BS: From someone who rarely starts threads

Subject: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 06:40 AM

As I type this we are but a few days from a UK general election. It is, frankly, ludicrous that we are not discussing it. So let's discuss it. I'll start by saying I hate the bloody lot of them but that someone has to run the country, so I'm voting. So there. Shoot.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Roger the Skiffler
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:07 AM

Someone in yesterday's Guardian mocked those of us who urged people to vote via social media but, as I said on Thimbles O'Hoologan (my evil doppelganger)'s Facebook page, if you don't vote you can't complain and I love to complain. Sadly, political threads here just get hijacked by name callers so I don't get involved here.
RtS

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Stu
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:15 AM

To not vote is frankly, pathetic. If you don't vote then your opinion is utterly worthless, little more than hot air. It's an old cliche, but people gave their lives so we can vote and we should exercise our prerogative.

That said, if there's no-one worth voting for then the only thing to do is spoil your vote. Spoilt votes are still counted and are a legitimate way to make your voice heard. I write poems on mine.

I've not decided who to vote for yet, as they all seem a right shower. Deffo not the Tories or the idiot kippers, almost certainly not the LibDems after last time and so that leaves Labour and the Greens.

Hmmm.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jack Campin
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:37 AM

SNP.

Who are not all that inspiring, but at least not a gang of murdering thugs, thieves and opportunistic liars.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: BrendanB
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:46 AM

I am definitely going to vote; I have even decided who I am going to vote for. Unfortunately, I am making a choice on which party do I believe is least worst rather than which is best, because there is no best. I just do not trust politicians not to put their own/their party's interests ahead of the interests of society as a whole.
Russell Brand is a self adulating pillock but it does feel as if there is something wrong with the way democracy is working in the UK today. This is in part a result of the rise of the professional politician and the effective disenfranchisement of a large part of the electorate because the education system favours the middle and upper classes regarding achievement. Do I know how that should be fixed? No, I don't.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:47 AM

I will be voting Lib Dem. If I lived in another area I may well have chosen Labour but I don't think they will be in the running in North Norfolk and I don't want the Tories getting in.

Whatever the general feeling about the Lib Dems may be throughout the country, I think Norman Lamb remains poplar round here and, in fairness, I think he is a good MP for the area.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:48 AM

The Greens are very nice people but they live in fairyland. I hate wind turbines and solar farms (all over Cornwall like a rash so that we can sustain the air conditioning in badly-built office blocks in London) and think that the only long-term answer to man-made global warming is nuclear power (oh yes, I know how to lose friends). The planet has proved beyond doubt that it can't and won't behave itself in terms of carbon emissions. So, as my priority is to get the bloody Tories out, I have to hold my nose and vote tactically here in North Cornwall. That would be LibDem, unfortunately, as Labour haven't got a cat in hell's chance here, so if I voted Labour I'd be helping the Tories. I'd rather die.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:49 AM

"To not vote is frankly, pathetic. If you don't vote then your opinion is utterly worthless"
Always been a fan of the old Anarchist graffiti - "Don't vote, it only encourages them" (about the only thing I have in common with Anarchism).
If voting produces the same result every time - electing the same bunch of dishonest and incompetent self-servers, making the same promises that disappear like sea-fog once the election is over and then carrying out the same policies that put us where we are which end up giving us same results - those who have keep having, those who don't become worse off - what's the point?
"Hmmm."
Hmmm indeed
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:50 AM

I suppose I meant the people on the planet. Didn't mean to diss poor old Mother Earth.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:53 AM

There always has to be a least worst though, Jim, no?


(I'll check me grammar later...)

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:12 AM

I see Nick Clegg [ leader fuckwits party ] is promising us the earth again, in full knowledge that he will never have to fulfill any promises. Or like last time if he sells his soul again for 5 minutes of imagined power, he'll go back on his word straight away. Mind, I think he'll not get elected due to what he did to the students and steelworkers.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:21 AM

Ah yes, notwithstanding which party crosses the line first, there's always the tangential pleasure of watching utter pillocks losing their seats. Clegg and Danny Alexander would be the top two on my hit-list. Any other additions gratefully and gleefully received.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:27 AM

"what's the point?"

Spoil your vote. Your vote still gets counted and you don't have to settle for the status quo. Like I said before, I write poems on my spoilt votes but you could paste pictures, write slogans and anything else.

By not voting, you're part of the problem and you don't have a voice. I'm not giving up my vote because the choice is between shysters, lickspittles and tosspots; they can all GTF. I'll damn well stand by the people who fought and died for universal suffrage, who suffered and defended our right to cast a ballot.

It always amazes me when the TV shows folks who can vote, possibly for the first time, are always happy to being doing so. They might have lived under a regime where their voices were silenced by force and oppression; they often queue for hours in all sorts of weather and they recognise the importance of being able to vote.

That people don't vote simply means the've either forgotten or don't care about how important voting is. We're under the kosh of the military-industrial complex and the establishment, but we're also still in with a shout.

Vote.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:31 AM

Although once a member of the Green Party, I am not very political and like Steve will vote for who I think is least worst, holding nose.

My last post on the old election thread was actually posted after it closed in response to its closure.
We really should be allowed to discuss our election.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Stu without cookie
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:34 AM

Guest above was me, not sure what happened to my cookie.

Hmmm (again).

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,#
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:40 AM

"Spoilt votes are still counted and are a legitimate way to make your voice heard. I write poems on mine."

I too have spoiled a few ballots in my time. I write short statements instead of poems. My last one read something like "Give me someone trustworthy to vote for and I won't be writing shit like this on my ballot."

I think it's important to go to the election booth and cast a ballot because it helps ensure we get to do so next election. Even if next election we have to spoil the ballot again.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:46 AM

"There always has to be a least worst though, Jim, no?"
No way to run a country Steve.
Until politicians are made directly answerable to the electorate on the promises they make at election time - there really doesn't seem any point.
I remember the buzz I felt the first time I put cross to paper (for Harold Wilson for god's sake)
Even though I didn't trust him or his promises, there was still a feeling that it was possible to make a difference and make your opinions count - 'all gone, no more tomorrow" as things stand at present.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,#
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:53 AM

We are beginning to feel that way in Canada, Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: BrendanB
Date: 03 May 15 - 09:32 AM

I can't go along with the view that because our democracy is a poor thing at the moment the answer is to disengage. The simple fact is that, in comparison to many countries in the world, the UK is a functioning society in which the vast majority are able to live and work free from fear or anxiety. I know that it is possible to point to food banks etc. and claim that this proves that democracy is not working but again, in comparison to large parts of the globe our system of government has enabled us to enjoy significant freedoms. I am voting because I want to see change - I want to resist the ant-immigration rhetoric of some, the willingness to collude with bad business practices of others. I despise the tax loopholes still available to the wealthiest in our society and want to see them closed. I believe that most politicians are there because of their principles, even though I may not share them. My vote enables me to give some sort of voice to my principles - and what is the real alternative? Bloody revolution? I sincerely hope not.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 03 May 15 - 10:02 AM

I agree that one should vote, but I find voting very depressing being, as I am, in a very safe Tory constituency. I have never voted Tory, never will - I despise the whole greedy, deceitful bunch of them - there is absolutely no chance of anyone getting in other than the sitting Tory, so what point is there in voting?

Until our system of 'first past the post' is replaced with a system of PR, the votes of people like me simply don't count. It's a bugger.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 15 - 10:17 AM

"I can't go along with the view that because our democracy is a poor thing at the moment the answer is to disengage"
I think it's not a problem of democracy not working, but of Parliamentary 'democracy' standing in the way of real democracy.
My chance to make a difference through the ballot box has been whittled away gradually by a series of governments of both complexions.
They are increasingly using tactics to take power and abuse it when they have got it, in particular, the press, which has become a virtual right-wing monopoly which controls information and manipulates opinions.
My rights as a Trades Unionist went with Thatcher and I have no say in my working life (should say, "had" - now retired and living elsewhere)
The tactic of setting one group of working people against another has now become a shameless election ploy - blaming immigrants for housing shortages and resurrecting a housing policy that made many thousands of families homeless as an election promise.
Labour has shown itself no better - Blair's W.M.D. invasion in the face of millions of people on the streets in protest showed that, once they get elected, our opinions are worth nothing.
Oddly enough, though three main parties here in Ireland are basically no different, things have been made slightly more transparent because we have a P.R. system.
We, like Britain, are faced with an unforeseeable series of coalitions so that the rich can stay rich and the poor are kept in their place.
It will be interesting to see what happens this year now Ireland has privatised water in the face of massive protests and now they are moving to privatise public transport, which will put at risk the free transport for pensioners scheme that Ireland prides itself upon.
At least we don't have politicians going to the polls on a racist ticket - yet!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,MikeL2
Date: 03 May 15 - 10:38 AM

Hi

We will not be voting!!!!!!

Only today we have been invited to stay with some friends for a week in Wales. And it is too late to get a postal vote.

If I had voted I would have voted Labour - because their is no way on Earth would I vote for Osborne. But in this constituency he will walk in.

Baaa

Cheers

MikeL2

PS see u all in a week.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 03 May 15 - 11:01 AM

my old mum is 83
and is stubbornly determined to continue walking to the polling station,
in all weathers, for every election,
to proudly vote Labour.

Despite her living in a perpetual tory safe seat.

I live in a neighbouring tory safe seat,
and for the first time after many years of voting tactically for the Liberals
I will enjoy casting my futile vote as my mind and heart has always dictated.. Labour !!!😎

[my dilemma is the local council elections where there is a slim chance
the liberals may defeat the tories...]

Trying to imagine under what dire future circumstances
we might have to contemplate voting even tory to keep UKIP out...?????😬

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 03 May 15 - 11:27 AM

In our constituency, the Tories took it from Labour last time. So perhaps floating voters make the difference?

I have already voted by post and have voted Labour. However, I had to think long and hard first. Are you voting for the candidate or the party?

Party.

The Labour candidate for this strange shaped large constituency has made it quite clear that she is only interested in two large towns, both about twenty miles from us and nobody here uses services there. (Even the council works out of another town, not in the constituency.)

The sitting Tory however has been vocal, present and active in many good causes such as development of trading estates nearby to attract jobs, rural broadband, upgrade of road networks and saving a local police station.

But as I said, you don't vote for him because when he isn't doing good deeds he is being herded through the lobby by his party whips and that is where he does the damage.

They are all opportunist politicians and in the areas where I know a bit, they give the impression of incompetence regardless of party. I just think Labour at least know why we have a public purse and what to use it for. I haven't voted for what is best for me but what I think is best for the country.

If I voted for my best interest it would be Tory but I can look after myself regardless of who is in power. Many cannot look after themselves and the Tories don't seem willing to look after them. Labour will try even if Ed does make a Balls of it.

Dunno about the other two Muskets but one of them is a Labour member so not much surprise I suppose.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 03 May 15 - 11:54 AM

Rather sad.. Two of us posting at around the same time?

I intend to vote Labour too, although with a heavy heart. Up here in Scotland, SNP are a popular party regardless of whether you want The UK or a tin pot Republic. Chiefly because they have policies similar to what most expect from a Labour Party, ie, social democracy, social infrastructure and jobs from inward investment.

I couldn't vote for them all the same, even with their wonderful commitment to equality and recognising the equal status of all. Somewhere, despite the people making it clear they wish to retain the union, they are still fighting for independence and giving them power just encourages them. Although as they have support from people who don't understand their policies and are blinkered by the neverendum dream, they will remain a confused party.

I also think a Tory run Westminster is in their favour as they are more successful at blaming others than getting on with discharging their responsibilities as the Scottish government.

Still, I have just returned from a trip to India that they paid for, encouraging doctors to apply for the huge number of vacancies that cannot be filled in our hospitals and practices. The irony being that the vacancies exist as UK people are loathe to relocate up here over the last few years because of the threat of independence. We have no ties and could move anywhere any time, (sell the house to Musket - he has holiday lets around here!) but once you get your kids in schools etc, you go native. Hence the damage SNP caused by the instability around the referendum.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:02 PM

SNP..but unless some drastic policies are brought forward, I fear an independent Scotland will be just another set of politicians playing the game.

There is much negativity on this thread, and we have a lot to be negative about. We need politicians who are prepared to tell the truth, middle class living standards must fall if we are to train our young people to do the jobs presently filled by immigrants.
Its bad for us and in the long term bad for them, we need to keep a generation on benefits as they are uncompetitive in the jobs market with immigrants from Eastern Europe. We educate our people and there are no proper jobs available for them....I have lost count of the number of highly qualified young shelf stackers and check outs that I've met lately, most living with their families.
The countries of Eastern Europe are in more need of workers to contribute to their economies than we do.
Economic immigration is a double edged sword.


I think perhaps we need something like a years community service for all school leavers, to prepare them for the real world.
To just do nothing and rely on cheap immigration to give a short term fix, is no option at all.

Its time to get serious if we are to provide any sort of future for our grandchildren. I am surprised by the number of people here who still view any negative views on immigration fron the EU as "racism"
The argument has been well made many times, the evidence is there for all to see the infrastructure is going into meltdown.

Of course there are other problems with how this country is run, but addressing unemployment(lack of PROPER jobs), and getting out of the EU are absolute priorities.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:14 PM

Regarding the last post by team Musket, there is already one in ten of our population who were born in England. These people are mainly here for economic reasons.....freebies and differentials in house prices....the vast majority in this area are retired, and do not contribute to Scotland's economy.
So at least the failed referendum did some good in cutting down the Northern drift.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:17 PM

Some people ONLY SAY, they believe in Democracy and freedom of speech....but don't believe or practice it!
They're called hypocrites!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:23 PM

(musket -are you sure you can get more than one vote? i'm off up to the north shortly. just booked 3 nights camping in nethy bridge -but where to stay after that? any cheap accommodation you might recommend?)

i met the labour candidate here yesterday. i said i was thinking of voting for her to keep the tories out (i can't agree 'they are all the same' the current lot are something else -dangerous to everything decent about the uk) but given miliband's stance rejecting the scots to appease the media and considering allowing the tories back in....she agreed that it was embarrassing and said that labour need to be more bold.
as a council candidate i should be voting green anyway

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:29 PM

Gust, you can make this thread about you, or you can back off and let the UK folks talk about their politics. Shaw had a perfectly reasonable beginning to the thread, he wasn't continuing a running fight.

Now if the dog whistles stay in your pockets, this one will run a logical course. But the fighting and name calling has to stop. People are entitled to discuss their political opinions, but when they are followed by "but" and speculation about the motives of others just to start another fight, that is where threads are closed. I didn't close the last thread, I don't close most threads, I'm not the only one here moderating.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:38 PM

I was originally intending to vote Green. Nevertheless, I am not impressed with the Green Party and someone pointed out to me that if people vote Green, in this constituency, we will get a Labour MP here ... which is not a very palatable outcome in an exclusively Labour run city.

I was then intending to vote for our current LibDem MP, because at least he's a decent bloke who has worked hard for this constituency.

Then something happened which turned everything on its head again. The last leaflet from the local Labour candidate contained a section on the environment (a vitally important subject which has hardly been mentioned during this election campaign). I sent him an e-mail commenting on this section of his leaflet and got an almost immediate reply! I also got a follow-up to my reply to him.

In today's Independent newspaper there's a piece by Nick Clegg about how he wouldn't go back into coalition with the Tories again (don't all shout at once!). One of the reasons he gives is the Tories' hostility to existing environmental legislation and environmental reforms during the course of the coalition government.

I'm just wondering, have their postbags been full of indignant letters asking why they have ignored environmental issues? Could it be that they're rattled?

As a committed environmentalist, I've decided to go back to Plan A and vote Green. If there's an unexpectedly big Green vote next week, it might make them think. If we get a Labour MP, then so be it (after all, Labour are the least worst option for running the country).In addition, he says that he wants to talk to me about my ideas after the election - I'll certainly be holding him to that promise!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 15 - 01:08 PM

"freebies and differentials in house prices"
Tsk tsk - straight from the Ukip manifesto.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST
Date: 03 May 15 - 01:10 PM

Are there any countries with less of a differential in living standards between the middle class and the 'working poor' ? If so how do they work and what could the UK do to get closer to that ?

Which, if any, party's policies would move things in that direction ?

Green for me in a Tory seat that the Lib Dem's couldn't win even when their supporters were not in a mood to punish them.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 May 15 - 01:16 PM

Usually Labour but now living in a safe Tory seat so green for me this time. As to the person trying to get the thread closed by introducing the usual right wing immigration tripe, you are sussed so just give it a rest.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 03 May 15 - 01:28 PM

Jim, my remarks do not concern EU immigrants....The differentials are between Southern England and most of Scotland ....I don't think UKIP would agree with me on the point I was making there.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 15 - 02:27 PM

"Jim, my remarks do not concern EU immigrants"
Apologies if that is the case - however, as a former economic migrant within Britain (Liverpool to Manchester to London) in search of work, the term "freebies" sets my teeth on edge - for the 'hounor' of obtaining work to make money for someone else I found neither handouts or a home without massive sacrifices on my part - the loss of contact with friends, family and familiar surroundings (not to mention fiancee) not being not the least of those.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Stu
Date: 03 May 15 - 03:17 PM

I too live in a safe tory seat, but still vote because the popular vote is not always reflected in the final make up of the government. So your vote still counts, even for those of us whose preferred candidates will never be voted in as the actual number of votes for any given party is part of their legitimacy to govern (in theory).

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 05:13 PM

I suppose so, Stu, but what about those hundreds of thousands of us who vote LibDem for tactical reasons? It inflates their total vote which they then use to claim undeserved legitimacy.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link
Date: 03 May 15 - 05:13 PM

I have in time past, also just written a statement on the card.   I might not decide till the day for definite what to do. Certainly the lack of integrity and honesty in politicians so far has been disappointing to say the least.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Tangledwood
Date: 03 May 15 - 06:33 PM

Any chance of you mob voting for Tony Abbott and getting him out of Australia?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:02 PM

Ake I think the figure is one in ten who were born elsewhere in the UK. The figure for born in England is 9% so yes most of those who were born elsewhere in the UK. I too live in an area where there are a very high percentage of English born people and yes some are elderly. Not sure if there are figures as to how many are retired compared with the host population or not but you could be right in saying they are more elderly. Not sure! However I don't think they only come because of monetary reasons - though no doubt it helps. Most who come seem to have a history of visiting Scotland and come because they love the place. At least that is what I've found. And of course, I'm talking about here in the Borders, they do contribute to society. Many of the retired incomers seem to be pretty well off and they spend as everyone else does and many will still be taxpayers anyway. They also add to rural life etc and often get stuck into local clubs and associations. So I'd say yes they are valued. Another group we have a great many of in the Borders is the returning retiring Scot. Often people from the central belt and further north who have lived and worked in England for decades. They look to come back to Scotland in retirement and find the Borders the best base because they are nearer to their families down south. Sometimes even the younger families then follow them up! We were worrying about depopulation until little more than a decade and a half ago so I don't think we should be worrying too much about people coming in. Yes we need younger people too but I don't think we can write off the retired as just being a burden!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:08 PM

Achmelvich. You are welcome to a holiday let. They are in most of the UK cottage catalogues! I must admit, bookings are far higher since the referendum, especially from German and Dutch holidaymakers. Last year was a bit flat. It is interesting how politicians can and do influence the real world but not in the way they think! I don't think any of them have any vacancies till October, and it's a long time since I last said that. Most of the bookings are from mainland Europe so some economies are moving upwards.

Scotland isn't the issue nationally other than to say that without SNP existing, Labour could have dreamed of a majority. They only have themselves to blame though, taking Scotland for granted for many years.

What I find funny is that for SNP to prop up Labour, there won't be a damaging and destabilising EU referendum hence no change in the political landscape, so no reason to grant a Scottish independence vote again. As the people living in Scotland rejected it, it remains rejected unless The UK changes in any way.

Interesting...

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:31 PM

The minute Labour so much as hints that it may do a deal with the SNP is the minute Labour signs its death warrant. Far too many English people dislike the SNP and the Scots, largely due to the effective scaremongering carried out by the Tories. The latter are scared to death of the SNP, and with good reason. The SNP will vote down any Tory Queen's Speech and there will be too many of them on current reckoning to allow Cameron to form a coalition with anyone else. Cameron's only chance is to scare off enough Labour voters in marginals to give him enough seats to do deals with the LibDems and/or those rather nasty unionist parties in Northern Ireland. Once the election's over, we'll get deals. They won't be called deals, anything but. But if Labour cosy up too close to the SNP, they will be condemning themselves to a single term only. Unless it works really well. Who knows. There could still be an upset this week. Gordon knew how to blow it, as did Neil. Third time lucky, it could be a Tory!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:36 PM

i always vote labour. my wife is badly disabled and we need the NHS. the private sector is virtually unregulated in this country - their whole attitude is one of obscene indifference to the country in which they are privileged to be doing business.

however i got pissed of with labour when they kept getting into wars that history made very plain we couldn't win. then on top of that they sent the soldiers off to war with crap weapons, because of defence cuts. iwas brought up a quaker and divis sweeney once called me a 'hopeless pacifist'. however i don't agree with this present policy of having a small overworked badly equipped army.

i wish labour was more purposeful - got us out of northern ireland, while at least there is some lull in the violence.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: kendall
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:45 PM

Bad leaders are elected by good people who don't vote. This is so true.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:37 PM

Shaw had a perfectly reasonable beginning to the thread, he wasn't continuing a running fight.

My mum calls me Steve, Mrs Steve calls me Steve (except when she's mad with me, in which case she calls me Stephen, then I know I'm in trouble), my mates call me Steve, my work colleagues called me Steve. I don't respond to Shaw usually, but on this occasion I will, only to ask you to not call me Shaw. Steve will do nicely. You do it in your PMs to me after all.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 03 May 15 - 09:40 PM

Okay. Good enough, Steve!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Joe Offer
Date: 03 May 15 - 11:57 PM

Stephen... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 04 May 15 - 03:07 AM

As the other two have had their say I'll have mine.

Labour.

Although I have huge issues with Andy Burnham and how he says stop reorganising how you manage The NHS then promises a bill if elected to do that very thing yet again!

He frightens me when he wants to put NHS commissioning into the hands of local councils. Since public health went that way, joint planning of health and social care has decreased rather than increased. The drive to redirect NHS money into avoiding hospital based care just means councils propping up their deficits rather than making residential social care better.

The likely scenario would be a councillor saying vote for us and we will reintroduce grommets for glue ear in children then look confused when doctors tell them to piss off and refuse, rightly, to treat. If a majority of people are suckered into the homoeopathy scam, would that mean they would spend even more NHS funding on it???

Still. At least with Labour we would stand a chance of retaining NHS although we are already signed up to trade treaties that allow US multinationals to tender for delivering and no government can risk ripping it up as the deals are amongst all G20 countries in many fields.

Election? It's about health and social care and how much of it we can afford. Don't let anyone kid you otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Iain
Date: 04 May 15 - 03:29 AM

Do we actually vote for the politicians we want, or are they selected by the puppetmasters and paraded before us, to enable us to tick the pre-selected boxes?
Is it to believe in conspiracy that many top politicians are Bilderberg attendees before they reach the pinnacles of power?
Or is it more rational to believe that attendance is a prerequisite for selection.
To me it seems an extremely unhealthy relationship for a democracy and it would appear bankers and corporations make the major choices for us.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 04 May 15 - 03:40 AM

Let's be clear there is a real underlying resentment and hostility to the potential new Scottish members of Westminster from sections of the Tory right and now UKIP too and the language has been inflammatory and if it had been directed by Scottish leading politicians at the English members in general they would have been slated by the London media as anti-English racists. It is being aimed at the potential SNP members at the moment but in a way that has taken the heat off Labour themselves. The same right wing would have been just as vocal if Labour won a UK majority based on their normal big Scottish contingent. During the last Labour admninistration the moans were already there despite Labour having a majority of English seats anyway! And to how it pans out in Scotland? Yes there are people who will stick to their parties whatever but for less committed floating voters or don't knows then it can only drive more and more Scots to the SNP. Even old Tories like Michael Forsyth have criticised the anti-Scottish tactics of Cameron/Boris/May etc. Alex Massie is a union supporting journalist and he warned of the consequences over a month ago.


http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/tory-commentator-alex-massie-scots-5409674

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 15 - 04:20 AM

The point is, what are all you "socialists" going to do when Labour, Tory, and Lib Dem, join forces again to remove power from the large group of SNP MPs about to be elected?
Get real for once, Steve is correct, Labour will be finished if it works with SNP.....and SNP have avowed never to work with the Tories
That leaves no option but a "Government of National Unity", or in other words the "Return of the Three Stooges."
Politically that would remove the balance of power from the SNP at a stroke, but set up massive constitutional difficulties....attacks would be made on the Barnet formula as attempts are made to "put the Scots in their place"....as Steve says Many English hate the Scots for their Bolshie attitude and what they perceive as an undeserved share of UK revenues(Barnett formula)

Knowing the strength of feeling in Scotland for political movement towards further devolution and independence this is a recipe for disaster, and will led directly to UDI.

UDI could mean Scotland out of the EU. Something I would love to see, but by then, the EU will doubtless want to see the back of the whole of the UK anyway.

Interesting times and the "left" credentials" of many Mudcatters will be tested to the limit.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 04 May 15 - 04:38 AM

I know the strength of feeling for independence.   Scotland roundly rejected it.

I know you live in Scotland, but have you ever been there?

Just wondering...

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 15 - 04:42 AM

Allan, I take your point, but something needs to be done about house price differentials in the UK.
Almost every house which comes on the market here goes to an English buyer, either as a retirement home of as "buy to let"....we have some examples on this forum.
Many young Scots are still living with their families into their forties and fifties, marriage and birth rates are falling, except amongst single parents and they have a huge drain on benefit and care budget.
We need Independence now and large taxes levied on house buyers from outside our borders, to protect the availability of housing and a real life for our young people.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 15 - 04:58 AM

Team Musket, the three of you put together know as much about Scotland, as my arse does about snipe shooting!

You have lived here(on a very temporary basis) for one year and you think you are an expert on the Scottish psyche?
I have lived eight miles away from you for seventy years man and boy,
I know the history, the families, the music, the land and the sea.
I know the politics , how they have changed in some ways and not in others, I know the dilution of the culture that is taking place, the ties getting weaker with every generation.....the heart and connection to this beautiful place will be no more within a couple of decades if we do not start a programme of regeneration.

My country will never be a desert, a museum, a shell filled with heartless strangers..

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 May 15 - 05:35 AM

Very funny, Joe. You've finally worked out how to send a shiver down my spine. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 04 May 15 - 05:44 AM

Musket it is true that Scotland rejected independence but it is also true that from a starting position the end result was very close, and that since the referendum the SNP itself has gone from strength to strength, and that the core support for independence is much stronger now than it was even 2 years ago - so although another referendum is not on the agenda for the forseeable future the issue is far from over. Remember the current devolution settlement itself came about on the second referendum a couple of decades after the first.

Ake I don't believe there would be UDI. I know there are calls from folks posting on the net for UDI but there is all kinds of daft stuff posted on the net. Sturgeon has said over and over again (indeed you could see last night she was getting really pissed off having to repeat it over and over again) that the only way independence would come about was if the SNP stated in their Holyrood manifesto that they were intending to hold a referendum; that the country would need to then give them a working majority at Holyrood; and that there would then need to be a Yes vote in said referendum. UDI can only be an option if there was a clear majority wanting independence and that majority's decision was being denied by the UK gvt. Neither of these factors exist at the moment.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 04 May 15 - 07:40 AM

So you keep holding neverendums till the silly people vote the right way?

Allan, you are falling into the same trap as a few others. Supporting SNP as a left leaning party to run Scottish affairs in the devolved Parliament is not the same as wanting independence. They are the nationalist not the Independence Party. Sturgeon makes that quite clear. The election is on running Scotland under the present constitution. Ask her, she'll tell you.

Worm. I have never lived in Scotland and I am the one who just said the people rejected independence. I think, though I could be wrong, that Musket left Sheffield and moved to Scotland about three years ago, not one year. Three years or seventy, you both have an equal stake in your property and say in affairs. Presumably his vote cancelled out yours. Nice.

I'm the one who owns bits of it, which is far better than living under the sword of Damacles known as neverendum. Mrs Musket used to live up there and so did my sister and an Aunty at various times. You see, as the UK, people move to get jobs. Those might be in Surrey or Sutherland, but they are all part of where you then live.

Nobody wants the natives claiming they have a better claim to The UK than other people in The UK.

SNP need to take that on board, but to to do so, they risk losing the votes of those who still think a vote for nationalism is a vote for independence.

In the words of Attila the Stockbroker. Tough shit.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 May 15 - 08:02 AM

Just been announced that Cameron, in a private conversation, says he can't win the election
Wonder if he's right
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 15 - 08:15 AM

Allan...UDI can only be an option if there was a clear majority wanting independence and that majority's decision was being denied by the UK gvt. Neither of these factors exist at the moment."555

No, they don't apply now, but they are very likely to apply after the coming election.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 15 - 08:22 AM

Team musket, it would aid discussion if you would cease your childish sharing of one username to cause confusion and "wind everyone up".

The Musket concerned made the observation that I do not know or understand Scottish people.....I found this a bit rich from a Johnny come lately part time resident.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 15 - 08:38 AM

Allan, if the SNP are not primarily focused on obtaining independence for Scotland, they are not worth one vote.

The very last thing we need is Scottish New Labour.

I don't trust any politician who has operated under this system of government, I have seen political giants of the left crumble to dust under pressure.

Independence First!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 04 May 15 - 09:03 AM

Tell you what, have a referendum and let the people speak.

Oh, you did.

The people of Scotland voted democratically to remain part of The UK.

Tough shit.

Live with it.

Your precious SNP are exactly what you just said you hoped they aren't.

So, who are you going to vote for? A left leaning SNP, a left leaning Labour or what?

I still find it funny that some idiots don't know the Scottish people and think they only voted as they did because they are taken in by rhetoric. You have a low opinion of the majority of Scottish people, I'll give you that much.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 May 15 - 11:00 AM

..here's a great idea..

let's all split up the left opposition into fragmented divisive bickering little niche parties
to ensure the tories stand a better chance of winning general elections and maintaining perpetual power...

That way capitalism can eventually collapse in on itself heralding a new age of revolutionary socialist utopia...

..oh..actually... no.. hold on a sec.. that's an effin' stupid idea...😜

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 May 15 - 11:04 AM

"let's all split up the left opposition into fragmented divisive bickering little niche parties"
Sadly - been there, done that.
Until the real left gets its act together, these political thugs witll cintinue their thuggishness unhindered.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 15 - 12:03 PM

PFR....the "left opposition" is non existent, there are no parties which speak for the poor or underprivileged.

All support the capitalist system which demands, especially in these difficult times, sacrifices by the low paid and those who are redundant to its needs.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 May 15 - 12:19 PM

The left may be fragmented, but is simply untrue that they are non-existent.
That sort of statement really doesn't help.
There may be no Left organisations that fight immigration "for the sake of us British people" (as some would have it, or oppose "the gay plague"... or all the other "evils of modern society", but to say they don't exist is nonsense and incredibly reactionary.
That is to suggest the British working person is quite happy to bend over and be shafted by the establishment.
Not as active as I would like - but that's me
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 04 May 15 - 12:20 PM

Musket yes the SNP are talking about changes within the UK at this election but read their manifesto they state that they do still and always will support independence. That is the long term goal and they have the democratic right to follow that goal and others have the democratic right to vote for them - but when a proposal for a new referendum is put forward (if it ever is) it will be in a manifesto for the Scottish elections and not the UK general election.

In this election they want the Smith Commission proposals as a bare minimum - that would pretty much be demanded - but they state they would like to take it further and move to full fiscal autonomy. That is unlikely to happen at the moment as all the major parties are against it. Obviously it would be another step nearer towards independence.

I understand that you are against independence - but unless a suitable balance is struck which is truly accepted by Scots in enough numbers the road to independence still looks likely. I won't say inevitable as situations might change and the bottom could fall out of the SNP popularity. Even demographics are against the unionist parties. The over 70s voted in great numbers to retain the union and their votes are as important as anyone else's but it is a problem for the unionist parties that natural passage of time is going to greatly weaken the unionist cause - unless there is a sea shift back to unionism amongst the younger age groups.

Yes Ake their raison d'etre is independence but the facts are facts the vote was narrowly lost. You can't go for UDI on the back of that! It has to be done, when it is done, democratically.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Sol
Date: 04 May 15 - 12:26 PM

Seat belts on, folks. I think we're in for a very bumpy ride after May 7th.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 May 15 - 12:50 PM

well this says it all now...

mrs punkfolkrocker just read me an email she got from some election news feed she follows...

"tories declare they should vote tactically for liberals to keep Labour out"...!!!

.. now where did we hear something a bit like that before ...????😣

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 May 15 - 12:59 PM

How about predictions for what we will wake up to on May the 8th? Here is mine.

Labour will have more seats than the Tories but will need the help of others. I think they will be able to do it with a number of loose partnerships rather teaming up with a specific minority for coalition. Wishful thinking I suppose but it could see the end of party politics as we know it.

On a more specific level, Al Murray will take enough votes away from Nigel Cabbage to keep him out. Bez will do well in Salford and keep his deposit at least.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 04 May 15 - 01:47 PM

i think unfortunately, it will be a tory landslide

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Nick
Date: 04 May 15 - 02:22 PM

I live in a constituency that has been held by the Conservatives (and the Unionists before them - unopposed in 1915!) for over 100 years.

It will be won by the Tories. It's the only time in my life that I will have an MP who I actually know as a nodding acquaintance oddly. There is not a way in the world that I would vote for him or the conservatives for the rest of my life (or UKIP).

I will still vote even though it might seem pointless historically. Though the current Conservative MP was elected on a turn out of 50% - so perhaps there is always a small forlorn hope.

To myself personally, it won't make a lot of difference whether the Conservatives or Labour win - unless either of them decides to totally abolish pensions which I haven't spotted on any of the literature but would make things harder for us. I am like quite a lot of over 60's approaching retirement. We are lucky to have no debt and some savings PURELY based on house price inflation. Our children have now left home and are independent and self sufficient. I am probably better off than at any time in my life as we have relatively small outgoings. I think we inherited a couple of thousand quid along the way when one of the parents died but have never relied on outside money. We decided when we had children that my wife would rather be at home and look after children and we decided that rather than bigger houses and holidays we'd like to help where we could with University fees etc not to land them with more debt than they needed to have.

I realise that others have not had the same chances or have not been as lucky. Most of our luck has been that we were able to afford a house. That house we bought when I earned £8000 and my wife £6000 cost £31,600 and we lived in it for only 6 months as I moved with a job. It was sold a year + ago for £560,000 and will be worth over £600,000 now. It's a 2 bed semi with no parking and a downstairs bathroom.

What gets to me is the chronic unfairness that exists and has grown over my lifetime. I earned reasonably under Thatcher (over average wage for a while but always less than 40k a year) but watched a world getting more unfair. When the labour party came in I thought they would create some sort of balancing act. They didn't. And it strikes me that they would now all sell their principles for power - most of them have over the last years.

Noone has knocked on the door or canvassed at all, perhaps it is pointless for them to waste their time and they are just going through the motions. We had a UKIP leaflet through today so I think we have a full set now. I think it is right to read what people put through not least to laugh at some of the lies and some of the misleading bits. Fracking is an issue round here and the phrasing of the Tory candidates leaflet is interesting - when he gets elected he'll I'm sure get told how to vote on the subject. My wife's experience through her work at the lying and cheating that people do routinely in their daily life to maximise their income at the expense of others is often there - the same people often bemoaning the scroungers and have nots.

Based on the 50% turnout last time - anyone could win if people bothered to vote. A quick check and mental arithmetic over the last century of a rock solid seat suggests that if any of the elections had 100% turnout they could have had pretty much any outcome.

My choices are Independent, Green, Lib Dem or Labour - all of which will not change anything here in the short term - apart from I will have indicated what this particular voter thinks is right and by vote will be counted. I'm still floating a bit as the Labour party have been a let down.

If I get one thing from this election so far it is about whether you want to do something towards a fairer world or not. And that's worth voting for as things do change.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 May 15 - 05:45 PM

Great sentiments, Nick. Our circumstances have been quite similar to yours. I can't see that it would make much difference to us whoever got in. One difference is that the LibDems are in serious danger of losing this seat to the Tories. I'm damned if I'll play even the teensiest part in allowing that to happen.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 15 - 06:00 PM

But Steve, the Lib Dems have been in cosy coalition with the Tories for the last number of years....In fact it can be said that they have provided cover for the Tories, enabling the attacks on the very poorest in society, and ensuring that the financial criminals got off .

What's the difference......ideology?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 May 15 - 06:05 PM

It may have escaped your attention that I am referring to a need I perceive in myself to do some tactical voting, in the hope that sufficient forces will be amassed to prevent another Tory prime minister. I don't give a damn about the bloody LibDems and their expedient and shifting ideologies.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: FreddyHeadey
Date: 04 May 15 - 06:05 PM

Radio 4 interviewed some 'public'' today I think...
One guy pointed out
"You can't trust politicicians, they tell you lies. They just tell you what you want to hear."

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 15 - 06:08 PM

Allan, I wouldn't go for UDI in any event.....I don't have a death wish. The UK govt would immediately send in the troops and the tanks, "to protect our defence installations"...any opposition would be swiftly dealt with and politically we would move back fifty years.

As I said before, this is not the beginning of the end, but the end of the beginning, there are huge obstacles to overcome.
The UK needs us much more than we need them, as can be seen from the bribery, threats and soon military force, if we look as if we are about to gain independence.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Teribus
Date: 04 May 15 - 06:36 PM

"I wouldn't go for UDI in any event.....I don't have a death wish. The UK govt would immediately send in the troops and the tanks, "to protect our defence installations"

Ridiculous. If an SNP Government was daft enough to make a unilateral declaration of independence they would run out of money and starve within months if not weeks. The flight of capital, businesses, jobs and expertise would be a stampede, the likes of which has never been seen. The SNP after having eight years to prepare for their referendum couldn't even get their act together to answer even the most basic questions related to the running an independent country, they still to this day have not addressed any of those questions, they were clueless then and they are clueless now - oil price then 110 US$ per barrel now just over half that, and they are still living in cloud cuckoo land.

"The UK needs us much more than we need them"

Don't really think so Akenaton.

So Akenaton what is your currency after declaring UDI?
Scottish trade within the rest of the UK (predominantly with England) amounts to 80% of your trade. Everything England gets from Scotland can be sourced elsewhere so who is UDI-Scotland going to trade with?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 May 15 - 07:25 PM

Now we really are taking this conversation into territory that should have rational minds beginning to question their own sanity... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: BobL
Date: 05 May 15 - 03:07 AM

It used to be so simple.

You* voted Tory to fix the mistakes made by the previous Labour govenment, and because they were better at creating wealth.

You voted Labour to fix the mistakes made by the previous Tory government, and because they were better at distributing wealth.

With a few exceptions, you voted Liberal as a protest vote.

* (the floating voters at least)

:(

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 05 May 15 - 03:12 AM

I love how people are still wanting to impose something on the people of Scotland that they firmly rejected.

I love the bit about tanks though. The garage in one of my holiday lets in Kingussie might be big enough to hide a tank if the army want to be prepared by stealth.

Having lost the referendum, someone appears to have lost the plot too.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 05 May 15 - 04:53 AM

I would be amused if the SNP got every Scottish seat but it would be a disaster for left-of centre politics.

It is very sad that my constituency, once represented (with different boundaries) by the excellent Bob Marshall-Andrews, now appears to be a fight between UKRAP and the con-servatives.

It is very alarming that people outside the top 5% in terms of income or wealth have been so brainwashed by foreign-owned media that a substantial number are prepared to vote for the con-servatives.

And speaking of foreign-owned media, I think it is a poor show when a foreign owned website - one where in most cases the US absolutist view of freedom of speech prevails - plans to and actually does censor the vilification, by the people whose polity is actually suffering them, of the right-wing as the scum they are.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 05 May 15 - 06:33 AM

"Lest we forget"

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 May 15 - 06:36 AM

And what was the point of that link?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 05 May 15 - 06:54 AM

A post from Planet Zog perhaps.

The definition of Planet Zog from the Collins dictionary is "a place or situation that is far removed from reality or what is currently happening" That seems to fit with Akeaton's thinking.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 05 May 15 - 07:03 AM

Steve, the constitutional issues arising presently, are as important to the UK government, as was the the socialist revolt in Glasgow almost one hundred years ago.

Troops and tanks were used to intimidate the workers and their firepower would certainly have been used had not the union leader ship capitulated.

In doing so, many lives were probably saved, but the system had shown its fangs, and the working class were absorbed.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 05 May 15 - 07:07 AM

Do not for one second imagine that the UK will happily give away Scotland. If we were of no value we would have been cast adrift years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 May 15 - 07:22 AM

This is getting very silly.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 May 15 - 07:24 AM

I found this helpful

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32235317

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 May 15 - 07:42 AM

I think the Scottish/English divide is being artificially created and the nationalistic element is falling for what is fed to them by the media hook, line and sinker. The revolt linked to would have been put down with equal force had it have been in Glasgow, Liverpool, Belfast or anywhere in the UK. As it was almost a hundred years earlier in Manchester. Those who follow the line and believe that one group of working folk is responsible for all their ills are part of the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 05 May 15 - 07:52 AM

The right-wing press are talking up a putative "right" for the party with the most seats to have first dibs on forming a government. This would be close to a coup (over cucumber sandwiches and tea).

THE correct legal position is stated by the BBC, although, in my view, insufficiently emphasised, namely

"The only test for whether a government can be formed is whether it has the confidence of the House of Commons: in other words, "Can it assemble the votes it needs to get its programme of proposed new laws passed in the Queen's Speech?" The date of the Queen's Speech is Wednesday, 27 May."

It would be nice if the BBC had its grammar and punctuation right, though.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 15 - 08:24 AM

"It would be nice if the BBC had its grammar and punctuation right, though"
Tharr'l be the day!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 May 15 - 08:50 AM

Scotland has become a perniciously distracting and disproportionate issue.
The tories are certainly grand masters at 'divide and rule' politics.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 May 15 - 08:53 AM

Bingo!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 May 15 - 09:22 AM

Yep, Guest of 05 May 15 - 08:50 AM. It is all part and parcel of the smoke and mirrors that politics has become, or maybe always has been!

To paraphrase an old joke, A politician, a Scotsman and and Englishman in a room with 10 biscuits on the table. The politician eats 9 of them and says to the Scotsman, "Look out, that imperialistic bastard is after your biscuit..."

I can't really blame the politicians for trying as long as idiots keep believing them :-(

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 05 May 15 - 09:30 AM

I don't care much for tartan tat in gift shops, Russ Abbot wigs or shortcake, but the maths being what they are, constituency boundaries favour The Tory Party when Scotland is taken out of the equation, (ditto Wales for that matter judging by recent Labour form in England) so Scotland is a factor in this election.

Don't get me wrong, it would be nice if it could stand on its own two feet financially and contribute rather than be a burden on the treasury, but collective government means you can encourage but not much else...

Tanks? No, silly boy. Most of the tanks are kept around Salisbury Plain. Scotland has the nuclear submarines and men in skirts playing bagpipes for royalty and tourists at the tattoo.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 May 15 - 09:34 AM

Well I rather like Scotland and spent many a long summer in Wester Ross and Sutherland in my youth (I was lucky enough to be there in the vintage summers of '75 and '76, though I did see a drop of rain at other times). I don't find anything pernicious about Scotland or the Scottish people. I find plenty pernicious about the scaremongering and vilification of Scotland and its politicians (the latter a damn sight more progressive than most of ours) by the right-wing media and Tory and LibDem politicians. A Labour/SNP coalition would work quite well, but, for now, they have to keep on baring their teeth at each other. Shame really.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 05 May 15 - 11:37 AM

I spend a fair bit of time in Scotland. Everybody I see is welcoming and friendly. English people we know (including Musket and his husband) don't recognise the stories of Scottish resentment of English moving in.

Despite what some think, even the local politicians welcome inward investment and as someone who invests in tourism through purchasing holiday lets, I have far more in Scotland than anywhere else.

That said, some of the rhetoric by many politicians whip up resentment by ignorant little people and that is the issue.

On a practical level, I also blame SNP for preferring to blame Westminster for issues rather than do something about them, which under devolved powers they could do if they wished. Again, it would suit the agenda of some to have a Tory government because it would fire up the neverendum debate yet again.

Meanwhile, back down here.. I had Jehovas Witnesses knocking on the door the other day. After giving them the usual two word reply, I got on with cooking. An hour later, another knock on the door, (they go round in relays) but I was wrong and afterwards, after checking a photo on the Internet, it appears I told our local MP to fuck off and slammed the door. Poor bugger, I had emailed last month saying how good he had been but I couldn't vote for his party.

Hey ho. God botherers giving me a bad name





Again

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 05 May 15 - 11:55 AM

It does seem quite strange that some leading English Tories seem to think that a party who (hypothetically lets say Labour) get 48% of the seats in England and perhaps something like 10% in Scotland working alongside another party (ie the SNP) who get let's say 85% of Scottish seats would have no legitimacy - whilst another party who got let's say 52% of seats in England but none in Scotland would be perfectly legitimate!

You can imagine how that doesn't quite equate for many Scots - especially as Labour's cowardice gives it some ill deserved back up! Rather than falling for the divide and rule the leading SNP politicians are still saying they will happily work with Labour for the benefit of the left. The strange thing is that many of them haven't shown outbursts of real anger and resentment.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 May 15 - 12:39 PM

there is nothing pernicious about any nation, to say so is racist and stereotyping.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 05 May 15 - 04:56 PM

It isn't distracting or disproportionate to Scots! And let's face it the only reason it is disproportionate in the UK as a whole is because the Tory/UKIP lot have decided to make it so by suggesting, incorrectly, that Scottish members are somehow less legitimate than English members.


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/05/election-death-of-the-union-snp-let-scotland-go?CMP=share_btn_fb

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 05 May 15 - 05:32 PM

Don't forget Labour and Gordon Brown, Allan.....he doesn't like to be left out.....They don't call them the "red Tories" for nothing.

We can't trust any of them!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 06 May 15 - 03:18 AM

I've seen Labour been cowed by the Tory/UKIP tactics and fail to stand up for the idea of "better together" but not really actually join in on it. Brown is campaigning for Labour and aiming his criticism at the SNP but he has every right to do that. As anyone has. The difference is the likes of Theresa May etc have been deliberately stirring up resentment against Scots and suggesting that SNP influence on any gvt would not be legitimate. That is the idea I am criticising.

For instance one of the recent polls had the result very close with the Tories only two seats in front of Labour with the SNP on about 53. So any reasonable person who claimed to believe in the union must concede that a combined Labour/SNP block would be legitimate in that scenario. It is not a two party system and the members from across the UK have the same rights etc. Of course there are other parties to consider too but that was an easy comparison.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 06 May 15 - 03:26 AM

I would be interested in what you think of my view, that post election, the Westminster parties will close ranks and squeeze out the SNP voice.....This could be a formal, or informal arrangement, to stop any minority govt being voted down?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 06 May 15 - 05:06 AM

We are a UK. I have no issue whatsoever with MPs from Scotland or Surrey voting on national affairs. Neither are within 200 miles of me but conversely my local MP is the same distance to them.

The problem, as Tartan Tam pointed out years ago, is where legislation being voted on does not affect the constituency of the MP voting to the extent that completely different legislation may be in place where that MP sits.

It is a dog's dinner and to ensure Westminster is relevant, areas of England would need regional assemblies, which as tax payers know too well, judging by the size of the car parks in Leith, Cardiff and Belfast, not cheap...

In the meantime, mealy mouthed scare bollocks from Cameron, Akenaton and Farage are the cost of flawed democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 06 May 15 - 07:14 AM

Mind though Musket the West Lothian Question is not what the issue is. Yes the devolution settlement is half cooked so needs sorting out. But some senior Tories have been saying, and using inflammatory language in the process, that SNP members would have no legitimate place in having any influence on a UK gvt. That is a different matter from the West Lothian Question.

Anyone can say "we don't want to work with a certain party" so there is no issue with that - but suggesting that certain parties have no legitimate place is attempting to disenfranchise half the population of Scotland.

Not that it matters in the scheme of things but my own mother-in-law, who is English but living in Scotland tried to tell me that Alex Salmond and other SNP members shouldn't even be allowed into the Houses of Parliament! The didn't want to be in the union so why should they be allowed into the UK parliament? She didn't seem to think there was anything undemocratic about taking that view - then wonders how she sometimes gets a frosty reaction from other people here! You've got to wonder sometimes?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Bloody cookie crumbled
Date: 06 May 15 - 08:06 AM

I say a similar thing about UKIP and certain Tory MEPs. Why take the Brussels rake off if you have no intention of delivering a better Europe?

But, here's the thing.. The Salmond question is different. SNP may well wish to run an independent Scotland and have that as a key deliverable at some point in the same way The Conservative and Unionist Party wish to retain the union with the same passion and ultimate aim..

But SNP have made it clear that they are standing for Westminster as is their right as a UK party and their manifesto is based on UK politics.

I welcome the idea of SNP in Westminster in the same way as any other party that gets the most votes in an election, but on the basis they wish to be constructive, as SNP indicate they do in Westminster, as opposed to UKIP not wanting to be constructive in The EU.

Anyway. As the election gets nearer, I find myself wanting a Labour government supported bill by bill by other parties such as SNP and Lib Dem in order to ensure thorough debate before parliamentary division. A clear majority can lead to complacent dogma turning into law. In an ideal world, having to convince those not subject to your party whip should lead to better acts of Parliament.

The recent coalition got it wrong by forming a joint government, as both sets of whips may well have been one whip in a majority government for all the good it did. It also meant they could rip up both manifestos...

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 15 - 09:16 AM

The Times this morning reports the sighting of a rare black squirrel in the Hertford area - a boost for Farrage's arguments no doubt !!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 May 15 - 09:17 AM

Almost a parody but very sadly similar to the Sun's leader yesterday. And still they fall for it...

Oh, and well said, crumbled :-)

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,#
Date: 06 May 15 - 09:41 AM

The Province of Alberta has in its provincial legislature 87 seats. For the first time in 43 years Alberta voters have turfed the Conservatives (in Canada, a right-wing party) and installed a 53 seat majority government by voting in the New Democratic Party (center-left) under the leadership of Rachel Notley. On October 19, 2015, we hope to turf the federal Conservatives. They are crooks, liars and scum, although not always in that order. Change can come, but seldom as quickly as many would like. If I learned anything from the Alberta election it is this: Vote your conscience. The morning the polls opened (yesterday) the news/poll pundits still had no idea what to predict. By 8:00 PM the votes had all been cast. The result was a shock even to the NDP. The adage to remember is an old computer saying: GIGO. The only poll that matters is the one counted on election day. IMO and YMMV.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 May 15 - 09:54 AM

poem by Catherine Scott of Hull

There's a plot
The government expects the British people
To be law abiding, hard working people
To be unassuming, non complaining,
Ever modest, self effacing
Prepared to work until they drop
And not withdraw from the pension pot
The government knows your average Brit
Will shrug their shoulders and moan a bit
Then roll up their sleeves and get on with it
Smile and make the most of it:
There's a plot
We're told to work for charity
For the greater good of society
I notice the fat cats don't work for free
They happily charge an exorbitant fee
Telling us they're adding to the GNP
It feels to me like a conspiracy
They've closed the factories and the corner shops
So for normal folks there aren't any jobs
There's far less haves than there are have nots
Who are resorting to alcohol and betting shops:
There's a plot
Here's the plot:-
Make people feel grateful for having a job
And it really doesn't matter what
If they're off the dole and earning a wage
They can keep on working to a ripe old age
Keep the masses in their places
We can't have them getting airs and graces
And as for the old, unwell or plain exhausted
They're just a drain on the country's resources
We can't be doing with those who whinge
People like that they make us cringe
They should get stuck in and not make a fuss
Because frankly my dear we don't give a fuck
So the poor will pay a bedroom tax
Whilst the rich observe, sit back and relax
Chuckling with the bankers behind our backs
Conniving together for the next cut backs
And that my dear is the Conservative plot

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 06 May 15 - 11:33 AM

Jim, this here squirrel...

Was it wearing a red beret it bought from a pound shop?

Did it only store nuts that are living, nutting in the last twenty years and are eminent in a tree like manner?

Did it squeak anti immigration rants re grey squirrels?

Did it claim "statistics" allow it to vilify dormice who can colour coordinate interior soft furnishings and make acorn soufflés?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 15 - 12:54 PM

"Jim, this here squirrel..."
I believe it was heard muttering something like "Those feckin' reds are at it again".
Ask Keith - they're near neighbours.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: The Sandman
Date: 06 May 15 - 05:22 PM

We are a UK,"
well hardly united, judging from this "what about the squirrells, what about the squirrells indeed sir" to quote peter sellers

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 07 May 15 - 02:58 AM

Just for the benefit of a singer too successful to live in The UK and presently in tax exile;

We are a United Kingdom. Constitutions do not rely on ignorant opinion nor are they swept away by a single word. "Hardly" is a difficult word to quantify or qualify.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: The Sandman
Date: 07 May 15 - 08:20 AM

hardly, united politically, judging from this thread and from anticipated results.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST
Date: 07 May 15 - 08:24 AM

Er, one of the reasons for agreeing to be united is that factional interests can be sorted out internally.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 07 May 15 - 08:36 AM

Back of the net, guest.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 07 May 15 - 10:26 AM

All of you go vote. You have no business arguing here about all of this if you don't also go cast a vote.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 07 May 15 - 10:52 AM

Voted by post last week. The thought of running the gauntlet of activists, pollsters and candidates down at the village hall isn't my idea of fun.

An old man, wearing his medals, a few years ago was arrested for whacking the BNP candidate over the head with his walking stick whilst walking out of the polling station last time round. I keep saying I am not political but my mate and I paid his fine and costs for him. The chairman of the bench who fined him, despite everybody expected it to be bound over to keep the peace was my neighbour.

Strange old world. My neighbour has a UKIP sticker in his car window. Needless to say, the local newspaper has been tipped off about a magistrate supporting UKIP. His freedom to support who he likes goes well with the newspaper's view that it might be in the public interest to mention it.

Yeah, enjoying this election.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Bill D
Date: 07 May 15 - 12:57 PM

mercy!

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/robert-blay-ukip-suspends-parliamentary-5641537

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: The Sandman
Date: 07 May 15 - 01:05 PM

Er, one of the reasons for agreeing to be united is that factional interests can be sorted out internally."
ignorant comment?, how has it sorted out factional interest in northern ireland, it has not, has it?.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 07 May 15 - 01:14 PM

Yeah, UKIP attract BNP, NF, skinheads, bigots, homophobes and those who disguise their hatred by hijacking serious concerns over how we work immigration.

But Farage said they had vetted them better this time...

It looks like it!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,#
Date: 07 May 15 - 01:24 PM

Does UKIP really stand for You Know It's Piss?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 May 15 - 01:36 PM

My (formerly) local pub is still covered in UKRAP stickers - and the landlord is standing as a UKRAP candidate for Medway Council. What a shitfest.

Yes, I have valiantly held my nose and voted a straight Labour ticket (general election, Medway council, and Stoke Parish Council). In the latter I could have cast 7 votes amongst 10 candidates - but voted only for the 3 councillors who were Labour/Old Labour. Two I knew as Labour candidates in the other current elections, but there was no third such and I had to ring up the main Labour candidate to find out who else he approved of. I could eliminate 4 of the candidates straight off as I knew them to be con-servative or worse, or could see from their candidature papers that they shared proposers, seconders, or addresses with known con-servatives, but pretty well none of the candidates other than the two main Labour ones had made any open declaration of affiliation or intent, so if any were TUSC, Left Unity, Communist or similar, or Green, they missed out on my vote.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 07 May 15 - 02:53 PM

Well done Bridge. That's one more of us and one less of them. 😎

Someone send Dick a link to The Good Friday Agreement, will they?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 May 15 - 03:06 PM

just done it -

Labour for the general election, Labour for town centre, Liberals for the commuter belt and farmlands...


Lab and lib both posted us graphs showing they were ahead for winning the town centre...

one of 'em must nave been a bit dodgy with statistics, if not exactly telling fibs...???😕

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 15 - 03:06 PM

"You have no business arguing here about all of this if you don't also go cast a vote."
So not only do we have only Tweedledum and Tweedledee as alternatives, but we don't even get a chance to discuss it.
Voting is not an end in itself, but the maens to an end (or supposed to be) - if either "end" is going to screw you - why bother?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 May 15 - 03:11 PM

Jim - if it's a choice between 10 hefty kicks up the arse.
or 8 slightly less vicious kicks...

I know which I'd vote for...😜

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: BrendanB
Date: 07 May 15 - 06:11 PM

Jim you have railed against voting vociferously, what you have not done is explain what you believe should take the place of the nearest thing to democracy we are likely to get. Do you want a dictatorship which embodies all your beliefs and principles and denies a voice to those who do not see the world as you do? That sounds dangerously like fascism to me. Perhaps you want anarchy, but would that not be a recipe for disaster? I know what you don't want but I just can't get a handle on what you do want. The other thought that occurs to me is that you no longer live in the UK, do you think you should be pontificating on how or even whether those of us who do live here should vote? I have close ties to Ireland but for me to attempt to tell anyone in Ireland how they should regard the democratic process in their country would, I believe, be presumptuous in the extreme.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: The Sandman
Date: 07 May 15 - 06:18 PM

ha ha , the good friday agreement, has not altered factionalism in northern ireland, you ignorant fool.it has not been sorted out internally. I agree that the situation is better now that the bombing campaign has ended, but you are kidding yourself if you think factionalism has been sorted out internally in northern ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST
Date: 08 May 15 - 03:07 AM

Dick needs a link about democracy, or politics even.

There are always factional interests.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 08 May 15 - 05:50 AM

He needs a link about non sequiteaurs for that matter. His logic is often difficult to fathom, let alone his barking at trees he has never come across before.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 May 15 - 05:52 AM

"take the place of the nearest thing to democracy we are likely to get"
If you believe that what we have got at present in any way resembles democracy, there seems little point in going into the question.
Working people fought hard to win the right to vote, to win the right to be represented in their work place, to improve their existence and their health.
All these moved were resisted fiercely by the right and when they became a reality, were accepted reluctantly and eventually incorporated into the system in a limited fashion as a con - the old Lampedusa philosophy that "Things must change if they are going to remain the same".
I was proud when I put my first cross on a ballot paper but I stopped voting with the advent of Blair and never did again in the UK.
Over here, I wouldn't vote for Burton and her Quislings in a thousand years, but at least we have an alternative and a degree of say with P.R., referendum and the willingness to put bankers on public trail - not much, but something.
Looks like the Tories have taken the election in Britain and are claiming to have done so with a working majority - another five years ago then "we started all over again" as the song says.
Would it have made that much difference to the working man and woman (the wealth providers) if Labour had won, or if it wins next time, or the next or the next...?
The ballot box hs become a meaningless exercise in changing things for the better - who trusts a politician nowadays?
As far as I can see, the fight lies elsewhere.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 08 May 15 - 08:47 AM

If we had PR here Jim, UKIP would have more seats than SNP, Lib Dem and all the Northern Ireland MPs put together... Instead of one, and one that disagrees with Farage on all fronts anyway. (Make that ex leader Farage.)

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 May 15 - 09:05 AM

"As far as I can see, the fight lies elsewhere."

elsewhere ?????

..personally I'm getting a bit too old and fat for storming parliament with sickles and molotovs..
and my irritable bowels and swollen feet might be a bit of a problem
what with any running street battles with the well trained heavily armed defenders of the capitalist monarchist state..

..do you mind if I just sit this one out at home, watching all the action and posting comments on the internet...😜

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 May 15 - 09:20 AM

"If we had PR here Jim, UKIP would have more seats than SNP"
Not sure if that's the case, but quite honestly, it's a risk worth taking.
PR has struck a balance her so we don't have a Government that is totally unanswerable to the people - even if we don't always like those answers.
It is only one aspect of the differences.
Thousands of people here took to the streets to protest water charges - changes were made (not enough) in Government policy and now, with the threat of continuing protests and non-payment of water bills, those who refuse to pay will not be jailed, as threatened.
Remind me what happened when at least a million people took to the streets in protest of the W.M.D. invasion which led to the loss of British lives and a long term military commitment in the area - more lives and a growing threat to Britain's security   
A public enquiry is taking place here at present into the financial shenanigans of the Irish banks.
Public pressure, following clerical abuse, is slowly loosening the grip of the Church on Ireland.
The laws have been changed on pregnancy termination following the death of a young woman who was refused appropriate treatment
We are about to hold a referendum on same-sex marriage.
None of this has been given out of the good of the Establishment's heart.
Irish politics is far from perfect, but it's streets ahead of the unassailable position British Governments have, once in office.
s I say - five years in office - lorra-lorra promised - re-election on policies that don't differ oe from the other to any great extent, then back on the roundabout.
At least here, you can use your vote tactically, once you've got your head around the system.
Not the only shake-up needed by any means - just a necessary reform, IMO
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 08 May 15 - 09:34 AM

no Jim - Farage is very bad news.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 08 May 15 - 10:13 AM

Ex bad news.

Although he said he might stand in the leadership election.

Look on the bright side, they could elect someone credible sounding and then we are stuffed, judging by how many people put self interest before community.

Jim. It is the case. Share of vote.

Anyway, you have had a few "interesting" governments over there, with Taisochs running guns to ones that made sub prime look a safe deal. There was a reason Cowan was called BIFFO.

I managed to sell my house in Blackrock just before it lost 60% of its value over the course of a month. Poor bugger who bought it must be suicidal. Don't rattle on about good government over there. Just be grateful Osborn found the cash to bail Eire out when he can't find it for his own people.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 May 15 - 10:52 AM

"Farage is very bad news."
Absolutely aware of this Al - but he would be bad news anyway.
Level out the playing field a little and there may be a chance of discussing the real issues of what makes our lives miserable and not be blaming the immigrants and other foreigners.
Leave things as they are at present and they win - use Farage as an excuse for not improving the system and he has won.
Before Farage, we had other scum, like Powell (remember the Dockers' march in support of "our Enoch" and his 'Rivers of Blood' speech?)
I'm sure there are bunches of wannabe Fuehrers lining up to take his place.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 May 15 - 11:57 AM

There is the point that people will not have used their votes in the same way under PR as they have done in this election. It isn't really valid to extrapolate this result into a PR scenario. Around 20% of voters did not vote for their first choice candidate, voting tactically instead. Under PR that would have happened very differently as people made their hierarchies of choices. Then you have the other 80% giving candidates they wouldn't have voted for this time a look-in. Apples and pears.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 08 May 15 - 12:19 PM

A majority Tory government! Disaster!!!

It's a good job that we haven't got chimneys any more because the evil bastards would be sending poor children up them! But I guess they'll find an alternative ... ?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 May 15 - 12:46 PM

Sending immigrants up them, perhaps?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 May 15 - 01:01 PM

"Sending immigrants up them, perhaps?"
What will they do with the indigenous out-of-work electricians, plasterers, plumbers, nurses..... and al the other tradesmen thrown on the dole in order to give bankers a bonus - don't be silly
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 May 15 - 01:25 PM

Scotland will come back to bite Cameron on the arse. He's not going to get away with all that vilifying and scaremongering, an extremely effective campaign tactic that probably lost it for Labour, without the SNP ramping up the threat of partition, unless they get what they want, far more than would have happened with Labour. And if we choose to leave the EU via his extremely ill-conceived referendum, Christ knows how Scotland will react to that. 56 out of 59 MPs mean that Scotland can't be ignored any more.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jack Campin
Date: 08 May 15 - 01:40 PM

PR has struck a balance her so we don't have a Government that is totally unanswerable to the people - even if we don't always like those answers.

So let's compare with what the authoritarian British system gave us:

Thousands of people here took to the streets to protest water charges - changes were made (not enough) in Government policy and now, with the threat of continuing protests and non-payment of water bills, those who refuse to pay will not be jailed, as threatened.

Didn't happen in Britain because even the Tories didn't threaten to jail people for not paying water bills.


A public enquiry is taking place here at present into the financial shenanigans of the Irish banks.

We've had those too. I doubt if yours are going to lead to any more effective a result.


Public pressure, following clerical abuse, is slowly loosening the grip of the Church on Ireland.

No church has such a grip in Britain.


The laws have been changed on pregnancy termination following the death of a young woman who was refused appropriate treatment

She would have been allowed the abortion fifty years ago in Britain.


We are about to hold a referendum on same-sex marriage.

Already allowed under English and Scottish law, we don't need no steenkin referendums.


Irish politics is far from perfect, but it's streets ahead of the unassailable position British Governments have, once in office.

Looks like you're saying Irish civil society is doing a great job at bringing about reforms that only a mediaeval theocracy needs. Give us a call when you reach the Enlightenment.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 May 15 - 02:07 PM

"Looks like you're saying Irish civil society is doing a great job at bringing about reforms that only a mediaeval theocracy needs."
Yes I am sort of - I am no fan of what has happened in Ireland and I and my family has suffered from its backwardness (don't believe for one minute that the church holds no power in Britain - it's still there to send us to war if necessary and it still an unelected integral part of a political system capable of kicking changes of law into touch).
The point I was making was that P.R. has played a part in bringing about important changes in life here and it has provided us with a greater spectrum of choice - never had that back home in Britain - but I thought I did when I first voted for 'Harold the Bootblack (MacColl song).
I'll vote here, whereas, could never bring myself round to doing so ocer the last 20-odd years in Britain
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 May 15 - 02:10 PM

Missed a bit
Don't forget - Ireland stayed where she was at the behest of 7 - 8 centuries of British colonisation (the aftermath of which still retains 6 of the wealthiest counties - a fact that is still stunting development)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Teribus
Date: 09 May 15 - 03:14 AM

"Don't forget - Ireland stayed where she was at the behest of 7 - 8 centuries of British colonisation (the aftermath of which still retains 6 of the wealthiest counties - a fact that is still stunting development)"

Complete and utter bullshit. Ireland stayed where she was because of a marked failure to learn from others, mainland Britain on the other-hand learned and advanced from every single one of her invaders and absorbed and assimilated them into her "native" population - odd isn't it that the six counties you mention were James Ist & VIth's "Plantation Colonies" where along with the people he "planted" there he also inadvertently introduced one of what Naill Ferguson referred to as the six "killer apps" that ensured the global success of "western civilisation" - The Protestant Work Ethic" - the other five were:

- Competition
- Science
- The property owning democracy
- Modern medicine
- The consumer society

As to skilled tradesmen being thrown on the dole? Really? I do not somehow think that those forming queues at Job Centres up and down the country are packed out with "out-of-work electricians, plasterers, plumbers, nurses", etc, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 May 15 - 03:43 AM

Yep we know your views on Ireland - t'ick Paddies playing Country and Western and singing moany songs - been there, done that with you.
No skilled tradesmen out of work - what planet have you been living on for the last half century?
I spent a great deal of my life moving from city to city dodging unemployment - if I had been married with a family, as many unemployed tradesmen I knew where in that little world outside the S.E. of England, we would never have survived - Norman the Dalek's (and your) advice of "get on your bikes" would never have been an option for us.
I was luck enough to get an apprenticeship - very few of my generation in the North of England got the same chance.
I'm afraid The Iron Lady's lies have addled your brain - do you actually believe the garbage you spout?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 May 15 - 03:50 AM

And by the way - of all the places in Britain, up to the point when the bankers and politicians fecked up the country, Ireland did extremely well out of Europe, socially and culturally - the Celtic Tiger may have been a slogan, but the improvements to the way of life here were very much a reality (I say that as someone who was never fully sold on the E.U. for political reasons).
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 May 15 - 05:26 AM

I live in Ireland, for all its faults I prefer it to England.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 09 May 15 - 06:28 AM

Low tax, cash culture.

I enjoyed it myself for a while for the same reasons...

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 09 May 15 - 07:01 AM

Well, as the recent election has shown, people are starting to pay attention.

The whole of England to a larger or lesser extent voted for conservative answers to the economic problems.
Scotland voted for a radical agenda of pressure on Westminster and the vision of a free Scotland to carry it forward.

The stance of the soft left has been found to be based on empty rhetoric.....it cannot be made to work in today's economic climate and given the way in which society has been emasculated.

Reality is slowly taking a grip, you want to live in a robber baron society?   then the barons rule.
As I have said many times, if you want the "fringe benefits" of "liberalism" someone has to pay the piper, and it wont be the ruling class.

Wish us luck you sassenachs...... Home rule for the Geordies and the Scousers!! :0)

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 May 15 - 07:39 AM

Home rule for the Geordies and the Scousers!! :0)

Hey! Don't forget Lancashire and Yorkshire. If it wasn't for the Pennines we would have ruled the world :-)

I'm all for re-introducing the Watford Gap as well...

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Teribus
Date: 09 May 15 - 07:41 AM

" if I had been married with a family, as many unemployed tradesmen I knew where in that little world outside the S.E. of England, we would never have survived"

Ehmm NO Jim you would have hit upon the solution you eventually found a damn sight sooner.

By the way how does having a wife and family prevent anybody from working elsewhere? Myself and thousands of others did it quite successfully for the best part of 40 years - if you work at sea it is the "norm".

You left the UK some time ago, therefore yo preaching at those who live here now amounts basically to just so much "magpie chatter".

Yes the Irish Republic did well out of the EU - only problem Jim, was it was all "borrowed money" - the EU, the biggest and best "Gombeen Men" on the planet.

This from Frank Kane written in November 2010 around the time of the last Irish Bail out:

"it is the euro that has reduced Ireland to its current dire straits - the euro, and the gombeen men, Irish, American or European, who will now hammer in the coffin nails.

The Irish themselves must bear a lot of the blame. How could a poor, underpopulated, agriculture-based society on the extreme limits of Europe suddenly become home to a thriving property market rivaling London, New York and Paris? It should have made somebody sit up and think when apartments in Ballsbridge, Dublin, were changing hands for more than the equivalent in Manhattan or Mayfair.

The statistic that brought it home to me was this: in 2005, the part of the world that had the highest per capita ownership of private swimming pools was not Malibu, California, or Boca Raton, Florida, nor even Dubai, UAE, but County Donegal, Ireland.

These were not owned by farmers who suddenly decided they might have need of a refreshing dip after they finished cutting the hay, traditionally the principal economic activity in the beautiful but impoverished region.

They were owned by investment bankers, stockbrokers and property investors from the great megalopolis of Dublin who, having made their millions there, wanted to get back to their Irish roots in the rural homelands. A swimming pool was just part of the package, even if totally inappropriate for the climate of north-west Ireland.

So indigenous greed was part of it; the gombeen man was usually Irish. But it was the euro and Ireland's enthusiastic membership of the EU that created the conditions for greed to grow.

Ireland had stoked its own property boom by a combination of generous tax incentives for businesses and entrepreneurs, especially the "creatives", which sucked in investment in the 1990s. The launch of the euro in Ireland in 2002, replacing the Irish pound, or punt, and the low interest rate regime Germany insisted on, really set the Irish property market alight.

Freed up from foreign exchange constraints and seeking the highest return, euros flooded into Ireland to inflate the property market. By the time the Irish realised what was happening, at the very beginning of the financial crisis, it was already too late.

Without the power to adjust interest rates or introduce currency controls, they were helpless to prevent the collapse. The one big, radical measure they took - when the government guaranteed all bank deposits - has exploded in their faces now that all Irish banks are more or less toxic institutions.

The fate of other small economies on the periphery of Europe, such as Greece and Portugal, simply reinforces the message: a one-for-all currency regime in a region with more than 300 million people all at different stages of economic development is simply not practical. The architects of the euro zone were peddling a fantasy when they suggested it was a desirable arrangement.

The Greek, Irish and (looming) Portuguese crises might prove to be the coffin-nail for the euro zone but somehow I doubt it. The gombeen men of the EU and IMF have got their power web in place and I doubt they'll want to relax their grip now."

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 May 15 - 09:02 AM

"By the way how does having a wife and family prevent anybody from working elsewhere? "
What a stupid question
Apart from not being there to see your children grow up - an incidental to some people I suppose - there's the question of paying two lots of rent on a working man's wage
By "hit upon the solution you eventually found a damn sight sooner" you mean what exactly - that I would have dragged a young family all over the place in search of work and somewhere to live - as I had to.
You really are sold aon Tebbit's bike - or maybe t that should be a tandem!
Eejit
The only place in Britain then and now was within reach of London - horrendously expensive then - out of the question now.
I lived fora fair amount of time in Wandsworth, in S W London.
A report on London accommodation in yesterday's Irish Times (headed "London exodus as tenants (are) paid to leave city), gives the average for a flat in Wandsworth today as £549 per week
A cramped one-bedroom gores just shy of £300 pw, a two bedroom for £465 and a three bedroom for £800
Who kows, maybe there's plenty of work on the Planet Zog, where you apparently seem to reside.
"therefore yo preaching at those who live here now amounts basically to just so much "magpie chatter"."
Again a statement based on total ignorance of the subject
Whan I left England I settled in Ireland - not on the Moon.
I have family all over England - two of my sisters are still in Liverpool, now retired and struggling on a pension following a life of being in and out of jobs, one disabled and in poor health, living on the estate I grew up in - it's always the same with you tossers - don't tell us how to run our lives - yet more than ready to send me packing all over England in search of work.
Your selected opinions on Ireland are similarly ignorant
Frank Kane was once Business editor of the Observer, writing on the interests of the wealthy. since 2007 he has been leading a team of seventy, editing a newspaper 'The Emirites Today', based in Dubai "The target audience is English-reading, affluent, aspirational people involved in business here".
Just the feller to tell Ireland where it went wrong.
It is probably one of the crassest summings up of what has happened and is still happening in Ireland I've ever come across - I can remember how it was greeted when it appeared in the press here - have ouu ever been to Donegal - I suggest you go and see how they live there
Ireland's problems were not unsimilar than those in Britain - ta massive build-build-build policy. banks advising customers that money grew on trees - then CRASH
Come into the real world and see how it really is, not howw its painted by them at the top.
Are you for real?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 09 May 15 - 09:06 AM

Err.. The people of Scotland voted for SNP to carry out its manifesto, which made it perfectly clear that independence was not a factor of the election and not to be seen as part of any mandate given to SNP.

They also stood on a manifesto of what has been called on these threads 'liberalism.'

Prosperity through equality, as the election slogan of SNP states quite clearly.

Not a good day at the office eh Alex?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 09 May 15 - 09:37 AM

I take it you didn't hear Mrs Sturgeons speech from the shadow of the Forth Railway Bridge today?

All about getting our young people back to work and other IMPORTANT issues. The media have served their purpose, or rather they have been outflanked....."softly softly catchee monkee" :0)

Don't be a sore loser, it looks like you may be getting David Lambie as leader.....I'm sure he'll be "liberal" enough for even you three :0)   LOL!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 09 May 15 - 10:21 AM

Lammy Akeaton, David Lammy

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 May 15 - 10:24 AM

Just to make it perfectly clear to Motörhead fans - not Lemmy either...!!!😜

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Teribus
Date: 09 May 15 - 10:31 AM

"I finally moved to the soft under-belly of Britain, the South East - struggled to find work, but with help, got it, but lived hand-to-mouth because of the cost of accommodation.
Finally became self-employed and got regular work

That was what you said on the Thatcher Squabble Thread wasn't it Jim.

Now read that part of it that I have highlighted in bold and then go back and re-read what I said.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 May 15 - 10:55 AM

"Now read that part of it that I have highlighted in bold and then go back and re-read what I said."
Why - you've said sweet sod all worth reading so far - what obscure point are you making now - that the nation should move to London to acquire work - maybe we should buy caravans and become itinerants - then your Tory Councils could move us on whenever they feel the need to.
You've ducked and dived every single set of figures you've been given to date.
You've refused to either justify Thatcher's fascism in relation to her support for murderous South American dictators
You have ignored the realities of having to follow the work
You've shuffled around the problems of moving to where the work is - horrendous rents, keeping two homes...
You quote a Dubai journalist whose stated aims are to suck up to the rich and successful, as evidence for what's happening in Ireland, siding with him when he blames the people for their predicament (now - there's a surprise!!)
You tell us tradesmen have never had trouble obtaining work.
You tell us the gap between rich and poor isn't getting bigger
You echo political thugs like Tebbit and tell us to get on our bikes
Don't think following your particular ball of string is really worth the effort
You seem far more in character when you're brown-nosing the establishment
Do you realise how ridiculous you appear when you try to talk down to people from the hole you've dug for yourself?
Jim Carroll (or maybe I should sign off im Carroll, and give you a typo to grasp)

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 May 15 - 12:51 PM

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket - PM
Date: 09 May 15 - 06:28 AM

Low tax, cash culture.

I enjoyed it myself for a while for the same reasons...
for feck sake, more cobblers, low tax in ireland?