours contracts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Included in this figure are people that have two or even three jobs with zero hours contracts." Even with n number of zero contracts an employee can still find himself in a situation with very little work coming in. I have managed a team of over 30 all on zero hours... it is not reliable income. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is true that the economy is growing but who benefits from that growth when a Tory government is in charge is debatable. Who suffers to create that growth is also debatable. So as they say, every silver lining has a cloud OP.
Well, you had two comparable countries with two equally comparable debt problems in 2010. France and the UK.
France chose a route that was being championed by Labour here in the UK and is exactly the road that Labour would have taken us down given the choice. Britain chose a different strategy and we voted in sensible austerity.
Today, France is in tatters. President Hollande is the most unpopular French President in living memory and his socialist economy is in abject meltdown. Meanwhile here in the UK we are living and breathing again and our economy is well out of recession.
The irony here is that you have people both sides of the Channel moaning about how tough life is.
The question is all about morality. Do we accept that as individuals, families and as a nation we should live within our means or do we expect everything and someone else to foot the bill?"Have to agree. Much as some of the cuts could have been placed in different areas. The operation has been a success. We have further staved of (I believe) 3 near misses, as far as European recessions? Something which when trying to balance the books must not have been an easy task - and something you cannot plan for. I remember it being said at the start of the last election campaign; "it doesn't matter who comes into government, they will always be hated for what they do." Simply due to the size of the task ahead of them. It was good to hear Cameron saying this morning that those most vulnerable will be protected under his next government, though there are obvious questions ... I think the coalition has done well on the whole in an extreme climate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It was good to hear Cameron saying this morning that those most vulnerable will be protected under his next government, though there are obvious questions ... " Jesus fucking Christ the Tories have spent 5yrs shitting all over 'those most vulnerable' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just a warning to those who prefer to moan, bellyache and complain through their life that the following link contains good news about Britain and our economy. Apologies in advance to those who prefer bad news stories and look to blame the Romans, or the Nazi's, or Mrs Thatcher, Tony Blair. UK's economic growth for 2014 revised up http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32126975 Celebrate good news, be positive, be happy and optimistic for the future... Britain is back!" Classic myopic interpretation of the world here. 'Everything is great! As long as you ignore everything that illustrates why everything is not great, and look at a single indicator devoid of context!' Whatever you do, please don't try to eat the pencil when you go to vote. Or ask for a very thick crayon at least. It's for your own good. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just a warning to those who prefer to moan, bellyache and complain through their life that the following link contains good news about Britain and our economy. Apologies in advance to those who prefer bad news stories and look to blame the Romans, or the Nazi's, or Mrs Thatcher, Tony Blair. UK's economic growth for 2014 revised up http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32126975 Celebrate good news, be positive, be happy and optimistic for the future... Britain is back! Classic myopic interpretation of the world here. 'Everything is great! As long as you ignore everything that illustrates why everything is not great, and look at a single indicator devoid of context!' Whatever you do, please don't try to eat the pencil when you go to vote. Or ask for a very thick crayon at least. It's for your own good." . For someone with so much time on his hands with all this long haul flying he does, you'd think he'd have read a few books at least, even if it's just business books or the ft, but I have to keep correcting him time and again on business issues of all things, and I'm just a gas fitter  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Print lots of money, stimulate some growth and then inflate your way out of a debt problem. There is probably a name for an economic policy like that but I'm too stupid to think of it. " Tried that in Zimbabwe, don't think it was a success. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lets face it there are no easy answers. Well there are but most people would be upset if we took them. But you would have to cut what the NHS provides in half, if this country actually could only spend what it earned. People talk about cutting the debt as though there is a magic solution. There ain't." . If you supply your money with a debt amount attached to it ie for every pound issued a % of debt is attached to it.... It's physically impossible to reduce your debt? Because you always need more money to repay your original one pound plus the debt you attached to it at the beginning!... Inflation of the money supply, it's why we dropped the gold standard and the bretton wood standard, you can never peg a perpetually growing currency to a finite product | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It was good to hear Cameron saying this morning that those most vulnerable will be protected under his next government, though there are obvious questions ... Jesus fucking Christ the Tories have spent 5yrs shitting all over 'those most vulnerable'" That's why I said it's nice to see him saying it, there are obvious questions, and cuts could have been better placed. The alternative model - that of lending and spending our way out of trouble is obviously a flawed model. If Labour would have gotten in, the debt ceiling would be enormous right now, alongside a whole range of other issues. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" How on earth any reason minded adult could entertain voting green or ukip is beyond me " This lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It was good to hear Cameron saying this morning that those most vulnerable will be protected under his next government, though there are obvious questions ... Jesus fucking Christ the Tories have spent 5yrs shitting all over 'those most vulnerable' That's why I said it's nice to see him saying it, there are obvious questions, and cuts could have been better placed. The alternative model - that of lending and spending our way out of trouble is obviously a flawed model. If Labour would have gotten in, the debt ceiling would be enormous right now, alongside a whole range of other issues. " . That's exactly what we've done | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You might be skint, credit etc...but these are independent figures. Not government or party figures. UK grew more in last year than Germany has in the last 4. There are nearly 2 million more jobs now than in 2010. There are more zero hours contracts now. True...but less as a proportion of the total. Yorkshire created more jobs last year than France, Italy and Spain combined. These are all easily checked facts....so yes OP. Let's celebrate UK. Getting back on track and finally heading in the right direction (generally at least)" Where did you get this info? 2 million jobs more than 2010 sounds ridiculous has does the UK growing more in 1 year than Germany in the last 4. This just smells of bs too me sorry. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would be very surprised if the conservatives don't get in , they really have turned things round for Britain . As the op says , we should be applauding the recovery and growth , but there will always be the very vocal anti any good news brigade . How on earth any reason minded adult could entertain voting green or ukip is beyond me , and as a result of this latest piece of good news , I would guess many a wavering labour voter may turn blue too ". It depends upon how gullible you are to believe any bollocks the government tell you... I've found green party members to be slightly more questioning and dare I say slightly more intelligent | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It was good to hear Cameron saying this morning that those most vulnerable will be protected under his next government, though there are obvious questions ... Jesus fucking Christ the Tories have spent 5yrs shitting all over 'those most vulnerable' That's why I said it's nice to see him saying it, there are obvious questions, and cuts could have been better placed. The alternative model - that of lending and spending our way out of trouble is obviously a flawed model. If Labour would have gotten in, the debt ceiling would be enormous right now, alongside a whole range of other issues. . That's exactly what we've done ". We've just spent our way out of it from throwing money at the top and not the bottom. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would be very surprised if the conservatives don't get in , they really have turned things round for Britain . As the op says , we should be applauding the recovery and growth , but there will always be the very vocal anti any good news brigade . How on earth any reason minded adult could entertain voting green or ukip is beyond me , and as a result of this latest piece of good news , I would guess many a wavering labour voter may turn blue too .
It depends upon how gullible you are to believe any bollocks the government tell you... I've found green party members to be slightly more questioning and dare I say slightly more intelligent"Slightly more questioning , for the sake of questioning , or questioning with a reasoned alternative ? Quite clearly the greens have absolutely no viable alternatives as numerous examples have proved . In today's world the tree hugging hippies may have a lovely idealistic principle or two , but running a country is way beyond their , dare I say it , slightly less intelligent ability . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would be very surprised if the conservatives don't get in , they really have turned things round for Britain . As the op says , we should be applauding the recovery and growth , but there will always be the very vocal anti any good news brigade . How on earth any reason minded adult could entertain voting green or ukip is beyond me , and as a result of this latest piece of good news , I would guess many a wavering labour voter may turn blue too .
It depends upon how gullible you are to believe any bollocks the government tell you... I've found green party members to be slightly more questioning and dare I say slightly more intelligent
Slightly more questioning , for the sake of questioning , or questioning with a reasoned alternative ?
Quite clearly the greens have absolutely no viable alternatives as numerous examples have proved .
In today's world the tree hugging hippies may have a lovely idealistic principle or two , but running a country is way beyond their , dare I say it , slightly less intelligent ability . ". I'm shocked madam. Round up the usual tree hugging numptys and have them lashed for their principled ideology. Answer me this. 200 years of conservative government have us socialism, you created the monster, we all know how Frankenstein's monster killed him in the end! Me I'm in the green party I prepare my political _iews with science and reasoning, thus with a planet that's habitable you can have capitalism but you can't have capitalism without a habitable planet, it's just a question of priorities | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would be very surprised if the conservatives don't get in , they really have turned things round for Britain . As the op says , we should be applauding the recovery and growth , but there will always be the very vocal anti any good news brigade . How on earth any reason minded adult could entertain voting green or ukip is beyond me , and as a result of this latest piece of good news , I would guess many a wavering labour voter may turn blue too .
It depends upon how gullible you are to believe any bollocks the government tell you... I've found green party members to be slightly more questioning and dare I say slightly more intelligent
Slightly more questioning , for the sake of questioning , or questioning with a reasoned alternative ?
Quite clearly the greens have absolutely no viable alternatives as numerous examples have proved .
In today's world the tree hugging hippies may have a lovely idealistic principle or two , but running a country is way beyond their , dare I say it , slightly less intelligent ability . .
I'm shocked madam.
Round up the usual tree hugging numptys and have them lashed for their principled ideology.
Answer me this.
200 years of conservative government have us socialism, you created the monster, we all know how Frankenstein's monster killed him in the end!
Me I'm in the green party I prepare my political _iews with science and reasoning, thus with a planet that's habitable you can have capitalism but you can't have capitalism without a habitable planet, it's just a question of priorities "I'm quite sure neither conservative nor socialist parties want an uninhabitable planet either ! I don't disagree with the ecological stance of the greens , it's the economic blueprint that worries me . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good news. I'm sure it'll cheer up all those forced to use foodbanks to survive. " Do you not think those forced to use the food banks would be just as likely to be using them under a labour government then ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would be very surprised if the conservatives don't get in , they really have turned things round for Britain . As the op says , we should be applauding the recovery and growth , but there will always be the very vocal anti any good news brigade . How on earth any reason minded adult could entertain voting green or ukip is beyond me , and as a result of this latest piece of good news , I would guess many a wavering labour voter may turn blue too .
It depends upon how gullible you are to believe any bollocks the government tell you... I've found green party members to be slightly more questioning and dare I say slightly more intelligent
Slightly more questioning , for the sake of questioning , or questioning with a reasoned alternative ?
Quite clearly the greens have absolutely no viable alternatives as numerous examples have proved .
In today's world the tree hugging hippies may have a lovely idealistic principle or two , but running a country is way beyond their , dare I say it , slightly less intelligent ability . .
I'm shocked madam.
Round up the usual tree hugging numptys and have them lashed for their principled ideology.
Answer me this.
200 years of conservative government have us socialism, you created the monster, we all know how Frankenstein's monster killed him in the end!
Me I'm in the green party I prepare my political _iews with science and reasoning, thus with a planet that's habitable you can have capitalism but you can't have capitalism without a habitable planet, it's just a question of priorities
I'm quite sure neither conservative nor socialist parties want an uninhabitable planet either !
I don't disagree with the ecological stance of the greens , it's the economic blueprint that worries me . ". You say that but then let's look at the Tories stance on the ever worrying fracking. Less regulation Changed laws to allow the companies to access private land without the consent of the owner. Took the power away from local councils to deny site approval. In fact the Tories have changed 22 amendments to allow for easier fracking despite the industry not being able to prove it safe. Does that really sound like a government wanting an inhabitable planet?. It sounds to me like a bunch of people reaping huge cash rewards from the petroleum companies and then if it all turns out shit they can retire to a Caribbean island where it's frack free!. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
Pussycat
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On the vote for policies site people can undertake a survey to choose the policies they most like, without knowing which party those policies represent. It will then tell you your results. The national results based on 216.1k compleyed surveys are: Labour 27.5% Green Party 21% Lib Dems 20.6% UKIP 13.8% Conservatives 13.4% SNP 1.6% Scottish Green Party 1.6% Plaid Cymru 0.5% Personally my results put me overwhelmingly in the Green camp and thats who I'll be voting for. And I am of reasonable mind and intelligence thank you very much. Sexy-bum, you rock
Pussycat
"There's a huge difference between stating what a policy is and putting it into practice, if elected. eg Miliband and Balls's economic and health policies, they haven't a fucking chance in hell of making them work. Blair/Brown were bad enough. But at least pro's at it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On the vote for policies site people can undertake a survey to choose the policies they most like, without knowing which party those policies represent. It will then tell you your results. The national results based on 216.1k compleyed surveys are: Labour 27.5% Green Party 21% Lib Dems 20.6% UKIP 13.8% Conservatives 13.4% SNP 1.6% Scottish Green Party 1.6% Plaid Cymru 0.5% Personally my results put me overwhelmingly in the Green camp and thats who I'll be voting for. And I am of reasonable mind and intelligence thank you very much. Sexy-bum, you rock
Pussycat
". Ahh thanks, being green is never an easy message to get across because we offer honest answers, and honest answers are never the most palatable, it always makes me sad that the most dishonest unscrupulous politicians get on the most because the public buy the bollocks every time. But do you know something the kids are getting it and I'm pretty optimistic for the next generation being less selfish than their parents. I don't mean that in a bad way but the current generation have lead a very hedonistic lifestyle they hold dearly too like gun owners in the usa  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good news. I'm sure it'll cheer up all those forced to use foodbanks to survive. Do you not think those forced to use the food banks would be just as likely to be using them under a labour government then ?" No I don't. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good news. I'm sure it'll cheer up all those forced to use foodbanks to survive. Do you not think those forced to use the food banks would be just as likely to be using them under a labour government then ? No I don't. " Well you should have a look across the Channel. Similar population to the UK and twice as many food banks with the biggest increase being in the last four years. As a reminder, president Hollande's policies were those championed by Labour in their fight in the 2010 election. The state of Britains economy would be worse today than it was in 2010 had we endured a Labour government for the last five years. France is the living example. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I tend to find political _iews are generally fixed. Debating x y and z is almost pointless as people are quite entrenched. I would not take the policy survey too literally. If I offered to boost living standards by £1000 a year. I'd imagine it would be popular. If I did it by borrowing money and in 10 years time the countries ininterest means taxing people by £2000 more a year then that would be less popular. But a policy to do something is never tied to a precise means if payment. I think they should pass a law meaning any proposal to spend money must be linked to the money raising. Same for cuts and tax give aways. General statements like we will cut £12 billion or we will balance the books should be fined. As neither party have actually stated how. The rest are as bad. The greens had no way of explaining how they would afford their housing policy. Fine them all for uncosted promises." Very good point. Great idea. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On the vote for policies site people can undertake a survey to choose the policies they most like, without knowing which party those policies represent. It will then tell you your results. The national results based on 216.1k compleyed surveys are: Labour 27.5% Green Party 21% Lib Dems 20.6% UKIP 13.8% Conservatives 13.4% SNP 1.6% Scottish Green Party 1.6% Plaid Cymru 0.5% Personally my results put me overwhelmingly in the Green camp and thats who I'll be voting for. And I am of reasonable mind and intelligence thank you very much. Sexy-bum, you rock
Pussycat
.
Ahh thanks, being green is never an easy message to get across because we offer honest answers, and honest answers are never the most palatable, it always makes me sad that the most dishonest unscrupulous politicians get on the most because the public buy the bollocks every time.
But do you know something the kids are getting it and I'm pretty optimistic for the next generation being less selfish than their parents.
I don't mean that in a bad way but the current generation have lead a very hedonistic lifestyle they hold dearly too like gun owners in the usa "The main problem with the Greens is that they think money grows on tree's. Is that why the are always hugging them?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The main problem with the Greens is that they think money grows on tree's. Is that why the are always hugging them? "That's very condescending. The greens have some decent policy _iews they just need to taper their political dogma for a centre right populace. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Absolute garbage. Some of the things this govt. has done are shameful. " But not as shameful as the Labour government did before them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On the vote for policies site people can undertake a survey to choose the policies they most like, without knowing which party those policies represent. It will then tell you your results. The national results based on 216.1k compleyed surveys are: Labour 27.5% Green Party 21% Lib Dems 20.6% UKIP 13.8% Conservatives 13.4% SNP 1.6% Scottish Green Party 1.6% Plaid Cymru 0.5% Personally my results put me overwhelmingly in the Green camp and thats who I'll be voting for. And I am of reasonable mind and intelligence thank you very much. Sexy-bum, you rock
Pussycat
.
Ahh thanks, being green is never an easy message to get across because we offer honest answers, and honest answers are never the most palatable, it always makes me sad that the most dishonest unscrupulous politicians get on the most because the public buy the bollocks every time.
But do you know something the kids are getting it and I'm pretty optimistic for the next generation being less selfish than their parents.
I don't mean that in a bad way but the current generation have lead a very hedonistic lifestyle they hold dearly too like gun owners in the usa
The main problem with the Greens is that they think money grows on tree's.
Is that why the are always hugging them? ". No money grows through debt, we know that, you'd like more money with less debt!!! . To anyone who knows how money creation works that sounds like lunacy to them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No I don't. Well you should have a look across the Channel. Similar population to the UK and twice as many food banks with the biggest increase being in the last four years. As a reminder, president Hollande's policies were those championed by Labour in their fight in the 2010 election. The state of Britains economy would be worse today than it was in 2010 had we endured a Labour government for the last five years. France is the living example." The French state was massive and growing under Sarkozy... Public debt was high and the country was already living beyond its means... People blame Blair and Brown for the economic woes we are currently suffering... If such is the case then Sarkozy ought to shoulder the blame too. The system is broken. Parties manipulate figures to hide their miscalculations... I.e. The move from RPI to CPI The changing of the age of compulsory education/training from 16 to 19 must make unemployment figures look better than they would have been. To spend as much as Cameron has and the propping up of failed banks don't smell like true conservative policies at all. They're all the same...the colours and ideologies are a facade. I'm going with the greens - they're posters on my window will look nice with my lawn. Pfft. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just a warning to those who prefer to moan, bellyache and complain through their life that the following link contains good news about Britain and our economy. Apologies in advance to those who prefer bad news stories and look to blame the Romans, or the Nazi's, or Mrs Thatcher, Tony Blair. UK's economic growth for 2014 revised up http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32126975 Will the number of people driving around in new cars and eating in restaurants , I never bothered listening to the doom and gloom merchants anyway. Very few people if any are either hungry or starving despite what some people want us to believe Celebrate good news, be positive, be happy and optimistic for the future... Britain is back!" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Absolute garbage. Some of the things this govt. has done are shameful. " . A few examples might help us to understand your point . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would be very surprised if the conservatives don't get in , they really have turned things round for Britain . As the op says , we should be applauding the recovery and growth , but there will always be the very vocal anti any good news brigade . How on earth any reason minded adult could entertain voting green or ukip is beyond me , and as a result of this latest piece of good news , I would guess many a wavering labour voter may turn blue too ". The Green Party want to add to pollution as well . They want more lorries on the road as they want to restrict vehicle weights to 20 tons . With the stock market close to an all time high we all have reason to celebrate . I have no desire to pay additional tax for others just to waste . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Whilst education Age bands have increased. Pension ages have also increased." But when do they take affect..? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are right everyone should live within their means, that's common sense isn't it. It's a lovely theory too. The problem is there are lots of people who will exploit others so they have lots more means. This leaves whole sections of society living in uncertainty, on a minimum wage (which isn't the same as a living wage). We can assume you are a Tory voter from your comments and we can also assume your motto for living is "I'm alright Jack". While our economy is growing it would be great if wealth was better distributed, that's all I am saying. What I am saying is that these threads are always about moaning and complaining and we never get to celebrate good news. When good news does come along you have a steady procession of doomsday preachers stating all of the reasons why it is not really good news and that we are all fucked, the country is fucked and the end of the world is just around the corner. What do we really want? Day after day of bad news stories so that we can all have a collective moan? My wife and I were both victims of the worldwide recession but we chose to see it as an opportunity rather than a crisis and we are now both doing OK after a period of instability. If that means i'm alright Jack... then so be it. I personally feel it more helpful and materially beneficial to seek out the good rather than the bad and find opportunity instead of a reason to complain. Having a positive attitude to life and living does not mean that you can't understand what is going on in life. It just means that you look for positives instead of taking the easier route and finding faults and being negative about things. " You find positives in food banks, zero hours contracts, cuts and sanctions to the poorest in society, the growth of short term contracts, greater employer's right, the lessening of worker's rights, to name a few things? The growth of pay day loans because average workers can't make ends meet? Or do you not care? You mentioned on my Zero Hours thread, it didn't matter as such a small percentage were affected. I asked you if I didn't matter, as I was teaching on a zero hours contract and had my hours cut overnight, pitching me into financial ruin overnight. Again, are zero hour contract matters inconsequential? Are my problems of no interest to you? Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Whilst education Age bands have increased. Pension ages have also increased. But when do they take affect..? " The increases are already in effect for 50% of the population as the womens state pension age has already been increasing. The state pension age is currently 65 for men and gradually increasing for women from 60 to 65 - it's 62 and a half from April 2015. From December 2018, it will start to increase for both men and women to reach 66 by October 2020. It will raise from 66 to 67 by 2026. Then it will be re_iewed every five years in line with life expectancy. Although I doubt it will go down if life expectancies reduces with obesity and other lifestyle changes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You might be skint, credit etc...but these are independent figures. Not government or party figures. UK grew more in last year than Germany has in the last 4. There are nearly 2 million more jobs now than in 2010. There are more zero hours contracts now. True...but less as a proportion of the total. Yorkshire created more jobs last year than France, Italy and Spain combined. These are all easily checked facts....so yes OP. Let's celebrate UK. Getting back on track and finally heading in the right direction (generally at least) Don't forget too that Labour opposed each and every measure proposed by the coalition government and they predicted economic catastrophe and massive unemployment. Their model is the one that Hollande has failed with in France." . Your predictions are about as reliable as a right wing government think tank on the outcome of middle Eastern wars!. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The so called economic recovery hasn't really happened outside london. The tories have overseen the longest period of wage repression in recent history and borrowed more in their first 3 years than every labour government in history combined - and that includes setting up the nhs and the welfare state, which the tories are in the process of destroying. Austerity is a con, it's just the tories selling off public assets and transferring wealth from the poor to the rich, it's what they do. True story. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've read some nonsense on this site over the years but the last couple of posts really take the biscuit. "That not a counter argument is it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just a warning to those who prefer to moan, bellyache and complain through their life that the following link contains good news about Britain and our economy. Apologies in advance to those who prefer bad news stories and look to blame the Romans, or the Nazi's, or Mrs Thatcher, Tony Blair. A depressed , low wage economy is what we have. Corporate slavery for the new era. If you're on the upside , cast aside your belief in fairness. If on the downside. Eat it. Our economy is a right way up pyramid of service. Arse wipers at the bottom. It will fail. When ? When we run out of immigrants to wipe arses. UK's economic growth for 2014 revised up http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32126975 Celebrate good news, be positive, be happy and optimistic for the future... Britain is back!" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just a warning to those who prefer to moan, bellyache and complain through their life that the following link contains good news about Britain and our economy. Apologies in advance to those who prefer bad news stories and look to blame the Romans, or the Nazi's, or Mrs Thatcher, Tony Blair. A depressed , low wage economy is what we have. Corporate slavery for the new era. If you're on the upside , cast aside your belief in fairness. If on the downside. Eat it. Our economy is a right way up pyramid of service. Arse wipers at the bottom. It will fail. When ? When we run out of immigrants to wipe arses. UK's economic growth for 2014 revised up http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32126975 Celebrate good news, be positive, be happy and optimistic for the future... Britain is back!" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If people want to live in a crowded wet windy country as opposed to a sun blessed nation then it means somethingis right " They're often coming here from countries with dictators. Shocking that people find fleeing violent persecution, torture and death more important than the bloody weather! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If people want to live in a crowded wet windy country as opposed to a sun blessed nation then it means somethingis right They're often coming here from countries with dictators. Shocking that people find fleeing violent persecution, torture and death more important than the bloody weather! "bringing it all back home. Celebrate your demise. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've read some nonsense on this site over the years but the last couple of posts really take the biscuit. ". No doubt there'll come for the biscuits once they've robbed all the money! .
Taking the biscuit in my opinion is a system that allows somebody to bribe his way into acquiring a national state owned gas industry, which belonged to an entire nation make billions with more bribing and then take asylum in London with his billions and think of ways to spend the money on ridiculous things!
I guess I'm just simply minded enough to believe that with the collective intelligence of humans these days there must be a better system than that!
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The so called economic recovery hasn't really happened outside london. The tories have overseen the longest period of wage repression in recent history and borrowed more in their first 3 years than every labour government in history combined - and that includes setting up the nhs and the welfare state, which the tories are in the process of destroying. Austerity is a con, it's just the tories selling off public assets and transferring wealth from the poor to the rich, it's what they do. True story. " . The majority of the population support the current government and realize that they have done a very good job in difficult circumstances . The recent election result is proof of that . Check the performance of the stock exchange and you will see that the economy is performing well. Most people accept that there are not unlimited resources and that the health service cannot have unlimited funds . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The so called economic recovery hasn't really happened outside london. The tories have overseen the longest period of wage repression in recent history and borrowed more in their first 3 years than every labour government in history combined - and that includes setting up the nhs and the welfare state, which the tories are in the process of destroying. Austerity is a con, it's just the tories selling off public assets and transferring wealth from the poor to the rich, it's what they do. True story. . The majority of the population support the current government and realize that they have done a very good job in difficult circumstances . The recent election result is proof of that . Check the performance of the stock exchange and you will see that the economy is performing well. Most people accept that there are not unlimited resources and that the health service cannot have unlimited funds . " 32% is the majority of the population? It isn't even the majority of the voters. It is the amount needed to secure being the government but that is not the majority of the population by many millions. The economy is slowing again, jobless figures are up, even with the stringent massaging the figures now get as many who are economically inactive but of working age are not eligible to appear as unemployed. I accept this is the government we have and I will always try and find solutions that apply to the current situation for current problems but do not claim it's the majority of the population. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just a warning to those who prefer to moan, bellyache and complain through their life that the following link contains good news about Britain and our economy. Apologies in advance to those who prefer bad news stories and look to blame the Romans, or the Nazi's, or Mrs Thatcher, Tony Blair. UK's economic growth for 2014 revised up http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32126975 Celebrate good news, be positive, be happy and optimistic for the future... Britain is back!" Look there's one day a year to be cheerful and it ain't in August. The Tories are in power which must mean there is a direct telephone line to hell in #10 so Satan can phone in his daily advice on fucking over the 99%. What we really need is another labour government who will "put an end to boom and bust" or someone even more left wing than Ed Milliband who didn't get elected because he was too right wing. And the tories lied about SNP support - because Satan told them to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just a warning to those who prefer to moan, bellyache and complain through their life that the following link contains good news about Britain and our economy. Apologies in advance to those who prefer bad news stories and look to blame the Romans, or the Nazi's, or Mrs Thatcher, Tony Blair. UK's economic growth for 2014 revised up http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32126975 Celebrate good news, be positive, be happy and optimistic for the future... Britain is back! Look there's one day a year to be cheerful and it ain't in August. The Tories are in power which must mean there is a direct telephone line to hell in #10 so Satan can phone in his daily advice on fucking over the 99%. What we really need is another labour government who will "put an end to boom and bust" or someone even more left wing than Ed Milliband who didn't get elected because he was too right wing. And the tories lied about SNP support - because Satan told them to. " Life is good for most people in Britain today . You only have to look at the number of people eating out in restaurants , number of new cars sold , how good the services of the NHS are , people paying three pounds for a cup of coffee or those in low cost accommodation who take out expensive subscriptions to Sky TV . The Tories are in power because more people voted for them that any other party . This must be proof that most people agree with their policies . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You might be skint, credit etc...but these are independent figures. Not government or party figures. UK grew more in last year than Germany has in the last 4. There are nearly 2 million more jobs now than in 2010. There are more zero hours contracts now. True...but less as a proportion of the total. Yorkshire created more jobs last year than France, Italy and Spain combined. These are all easily checked facts....so yes OP. Let's celebrate UK. Getting back on track and finally heading in the right direction (generally at least) Low quality private sector jobs." Is that better or worse than a low quality public sector job? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are right everyone should live within their means, that's common sense isn't it. It's a lovely theory too. The problem is there are lots of people who will exploit others so they have lots more means. This leaves whole sections of society living in uncertainty, on a minimum wage (which isn't the same as a living wage). We can assume you are a Tory voter from your comments and we can also assume your motto for living is "I'm alright Jack". While our economy is growing it would be great if wealth was better distributed, that's all I am saying." But surely, in order to distribute the wealth it must first be created. It's easy to share nothing out equally. Maybe that'll be Labour's big new idea when Corbyn becomes leader? Everyone one to get an equal share of nothing! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP, you are right everyone should live within their means, that's common sense isn't it. It's a lovely theory too. The problem is there are lots of people who will exploit others so they have lots more means. This leaves whole sections of society living in uncertainty, on a minimum wage (which isn't the same as a living wage). We can assume you are a Tory voter from your comments and we can also assume your motto for living is "I'm alright Jack". While our economy is growing it would be great if wealth was better distributed, that's all I am saying. But surely, in order to distribute the wealth it must first be created. It's easy to share nothing out equally. Maybe that'll be Labour's big new idea when Corbyn becomes leader? Everyone one to get an equal share of nothing!" I hope Corbyn does become leader . At least we will all be safe then. Seems a. great way to destroy the Labour Party. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The so called economic recovery hasn't really happened outside london. The tories have overseen the longest period of wage repression in recent history and borrowed more in their first 3 years than every labour government in history combined - and that includes setting up the nhs and the welfare state, which the tories are in the process of destroying. Austerity is a con, it's just the tories selling off public assets and transferring wealth from the poor to the rich, it's what they do. True story. " Well it may not have hit south Cheshire yet but it's most definitely real in north Cheshire. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The media have been lying to the public since 2010 so it's not surprising people don't realise when they're being told the truth. As Mark Twain said, it's a lot easier to make someone believe a lie than to convince them they've been lied to." But some how you alone are the only one able to pick through the lies and propaganda and see the truth because the rest of us are too stupid to realise what's really going on. Well that's convinced me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The so called economic recovery hasn't really happened outside london. The tories have overseen the longest period of wage repression in recent history and borrowed more in their first 3 years than every labour government in history combined - and that includes setting up the nhs and the welfare state, which the tories are in the process of destroying. Austerity is a con, it's just the tories selling off public assets and transferring wealth from the poor to the rich, it's what they do. True story. . The majority of the population support the current government and realize that they have done a very good job in difficult circumstances . The recent election result is proof of that . Check the performance of the stock exchange and you will see that the economy is performing well. Most people accept that there are not unlimited resources and that the health service cannot have unlimited funds . 32% is the majority of the population? It isn't even the majority of the voters. It is the amount needed to secure being the government but that is not the majority of the population by many millions. The economy is slowing again, jobless figures are up, even with the stringent massaging the figures now get as many who are economically inactive but of working age are not eligible to appear as unemployed. I accept this is the government we have and I will always try and find solutions that apply to the current situation for current problems but do not claim it's the majority of the population. " I'm sure we've gone over this before but I'll go over it again. The actual percentage of people who voted for parties who where putting forward austerity packages at the last election was 56% not 36% This is made up of 36% con 12% UKIP 8% LinD And is a clear majority in favour of reducing spending and balancing the books. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The so called economic recovery hasn't really happened outside london. The tories have overseen the longest period of wage repression in recent history and borrowed more in their first 3 years than every labour government in history combined - and that includes setting up the nhs and the welfare state, which the tories are in the process of destroying. Austerity is a con, it's just the tories selling off public assets and transferring wealth from the poor to the rich, it's what they do. True story. . The majority of the population support the current government and realize that they have done a very good job in difficult circumstances . The recent election result is proof of that . Check the performance of the stock exchange and you will see that the economy is performing well. Most people accept that there are not unlimited resources and that the health service cannot have unlimited funds . 32% is the majority of the population? It isn't even the majority of the voters. It is the amount needed to secure being the government but that is not the majority of the population by many millions. The economy is slowing again, jobless figures are up, even with the stringent massaging the figures now get as many who are economically inactive but of working age are not eligible to appear as unemployed. I accept this is the government we have and I will always try and find solutions that apply to the current situation for current problems but do not claim it's the majority of the population. I'm sure we've gone over this before but I'll go over it again. The actual percentage of people who voted for parties who where putting forward austerity packages at the last election was 56% not 36% This is made up of 36% con 12% UKIP 8% LinD And is a clear majority in favour of reducing spending and balancing the books." Your UKIP figures are low.... The folk who prefer proportional representation would have ended up with a Tory/UKIP coalition so an even more right wing government than we have now. No other combination of parties (ALL the rest combined) would have given a majority. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hahaha but it's true! Every single word i have written is the god's honest truth. All the facts and figures. Seriously look this shit up. Unless you're in the top tax bracket a conservative vote is against your own self interest. It's not just me. Did you miss the part about only 24% of the electorate being stupid or selfish enough to vote tory? " I didn't miss it I dismissed it as being irrelevant. If you seriously believe that all the 56% of the electorate who voted for the current economic policy ( or even more austere) voted that way because they are stupid and/or selfish then you've already lost the next election. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Austerity won't balance the books and it's not what it's for, it's about shrinking the state, selling off public services and making rich people richer. Standard tory business since thatcher. People are dying ffs." I'm totally in favour of a shrinking state and, as long as the service is provided, I don't really care if it's owned publicity or privately. Why should I. It's the service I want. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hahaha but it's true! Every single word i have written is the god's honest truth. All the facts and figures. Seriously look this shit up. Unless you're in the top tax bracket a conservative vote is against your own self interest. It's not just me. Did you miss the part about only 24% of the electorate being stupid or selfish enough to vote tory? I didn't miss it I dismissed it as being irrelevant. If you seriously believe that all the 56% of the electorate who voted for the current economic policy ( or even more austere) voted that way because they are stupid and/or selfish then you've already lost the next election." Of course they are, these are the same electorate who voted for Tony Blair who we know to be Satan's step-son in law. Listen to the guy who goes to the second page of Google to find the truth on the interwebs ffs. Have we seen Tony Blairs birth certificate? Wake up and smell the conspiracy. Only the right wing media lie, left wing media is incapable of lying. It never happened in any of the great socialist systems like the soviet union. That was a beacon of truth and good journalism. Let's have that system here. What we need is more investment (spending) to get out of a debt crisis. Haven't you read Kaynes? He's the only serious economist you know. His _iews are empirically validated and not disputed by any facts. Educate yourselves sheeple. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Austerity won't balance the books and it's not what it's for, it's about shrinking the state, selling off public services and making rich people richer. Standard tory business since thatcher. People are dying ffs. I'm totally in favour of a shrinking state and, as long as the service is provided, I don't really care if it's owned publicity or privately. Why should I. It's the service I want." So you're happy with the state of affairs where disabled people can't afford to live, where people starve to death in their homes because they can't afford food or to cool their insulin? You're happy with the thought of a health system like the US, where poor people regularly die because they can't afford treatments? Oh, I'm alright Jack... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hahaha but it's true! Every single word i have written is the god's honest truth. All the facts and figures. Seriously look this shit up. Unless you're in the top tax bracket a conservative vote is against your own self interest. It's not just me. Did you miss the part about only 24% of the electorate being stupid or selfish enough to vote tory? I didn't miss it I dismissed it as being irrelevant. If you seriously believe that all the 56% of the electorate who voted for the current economic policy ( or even more austere) voted that way because they are stupid and/or selfish then you've already lost the next election. Of course they are, these are the same electorate who voted for Tony Blair who we know to be Satan's step-son in law. Listen to the guy who goes to the second page of Google to find the truth on the interwebs ffs. Have we seen Tony Blairs birth certificate? Wake up and smell the conspiracy. Only the right wing media lie, left wing media is incapable of lying. It never happened in any of the great socialist systems like the soviet union. That was a beacon of truth and good journalism. Let's have that system here. What we need is more investment (spending) to get out of a debt crisis. Haven't you read Kaynes? He's the only serious economist you know. His _iews are empirically validated and not disputed by any facts. Educate yourselves sheeple. " keynes hasn't been taken seriously by western governments for 40 years! I would take exception to any economist that thinks we it was a sovereign debt crises, as all the evidence was that it was a private debt problem, the reason we now have a massive sovereign debt problem is. Errrr we bought all the private debt! You don't need to be keynes or Friedman or marx or even fucking Einstein to work that out! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just a warning to those who prefer to moan, bellyache and complain through their life that the following link contains good news about Britain and our economy. Apologies in advance to those who prefer bad news stories and look to blame the Romans, or the Nazi's, or Mrs Thatcher, Tony Blair. UK's economic growth for 2014 revised up http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32126975 Celebrate good news, be positive, be happy and optimistic for the future... Britain is back!" You 'avin' a laff, lass? http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/08/uk-economy-six-summer-budget-graphs-you-need-to-see | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Austerity won't balance the books and it's not what it's for, it's about shrinking the state, selling off public services and making rich people richer. Standard tory business since thatcher. People are dying ffs. I'm totally in favour of a shrinking state and, as long as the service is provided, I don't really care if it's owned publicity or privately. Why should I. It's the service I want. So you're happy with the state of affairs where disabled people can't afford to live, where people starve to death in their homes because they can't afford food or to cool their insulin? You're happy with the thought of a health system like the US, where poor people regularly die because they can't afford treatments? Oh, I'm alright Jack..." Yes there are only two possible health systems to choose from. It's NHS or U.S. system. Nobody else in the world has a viable alternative that sits somewhere in the middle. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hahaha but it's true! Every single word i have written is the god's honest truth. All the facts and figures. Seriously look this shit up. Unless you're in the top tax bracket a conservative vote is against your own self interest. It's not just me. Did you miss the part about only 24% of the electorate being stupid or selfish enough to vote tory? I didn't miss it I dismissed it as being irrelevant. If you seriously believe that all the 56% of the electorate who voted for the current economic policy ( or even more austere) voted that way because they are stupid and/or selfish then you've already lost the next election. Of course they are, these are the same electorate who voted for Tony Blair who we know to be Satan's step-son in law. Listen to the guy who goes to the second page of Google to find the truth on the interwebs ffs. Have we seen Tony Blairs birth certificate? Wake up and smell the conspiracy. Only the right wing media lie, left wing media is incapable of lying. It never happened in any of the great socialist systems like the soviet union. That was a beacon of truth and good journalism. Let's have that system here. What we need is more investment (spending) to get out of a debt crisis. Haven't you read Kaynes? He's the only serious economist you know. His _iews are empirically validated and not disputed by any facts. Educate yourselves sheeple. keynes hasn't been taken seriously by western governments for 40 years! I would take exception to any economist that thinks we it was a sovereign debt crises, as all the evidence was that it was a private debt problem, the reason we now have a massive sovereign debt problem is. Errrr we bought all the private debt! You don't need to be keynes or Friedman or marx or even fucking Einstein to work that out!" Indeed it was more of a private debt crisis but there was still more public spending than we had means for. It just became more apparent when things like PFI's got reclassified to be shown as debt instead of off balance sheet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hahaha but it's true! Every single word i have written is the god's honest truth. All the facts and figures. Seriously look this shit up. Unless you're in the top tax bracket a conservative vote is against your own self interest. It's not just me. Did you miss the part about only 24% of the electorate being stupid or selfish enough to vote tory? I didn't miss it I dismissed it as being irrelevant. If you seriously believe that all the 56% of the electorate who voted for the current economic policy ( or even more austere) voted that way because they are stupid and/or selfish then you've already lost the next election. Of course they are, these are the same electorate who voted for Tony Blair who we know to be Satan's step-son in law. Listen to the guy who goes to the second page of Google to find the truth on the interwebs ffs. Have we seen Tony Blairs birth certificate? Wake up and smell the conspiracy. Only the right wing media lie, left wing media is incapable of lying. It never happened in any of the great socialist systems like the soviet union. That was a beacon of truth and good journalism. Let's have that system here. What we need is more investment (spending) to get out of a debt crisis. Haven't you read Kaynes? He's the only serious economist you know. His _iews are empirically validated and not disputed by any facts. Educate yourselves sheeple. keynes hasn't been taken seriously by western governments for 40 years! I would take exception to any economist that thinks we it was a sovereign debt crises, as all the evidence was that it was a private debt problem, the reason we now have a massive sovereign debt problem is. Errrr we bought all the private debt! You don't need to be keynes or Friedman or marx or even fucking Einstein to work that out! Indeed it was more of a private debt crisis but there was still more public spending than we had means for. It just became more apparent when things like PFI's got reclassified to be shown as debt instead of off balance sheet. " . I would say you need to look at any graph for UK long term deficits since 1975! It goes up a little in 1980 stays quite flat through the 80s,a little surplus around 88 before going up a bit in the early 90s and then slowly falling back to another surplus around 2000 before gently rising a bit until 2007, where it goes off the chart! Now let me think what happened in 2007... Did we suddenly start shelling out massive money to disabled people. Err no Oooo did we suddenly increase the budget massively to the NHS or did old people suddenly start living massively longer.. Err no I wonder what could have caused that massive upswing in debt in 2007... It's such a fucking puzzle! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hahaha but it's true! Every single word i have written is the god's honest truth. All the facts and figures. Seriously look this shit up. Unless you're in the top tax bracket a conservative vote is against your own self interest. It's not just me. Did you miss the part about only 24% of the electorate being stupid or selfish enough to vote tory? I didn't miss it I dismissed it as being irrelevant. If you seriously believe that all the 56% of the electorate who voted for the current economic policy ( or even more austere) voted that way because they are stupid and/or selfish then you've already lost the next election. Of course they are, these are the same electorate who voted for Tony Blair who we know to be Satan's step-son in law. Listen to the guy who goes to the second page of Google to find the truth on the interwebs ffs. Have we seen Tony Blairs birth certificate? Wake up and smell the conspiracy. Only the right wing media lie, left wing media is incapable of lying. It never happened in any of the great socialist systems like the soviet union. That was a beacon of truth and good journalism. Let's have that system here. What we need is more investment (spending) to get out of a debt crisis. Haven't you read Kaynes? He's the only serious economist you know. His _iews are empirically validated and not disputed by any facts. Educate yourselves sheeple. keynes hasn't been taken seriously by western governments for 40 years! I would take exception to any economist that thinks we it was a sovereign debt crises, as all the evidence was that it was a private debt problem, the reason we now have a massive sovereign debt problem is. Errrr we bought all the private debt! You don't need to be keynes or Friedman or marx or even fucking Einstein to work that out! Indeed it was more of a private debt crisis but there was still more public spending than we had means for. It just became more apparent when things like PFI's got reclassified to be shown as debt instead of off balance sheet. . I would say you need to look at any graph for UK long term deficits since 1975! It goes up a little in 1980 stays quite flat through the 80s,a little surplus around 88 before going up a bit in the early 90s and then slowly falling back to another surplus around 2000 before gently rising a bit until 2007, where it goes off the chart! Now let me think what happened in 2007... Did we suddenly start shelling out massive money to disabled people. Err no Oooo did we suddenly increase the budget massively to the NHS or did old people suddenly start living massively longer.. Err no I wonder what could have caused that massive upswing in debt in 2007... It's such a fucking puzzle! "Now now, I said debt not deficit. Real government spending increased year on year from FY 97-98 to FY 10-11 with the minor blip of 01-02 where it fell a whopping 1%. That's all very well when the good times roll but it only takes a banking and eurozone crisis to make the spending unsustainable. I don't blame labour for the banking crisis but it's not good economic management to spend as if GDP will rise in a smooth upwards trend indefinately. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Like I said the Tories ran the same deficit through out the 80s and 90s with the exact same "blip" for one year out of 16 years governing! To blame our current spending on labours in ability to balance our books to which I'd add find me a comparable country that did!. The fact of the matter is even if we'd ran a balance book in 2007 the banking crises would have critically hit us anyhow!. Now the real solution to the real problem. Well we know between our discussion, that it was private debt from banks that caused the massive problem we had... So how does austerity for people on benefits fix that?" Ummm austerity isn't just for people on benefits. It hasn't been a picnic here I assure you. Don't look to me to defend bank bailouts, I'm with you on that one. Just don't say labour managed the economy well by quoting things like percentages of GDP and other such nonsense, real spending went up from £437bn in FY 97/98 to £709bn in FY 10/11 (in 2011 economics). That ain't preparing for a rainy day. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Like I said the Tories ran the same deficit through out the 80s and 90s with the exact same "blip" for one year out of 16 years governing! To blame our current spending on labours in ability to balance our books to which I'd add find me a comparable country that did!. The fact of the matter is even if we'd ran a balance book in 2007 the banking crises would have critically hit us anyhow!. Now the real solution to the real problem. Well we know between our discussion, that it was private debt from banks that caused the massive problem we had... So how does austerity for people on benefits fix that? Ummm austerity isn't just for people on benefits. It hasn't been a picnic here I assure you. Don't look to me to defend bank bailouts, I'm with you on that one. Just don't say labour managed the economy well by quoting things like percentages of GDP and other such nonsense, real spending went up from £437bn in FY 97/98 to £709bn in FY 10/11 (in 2011 economics). That ain't preparing for a rainy day. " . No your still doing it though! What was the spending in 2006 pre bailing out the banks!. I'm not defending labour honestly, I'm a green party member, Tony Blair let me down on many things! Are deficit spending trend has pretty much been a very slight steady incline from 1979-2006. Did you hear austerity mentioned in 1989-95 when deficit crept up under a Tory government... Come to think of it what happened in 1988 ...mmm Oh yes runaway financial crises caused by excessive PUBLIC debt! It's not governments that need austerity.... It's fucking people, just like business's left to their own devises, there a bunch of wreckless fuck wits who will fuck anything up for ten bob! It's why we have to regulate credit, because people can't be trusted to be, how can I say it. Err sensible! And like people who run business's... Really really big business's well there the least fucking sensible of all the bunch of fuck wits going! We don't need saving from business or capitalism or communism or climate charge, none of these things perse are "bad".... But boy oh boy put a fucking human in charge and they can fuck everything up! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Don't look to me to defend bank bailouts, I'm with you on that one. Just don't say labour managed the economy well by quoting things like percentages of GDP and other such nonsense, real spending went up from £437bn in FY 97/98 to £709bn in FY 10/11 (in 2011 economics). That ain't preparing for a rainy day. . No your still doing it though! What was the spending in 2006 pre bailing out the banks!. I'm not defending labour honestly, I'm a green party member" Green eye, what exactly is wrong with lib dems? Yes they lied on one teeny weeny issue but they did a lot of other good things. I mean who doesn't lie in politics? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Don't look to me to defend bank bailouts, I'm with you on that one. Just don't say labour managed the economy well by quoting things like percentages of GDP and other such nonsense, real spending went up from £437bn in FY 97/98 to £709bn in FY 10/11 (in 2011 economics). That ain't preparing for a rainy day. . No your still doing it though! What was the spending in 2006 pre bailing out the banks!. I'm not defending labour honestly, I'm a green party member Green eye, what exactly is wrong with lib dems? Yes they lied on one teeny weeny issue but they did a lot of other good things. I mean who doesn't lie in politics? " . They all lie that's my point about blaming austerity on budget deficit spending! The labour party ran no worse a public deficit than the Tories! The Tories had 8% deficit to gdp in 1992-3-4 , labours was 3.5% in 2006 If you look at the big rises in deficit spending they came in 1975,1994,2008 Now look historically what happened before the big push. Energy crises Financial crises Banking crises Exactly which one of these problems was caused by Spending on NHS Spending on welfare Spending on pensions? Answer none! The banking crises was caused by deregulation not over regulation We know that the vast majority of people cannot be trusted to be sensible, that's why we have drinking laws, driving laws, credit laws, health and safety laws... All this regulation is there because most people are short term fuck wits. Like fuck wits in China who store massive amounts of volatile chemicals unsafely... Because they can and it gives them more profit!! The same applies to banking/credit regulations, when you remove them like Thatcher and Reagan did in 1980 you let loose the fuck wits with short term idiocy that leads to long term debt problems!, again that's not a problem with government spending it's a regulation problem, caused by business's infiltration of politics | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just out of interest, are greens stistically more likely to swing than up tight conservatives? " . I'll be honest with you.. Probably, I've meet very few uptight green party members over the 16 years ish time I've been a member! However I've meet some very liberal Tories and labour party members as well! I think people who get the necessity to change are usually more open minded on issues that are outside the norm! I personally have some very right wing issues outside of the green party norm, I don't hug trees, I don't play guitar, I don't own a caftan, I rarely eat lentils, I used to race cars and own three at the moment, and I don't know the lyrics to kumbyyar... But they've excepted me anyhow | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just out of interest, are greens stistically more likely to swing than up tight conservatives? . I'll be honest with you.. Probably, I've meet very few uptight green party members over the 16 years ish time I've been a member! However I've meet some very liberal Tories and labour party members as well! I think people who get the necessity to change are usually more open minded on issues that are outside the norm! I personally have some very right wing issues outside of the green party norm, I don't hug trees, I don't play guitar, I don't own a caftan, I rarely eat lentils, I used to race cars and own three at the moment, and I don't know the lyrics to kumbyyar... But they've excepted me anyhow "Ok but doesn't sound like you have much left in common with the rest of them to talk about? Again, I would have guessed lib dem... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Austerity won't balance the books and it's not what it's for, it's about shrinking the state, selling off public services and making rich people richer. Standard tory business since thatcher. People are dying ffs. I'm totally in favour of a shrinking state and, as long as the service is provided, I don't really care if it's owned publicity or privately. Why should I. It's the service I want. So you're happy with the state of affairs where disabled people can't afford to live, where people starve to death in their homes because they can't afford food or to cool their insulin? You're happy with the thought of a health system like the US, where poor people regularly die because they can't afford treatments? Oh, I'm alright Jack..." Well glad to know you're alright Jack but maybe you should think a bit more about others rather just what you think is best for YOU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just out of interest, are greens stistically more likely to swing than up tight conservatives? . I'll be honest with you.. Probably, I've meet very few uptight green party members over the 16 years ish time I've been a member! However I've meet some very liberal Tories and labour party members as well! I think people who get the necessity to change are usually more open minded on issues that are outside the norm! I personally have some very right wing issues outside of the green party norm, I don't hug trees, I don't play guitar, I don't own a caftan, I rarely eat lentils, I used to race cars and own three at the moment, and I don't know the lyrics to kumbyyar... But they've excepted me anyhow
Ok but doesn't sound like you have much left in common with the rest of them to talk about? Again, I would have guessed lib dem... ". Libdems... Fuck off,what a bunch of squares | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hahaha but it's true! Every single word i have written is the god's honest truth. All the facts and figures. Seriously look this shit up. Unless you're in the top tax bracket a conservative vote is against your own self interest. It's not just me. Did you miss the part about only 24% of the electorate being stupid or selfish enough to vote tory? I didn't miss it I dismissed it as being irrelevant. If you seriously believe that all the 56% of the electorate who voted for the current economic policy ( or even more austere) voted that way because they are stupid and/or selfish then you've already lost the next election. Of course they are, these are the same electorate who voted for Tony Blair who we know to be Satan's step-son in law. Listen to the guy who goes to the second page of Google to find the truth on the interwebs ffs. Have we seen Tony Blairs birth certificate? Wake up and smell the conspiracy. Only the right wing media lie, left wing media is incapable of lying. It never happened in any of the great socialist systems like the soviet union. That was a beacon of truth and good journalism. Let's have that system here. What we need is more investment (spending) to get out of a debt crisis. Haven't you read Kaynes? He's the only serious economist you know. His _iews are empirically validated and not disputed by any facts. Educate yourselves sheeple. keynes hasn't been taken seriously by western governments for 40 years! I would take exception to any economist that thinks we it was a sovereign debt crises, as all the evidence was that it was a private debt problem, the reason we now have a massive sovereign debt problem is. Errrr we bought all the private debt! You don't need to be keynes or Friedman or marx or even fucking Einstein to work that out! Indeed it was more of a private debt crisis but there was still more public spending than we had means for. It just became more apparent when things like PFI's got reclassified to be shown as debt instead of off balance sheet. . I would say you need to look at any graph for UK long term deficits since 1975! It goes up a little in 1980 stays quite flat through the 80s,a little surplus around 88 before going up a bit in the early 90s and then slowly falling back to another surplus around 2000 before gently rising a bit until 2007, where it goes off the chart! Now let me think what happened in 2007... Did we suddenly start shelling out massive money to disabled people. Err no Oooo did we suddenly increase the budget massively to the NHS or did old people suddenly start living massively longer.. Err no I wonder what could have caused that massive upswing in debt in 2007... It's such a fucking puzzle! "A lot of us know already that the debt crisis was created by private debt. I also believe that most fair minded people do not blame Labour for causing the recession. However they had been in power for 10 years and clearly had not done enough to put Britain in a position to weather the bad times when they came. You cannot be a in power for 10 years, take the credit for the good times then expect not to held responsible when everything goes tits up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hahaha but it's true! Every single word i have written is the god's honest truth. All the facts and figures. Seriously look this shit up. Unless you're in the top tax bracket a conservative vote is against your own self interest. It's not just me. Did you miss the part about only 24% of the electorate being stupid or selfish enough to vote tory? I didn't miss it I dismissed it as being irrelevant. If you seriously believe that all the 56% of the electorate who voted for the current economic policy ( or even more austere) voted that way because they are stupid and/or selfish then you've already lost the next election. Of course they are, these are the same electorate who voted for Tony Blair who we know to be Satan's step-son in law. Listen to the guy who goes to the second page of Google to find the truth on the interwebs ffs. Have we seen Tony Blairs birth certificate? Wake up and smell the conspiracy. Only the right wing media lie, left wing media is incapable of lying. It never happened in any of the great socialist systems like the soviet union. That was a beacon of truth and good journalism. Let's have that system here. What we need is more investment (spending) to get out of a debt crisis. Haven't you read Kaynes? He's the only serious economist you know. His _iews are empirically validated and not disputed by any facts. Educate yourselves sheeple. keynes hasn't been taken seriously by western governments for 40 years! I would take exception to any economist that thinks we it was a sovereign debt crises, as all the evidence was that it was a private debt problem, the reason we now have a massive sovereign debt problem is. Errrr we bought all the private debt! You don't need to be keynes or Friedman or marx or even fucking Einstein to work that out! Indeed it was more of a private debt crisis but there was still more public spending than we had means for. It just became more apparent when things like PFI's got reclassified to be shown as debt instead of off balance sheet. . I would say you need to look at any graph for UK long term deficits since 1975! It goes up a little in 1980 stays quite flat through the 80s,a little surplus around 88 before going up a bit in the early 90s and then slowly falling back to another surplus around 2000 before gently rising a bit until 2007, where it goes off the chart! Now let me think what happened in 2007... Did we suddenly start shelling out massive money to disabled people. Err no Oooo did we suddenly increase the budget massively to the NHS or did old people suddenly start living massively longer.. Err no I wonder what could have caused that massive upswing in debt in 2007... It's such a fucking puzzle!
A lot of us know already that the debt crisis was created by private debt. I also believe that most fair minded people do not blame Labour for causing the recession. However they had been in power for 10 years and clearly had not done enough to put Britain in a position to weather the bad times when they came. You cannot be a in power for 10 years, take the credit for the good times then expect not to held responsible when everything goes tits up.". Oh no I'm all for giving labour hell, I'm no supporter of there's! I'm just being fair, it wasn't deficit spending that caused the problem, it was deregulation of banks! If they had banking Britain on ch5 depicting wanker bankers snorting fucking rent boys while stuffing they're pants with illicit tenners that there'd robbed through ppi or rigging various markets, then fair play... But do we see those programme's. No we see benefit Britain and nhs in crises and pension woes... Fuck em I don't even like poor people they drink cider and smoke roll ups... Bunch of cunts... Trouble is once I start deciding in my mind who deserves what... I turn into Hitler... And we all know where that ends! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hahaha but it's true! Every single word i have written is the god's honest truth. All the facts and figures. Seriously look this shit up. Unless you're in the top tax bracket a conservative vote is against your own self interest. It's not just me. Did you miss the part about only 24% of the electorate being stupid or selfish enough to vote tory? I didn't miss it I dismissed it as being irrelevant. If you seriously believe that all the 56% of the electorate who voted for the current economic policy ( or even more austere) voted that way because they are stupid and/or selfish then you've already lost the next election. Of course they are, these are the same electorate who voted for Tony Blair who we know to be Satan's step-son in law. Listen to the guy who goes to the second page of Google to find the truth on the interwebs ffs. Have we seen Tony Blairs birth certificate? Wake up and smell the conspiracy. Only the right wing media lie, left wing media is incapable of lying. It never happened in any of the great socialist systems like the soviet union. That was a beacon of truth and good journalism. Let's have that system here. What we need is more investment (spending) to get out of a debt crisis. Haven't you read Kaynes? He's the only serious economist you know. His _iews are empirically validated and not disputed by any facts. Educate yourselves sheeple. keynes hasn't been taken seriously by western governments for 40 years! I would take exception to any economist that thinks we it was a sovereign debt crises, as all the evidence was that it was a private debt problem, the reason we now have a massive sovereign debt problem is. Errrr we bought all the private debt! You don't need to be keynes or Friedman or marx or even fucking Einstein to work that out! Indeed it was more of a private debt crisis but there was still more public spending than we had means for. It just became more apparent when things like PFI's got reclassified to be shown as debt instead of off balance sheet. . I would say you need to look at any graph for UK long term deficits since 1975! It goes up a little in 1980 stays quite flat through the 80s,a little surplus around 88 before going up a bit in the early 90s and then slowly falling back to another surplus around 2000 before gently rising a bit until 2007, where it goes off the chart! Now let me think what happened in 2007... Did we suddenly start shelling out massive money to disabled people. Err no Oooo did we suddenly increase the budget massively to the NHS or did old people suddenly start living massively longer.. Err no I wonder what could have caused that massive upswing in debt in 2007... It's such a fucking puzzle!
A lot of us know already that the debt crisis was created by private debt. I also believe that most fair minded people do not blame Labour for causing the recession. However they had been in power for 10 years and clearly had not done enough to put Britain in a position to weather the bad times when they came. You cannot be a in power for 10 years, take the credit for the good times then expect not to held responsible when everything goes tits up..
Oh no I'm all for giving labour hell, I'm no supporter of there's!
I'm just being fair, it wasn't deficit spending that caused the problem, it was deregulation of banks!
If they had banking Britain on ch5 depicting wanker bankers snorting fucking rent boys while stuffing they're pants with illicit tenners that there'd robbed through ppi or rigging various markets, then fair play...
But do we see those programme's. No we see benefit Britain and nhs in crises and pension woes...
Fuck em I don't even like poor people they drink cider and smoke roll ups... Bunch of cunts... Trouble is once I start deciding in my mind who deserves what... I turn into Hitler...
And we all know where that ends!"Yeah but if you don't know the BBC is run by champagne socialists then you shouldn't be allowed a TV licence! One could always read / watch "liars poker, straight to hell, wolf of wall Street, wall Street, when genius failed etc" to understand what high minded, honourable, smart people bankers age. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The simple fact the matter is! If you want a fairer society then you need a more varied representation in the Government, in that you need politicians from all areas of society who help implement change for everybody, not just the wealthiest, with direct connections to the global corporate and financial sectors, who are going to provide them with a secure financial future once they leave Government. The problem with this is that somebody from a poorer back will find it almost impossible to be because an MP because of the cost and time constraints required to do so, hence the power remains with rich. This is fact, it's the same with the media, who control the information which the wealthiest want you to know about. With regards to the economy, yes it's improving but the standard of living for a lot of people is falling whilst the top 1% wealth is growing disproportionately. Don't get me wrong I'm far from poor but when 1 man ( George Soros) can make over 1 billion from the recessy whilst a lot of the world suffering, I find a little obscene. " This all very well and good but totally ignores the facts. The reality is that over the last 5 years in this country the gap between the rich (top 10%) and the poor (bottom 10%) has actually shrunk not got bigger. It's also enlightening to learn that the last time the gap between the rich and the poor decreased over a 5 year period was in the mid 90's. It's even more amazing to learn that the largest increase in the gap between the rich and the poor, in this country was between 1997 and 2007. But don't let reality and truth sway you from your current beliefs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" This all very well and good but totally ignores the facts. The reality is that over the last 5 years in this country the gap between the rich (top 10%) and the poor (bottom 10%) has actually shrunk not got bigger. It's also enlightening to learn that the last time the gap between the rich and the poor decreased over a 5 year period was in the mid 90's. It's even more amazing to learn that the largest increase in the gap between the rich and the poor, in this country was between 1997 and 2007. But don't let reality and truth sway you from your current beliefs." Interesting. May I see the source please...? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" This all very well and good but totally ignores the facts. The reality is that over the last 5 years in this country the gap between the rich (top 10%) and the poor (bottom 10%) has actually shrunk not got bigger. It's also enlightening to learn that the last time the gap between the rich and the poor decreased over a 5 year period was in the mid 90's. It's even more amazing to learn that the largest increase in the gap between the rich and the poor, in this country was between 1997 and 2007. But don't let reality and truth sway you from your current beliefs. Interesting. May I see the source please...? " . That's figure is true When you move it to the top 10%. because at 10% your moving it to include the traditional middle classes, basically people earning 65k plus, and they've been hammered for years by tory and labour and not just the uk the middle class of America has been decimated, high quality manufacturing jobs, chemists, scientists, engineers, that job base has been pretty badly hit and obviously hit the worse during recession which are the mid 90s and 2008 onwards! However if you take that 10% figure and reduce it to the top 1% , you see that there's a big increasing gap between them and the 99% and if you take it and reduce it again to the top 0.1% you'll see that gap jumps massively in disparity between the top 0.1% and even the top 10% never mind the 99.9%. The fact of the matter is, that during the last 30 or 40 years wealth is accumulating at the very top of society, faster and more than ever before in history and this poses a very real and present danger that's acknowledged by the IMF, world bank, top economists and even the US government, these figures are not disputed by anyone! Most of them agree it's causing massive problems in modern capitalism, what they disagree on, is the best way solve it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" This all very well and good but totally ignores the facts. The reality is that over the last 5 years in this country the gap between the rich (top 10%) and the poor (bottom 10%) has actually shrunk not got bigger. It's also enlightening to learn that the last time the gap between the rich and the poor decreased over a 5 year period was in the mid 90's. It's even more amazing to learn that the largest increase in the gap between the rich and the poor, in this country was between 1997 and 2007. But don't let reality and truth sway you from your current beliefs. Interesting. May I see the source please...? " I've posted the source on other threads. Go and look for the proof yourself this time. But look to find the proof not what you may already believe. At the end of the day it's all statistics and using different figures for percentage and timeframe you can get any result you like. I like 'the gaps got smaller' so I'm using the figures that show that. Others use the figures that gives the result they want. The reality is that we all know thinks have been worse for almost everyone over the last 8 years (both rich and poor) and that life is a lot better for all than it was 20, 30 or 40 years ago. We don't need statistics to tell us these truths and using them often just misdirects all into a meaningless sources competition. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" This all very well and good but totally ignores the facts. The reality is that over the last 5 years in this country the gap between the rich (top 10%) and the poor (bottom 10%) has actually shrunk not got bigger. It's also enlightening to learn that the last time the gap between the rich and the poor decreased over a 5 year period was in the mid 90's. It's even more amazing to learn that the largest increase in the gap between the rich and the poor, in this country was between 1997 and 2007. But don't let reality and truth sway you from your current beliefs. Interesting. May I see the source please...? . That's figure is true When you move it to the top 10%. because at 10% your moving it to include the traditional middle classes, basically people earning 65k plus, and they've been hammered for years by tory and labour and not just the uk the middle class of America has been decimated, high quality manufacturing jobs, chemists, scientists, engineers, that job base has been pretty badly hit and obviously hit the worse during recession which are the mid 90s and 2008 onwards! However if you take that 10% figure and reduce it to the top 1% , you see that there's a big increasing gap between them and the 99% and if you take it and reduce it again to the top 0.1% you'll see that gap jumps massively in disparity between the top 0.1% and even the top 10% never mind the 99.9%. The fact of the matter is, that during the last 30 or 40 years wealth is accumulating at the very top of society, faster and more than ever before in history and this poses a very real and present danger that's acknowledged by the IMF, world bank, top economists and even the US government, these figures are not disputed by anyone! Most of them agree it's causing massive problems in modern capitalism, what they disagree on, is the best way solve it." This is true on a world scale but on both Europe and Britain the picture is not quite so bleak. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" This all very well and good but totally ignores the facts. The reality is that over the last 5 years in this country the gap between the rich (top 10%) and the poor (bottom 10%) has actually shrunk not got bigger. It's also enlightening to learn that the last time the gap between the rich and the poor decreased over a 5 year period was in the mid 90's. It's even more amazing to learn that the largest increase in the gap between the rich and the poor, in this country was between 1997 and 2007. But don't let reality and truth sway you from your current beliefs. Interesting. May I see the source please...? . That's figure is true When you move it to the top 10%. because at 10% your moving it to include the traditional middle classes, basically people earning 65k plus, and they've been hammered for years by tory and labour and not just the uk the middle class of America has been decimated, high quality manufacturing jobs, chemists, scientists, engineers, that job base has been pretty badly hit and obviously hit the worse during recession which are the mid 90s and 2008 onwards! However if you take that 10% figure and reduce it to the top 1% , you see that there's a big increasing gap between them and the 99% and if you take it and reduce it again to the top 0.1% you'll see that gap jumps massively in disparity between the top 0.1% and even the top 10% never mind the 99.9%. The fact of the matter is, that during the last 30 or 40 years wealth is accumulating at the very top of society, faster and more than ever before in history and this poses a very real and present danger that's acknowledged by the IMF, world bank, top economists and even the US government, these figures are not disputed by anyone! Most of them agree it's causing massive problems in modern capitalism, what they disagree on, is the best way solve it. This is true on a world scale but on both Europe and Britain the picture is not quite so bleak. " . Globalisation was a great idea and I'm still totally for it... The trouble is, it's a bit like Europe, if you want a globalised economy, you need one world government and quite frankly on this issue the un,IMF, world bank have been hopeless and at times dishonest and bullies I once saw a lecture from a guy from LSE years ago and he was advocating a system of monetary equilibrium that was run from the imf where they had there own currency and when you traded from nation to nation you traded through this imf currency and they then taxed the accumulators and redistributed to the losses, basically giving every nation state an equal current account on balance of trade or at least an equalising of trade accounts! This notion that every country in Europe can run a balanced deficit is just stupid.... We can't all be Germany and export more than we import, that's just common sense and if some of us are going to be importers then were going to go into debt, that's obvious!. Any system is as strong as the weakest link and the weak link in any system we run is always going to be humans! Narcissistic natural tendencies means people start to believe there own hype, they genuinely believe that there the wealth creators, without them the world would just curl up and die, the fact that 8 out of 10 entrepreneurs fail completely goes over their heads!, so how do you get the banks to lend to businesses and entrepreneurs when in reality 8 out of 10 fail? We've been in an asset bubble economy for 30 years because you can make more money and create more money on asset inflation, so why would you not expect the banks to do this... That's capitalism, it's also really really bad capitalism! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" This made for interesting reading. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/jan/27/unequal-britain-report Is it a problem intrinsic to Labour to more specific to New Labour? " So i found it interesting that it says "social class has a big impact on children's school readiness at the age of three" Please tell me we aren't blaming that on the government now? There's something very un-PC that statement is trying to allude to... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So i found it interesting that it says "social class has a big impact on children's school readiness at the age of three" Please tell me we aren't blaming that on the government now? There's something very un-PC that statement is trying to allude to..." Some blame government for not effective dealing with social inequality... I suppose the article is suggesting school readiness or lack thereof may be linked to socioeconomic group you belong to... Why do you find the statement particularly ...controversial? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" This all very well and good but totally ignores the facts. The reality is that over the last 5 years in this country the gap between the rich (top 10%) and the poor (bottom 10%) has actually shrunk not got bigger. It's also enlightening to learn that the last time the gap between the rich and the poor decreased over a 5 year period was in the mid 90's. It's even more amazing to learn that the largest increase in the gap between the rich and the poor, in this country was between 1997 and 2007. But don't let reality and truth sway you from your current beliefs. Interesting. May I see the source please...? I've posted the source on other threads. Go and look for the proof yourself this time. But look to find the proof not what you may already believe. At the end of the day it's all statistics and using different figures for percentage and timeframe you can get any result you like. I like 'the gaps got smaller' so I'm using the figures that show that. Others use the figures that gives the result they want. The reality is that we all know thinks have been worse for almost everyone over the last 8 years (both rich and poor) and that life is a lot better for all than it was 20, 30 or 40 years ago. We don't need statistics to tell us these truths and using them often just misdirects all into a meaningless sources competition." True | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So i found it interesting that it says "social class has a big impact on children's school readiness at the age of three" Please tell me we aren't blaming that on the government now? There's something very un-PC that statement is trying to allude to... Some blame government for not effective dealing with social inequality... I suppose the article is suggesting school readiness or lack thereof may be linked to socioeconomic group you belong to... Why do you find the statement particularly ...controversial? " It's alluding to some parents not valuing education and therefore their kids don't do so well in education. Subsquently they don't earn much as adults and somehow it's the governments fault that there's a gap between those people and those who are well educated and earn alot! You can blame the government for what happens when they are at school but at 3 years old the government hasn't really touched them. Who wants to live in a world where governments tell us how to raise out children. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So i found it interesting that it says "social class has a big impact on children's school readiness at the age of three" Please tell me we aren't blaming that on the government now? There's something very un-PC that statement is trying to allude to... Some blame government for not effective dealing with social inequality... I suppose the article is suggesting school readiness or lack thereof may be linked to socioeconomic group you belong to... Why do you find the statement particularly ...controversial? It's alluding to some parents not valuing education and therefore their kids don't do so well in education. Subsquently they don't earn much as adults and somehow it's the governments fault that there's a gap between those people and those who are well educated and earn alot! You can blame the government for what happens when they are at school but at 3 years old the government hasn't really touched them. Who wants to live in a world where governments tell us how to raise out children. " I didn't glean that at all. The amount of social capital people hold can depend on the type and quality of education they themselves received. It can be potentially advantageous, I suspect, for children if there parents are graduates or 'successful' or financially stable, or come from a supportive family. A child's diet may be better. The type of nursery or pre school they attend too. Even the type and quality of play... For instance, not everyone knows how they can help with their child's fine motor skills or the what to do to embed the foundational skills necessary to write well. Not all parents will know what a 'growth mindset' is and how they may be able to instil it in their children. It's tough being a parent anyway...these little advantages that money, support from the extended family, certain social circles and experience bring...can potentially make a lasting difference. These are some of the things a society and by extension its leaders may wish to consider if they wish to try to make the inequality gap a little narrower, and give all of our young the best possible chance at becoming the best they can be...so they may have opportunities to smash through any ceilings that the situation they were born into has placed them under. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So i found it interesting that it says "social class has a big impact on children's school readiness at the age of three" Please tell me we aren't blaming that on the government now? There's something very un-PC that statement is trying to allude to... Some blame government for not effective dealing with social inequality... I suppose the article is suggesting school readiness or lack thereof may be linked to socioeconomic group you belong to... Why do you find the statement particularly ...controversial? It's alluding to some parents not valuing education and therefore their kids don't do so well in education. Subsquently they don't earn much as adults and somehow it's the governments fault that there's a gap between those people and those who are well educated and earn alot! You can blame the government for what happens when they are at school but at 3 years old the government hasn't really touched them. Who wants to live in a world where governments tell us how to raise out children. " . What, you have heard of slavery haven't you?.... You know where the government barely touched any part of a black slaves life but the policies they put in place controlled the outcome of said child!! Why look to blame anybody!, the fact of the matter is, here's something that's failing, how do we make it better? You already live in a country that dictates by government how you can raise your child! You can't hit them, they have to attend school, they can't work! Come to think of it.... You know why we had to legislate against those measures? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So i found it interesting that it says "social class has a big impact on children's school readiness at the age of three" Please tell me we aren't blaming that on the government now? There's something very un-PC that statement is trying to allude to... Some blame government for not effective dealing with social inequality... I suppose the article is suggesting school readiness or lack thereof may be linked to socioeconomic group you belong to... Why do you find the statement particularly ...controversial? It's alluding to some parents not valuing education and therefore their kids don't do so well in education. Subsquently they don't earn much as adults and somehow it's the governments fault that there's a gap between those people and those who are well educated and earn alot! You can blame the government for what happens when they are at school but at 3 years old the government hasn't really touched them. Who wants to live in a world where governments tell us how to raise out children. I didn't glean that at all. The amount of social capital people hold can depend on the type and quality of education they themselves received. It can be potentially advantageous, I suspect, for children if there parents are graduates or 'successful' or financially stable, or come from a supportive family. A child's diet may be better. The type of nursery or pre school they attend too. Even the type and quality of play... For instance, not everyone knows how they can help with their child's fine motor skills or the what to do to embed the foundational skills necessary to write well. Not all parents will know what a 'growth mindset' is and how they may be able to instil it in their children. It's tough being a parent anyway...these little advantages that money, support from the extended family, certain social circles and experience bring...can potentially make a lasting difference. These are some of the things a society and by extension its leaders may wish to consider if they wish to try to make the inequality gap a little narrower, and give all of our young the best possible chance at becoming the best they can be...so they may have opportunities to smash through any ceilings that the situation they were born into has placed them under. " So your logic is that the burden rests on "society and it's leaders" to do... I'm not sure what... because some parents don't know how to Google: "what the fuck is a healthy diet" and "should I give my child breakfast before school". Have you ever heard the phrase that starts "you can lead a horse to water"? At what point does a person take responsibility for their life and their family? - or do we want to live in a country where the government comes into our houses and watches to make sure we wipe our backside from front to back? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I didn't glean that at all. The amount of social capital people hold can depend on the type and quality of education they themselves received. It can be potentially advantageous, I suspect, for children if there parents are graduates or 'successful' or financially stable, or come from a supportive family. A child's diet may be better. The type of nursery or pre school they attend too. Even the type and quality of play... For instance, not everyone knows how they can help with their child's fine motor skills or the what to do to embed the foundational skills necessary to write well. Not all parents will know what a 'growth mindset' is and how they may be able to instil it in their children. It's tough being a parent anyway...these little advantages that money, support from the extended family, certain social circles and experience bring...can potentially make a lasting difference. These are some of the things a society and by extension its leaders may wish to consider if they wish to try to make the inequality gap a little narrower, and give all of our young the best possible chance at becoming the best they can be...so they may have opportunities to smash through any ceilings that the situation they were born into has placed them under. --------------- So your logic is that the burden rests on "society and it's leaders" to do... I'm not sure what... because some parents don't know how to Google: "what the fuck is a healthy diet" and "should I give my child breakfast before school". Have you ever heard the phrase that starts "you can lead a horse to water"? At what point does a person take responsibility for their life and their family? - or do we want to live in a country where the government comes into our houses and watches to make sure we wipe our backside from front to back? " That's not what I said... a lack of social capital is linked with class/education... Such things have an impact on children. Ergo there is a problem. Can the problem be solved collectively, or do we let the horses figure out that all these troughs exist, never mind where they are? In a democracy, the society will decide. Thank fuck for Google eh? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I didn't glean that at all. The amount of social capital people hold can depend on the type and quality of education they themselves received. It can be potentially advantageous, I suspect, for children if there parents are graduates or 'successful' or financially stable, or come from a supportive family. A child's diet may be better. The type of nursery or pre school they attend too. Even the type and quality of play... For instance, not everyone knows how they can help with their child's fine motor skills or the what to do to embed the foundational skills necessary to write well. Not all parents will know what a 'growth mindset' is and how they may be able to instil it in their children. It's tough being a parent anyway...these little advantages that money, support from the extended family, certain social circles and experience bring...can potentially make a lasting difference. These are some of the things a society and by extension its leaders may wish to consider if they wish to try to make the inequality gap a little narrower, and give all of our young the best possible chance at becoming the best they can be...so they may have opportunities to smash through any ceilings that the situation they were born into has placed them under. --------------- So your logic is that the burden rests on "society and it's leaders" to do... I'm not sure what... because some parents don't know how to Google: "what the fuck is a healthy diet" and "should I give my child breakfast before school". Have you ever heard the phrase that starts "you can lead a horse to water"? At what point does a person take responsibility for their life and their family? - or do we want to live in a country where the government comes into our houses and watches to make sure we wipe our backside from front to back? That's not what I said... a lack of social capital is linked with class/education... Such things have an impact on children. Ergo there is a problem. Can the problem be solved collectively, or do we let the horses figure out that all these troughs exist, never mind where they are? In a democracy, the society will decide. Thank fuck for Google eh? " I'm just saying that you think this is a problem but maybe some of the people concerned don't; because they don't value education. I know lots of people (from school) who think education is a waste of time, work is an inconvenient thing that interrupts their social life, they had no ambition to earn more than the minimum wage. They wouldn't recognise what you are describing as a problem. In fact, they'd find it very patronising! As a result I have absolutely zero confidence any "collective solution" would work. If there even was such a solution I'd suggest the government is one of the least able social institutions to implement it. The most likely outcome is negative unintended consequences for the rest of us. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So for me the question will be...do they not value education and if so, what's the root cause. Why does the value an education places on education seem linked with the quality of education received. It can be agreed that on the whole, poorer people will experience a lesser educational experience within their early years both at home and at school. Understand the following are generalisations but are some of the things that distinguish the lives of children as a result of different socioeconomic backgrounds...generation upon generation. Poorer folk can't afford a family David Lloyd membership to encourage their children to be competitive, strong and coordinated from when they're toddlers. They won't go often go away on holidays or to museums or the theatre because their parents rarely if ever experienced such themselves. If the parents weren't taught to appreciate fine art, they can't share it with their children...because they don't value it...for it was never given value. Poorer kids will go to the nearest kick start nursery because it's cheap and nearby...it's familiar. They'll never have heard of Montessori. They won't have the wide vocabulary range or love of reading because their parents are less likely to be graduates who possess such things themselves. The state school system is DESIGNED to encourage, in fact, incentivise teaching a narrow body of knowledge via repeated testing. Despite report after report, (see Cockroft for example), conceptual understanding is given little consideration because the tests don't require it. That's just the tip, and I'll stop there as I sense a tangent just ahead. Children in the leafy suburbs (even those of 'low ability') are hot housed by parents who complete homework for them, and by after school tutors for every subject - whose hourly charges can range from £15 p/h to the more common £30 p/h....from primary school onwards. At a-level the hourly costs can be much more. The extra curricular activities will differ because a) the trips abroad can be expensive b) what the heck is a duke of Edinburgh award? c) if you've been coached to play sports from 3, you're likely to be better at it than the poor kids who used jumpers for goal posts at there local 'park'... I could go on and speak about all the other ways that Google can do jack to improve the situation or rectify the problem. The problem of value... Of valuing something that means little to someone because they never experienced more than a tinge of it. You can't appreciate the benefits of social capital, if you've never known for them to benefit you. If you've never know for them to exist. The consequences of doing nothing simply perpetuates this cycle. It's up to society and the people within it who have a stake, power and the means, to decide whether it's worth risking the possibility of unintended consequences by considering the why and finding ways of dealing with it. I guess when a by product of the goal is more social equality ...it means less relative wealth ...perhaps a reason why some prefer a system that sustains the status quo. Dunno." Everything you say rests upon the assumption that everyone is, or should be, striving for the same definition of success you have in mind. Somewhere on another website there's a "bottom 10%" person writing: "So today at work the regional manager had a heart attack and he's only 50. I don't get why they work so hard and ruin their health. Don't they know there's more to life than work? It's all very well having all that money, but they have no life outside work. I asked him what he thought of Peter Andre and he didn't even know who he was! Does this guy live under a rock or what! I feel sorry for him really, he's always working and he'll never know what it's like to watch a complete season of x factor, meet someone from the only way is essex or watch every single thing your child ever does and post 10 pictures of each on facebook. I don't want my little Alfie growing up like that, no sir" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
