The NEW very important election thread

[Slam62]

when the glorious 5 year term of fairness and freedom is up we will probably have a national debt of about £1.4trn and the interest will be £70bn a year.

don't worry though, big society will save us.

hmm, strokes chin, oh dear

edit: after stroking chin

the deficit is 160bn, it is to be cut by 40bn so 120bn add 30bn more interest, back to 150bn

add extra welfare bill due to unemployment and house repossessions back to 160bn, remove tax take from private enterprise depending on state plus knock on of public sector job losses, 180bn, so 5 years down the road we are no better off.

still hopefully I am completely wrong and real economic growth will occur.

If a sensible sounding labour leader gets elected and sticks to a plausible yet optimistic message, they will walk it.

 

[Dolph]

when the glorious 5 year term of fairness and freedom is up we will probably have a national debt of about £1.4trn and the interest will be £70bn a year.

don't worry though, big society will save us.

hmm, strokes chin, oh dear

edit: after stroking chin

the deficit is 160bn, it is to be cut by 40bn so 120bn add 30bn more interest, back to 150bn

add extra welfare bill due to unemployment and house repossessions back to 160bn, remove tax take from private enterprise depending on state plus knock on of public sector job losses, 180bn, so 5 years down the road we are no better off.

still hopefully I am completely wrong and real economic growth will occur.

If a sensible sounding labour leader gets elected and sticks to a plausible yet optimistic message, they will walk it.

Erm, the deficit will be gone at the end of five years, as opposed to Labour's plans to only spend half as much we couldn't afford, and increase the debt further...

Still, I suppose you must know more than all the economists recommending this course of action, or the OBR...

 

[Slam62]

Economically or socially? Economically, they are pretty close, but then it's to be expected given they have a very similar mess to clear up to that which Thatcher was left.

Socially, the coalition is much more liberal than Thatcher's government was, and Thatcher was more liberal than New Labour.

in what way exactly?

Only because the voting system is skewed (and labour proceeded to skew it further). What happened to labour's promises on electoral reform anyway? The coalition is the most representative government we have had for decades.

Only because Clegg hid his true colours. The lib dems share of the vote dropped. Clegg sold his party's sole for power.

The election was a blatant disaster for the tories and the dems. Remind me again when did we last have a coalition and how long did that last?

True, but the labour party has been soundly rejected by the electorate, in their worst defeat since 1983. Only the gerrymandered voting system flattered their results, and even now they are trying to oppose coalition attempts to correct their skewing of the system.

marginally rejected despite being very unpopular and targeted by the Tory press, gerrymandering like the Westminster council you mean.

We should have a clear, written constitution placing strict limits on the government, and a supreme court capable of holding them to account.

oh yeah like they do in america, you have to be joking.

 

[KNiVES]

I think Diane Abbot should get lost because she's a huge fool. A stupid idiot because she knows she's the token black and token woman rolled up in one just so the rest of the party can look like they're a diverse bunch. 'Bring out the token black lady' they said. 'We will look good'. Yet Diane knows this but she struggles and flails like a dying fish in the leadership contest. She should have withdrawn instead of giving the millipedes and the other contestants oxygen. Diane knows she's just being used. It's a highly disgraceful act by the rest of the party and they really should know better - but then again it's currently being led by Harman....

Oh dear Labour. Oh dear... you even make the Tories look good right now.

The worst and saddest thing is that none of the candidates right now are remotely credible or anywhere near what the party needs to gain its relevance again.

 

[Will Lucky]

in what way exactly?


Only because Clegg hid his true colours. The lib dems share of the vote dropped. Clegg sold his party's sole for power.

The election was a blatant disaster for the tories and the dems. Remind me again when did we last have a coalition and how long did that last?


marginally rejected despite being very unpopular and targeted by the Tory press, gerrymandering like the Westminster council you mean.

Well technically, Thatcher was a Classical Liberal. In many many ways, New Labour pretty much copied her.

The last Coalition was from 1941-1945, very successful. Clegg wanted a coalition and it didn't matter who with, that was one of the Parties aims.

Labour received 29% of the vote, yet in 1983 they recieved 27.6% where they were almost annihilated. How they managed to get as many seats as they did is undoubtedly down to gerrymandering.

 

[Dolph]

in what way exactly?

Gay rights for a start...

Only because Clegg hid his true colours. The lib dems share of the vote dropped. Clegg sold his party's sole for power.

Twaddle, have you never read the Orange book: Reclaiming Liberalism that was published in 2004?

The fact that some people still seemed to believe that the Lib dems were somehow an extension of the labour left without the authoritarianism are the problem there...

The election was a blatant disaster for the tories and the dems. Remind me again when did we last have a coalition and how long did that last?

Not as much of a disaster as it was for Labour

Pretty much all the coalitions of the 20th Century involved the Tories and the Liberals, mind you there has only been a couple of them. Parliament has only been hung 5 times in the last century, and the others were either a minority government or a supply and demand pact.

The formal coalitions lasted much longer than the other two. May I suggest some research?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_governments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hung_parliament#United_Kingdom

marginally rejected despite being very unpopular and targeted by the Tory press, gerrymandering like the Westminster council you mean.

They polled lower than the Tories did in 1997, and nearly as low as they did in 1983 (which was their lowest result since becoming a political force). How the hell is that 'marginally', unless you're massively biased?

By that logic, the Tories were only 'marginally' rejected in 1997...

With regards to gerrymandering, any situation where (after your boundary changes), you require a much smaller proportionof the votes than other parties for the same number of seats is certainly gerrymandering.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/swing-calculator

Remember the poll calculator? Why not go have a play with it. Put 33.3 in for each party and see what happens

oh yeah like they do in america, you have to be joking.

Why not? are you an opponent of freedom? Do you think the government should be able to make decisions evidence and justification free?

 

[Slam62]

Erm, the deficit will be gone at the end of five years, as opposed to Labour's plans to only spend half as much we couldn't afford, and increase the debt further...

Still, I suppose you must know more than all the economists recommending this course of action, or the OBR...

hmm not gone, even the office of smoke and mirrors says 20bn a year, the sums don't add up though because the debt will have increased and the interest will be a lot more than 20bn implying the budget is really positive. They also assume 100000 more unemployed.

hmm again

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/statement_chx_140610.htm

seems to say total deficit is £155bn structural is 5.2% gdp, and the total cuts will end up as £44bn over 5 years leaving the structural deficit at about 1.1% of gdp, meanwhile the rest of the deficit is dissipating with the booming economy.

But he still says the interest will be £67bn a year so he is expecting to owe well over £1trn, probably with a total deficit of somewhere near my figures, but don't worry, most of it is not structural and will disappear in the end.

edit to clarify, I think the £155bn is 11% of gdp so 5.8% is non structural.

so they are really not achieving very much at all and I do really hope I am wrong and the economy does boom. (no really)

 

[Stretch]

Isn't it obvious that the lib dems are finished?
I think labour are certain to win the next election, unless the coalition collapses before the cuts really come in. The win will probably be a landslide as well.

People are going to feel so much pain from the cuts, they won't know what hit them.

Don't underestimate the ability of the Tory party to buy the electorate before an election. It's no coincidence that the Tory election pledge was to eliminate the bulk of budget deficit by 2014. That's one year before they have to call an election.

That gives them time to clear the debt and organize calculated tax cuts before they have to go back to the ballot box. If they can achieve all this they’ll get my vote.

 

[Dolph]

Yet more evidence that the unions have bought far too much sway previously...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...llions-paying-for-trade-union-activities.html

Local authorities across the country are allowing hundreds of their employees to devote all or part of their working week to union, rather than council, duties - while their salaries are paid from public funds.

A survey of 77 English councils by this newspaper found that they spent around £11 million last year on the salaries of individuals who were employed by the councils, but in fact spent their time on trade union duties.

The full time union worker being employed by the council is a disgusting and vile practice that should be outlawed immediately.

 

[Biohazard]

I hope New Labour, and Scottish Labour, continue to collapse inwards on themself its great to watch.. in fact I'd go as far as saying I wish they'd bugger off and dissapear all together. We'd all be better off.

 

[Naffa]

Yet more evidence that the unions have bought far too much sway previously...

I will concede that one of the very few things I actually agreed with Margaret Thatcher on was her stance regarding unions. However, do you just choose to ignore how so many of the beneficiaries of the (admittedly small scale, at the moment) privatisations and various reforms of the public sector happen to be people that have made donations to the Tory party? I would never be so obtuse as to assume that such practice was something one could only assign to a single political party.

 

[Slam62]

Yet more evidence that the unions have bought far too much sway previously...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...llions-paying-for-trade-union-activities.html



The full time union worker being employed by the council is a disgusting and vile practice that should be outlawed immediately.

haha good one, so what is the case with union reps in Germany then?

Large companies tend to like unions because it gives them a focal point for negotiations.

The union can be extremely good at helping to avoid compulsory job losses by persuading the company to explore other avenues. This is generally done by dialogue rather than industrial action. Of course only the militant sensationalist stories will be printed.

In my experience industrial action rarely achieves anything.

A union fully and openly engaged with the company can be helpful in setting realistic expectations from the workforce.

in general the amount of time spent on union duties is about 2hrs every couple of months. But don't let reality get in the way of anything.

 

[Slam62]

I hope New Labour, and Scottish Labour, continue to collapse inwards on themself its great to watch.. in fact I'd go as far as saying I wish they'd bugger off and dissapear all together. We'd all be better off.

yes but there is no collapse.

 

[Dolph]

haha good one, so what is the case with union reps in Germany then?

Large companies tend to like unions because it gives them a focal point for negotiations.

The union can be extremely good at helping to avoid compulsory job losses by persuading the company to explore other avenues. This is generally done by dialogue rather than industrial action. Of course only the militant sensationalist stories will be printed.

In my experience industrial action rarely achieves anything.

A union fully and openly engaged with the company can be helpful in setting realistic expectations from the workforce.

in general the amount of time spent on union duties is about 2hrs every couple of months. But don't let reality get in the way of anything.

Way to completely fail to read the story. The article was about full time employees being paid large salarys to only do union duties.

I don't have any issue with the 2hrs a week or whatever.

Also, the benefits you cite don't require a trade union, an internal consultation group can work just as well.

 

[Scania]

I hope New Labour, and Scottish Labour, continue to collapse inwards on themself its great to watch.. in fact I'd go as far as saying I wish they'd bugger off and dissapear all together. We'd all be better off.

I'm sure the collapse will continue - the Tories did the same after '97 and carried on for years.

Ultimately, this led us to Browns "Coronation" as PM and the disaster that followed....

So, no ,imo, we would not be better off if they dissapear all together, we can only hope they stay in bits long enough for the country to be back on its feet again and then return as a decent opposition that will hold the party(s) in power to book.


Talking of books - imo its a shame those responsible for the current mess are set to rake in the book deals rather than face up for what they have done to the U.K.'s finances,society & worldwide reputation.