General Election 2019 thread

[dunover]

The fact is, since Thatcher in 1979 UK politics changed for good. The disastrous socialism of Labour and the most ruinous decade ever in peacetime was the 1970's. I guess people need to see the photos of rubbish dumped 10 feet high in Leicester Square, bodies unburied and huge resources being pumped into state-owned industries in the main producing crap that there was little demand for. The oil crisis, that fucked the country far worse than what's happening now, Healey going cap-in-hand to the IMF.

We had an endless cycle of one step forwards, 2 steps back politics by means of alternating Lab/Con administrations, no set path. This could have well carried on too had it not been for Genreal Galtieri and a huge win for Thatcher in 1983 which allowed more time for the UK to be moved from the old path. In doing so, she effectively moved a significant amount of working people away from floating voters and into the new tory philospohy via shares, home ownership, lower business taxes and not punishing achievers with punitive tax like Labour which resulted in a 'brain drain' and the high earners locating abroad. This new path ultimately proved popular with the people, well enough to permanently move us away from the failed doctrine of socialism which as she said 'works until you run out of other people's money' (or resources in the case of say Norway and Sweden.) Don't get me wrong, the woman annoyed me like hell but lay the seeds for the UK's rise up the list of wealthiest nations league which whether you like to admit it or not, we have all materially benefited from in one way or another.

Further proof is the fact that Labour can only get elected when largely keeping the path above, hence 'Tory Blair' and 'Conservative Lite' when they regained power for 3 terms themselves. The British people have rejected socialism and leftist politics, accept that or not.

Watch the BBC and and their cronies in their little cliched right-on world of political and liberal fantasy. Then see their dismay time after time, nay shock even, when their side loses in almost every poll. Pick from Cameron winning in 2010, a weak leader who allied with the LD's but preferable to the ghastly altenative of that drip Brown. Then 2015 when Cameron won an outright majority mainly due to fear of the sap Millipede being pulled along by the short and curlies with Sturgeon, a hellish prospect. The Brexit vote 2016. Trump winning in the US. Johnson's massive majority.
Get the picture? The leftists and their acolytes are so out of touch with most people and their feelings.

As for gas prices, this is a commodity produced, bought and sold by private companies in the main. You cannot blame one person or govt. for the market conditions worldwide. We get about 45% from domestic production in the North Sea, IIRC over 30% from a long-term agreement with Norway's fields and the smaller portion from multiple countries like Algeria, Egypt, Holland, Russia etc. It is clear however that if our direction is carbon-neutral we need to rapidly follow Holland and ban the fitting of all new homes to gas mains, as the future of this scarce commodity is uncertain as well as the supply chain. We have the capacity here in the UK to produce all our needs from renewables by way of electricity and rapidly this seems to be happening and while it does, people must accept it comes at a cost.

 

[pocoman]

Definitely. And I seem to recall that it was more than just the UK government who got caught out by covid, but why let facts get in the way of anything.

So what's your argument here? Other Government's did shit so it's ok that our Government did shit? Is that it?

What a lofty aspiration to achieve.

I note that there's still no response to Dunover's 'Bankrupt' claims yet he can still 'laughey smiley' your response to me...

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Still better than a terrorist supporting marxist....

Imaginary prime minister we never had better than the actual prime minister we've got who's shit, gotcha.

Like a slots session on Mega Moolah that made us a millionaire with the one small problem that we didn't hit the jackpot, i.e. fantasy island.

 

[paul7388]

Imaginary prime minister we never had better than the actual prime minister we've got who's shit, gotcha.

Like a slots session on Mega Moolah that made us a millionaire with the one small problem that we didn't hit the jackpot, i.e. fantasy island.

To be fair I could not think i could think of anyone I would have wanted running this country less than Corbyn .

Boris is a complete idiot agreed but compared to having Corbyn in charge we got off lightly. The man and everything he stands for makes me sick.

He is that bad that if I had to have a choice of a UK run by Corbyn or an independent Scotland run by the Little dictator Sturgeon I would have to go against everything I believe in and choose her.

 

[dunover]

That bloody Brexit and government we got! Seems we need to follow Europe for resolving the gas price crisis. Oh no! Hang on a mo...

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[dunover]

To be fair I could not think i could think of anyone I would have wanted running this country less than Corbyn .

Boris is a complete idiot agreed but compared to having Corby in charge we got off lightly. The man and everything he stands for makes me sick.

He is that bad that if I had to have a choice of a UK run by Corbyn or an independent Scotland run by the Little dictator Sturgeon I would have to go against everything I believe in and choose her.

I think that line should be put in the OED Thesauraus by 'Hobson's Choice' as a permanent definition.

 

[kennygamerboy]

Still better than a terrorist supporting marxist....

That old chestnut

 

[pinnit2014]

To be fair I could not think i could think of anyone I would have wanted running this country less than Corbyn .

Boris is a complete idiot agreed but compared to having Corbyn in charge we got off lightly. The man and everything he stands for makes me sick.

He is that bad that if I had to have a choice of a UK run by Corbyn or an independent Scotland run by the Little dictator Sturgeon I would have to go against everything I believe in and choose her.

Disgree re Sturgeon - she's a Juggernaut of a Queen.

Agree Corbyn - there isn't enough tweed that you could have wrapped him in and rolled him away in. Let's radicalise.

Chopley's view that Labour are 'not in a good place' is a slight understatement. They're not even in a place, a not so good one would be an improvement.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

The fact is, since Thatcher in 1979 UK politics changed for good. The disastrous socialism of Labour and the most ruinous decade ever in peacetime was the 1970's. I guess people need to see the photos of rubbish dumped 10 feet high in Leicester Square, bodies unburied and huge resources being pumped into state-owned industries in the main producing crap that there was little demand for. The oil crisis, that fucked the country far worse than what's happening now, Healey going cap-in-hand to the IMF.

We had an endless cycle of one step forwards, 2 steps back politics by means of alternating Lab/Con administrations, no set path. This could have well carried on too had it not been for Genreal Galtieri and a huge win for Thatcher in 1983 which allowed more time for the UK to be moved from the old path. In doing so, she effectively moved a significant amount of working people away from floating voters and into the new tory philospohy via shares, home ownership, lower business taxes and not punishing achievers with punitive tax like Labour which resulted in a 'brain drain' and the high earners locating abroad. This new path ultimately proved popular with the people, well enough to permanently move us away from the failed doctrine of socialism which as she said 'works until you run out of other people's money' (or resources in the case of say Norway and Sweden.) Don't get me wrong, the woman annoyed me like hell but lay the seeds for the UK's rise up the list of wealthiest nations league which whether you like to admit it or not, we have all materially benefited from in one way or another.

Further proof is the fact that Labour can only get elected when largely keeping the path above, hence 'Tory Blair' and 'Conservative Lite' when they regained power for 3 terms themselves. The British people have rejected socialism and leftist politics, accept that or not.

Watch the BBC and and their cronies in their little cliched right-on world of political and liberal fantasy. Then see their dismay time after time, nay shock even, when their side loses in almost every poll. Pick from Cameron winning in 2010, a weak leader who allied with the LD's but preferable to the ghastly altenative of that drip Brown. Then 2015 when Cameron won an outright majority mainly due to fear of the sap Millipede being pulled along by the short and curlies with Sturgeon, a hellish prospect. The Brexit vote 2016. Trump winning in the US. Johnson's massive majority.
Get the picture? The leftists and their acolytes are so out of touch with most people and their feelings.

As for gas prices, this is a commodity produced, bought and sold by private companies in the main. You cannot blame one person or govt. for the market conditions worldwide. We get about 45% from domestic production in the North Sea, IIRC over 30% from a long-term agreement with Norway's fields and the smaller portion from multiple countries like Algeria, Egypt, Holland, Russia etc. It is clear however that if our direction is carbon-neutral we need to rapidly follow Holland and ban the fitting of all new homes to gas mains, as the future of this scarce commodity is uncertain as well as the supply chain. We have the capacity here in the UK to produce all our needs from renewables by way of electricity and rapidly this seems to be happening and while it does, people must accept it comes at a cost.

I didn't know you moonlighted as a columnist for the Daily Mail dunover

The problem with selling the family silver as Thatcher did (a policy carried on by subsequent Tory governments) is you can only do it once, and there's nothing left to sell now. The young are increasingly left leaning and the Tories are arguably on borrowed time as their base of support literally dies off. You seen many young people buying houses or shares recently?...... (Thatcher had a massive stock of social housing to pawn off of course, most of which has eventually ended up in the hands of private landlords, renting it out at exorbitant rates, which are often subsidised by the taxpayer.)

Also of course our FPTP system massively skews results into landslides where the actual number of votes cast shows a clearer picture (Labour should have used their last stint in government to bring in proportional representation), the Tories aren't as far ahead as their seats in the House of Commons would suggest, and lest we forget the overall majority popular vote was cast for left/liberal parties.

Let's see how it goes, the electorate won't be forgiving of the Tories once their taxes start to rise along with inflation, add in shortages on the shelves and the prospect of a frosty winter in more ways than one, and things could change more quickly than expected.

All governments look invincible until they suddenly don't.

 

[mack341]

What a dyed in the wool wombat. Obviously getting his ideas from 'focus groups'

BBC: Sir Keir Starmer has promised children in England an "education fit for the future" paid for by a tax raid on private schools, if he wins power.

In his Sunday Mirror interview, Sir Keir says schools should teach practical life skills such as pension planning and applying for a mortgage.

-----------
One of the things we do well and helps the country compete down the line, no let's tax it so it becomes more unaffordable. Never a good idea to tax education.

Article from 2013 re wasted money by govt, must be possible to find the £1.7 billion which he says this education tax would raise:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[pinnit2014]

What a dyed in the wool wombat. Obviously getting his ideas from 'focus groups'

BBC: Sir Keir Starmer has promised children in England an "education fit for the future" paid for by a tax raid on private schools, if he wins power.

In his Sunday Mirror interview, Sir Keir says schools should teach practical life skills such as pension planning and applying for a mortgage.

-----------
One of the things we do well and helps the country compete down the line, no let's tax it so it becomes more unaffordable. Never a good idea to tax education.

Article from 2013 re wasted money by govt, must be possible to find the £1.7 billion which he says this education tax would raise:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

There's a massive chasm in the middle grounds - everything is geared towards the opposite ends of the spectrum; no wonder folk get pissed off and feel disconnected.

Hate listening to the likes of labour, in a rather patronising and cringeworthy tone, talk about 'working class communities' as if they think everyone is as thick as pie.

If it moves, tax it should be the leading words in their manifesto - though, this Tory Government seems to be adopting some of that.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

/checks who's been in power for the last eleven years.

But I know, let's get cross about the tax rises that aren't being implemented by the party that isn't in power, that's the ticket.

 

[mack341]

Let's punish parents who, by opting to go private, save the govt the money required to educate that child, it will just mean only the super rich and foreign wealthy can afford it. He could be worse than blair given a similar majority in the hoc, lots want the state eduction system to be improved, but this is a dumb way.

Edit: Chop starmer is planning and laying out what he will do if voted to power, not much point getting cross afterwards, boris will also come under fire for his tax increases, it's not either or.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Right I've actually looked into this and what Starmer is proposing is basically to close a tax loophole whereby private schools have charitable status, and then abuse the money they save by giving discounts to family, friends, and families that are already well off. (Amongst other things.)

I never quite understand why folks get cross when Labour proposes measures that might make already well off people ever so slightly less well off, like tax rises targeted at people earning more than £70K, and the people moaning about it earn £20K per year, but when you ask them about it the answer is something like, 'Well I might earn £70K at some point and then Labour will try to take my money off me'.

And this is against a backdrop of an actual Tory government just increasing the total tax take in the UK to its highest level in 70 years and doing it with a regressive tax in the form of NI that hits lower earners the hardest.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Through their charitable status, private schools enjoy significant tax breaks, including concessions with VAT and business rates, and relief from corporation tax if they make a surplus. One analysis of local authority business rates records published last year estimated that private schools would receive tax rebates totalling £522m over the next five years as a result of their status.

 

[mack341]

Right I've actually looked into this and what Starmer is proposing is basically to close a tax loophole whereby private schools have charitable status, and then abuse the money they save by giving discounts to family, friends, and families that are already well off. (Amongst other things.)

I never quite understand why folks get cross when Labour proposes measures that might make already well off people ever so slightly less well off, like tax rises targeted at people earning more than £70K, and the people moaning about it earn £20K per year, but when you ask them about it the answer is something like, 'Well I might earn £70K at some point and then Labour will try to take my money off me'.

And this is against a backdrop of an actual Tory government just increasing the total tax take in the UK to its highest level in 70 years and doing it with a regressive tax in the form of NI that hits lower earners the hardest.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Through their charitable status, private schools enjoy significant tax breaks, including concessions with VAT and business rates, and relief from corporation tax if they make a surplus. One analysis of local authority business rates records published last year estimated that private schools would receive tax rebates totalling £522m over the next five years as a result of their status.

Well the charity commission ought to check their books carefully and take action; starmer is talking about 1.7 billion annually afaik. It's schools located in rough areas that fail the most, mortgage lessons aren't going to do diddly, technical courses and firm discipline will make more improvement.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Well the charity commission ought to check their books carefully and take action; starmer is talking about 1.7 billion annually afaik. It's schools located in rough areas that fail the most, mortgage lessons aren't going to do diddly, technical courses and firm discipline will make more improvement.

Well this is the point, they're not technically doing anything wrong, the rules were tightened up under the last Labour government but they're still taking the piss, so the proposal now is to simply strip them of their charitable status so they can't abuse the system. No one's saying private schools can't exist.

 

[mack341]

Well this is the point, they're not technically doing anything wrong, the rules were tightened up under the last Labour government but they're still taking the piss, so the proposal now is to simply strip them of their charitable status so they can't abuse the system. No one's saying private schools can't exist.

I'd rather the rules were changed to catch any financial abuse (favours etc). All that will survive are the top paying ones. With the learning tool of the internet, basically a huge reference library etc..education and intelligence/learning should be going up for little cost in any case. That should be a huge advantage compared to the 80's and 90's.

I think it's a mistake to make private schooling more cost prohibitive, maybe eton and the elite ones shouldn't enjoy charity status - if they have it. That I could find more understandable, similar logic to huge multinationals paying too little so the govt ends up subsidising the salary.

 

[pinnit2014]

I'd rather the rules were changed to catch any financial abuse (favours etc). All that will survive are the top paying ones. With the learning tool of the internet, basically a huge reference library etc..education and intelligence/learning should be going up for little cost in any case. That should be a huge advantage compared to the 80's and 90's.

I think it's a mistake to make private schooling more cost prohibitive, maybe eton and the elite ones shouldn't enjoy charity status - if they have it. That I could find more understandable, similar logic to huge multinationals paying too little so the govt ends up subsidising the salary.

Think Eton is: suppose in many ways it depends on the 'institution': dunno about England but up in Scotland the Leisure and Cultural elements of the Council's were pulled out from the Council's, into ALEO's (ughhh) for the sole purpose of the tax breaks they get: don't think it's allowed now and there was a review recently that threatened to revoke their status: was speaking with a few guys who work there and they did say if that happened they'd go under (or, more likely, back in under the local authority) - i doubt Eton would though

 

[mack341]

Think Eton is: suppose in many ways it depends on the 'institution': dunno about England but up in Scotland the Leisure and Cultural elements of the Council's were pulled out from the Council's, into ALEO's (ughhh) for the sole purpose of the tax breaks they get: don't think it's allowed now and there was a review recently that threatened to revoke their status: was speaking with a few guys who work there and they did say if that happened they'd go under (or, more likely, back in under the local authority) - i doubt Eton would though

Yes I think a similar thing happened, sports facilities separated but somehow still part of the council portfolio, if they hit financial difficulties the counciil bail them out.

Just checked universities and they seem to enjoy charitable status, incl Oxford, so that is also paying for education, a privilege more enjoyed by the wealthy, but won't be part of starmer's tax raid, so it's favouritism to one part. Some of the university heads or managers are on hefty salaries, for so called charities.

Edit: Apparently the average pay of a university vice-chancellor is £280,000, but to starmer it's all the private schools that should lose tax relief. Something about his proposal makes me blinking annoyed, and l simply loathe him more, it's another attack on choice and freedom, that's the underlying problem I think.

 

[dunover]

Yes I think a similar thing happened, sports facilities separated but somehow still part of the council portfolio, if they hit financial difficulties the counciil bail them out.

Just checked universities and they seem to enjoy charitable status, incl Oxford, so that is also paying for education, a privilege more enjoyed by the wealthy, but won't be part of starmer's tax raid, so it's favouritism to one part. Some of the university heads or managers are on hefty salaries, for so called charities.

Edit: Apparently the average pay of a university vice-chancellor is £280,000, but to starmer it's all the private schools that should lose tax relief. Something about his proposal makes me blinking annoyed, and l simply loathe him more, it's another attack on choice and freedom, that's the underlying problem I think.

It doesn't take long for the bilious far left of the Labour party to revert to type. And they wonder why they fail in election after election...

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

An amusing cover on the most recent Private Eye which dropped through the letterbox this morning.

 

[goatwack]

It's clear that Boris is a mop- haired gaslighting egotist incapable of leading his own comb, who wobbles his head at the merest hint of crisis management.

I'd like to think most ordinary folk who want some form of Government competency aren't allied to either of the big parties, whether it be 'New Labour' posturing as Conservatives, or the current All-Star Tory lineup that are so far Left you'd swear it was 1978 again.

I think most would want a viable Opposition to kick Government into gear, with the ever-changing shifts of Labour and the Cons I believe most would vote for whoever seems capable of delivering on their pledges, able to lead, and are also relatable/ personable.

We didn't really get that with Boris, whose shortcomings are being exposed at a rate of knots, but who's left to lead? Labour?

Looking at the shambolic Labour conference you'd be forgiven for thinking they're in major disarray, what with Angela Rayner's guttural (Was she drunk? Was she not drunk?) emotional outbursts, Starmer and Rachel Reeves' flat denial that only women have a cervix, as well as the conference mid-speech heckling by their own members.

So yes, we're stuck with Boris until even he gets ousted by Sunak, which will be another hand-me-down of power, whilst Labour toil for another half a generation.

"Great"

 

[dunover]

An amusing cover on the most recent Private Eye which dropped through the letterbox this morning.

View attachment 159012

I'm still reading mine. Although in 1970's there really was a fuel shortage and the price quadrupled due to the A-rabs. Whereas now there's no shortage or fourfold increase in price, but rather a fourfold increase in the stupidity of the general public. To get back to the 1970's we need every car manufactured here to break down, rubbish 10 foot high in Leicester Square, power cuts, 3-day weeks, broken nationalized industries, bodies unburied, failing to qualify for two World Cups and a supertax to discourage investment and entrepreneurs.

Even Boris is failing miserably to match the catastrophic events of the last (and hopefully only time) the UK had a socialist govt.

 

[geordiecolin]

The fact is, since Thatcher in 1979 UK politics changed for good. The disastrous socialism of Labour and the most ruinous decade ever in peacetime was the 1970's. I guess people need to see the photos of rubbish dumped 10 feet high in Leicester Square, bodies unburied and huge resources being pumped into state-owned industries in the main producing crap that there was little demand for. The oil crisis, that fucked the country far worse than what's happening now, Healey going cap-in-hand to the IMF.

We had an endless cycle of one step forwards, 2 steps back politics by means of alternating Lab/Con administrations, no set path. This could have well carried on too had it not been for Genreal Galtieri and a huge win for Thatcher in 1983 which allowed more time for the UK to be moved from the old path. In doing so, she effectively moved a significant amount of working people away from floating voters and into the new tory philospohy via shares, home ownership, lower business taxes and not punishing achievers with punitive tax like Labour which resulted in a 'brain drain' and the high earners locating abroad. This new path ultimately proved popular with the people, well enough to permanently move us away from the failed doctrine of socialism which as she said 'works until you run out of other people's money' (or resources in the case of say Norway and Sweden.) Don't get me wrong, the woman annoyed me like hell but lay the seeds for the UK's rise up the list of wealthiest nations league which whether you like to admit it or not, we have all materially benefited from in one way or another.

Further proof is the fact that Labour can only get elected when largely keeping the path above, hence 'Tory Blair' and 'Conservative Lite' when they regained power for 3 terms themselves. The British people have rejected socialism and leftist politics, accept that or not.

Watch the BBC and and their cronies in their little cliched right-on world of political and liberal fantasy. Then see their dismay time after time, nay shock even, when their side loses in almost every poll. Pick from Cameron winning in 2010, a weak leader who allied with the LD's but preferable to the ghastly altenative of that drip Brown. Then 2015 when Cameron won an outright majority mainly due to fear of the sap Millipede being pulled along by the short and curlies with Sturgeon, a hellish prospect. The Brexit vote 2016. Trump winning in the US. Johnson's massive majority.
Get the picture? The leftists and their acolytes are so out of touch with most people and their feelings.

As for gas prices, this is a commodity produced, bought and sold by private companies in the main. You cannot blame one person or govt. for the market conditions worldwide. We get about 45% from domestic production in the North Sea, IIRC over 30% from a long-term agreement with Norway's fields and the smaller portion from multiple countries like Algeria, Egypt, Holland, Russia etc. It is clear however that if our direction is carbon-neutral we need to rapidly follow Holland and ban the fitting of all new homes to gas mains, as the future of this scarce commodity is uncertain as well as the supply chain. We have the capacity here in the UK to produce all our needs from renewables by way of electricity and rapidly this seems to be happening and while it does, people must accept it comes at a cost.

I only read the first sentence then stopped reading.
Politics has became more and more about winning the next election than long term planning for the good of the Country. We have the same folk in position of influence in place advising on key issues and direction no matter which party wins. And behind them are bigger powers influencing them.
Should I be reading the rest of your post?

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I only read the first sentence then stopped reading.
Politics has became more and more about winning the next election than long term planning for the good of the Country. We have the same folk in position of influence in place advising on key issues and direction no matter which party wins. And behind them are bigger powers influencing them.
Should I be reading the rest of your post?

Spoiler alert - No

(Sorry dunover!)