BS: voting? (UK)

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Apr 15 - 06:25 AM

I just marvel at the lack of intelligence required from people in order to fall for it.

:-D It astounds me too, Musket. I generally work on the basis that everyone is the same. No one is any better or worse than me and that philosophy helps me to treat people as equals regardless of race, colour, creed, sexuality or ethnicity. On seeing how some people fall for the same old lies over and over again I do sometimes have serious doubts though...

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Musket
Date: 03 Apr 15 - 06:05 AM

I never knew Hugh Gaitskill and I were Tory lackies? You live and learn. Although as I have never been in The Labour Party, I never had a view, prat.

I'll not take lessons from a solicitor on the morality of making money, if its all the same to you. Still advertising how you use computers to keep costs down for your clients, after making your staff redundant?

I notice the recent ten year period statistic showing immigration over the last ten years has contributed rather than been a burden to the economy. I also notice The Scottish government has just sent one of the other Muskets with others on a tour of India and Pakistan to try to encourage people to apply for doctor posts in Scotland. Medical schools can provide consultants in about fifteen years from enrolling as students for the less complicated specialties, and often longer for the more complex careers. Meanwhile, after the threat of independence, over 10% of consultant grade posts in Scotland remain unfilled. Everybody hesitated rather than face working in an independent Scotland with an uncertain future.

I also notice that blaming sections of society for all the problems is the usual resort of politicians bankrupt of ideas. Hitler started the modern craze in the late '20s, but of course, everybody has always been at it. I just marvel at the lack of intelligence required from people in order to fall for it.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Apr 15 - 05:21 AM

Immigration has always yo-yoed up and down and will continue to do so. There is a very good alternative to leaving the EU. and that is to stay in the EU. Battle to make it more accountable, more democratic and less of a gravy train for bureaucrats, but stay in. No-one has ever called me or my son up to get killed fighting another European nation and I wouldn't mind keeping it that way if you don't mind. That's among all the other arguments in favour. As for the cheap labour sending most of their money back home, no they bloody don't and you know it. Most of their below-living wages, paid by BRITISH capitalists, are spent on paying spiv BRITISH landlords inflated rents and on just about keeping themselves alive. Have you anything to say about those millions of UK expats who live in Europe but spend their UK state-provided pensions in another country? Isn't that us sending taxpayers' money abroad, which has got to be worse than an Estonian plumber sending a few hard-earned quid back to his family which he earned, at least, by unblocking your bog?

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 03 Apr 15 - 05:16 AM

No-one seems to address much the issue of the almost 2 million British people living elsewhere in the EU. It is an exchange of peoples not just an influx into Britain. Plus could any UK party guarantee their rights of abode should we withdraw from the EU. Maybe unlikely but should for instance the Spanish say to the million or so Brits there "sorry you guys are no longer EU citizens so no longer have the right to stay here" what kind of massive human tragedy would that cause?

The Tories and UKIP were quick to blame the Scottish gvt for not having the legality etc ironed out 100% with Brussels - but in reality Holyrood couldn't do that as discussions would need to be with the member state's gvt itself. But prior to any EU referendum will the UK gvt have all the legal issues ironed out with Brussels over what the legality would be in the wake of British succession What would be the consequence for Brits abroad?

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Apr 15 - 03:29 AM

Richard, there is simply no alternative to leaving the EU.

It is about numbers, not what immigrants contribute or take from our economy.
Immigration rates are presently running at ten times what they have been in the past with no signs of falling....do you think given our financial position and infrastructure this can be allowed to continue for ever.....OK we have cheap labour, but most of the money earned by economic immigrants goes straight back home.
Nobody blames these folks for wishing to feed their families or build houses for themselves, but our government have a duty to look after our own people, there is no reason why our people could not be trained to run the Health service, build houses, or run the transport system.......Not to do so is madness and short term thinking, only lining the pockets of the unscrupulous employers.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 03 Apr 15 - 02:55 AM

Mither, you are a twerp. You say you are a capitalist, and then deny opposing clause 4. It is simply impossible for both to be true. Capitalism necessarily involved capital - not the workers - owning the means of production and benefitting from the fruits of the workers' labour.

Clause 4 read "To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service"

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 03 Apr 15 - 02:38 AM

Vote Labour

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Musket
Date: 03 Apr 15 - 02:28 AM

No Brendon. Just returning in kind. If you happen to like his bollocks about me, you can't really complain about my bollocks about him.

Presumably Bridge can get a crystal ball and deliver my opinion of clause 4 followed by calling me the enemy within for holding an opinion I never put forward in the first place.

The last person to call me the enemy within was Th*tcher in 1984. It seems you can take the public school educated solicitor out of The Con Club but you can't take The Con Club out of the public school educated solicitor.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Musket
Date: 03 Apr 15 - 01:40 AM

So Nigel. What happens during the ten years where we find new markets? Eat each other? The whole of the western world is in trade agreements.

Of course, the UKIP method requires labour rates lower than Bangladesh in order to be competitive.

Nice to see Bridge state why hypocrisy is often found out. His specialism if nobody knows, is leeching his own pot from sustaining the capitalist aspects of royalties in the music industry.

I didn't watch the leaders debate last night. But read a review or two. My concerns with the two people who could be Prime Minister are that they seem to be unable to brush aside false claims by others. By not addressing bullshit, people might think there could be a reason.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Apr 15 - 05:21 PM

http://www.cer.org.uk/sites/default/files/smc_final_report_june2014.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Apr 15 - 05:19 PM

The overall risk (economically) of the UK leaving the EU exceeds likely benefits: http://www.cer.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/attachments/pdf/2014/pb_britishtrade_16jan14-8285.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 15 - 05:11 PM

My last post appears to have been deleted. Not sure why. Possibly because it pointed out that MikeL2 should vote, even if only to register a protest. Go for it Mike, if you see this. Moderators, you have been rumbled... :-P

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: BrendanB
Date: 02 Apr 15 - 04:52 PM

There is a delicious irony in the fact that Musket claims to have multiple personalities to encourage posters to focus on the post and not the poster while at the same time hurling personal obscene abuse and invective at anyone who posts in opposition to him.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Apr 15 - 04:48 PM

Well said Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 02 Apr 15 - 02:57 PM

Musket:
The guest above meanwhile has posted possibly the worst words on this thread. If you don't understand Euro trading, do the country a favour and be in bed with flu on voting day. I want us to trade with Europe and have a say. The Norways of this world are bound by all the European laws and regulations but cannot influence what they are.

Your point might have some weight, were it not for the fact that, as trading partners our balance of payments with the rest of the EU shows that we purchase more from them than they do from us. If we were not in the EU the EU would still want to trade with us because it is a source (net) of income for them.

Of course, if we could trade as we wished with the rest of the world, ignoring European fish quotas, the CAP & European import tariffs, we might find that we would be better off not trading so heavily with the EU.

The leaders of the other members of the EU do not want to keep the UK as a member for the UK's benefit, but because the UK is a net contributor to the EU 'common' purse. To what extent, it may be difficult to say, as the auditors have been unable to agree the books of Europe for many years.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: MikeL2
Date: 02 Apr 15 - 09:56 AM

hi

I am in George Osborne's constituency.....soooooo my Labour vote is lost in a sea of blue.

I went to see George the other night and watched and heard him deliver a "sound-bite" speech about the plan for the Northern Powerhouse !!!

The man lives in an ivory tower and has no idea of how the real World lives outside his dreams.

So I will not be voting yet again.

Cheers

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 03:29 PM

We want to be a trading partner with the EU, not governed by it.

Yes, and the only way to be in 'the club' is to comply with it's rules. If we don't like the rules, the best place to get them changed is from within. UKIP are a one trick pony and a very bad trick at that. Don't be fooled by them. There is plenty to go round for everyones but it is held by the top 1%. You must have heard the old joke. A Tory, a Daily Mail reader and a Romanian are sat at a table with a plate of 10 biscuits on it. The Tory eats 9 biscuits and says to the Daily Mail reader, "Watch that Romanian, he is after your biscuit." As my Mum used to say, many a true word spoken in jest.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 02:48 PM

Regardless of whether one is a socialist or a capitalist, M Goodwin is correct in the points he makes.
We want to be a trading partner with the EU, not governed by it.
We really must have some control over who and how many people come here from the EU.
I will be voting SNP, but even in an independent Scotland these points would be valid. I don't agree with everything the SNP say they are in favour of (like EU membership), but on balance they get my vote.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 01:47 PM

Mither you are acting and speaking foolishly. Indeed when you resort to stupiod "peedo" insults you sound as bright as a kipper. You said you were a capitalist. Capitalism leads ineluctably to the oppression of labour (indeed, the exploitation of labour) precisely because for the capitalist the lowest cost of production is always preferable.

And let's see, the last time I voted conservative, before I fully grew up, before I fully realised how evil most conservatives were, was probably about 40 years ago. A rational person should be prepared to be convinced by improved data.

You, on the other hand, seem to have progressed from perhaps almost a socialist to being one of the exploiters.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 01:25 PM

and what a buch of prime lying shits they are.

Pretty much standard politicians then. At least their influence is limited to Croydon. Have you read the linked article yet?

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 12:48 PM

"Butch"!!! perhaps one or two are!!! Bunch was meant of course.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 12:47 PM

"Croydon Council is Labour" and what a buch of prime lying shits they are.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 12:27 PM

musket - i did suggest that everyone-it's not all about you - stops trading insults. i mentioned your name as your latest outburst did catch the eye more than most. i think you may have asked me what planet i am on before. i havn't bothered to really work it out yet - but it is some old hippy idealist red/green one to be sure. at least i don't have to work out who i am. today.

i always found it odd that some folk prefer to hide their voting intentions. as i can honestly say i have not had more than half a dozen conversations in 40 years with people who make the conservative argument, i would guess people are not so happy to do so as are us loud-mouthed lefty types. are they ashamed or is there no humane argument to be made for today's unprincipled capitalism?

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Ian
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 12:02 PM

Read the article above. Deserves more publicity. Shame it isn't in the main news.
I found it offensive yesterday when the BBC newsreader kept using the Tory catchphrase "long term economic plan". It hardly seemed impartial.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Musket
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 11:58 AM

If you are asking people to stop trading insults Achmelvich, note Bridge's insults as well as perfectly justified reactions.

I want to get this thread closed? What fucking planet are you on?

The guest above meanwhile has posted possibly the worst words on this thread. If you don't understand Euro trading, do the country a favour and be in bed with flu on voting day. I want us to trade with Europe and have a say. The Norways of this world are bound by all the European laws and regulations but cannot influence what they are.

What makes you think we can keep the vast majority of our trade if our largest market puts tariff conditions on us or uses the preferred partner directive?

If we don't trade, you can dream up all the no tax for minimum wage laws you want. The exercise will help distract you from the fact we would all be starving.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 11:51 AM

Then, M. Goodwin, you are a prime example of those who have been hoodwinked by the present administration, the press and the snake-oil patter of Farage.

Back to the main event rather than the comedy stage. Interesting article from a self-confessed Tory!

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 11:46 AM

I and a growing number of people wish for one overarching principle – that the laws of this country be made by the people who live in this country!

We wish to be trading partners with Europe, but not governed by it.

We wish that our politicians be more than cardboard cut-outs and cared more for the people they are meant to represent than they do about their careers.

What do we want other than these basic demands? Lower taxes, yes I mean for poorer people. No tax on the minimum wage. Cheap and reliable energy so we don't have to worry about putting the heating on. Oh, and one more thing – actual border controls so we can control who and how many people come in to our country.

"Little or no financial rewards" for the politicians of LibLabCon you say?

You must be joking! Has the expenses scandal left your mind already?

Thanks but I will be taking Edward Johnson's advice and UKIP will have my vote.

M. Goodwin

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 11:42 AM

I think Achmelvich, that there is a big difference between flinging insults about and making veiled accusations of paedophilia?
Then there's the continued denigration of women.

"equality warriors" indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 11:38 AM

Agreed, achmelvich. I guess the point is UK voting for the forthcoming election rather than some pie in the sky ideas about replacing capitalism with a system of money-less egalitarianism where health and social care are provided by magic fairy dust? :-) Why not tell off your countryman about unwarranted invective as well? He is enough to drive a saint to swear!

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 10:20 AM

Aye an' ah'll suggest tae him wherr tae stick it!

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 10:08 AM

could we get back to the point? surely all the insults that ever needed to be chucked around on here have been done so many times. or, musket, is this just another attempt to close down a thread as you don't like the way it is proceeding? calm down eh.....i suggest a camberwell carrot

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Musket
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 10:02 AM

Clause four was well meaning. The redesign by Labour to rid the confusion of ends with means was also well meaning.

It isn't for or against, but a definition by the Labour party. As I am not a member and never have been, I doubt I had an opinion one way or another. I support most Labour objectives, rather than your voting record of Tory a few years ago Bridge.

How did it look from your one world conservatism perspective? (Which is the same thing, but substitute the word "worker" with "shareholder."

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Musket
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 09:55 AM

Sounds like you never supported anti paedophilia legislation Bridge.

We can both play that fucking game, cunt.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 09:53 AM

Why do you think the leaders of the UK financial system are not in prison, when John down the road who claimed a few pounds a week benefits and padded it out with a part time job digging gardens was fined and given a criminal record......."equality" my arse!

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 09:52 AM

Sounds like you never supported clause 4 Mither. That makes you the enemy - indeed the enemy within.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 09:46 AM

Everyone should pay.

Never said otherwise. In fact I have advocated that those with more should pay more on this thread. Rather than just using invective why don't you try reading what people say? Who is 'gazing in admiration' at the rich BTW? Certainly not me and to even suggest that anyone does says a lot about how you think.

FWIW I have have been a lifelong Labour and Trade Union supporter. Sadly, both cocked up in the 60s and 70s causing the right wing backlash that was Thatcherism and we are still suffering from that. It will level out eventually when people realise excesses in anything are never a good idea. Hopefully in my lifetime. Certainly in my childrens.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 09:26 AM

Why don't you just save yourself a lot of heartsearching Dave and just vote Tory?....."Would you like kick my arse sir?.....Oww thank you sir"...:0)

Everyone should pay. One sector of society should not be allowed to get away with it, to provide a "financial aspiration model" for the rest of us to gaze at in admiration and try in vain to duplicate.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 09:12 AM

yes, but its never by the rich....its ostly by the poor buggers on PAYE.

That's the whole point! If no-one has any money, who is going to pay for it? As I said earlier there is nothing wrong with funding a social policy through business generated capital. It is far preferable to funding it through the poor buggers you mention! This is one of the major points of government and perhaps the most worrying. Leaving an economy in the hands of well meaning amateurs is a recipe for disaster.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 09:01 AM

"I'm a Socialist too :0("....Oh no you're not! Absentee landlords with multiple properties don't qualify.
People who believe in unregulated Capitalism don't qualify either.

Especially in Scotland!

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 08:47 AM

"A good social policy to raise standards for all requires to be paid for.".......yes, but its never by the rich....its ostly by the poor buggers on PAYE.

Don't try and defend this stinking system here, you "equality warriors"   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 08:24 AM

I'm pretty sure that is what I was trying to say too. Maybe I am Musket as well! :-D

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 08:23 AM

Around here people are moving from Labour to the Greens because Labour is not declaring against fracking.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Musket
Date: 01 Apr 15 - 08:15 AM

I've always been a capitalist, Bridge. There again, I've never voted Tory.

In fact, I have always voted Labour.

How's about you?   

By the way. The term capitalist isn't described well on these threads. After all, I am a Socialist too. When your balls eventuality drop, you'll realise they are not incompatible. A good social policy to raise standards for all requires to be paid for.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Mar 15 - 06:22 PM

I hope you're right. {Scary face emoticon}

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 31 Mar 15 - 06:11 PM

Yeagh but Labour not getting an overall majority is not the same as another 5 years of Cameron. In truth neither party is likely to get a majority. But the way the seats look like panning out in Scotland suits a potential Lab-Nat group much more than it does a renewed Tory-LibDem grouping.

In the last election the current coalition got 98 seats more than Labour and the SNP did combined. If the Lib Dems do lose the predicted 10 Scottish seats than that instantly drops to 78 seats a massive 20% or so change from only 8% of the population. Then there is the Lib Dem collapse in England along with the swing from Tory to Labour since last election. ie The Tories had about a 7% lead last election whilst in BBCs poll of polls the two main parties are neck and neck so far.

So Labour are trying to say in Scotland that vote SNP and we have no chance of getting a majority and you may well get the Tories but they have two problems with that. Firstly none of the gains with the possible exception of my own constituency have any chance of being Tory gains. Scots who vote SNP know the Nats will oppose the Tories in Westminster just as much as any Labour MP would do. Secondly people who vote SNP don't want Labour to have a majority.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Mar 15 - 05:50 PM

It's all in the arithmetic, Allan. Without a considerable number of Scottish seats Labour won't get anywhere near a majority. Unless they are the largest single party by a good few, we're going to get five more years of the same.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Mar 15 - 05:32 PM

Croydon North will beyond doubt stay Labour. Suck it up Bonzo.

Croydon South you could put a conservative rosette on a pig (a fairly commonplace occurrence) and it would get elected.

Croydon Central will be more interesting. It could well go Labour as UKIP pressures the core vote for ignorance and a return to the 1800s in the conservative party; and as people realise how much poorer Scumeron has made most people other than the top 5%. Some pollsters so predict.

Croydon Council is Labour.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 31 Mar 15 - 05:22 PM

"And if the SNP triumphantly wipes out Labour in Scotland, you won't get any of that, because we would get five more years of Cameron"

I don't think that is necessarily so. Labour MPs are potentially being replaced by Nat MPs not Tory or Lib dem MPs. The Nats have said they would vote against any Tory Queen's Speech and offer support to Labour. The Lib Dems look like losing all their Scottish seats bar one so the present coalition seats in Scotland will be greatly reduced by about 10 seats approx whilst the potential anti coalition gvt block looks like greatly increasing by that said number.

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 31 Mar 15 - 05:09 PM

"but a party that thinks Scotland voted how it did because they were taken in by English promises? Wow.. SNP do sometimes arrogantly think they know better than the electorate, and in case anybody missed it, Scotland doesn't want independence."

Various things there. First of all the use of "English" which I think is wrong. Unionist or Westminster would be better usage. I mean Gordon Brown isn't English is he? Some on the Yes side way overestimate the Vow but I think it isn't sensible to dismiss it as of no consequence either. Facts are that the Unionists insisted there was no question on further devolution on the paper despite the Nats being willing to have it on there. It was to be either in or out the union. Any further devolution would be discussed after the referendum. That was until the polls were neck and neck just prior to the vote. So all three unionist leaders, with Brown as spokesmen, suddenly promise much further powers to Scotland in the wake of a No vote. Thus there was to be guaranteed further devolution without even a vote - even though the Scottish Tory leader had said there was a line in the sand. No more powers. It is absurd to think that didn't swing some people. It didn't need to swing that many. 20 people in a room then 11 had voted No and 9 voted Yes. It would only have taken the promise of devolution to have swung one out of the 11 No voters to make it a stalemate.

Lastly yes it is true that Scotland didn't vote for independence but various things there. The SNP are not heading to Westminster to claim a mandate for Scottish independence anyway. They are heading to Westminster to among other things ensure the further powers are delivered. Whether individual Scots want independence or not is by the by - the facts are that when it comes to fighting for Scotland's interests the Nats are trusted more by the Scottish population as a whole than any of the other parties are.

Likewise it is true that the Nats lost the referendum but it is also true that they are now in a stronger position than they were prior to the referendum debate. The debate started with Yes on about 30% on most polls whereas it finished on 45% a 50% growth in support. The membership of the party has rocketed with them now having by far the biggest membership. The facts of the matter are that the core support for independence is now far stronger than it was even 2 years ago and age demographics is a big threat to the unions slender lead. So the issue, even if on the back burner for the moment can't be dismissed so easily. The No side can't just sit back and say "we won" rather they need to win the hearts and minds of Scots under the age of 65!

Subject: RE: BS: voting? (UK)
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Mar 15 - 04:21 PM

I am sure your party are proud of you, Bonzo.