Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am right behind ya Wishy "I won't say 'right on brother' cos that's too fookin socialist so I'll just have to say "£50 as agreed?" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am right behind ya Wishy
Mmmmm and me xx "Hold on a sec, I ain't made of money y'know. Let me see what's left in the Nepotism Fund and I'll get back to ya. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am right behind ya Wishy
I won't say 'right on brother' cos that's too fookin socialist so I'll just have to say "£50 as agreed?" "yes thanks... now hand over the cash and lets crack on | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well they are shafting most of the country right now "But only a little bit. Nowhere near as much as Gordy the Gaffe and Tony B.Liar. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am right behind ya Wishy "+1 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well they are shafting most of the country right now
But only a little bit. Nowhere near as much as Gordy the Gaffe and Tony B.Liar. "Stop sitting on the fence Wishy!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wow a Tory in the north east - must be awful lonely up there for him" It's alright....he was staunch Labour when he moved in.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
".... so all you Labour loonies can be bred out and we can get on with running the country under good old fashioned capitalist values and reinstate the workhouses for assholes too lazy to go an earn a crust. I'll just be going now ok. "your preference | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
".... so all you Labour loonies can be bred out and we can get on with running the country under good old fashioned capitalist values and reinstate the workhouses for assholes too lazy to go an earn a crust. I'll just be going now ok. "ugly children alert! ugly children alert! everyman for themselves, oh shit,thats me a tory already.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wow a Tory in the north east - must be awful lonely up there for him" I'm always served first in the local Conservative Club - ok, so it's in my shed, but I still get served first. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm a rare breed in Hull, a Tory in the middle of all the Labourites!" And so pleased to say that Northants is just about all Tory! But I'd love to know what the Tories have done to earn such bile on these forums! They are only cleaning up the mess that Gordon Clown and Tony B.Liar left us with!!! 
(Runs and hides in the cupboard under the stairs!)
(No, you stupid bugger! You told em now.. Better go to the shed!)
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tories, they really seem to care,about what,i have No idea,lol" The rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm a rare breed in Hull, a Tory in the middle of all the Labourites! And so pleased to say that Northants is just about all Tory! But I'd love to know what the Tories have done to earn such bile on these forums! They are only cleaning up the mess that Gordon Clown and Tony B.Liar left us with!!!
(Runs and hides in the cupboard under the stairs!)
(No, you stupid bugger! You told em now.. Better go to the shed!)
"and they were cleaning up the mess left by the tories before. let's face it politicians are not to be trusted regardless of which party they belong. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it quite comical up north actually - they all vote the way grandad used to, it's like mass not being able to think for themselves." i know what your saying wishy. shower of cloth cap wearing,always saying,owt lik fowk,b*******. say after me. we are all individuals. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
".... so all you Labour loonies can be bred out and we can get on with running the country under good old fashioned capitalist values and reinstate the workhouses for assholes too lazy to go an earn a crust. I'll just be going now ok. "Hmm. I think you need to read something other than the tabloid 'newspapers' which you confess to taking. Books which give you the basics of economic theory and political philosophy as well as some history would be a good start. "The only thing worse than a supporter of the Conservative Party is a supporter of the Conservative Party who doesn't understand what the Conservative Party stands for" (And if you can tell me who said this I shall tip my hat to you) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it quite comical up north actually - they all vote the way grandad used to, it's like mass not being able to think for themselves." Speaking of which you reckon you're a Man Utd fan don't you?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
".... so all you Labour loonies can be bred out and we can get on with running the country under good old fashioned capitalist values and reinstate the workhouses for assholes too lazy to go an earn a crust. I'll just be going now ok. "imagine you having a baby with William Hague oh my | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Now I need to know what they are spending my £1700 on every year?
They don't even send me an invite to their party. Grrrrr | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Derby = train industry What the fuck are they thinking about ? "Saving the country money in the long run by not awarding a contract to a company based purely upon the fact they were British, (they're Canadian actually). Bombardier lost the bid for 1,200 new carriages because they were two years late with the last order they got from the govt which meant keeping old out of date rolling stock on the tracks plus having to maintain them. Siemans offered a better deal and in anyone's understanding of accountancy it made for good housekeeping. Or should we just fritter away money because they were British jobs? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
".... so all you Labour loonies can be bred out and we can get on with running the country under good old fashioned capitalist values and reinstate the workhouses for assholes too lazy to go an earn a crust. I'll just be going now ok.
Hmm. I think you need to read something other than the tabloid 'newspapers' which you confess to taking. Books which give you the basics of economic theory and political philosophy as well as some history would be a good start.
"The only thing worse than a supporter of the Conservative Party is a supporter of the Conservative Party who doesn't understand what the Conservative Party stands for"
(And if you can tell me who said this I shall tip my hat to you)
"Right, so I'm supposed to know every single speech made that has the word 'Conservative' in it just because I vote Tory? Can you tell me the name of any orator of any obscure speech I post in here too? (If you can I'll tip my hat off to you) I'm more than aware of Tory policies, but tbh I'd vote for a monkey in a suit if that was the only alternative to fookin Labour. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"and they were cleaning up the mess left by the tories before. let's face it politicians are not to be trusted regardless of which party they belong." Blair inherited an economy in excellent health from the Tories when Labour won in 97. The Tories' undoing was the personal lives of their MPs. The country had had enough of duck a l'orange kinky sex from their MPs and let's face it, John Major wasn't exactly a charismatic man up against Tony Blair's good public image at the time (I voted for him, which was the last time Labour will ever con me out of my vote). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
".... so all you Labour loonies can be bred out and we can get on with running the country under good old fashioned capitalist values and reinstate the workhouses for assholes too lazy to go an earn a crust. I'll just be going now ok.
Hmm. I think you need to read something other than the tabloid 'newspapers' which you confess to taking. Books which give you the basics of economic theory and political philosophy as well as some history would be a good start.
"The only thing worse than a supporter of the Conservative Party is a supporter of the Conservative Party who doesn't understand what the Conservative Party stands for"
(And if you can tell me who said this I shall tip my hat to you)
Right, so I'm supposed to know every single speech made that has the word 'Conservative' in it just because I vote Tory?
Can you tell me the name of any orator of any obscure speech I post in here too?
(If you can I'll tip my hat off to you)
I'm more than aware of Tory policies, but tbh I'd vote for a monkey in a suit if that was the only alternative to fookin Labour."You may be 'more than aware of Tory policies' (though I find it hard to believe that you are aware of all of them), but the contents of your numerous postings in this forum make it transparently clear that you do not understand the philosophy of the Conservative Party, and until a person understands the philosophy of a particular political party he cannot really be said to know what that party stands for. Incidentally, I was quoting from a speech made by one of the most significant political figures in British History several years before he joined......the Conservative Party. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You may be 'more than aware of Tory policies' (though I find it hard to believe that you are aware of all of them), but the contents of your numerous postings in this forum make it transparently clear that you do not understand the philosophy of the Conservative Party, and until a person understands the philosophy of a particular political party he cannot really be said to know what that party stands for. Incidentally, I was quoting from a speech made by one of the most significant political figures in British History several years before he joined......the Conservative Party. "O please wise one, enlighten us. Hold on, let me guess what you'd say.. "The philosophy of the Conservative Party is to make the rich richer at the expense of the poor." What about the philosophy of the Labour Party then? Do they even have one? Could it be something along the lines of: "We shall endeavour to bring the country to it's knees whenever we get the chance as we firmly believe that when people are down they have no fight left in them and then we can really put our Communist ideals into place." ...and no, I don't know every single policy the Tories have. I bet even die hard Tory activists couldn't recite them without looking them up. Your argument is futile. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Derby = train industry What the fuck are they thinking about ?
Saving the country money in the long run by not awarding a contract to a company based purely upon the fact they were British, (they're Canadian actually). Bombardier lost the bid for 1,200 new carriages because they were two years late with the last order they got from the govt which meant keeping old out of date rolling stock on the tracks plus having to maintain them.
Siemans offered a better deal and in anyone's understanding of accountancy it made for good housekeeping.
Or should we just fritter away money because they were British jobs?"Yes but economics is not quite as simple as that. For every pound that is saved from the contract, you then have to add up the cost to the government of unemployment benefit/tax credits/housing benefits etc that the employees they had to let go will claim. Then added to that is the lost income tax from them being in jobs, and the indirect loss from suppliers/businesses that the employees would have spent their wages on. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Derby = train industry What the fuck are they thinking about ?
Saving the country money in the long run by not awarding a contract to a company based purely upon the fact they were British, (they're Canadian actually). Bombardier lost the bid for 1,200 new carriages because they were two years late with the last order they got from the govt which meant keeping old out of date rolling stock on the tracks plus having to maintain them.
Siemans offered a better deal and in anyone's understanding of accountancy it made for good housekeeping.
Or should we just fritter away money because they were British jobs?
Yes but economics is not quite as simple as that. For every pound that is saved from the contract, you then have to add up the cost to the government of unemployment benefit/tax credits/housing benefits etc that the employees they had to let go will claim. Then added to that is the lost income tax from them being in jobs, and the indirect loss from suppliers/businesses that the employees would have spent their wages on. "Don't forget the Spanish hoteliers that will lose out cos the sacked British worker won't have a couple of hundred quid to go to Benidorm next year.
There is no way you can factor in what someone will spend their wages on after they've been paid. The government can only take the direct cost to them when awarding contracts. Many of those working at Bombardier are contractors and as contractors they are paid more than PAYE employees because of the very nature of contracting - no holiday pay, sickness pay or notice periods to serve. These contractors would have been let go at the end of the current contract anyway as that would have finished before the new contract started next year. It's very convenient for Bombardier to use them in it's argument against awarding the contract to Siemens when the reality is those workers would have been sacked anyway. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Derby = train industry What the fuck are they thinking about ?
Saving the country money in the long run by not awarding a contract to a company based purely upon the fact they were British, (they're Canadian actually). Bombardier lost the bid for 1,200 new carriages because they were two years late with the last order they got from the govt which meant keeping old out of date rolling stock on the tracks plus having to maintain them.
Siemans offered a better deal and in anyone's understanding of accountancy it made for good housekeeping.
Or should we just fritter away money because they were British jobs?
Yes but economics is not quite as simple as that. For every pound that is saved from the contract, you then have to add up the cost to the government of unemployment benefit/tax credits/housing benefits etc that the employees they had to let go will claim. Then added to that is the lost income tax from them being in jobs, and the indirect loss from suppliers/businesses that the employees would have spent their wages on.
Don't forget the Spanish hoteliers that will lose out cos the sacked British worker won't have a couple of hundred quid to go to Benidorm next year.
There is no way you can factor in what someone will spend their wages on after they've been paid. The government can only take the direct cost to them when awarding contracts. Many of those working at Bombardier are contractors and as contractors they are paid more than PAYE employees because of the very nature of contracting - no holiday pay, sickness pay or notice periods to serve. These contractors would have been let go at the end of the current contract anyway as that would have finished before the new contract started next year. It's very convenient for Bombardier to use them in it's argument against awarding the contract to Siemens when the reality is those workers would have been sacked anyway."I think you fail to understand the nature of a false economy. Lose 1200 jobs at Derby, and you can mulitply that by 5 to get the real job losses from suppliers who are in Bombardier's supply chain. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"its bad enough being married to a bloody torie but to have one infiltrate the forums too "Hear hear! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Majorities? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You may be 'more than aware of Tory policies' (though I find it hard to believe that you are aware of all of them), but the contents of your numerous postings in this forum make it transparently clear that you do not understand the philosophy of the Conservative Party, and until a person understands the philosophy of a particular political party he cannot really be said to know what that party stands for. Incidentally, I was quoting from a speech made by one of the most significant political figures in British History several years before he joined......the Conservative Party.
O please wise one, enlighten us.
Hold on, let me guess what you'd say..
"The philosophy of the Conservative Party is to make the rich richer at the expense of the poor."
What about the philosophy of the Labour Party then? Do they even have one? Could it be something along the lines of:
"We shall endeavour to bring the country to it's knees whenever we get the chance as we firmly believe that when people are down they have no fight left in them and then we can really put our Communist ideals into place."
...and no, I don't know every single policy the Tories have. I bet even die hard Tory activists couldn't recite them without looking them up.
Your argument is futile."Oh I see. You think I am a supporter of the Labour Party. Oh dear. Not everybody can be neatly pigeon-holed as either supporters of this political grouping or that one. As I have already said elsewhere I share some political ground with virtually every single political grouping in the country including the Conservative Party. Your remarks concerning the Labour Party make it clear that as I said in the beginning, you need to do some serious reading if you want to hold forth about politics and be taken seriously by those of us whose _iews are not informed by the comics you have confessed to reading. The Labour Party in Britain is no more likely to " put Communist ideals into place" than the Conservative Party is likely to do likewise with fascist ideals (particularly these days). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it quite comical up north actually - they all vote the way grandad used to, it's like mass not being able to think for themselves." I find it quite comical the way you mass-stereotype in a very unthinking way. In a similar ignorant stereotyping way, everybody in the south is a snooty home-insurance-fiddling wanker. My grandad was a tory like you and they caught him for tax evasion. Stinking Capitalist scrounger on the state. [steroetyping]You're all at it.[/stereotyping] And I thought that up all by myself. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
I do have my political _iews, but I'm not about to air them on a site that's meant to be about having fun and meeting people to socialise with.
To the OP (who I know very well) get yours and H's names down on the BBQ thread I've posted mate. Been too long since I've seen the pair of you.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The credit crunch created the deficit problem and gave Cameron what he needed, the opportunity to differentiate. This week we have avoided an even bigger problem with the Greek bailout, whatever he says publically Cameron is breathing a huge sigh of relief! " Really? Is it not rather the case that sustained and massive deficits ( Governmental and households ) caused the credit crunch? Deficits run by most EC national governments for donkeys years before 2008. Cart, horse, horse, cart. And did Gordon Brown, first Chancellor then PM, even acknowledge his policies were stoking the flames? Not a bit of it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it quite comical up north actually - they all vote the way grandad used to, it's like mass not being able to think for themselves." It is a joint party government we have right now, yes? Thats very like the whole country being unable to think for themselves, "ohh i say, who shall i pick, ohh i like blue, yes the blue ones",lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just before the credit crunch and election campaign you would struggle to put a wafer between the Tories and Labour. Both parties were fighting for the centre ground. Both supported the Wars, both supported the then level of bank regulation (in fact some Tories wanted to free up further), both had similar spending plans. In fact it was seen as Camerons biggest challenge to differentiate the Tories in time for the election. Then the credit crunch came and changed the game, at the time the Tories BACKED Labours decision for a bailout. The credit crunch created the deficit problem and gave Cameron what he needed, the opportunity to differentiate. I'm sick of hearing the propaganda that Labour created this mess, if the Tories had been in we would still have had the credit crunch and the bank bailout. Labour would then have been the opportunists instead of the Tories. This week we have avoided an even bigger problem with the Greek bailout, whatever he says publically Cameron is breathing a huge sigh of relief! Both parties have their pros and cons, personally I find it difficult to completely follow one or the other. " Of course it was the Labour Party's fault. It was their fault that America is in such difficulties too-not to mention the Eurozone! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remind me... who introduced the Poll Tax?" a stroke of genius that was....i'd have gone further and levied a tax on the rain that fell in our gardens and the daylight that cast its glow through our windows.....we've had it far too good for far too long | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remind me... who introduced the Poll Tax? a stroke of genius that was....i'd have gone further and levied a tax on the rain that fell in our gardens and the daylight that cast its glow through our windows.....we've had it far too good for far too long "Will there is always the Window Tax which was prevelant in the 18th and 19th centuries. Have a conservatory will just about cripple you in taxation! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"...privatise the NHS" I shall throw a street party the day that happens. I'm all for a National Health Service if it does what it says on the tin, but this shambolic imposter of a system that we're FORCED to contribute to is a feckin joke. Outsource the whole friggin lot and charge doctors and surgeons for office space and operating theatre time. Nurses to be employed by each hospital and set their own levels of care but a minimum level should be set by the Health Authority. As for N.I. contribs? We're all paying them anyway so why not scrap that but we must pay into a private healthcare fund. That'll do me - the freedom of CHOICE. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"...Outsource the whole friggin lot and charge doctors and surgeons for office space and operating theatre time. Nurses to be employed by each hospital and set their own levels of care but a minimum level should be set by the Health Authority" Oh no... I am not about to use my major capital resources to buy out the failing NHS as a profit making enterprise for me and my shareholders AND allow a bunch of losers from a current public sector Health Authority to impose ANY level of care on the function of my business plan.... The public sector has on business in the private sector... Did we not learn from the railways... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" "We shall endeavour to bring the country to it's knees whenever we get the chance as we firmly believe that when people are down they have no fight left in them and then we can really put our Communist ideals into place."" lmfao wishy you cant seriously suggest new labour had communist ideals,they hijacked the middle ground from the tories,Blair was educated in a public school ffsake and came from the upper middle classes....  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The credit crunch created the deficit problem and gave Cameron what he needed, the opportunity to differentiate. This week we have avoided an even bigger problem with the Greek bailout, whatever he says publically Cameron is breathing a huge sigh of relief! Really? Is it not rather the case that sustained and massive deficits ( Governmental and households ) caused the credit crunch? Deficits run by most EC national governments for donkeys years before 2008. Cart, horse, horse, cart. And did Gordon Brown, first Chancellor then PM, even acknowledge his policies were stoking the flames? Not a bit of it. " No. That is not what caused the credit crunch. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn't worry about the Tories fucking you. They fuck everyone even their mates. Thats what Tories do! Usual up the arse roughly with no lube. "Maybe they're looking for a g-spot so they can tax it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn't worry about the Tories fucking you. They fuck everyone even their mates. Thats what Tories do! Usual up the arse roughly with no lube.
Maybe they're looking for a g-spot so they can tax it. "The Tories traditionally love kinky sex. Up the arse. belt round the neck, wanking with an orange in the mouth. I don't think many give their wife one up the fount bottom. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn't worry about the Tories fucking you. They fuck everyone even their mates. Thats what Tories do! Usual up the arse roughly with no lube.
Maybe they're looking for a g-spot so they can tax it.
The Tories traditionally love kinky sex. Up the arse. belt round the neck, wanking with an orange in the mouth. I don't think many give their wife one up the fount bottom. "Ah right, that explains why there aren't any Labour supporters on here eh? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I wouldn't worry about the Tories fucking you. They fuck everyone even their mates. Thats what Tories do! Usual up the arse roughly with no lube.
Maybe they're looking for a g-spot so they can tax it.
The Tories traditionally love kinky sex. Up the arse. belt round the neck, wanking with an orange in the mouth. I don't think many give their wife one up the fount bottom. "Thought that was Michael Hutchence  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just before the credit crunch and election campaign you would struggle to put a wafer between the Tories and Labour. Both parties were fighting for the centre ground. Both supported the Wars, both supported the then level of bank regulation (in fact some Tories wanted to free up further), both had similar spending plans. In fact it was seen as Camerons biggest challenge to differentiate the Tories in time for the election. Then the credit crunch came and changed the game, at the time the Tories BACKED Labours decision for a bailout. The credit crunch created the deficit problem and gave Cameron what he needed, the opportunity to differentiate. I'm sick of hearing the propaganda that Labour created this mess, if the Tories had been in we would still have had the credit crunch and the bank bailout. Labour would then have been the opportunists instead of the Tories. This week we have avoided an even bigger problem with the Greek bailout, whatever he says publically Cameron is breathing a huge sigh of relief! Both parties have their pros and cons, personally I find it difficult to completely follow one or the other. " i totally agree,people who have fallen for the murdoch spin that labour put us in this position are showing a lack of knowledge of economics and shall we sall "selective memory". To keep accusing brown of causing it is now pissing everyone off as its such a patronising statement and no longer fooling anyone including the "normal press" who take them to task when they try it on these days. Brown did not go on a spending spree using credit,his figures of debt per gdp were the lowest in 50 years apart from one anomalous figure about 30 years ago. Take a look at camerons words around the time of the bank crisis he totally supported the gov line on the bailout,but now uses it as an excuse for "son of thatcher" to weiled the axe on public services and "hopes" the private sector creates wealth anhd jobs. In the run up to the crisis were they calling for tighter regulation of finance ? errrr no...quite the reverse Were they warning us all about impending doom and global financial meltdown ? Nahhhhhh
Did they tell us in there manifesto they intended to chuck a half a million public service workers on the dole,close
pre school provision,cut the army to the lowest levels in 108 years,privatise the nhs (despite saying it was "safe" in there hands)
Of course not ...i am a realist who has lived under tory spin and lies before,
Are labour any different in their spin ...nope.
The debt (which we have always had) as percentage of GDP has averaged at 47.9%
for the last 100 years,it has been as high as 240% in the last 60 years.the reason it went up to its current 59.7% of gdp is because of of the last 2 years where it rose 8% per year due to the global crisis,anyone blaming Brown or labour are just showing ignorance and succeptibility to spin tbh.
Until this country gets politicians with credibility and belief rather than
following party doctrine or weasley statements with an ear on the soundbite or eye on a headline ,it will remain in the gutter.
And thats a tragedy as the people of the UK deserve so much more !!!!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The credit crunch created the deficit problem and gave Cameron what he needed, the opportunity to differentiate. This week we have avoided an even bigger problem with the Greek bailout, whatever he says publically Cameron is breathing a huge sigh of relief! Really? Is it not rather the case that sustained and massive deficits ( Governmental and households ) caused the credit crunch? Deficits run by most EC national governments for donkeys years before 2008. Cart, horse, horse, cart. And did Gordon Brown, first Chancellor then PM, even acknowledge his policies were stoking the flames? Not a bit of it. No. That is not what caused the credit crunch. " No? So you hold to your _iew that the credit crunch created deficits? Care to comment in simple terms why that should be or why the credit crunch didn't result from deficits, unaffordable and unsustainable borrowings/lendings, Fanny Mae etc, and other so called "toxic loans"? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But! But! the conservatives are communists! The only thing that is puzzling, is what the other guys are. What people in this country consider to be 'on the right' is laughable." what diversification in politics ,they are all too busy in the blobby middle England bit ,trying to appeal to mondeo man. Never nail your colours to a policy unless backed in a corner and remain slippy and versatile for as long as you can. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The credit crunch created the deficit problem and gave Cameron what he needed, the opportunity to differentiate. This week we have avoided an even bigger problem with the Greek bailout, whatever he says publically Cameron is breathing a huge sigh of relief! Really? Is it not rather the case that sustained and massive deficits ( Governmental and households ) caused the credit crunch? Deficits run by most EC national governments for donkeys years before 2008. Cart, horse, horse, cart. And did Gordon Brown, first Chancellor then PM, even acknowledge his policies were stoking the flames? Not a bit of it. No. That is not what caused the credit crunch. No? So you hold to your _iew that the credit crunch created deficits? Care to comment in simple terms why that should be or why the credit crunch didn't result from deficits, unaffordable and unsustainable borrowings/lendings, Fanny Mae etc, and other so called "toxic loans"? " I did not say the credit crunch created deficits, your quoting me incorrectly. I said the 'deficit problem'. Prior to the credit crunch and bank bailout the deficit was not a problem, it was manageable. In fact depending on which economist you listen to debt to Gdp percentage was at it's lowest for 30-50 years and was definitely one of the best in the G8. The deficit 'problem' is as a result of the credit crunch and bank bailout. I'm happy to attempt a simple explanation of the credit crunch if you'd like, but be assured, the root cause had nothing to do with Government debt. Don't fall for the nonsense and propaganda some of the media pushes out. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The credit crunch created the deficit problem and gave Cameron what he needed, the opportunity to differentiate. This week we have avoided an even bigger problem with the Greek bailout, whatever he says publically Cameron is breathing a huge sigh of relief! Really? Is it not rather the case that sustained and massive deficits ( Governmental and households ) caused the credit crunch? Deficits run by most EC national governments for donkeys years before 2008. Cart, horse, horse, cart. And did Gordon Brown, first Chancellor then PM, even acknowledge his policies were stoking the flames? Not a bit of it. No. That is not what caused the credit crunch. No? So you hold to your _iew that the credit crunch created deficits? Care to comment in simple terms why that should be or why the credit crunch didn't result from deficits, unaffordable and unsustainable borrowings/lendings, Fanny Mae etc, and other so called "toxic loans"? I did not say the credit crunch created deficits, your quoting me incorrectly. I said the 'deficit problem'. Prior to the credit crunch and bank bailout the deficit was not a problem, it was manageable. In fact depending on which economist you listen to debt to Gdp percentage was at it's lowest for 30-50 years and was definitely one of the best in the G8. The deficit 'problem' is as a result of the credit crunch and bank bailout. I'm happy to attempt a simple explanation of the credit crunch if you'd like, but be assured, the root cause had nothing to do with Government debt. Don't fall for the nonsense and propaganda some of the media pushes out. " OK, i'll ignore such media nonsense and propoganda that the Greek Governments deficit and funding problems, ie unmanageable debt, are causing widespread problems for the Euro. Or the media nonsense and propganda of the USA having debt problems of their own, that Obama's current consternation is all nonsense. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I did not say the credit crunch created deficits, your quoting me incorrectly. I said the 'deficit problem'. Prior to the credit crunch and bank bailout the deficit was not a problem, it was manageable. In fact depending on which economist you listen to debt to Gdp percentage was at it's lowest for 30-50 years and was definitely one of the best in the G8. The deficit 'problem' is as a result of the credit crunch and bank bailout. I'm happy to attempt a simple explanation of the credit crunch if you'd like, but be assured, the root cause had nothing to do with Government debt. Don't fall for the nonsense and propaganda some of the media pushes out. " just to be a bit pedantic, it is not economist speak here ,the official independant figures are quite clear the govt spending as per GDP under Brown was at its lowest for years,so it was not Brown who got us into this position,as you rightly say most of europe ,Japan and and the USA are in trouble because of a "global" financial crisis the like of which has not been seen since the great depression. Even the Arabs are getting jittery that the money-go-round is broken,take a look at dubai's nationalised property initiative struggling. I am not a great lover of brown but i just think people who blame brown are being simplistic and also conveniently forgetting the opposition support for his actions when the crisis hit. A new political dogma has resurfaced and they are getting it done under the banner of debt,a debt which is still relatively low as a percentage of GDP compared to times in recent modern history. But like they did in the 80s they will push and push and push the poor and vunerable with messages of debt and borrowing,until tossed out,or cleggy has had enough, not long now i reckon judging by his body language in parliament last week. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remind me... who introduced the Poll Tax?" Very good point. Remind me who introduced vat or tax on fuel or who sold off all the nationalised companys so they could now put up prices by 18% at a time to pay share holders Dividends. In a year or so when we are paying over a £1 to post a letter i wonder also whos fault that would be Remind me? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But! But! the conservatives are communists! The only thing that is puzzling, is what the other guys are. What people in this country consider to be 'on the right' is laughable." Ah, the one preoccupied with 'communists". Perhaps you'd care to clarify what you mean by 'communists'. Do you mean, for examples, Marxists who are Leninists, or Marxists who aren't? Stalinists? Trotskyists? Maoists? Anarcho-communists (ie those who share the _iews of Kropotkin rather than those of Bakunin or Proudhon)? Libertarian communists (not to be confused with libertarian conservatives)? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" OK, i'll ignore such media nonsense and propoganda that the Greek Governments deficit and funding problems, ie unmanageable debt, are causing widespread problems for the Euro. Or the media nonsense and propganda of the USA having debt problems of their own, that Obama's current consternation is all nonsense." You ignore whatever you want to. You seem to be talking about something else now anyway. Most of this thread has been about the UK major parties and how they have and are dealing with issues in the UK. Any reference to the credit crunch or deficit has been in relation to the UK. I'm sorry but I don't understand the point your trying to make. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But! But! the conservatives are communists! The only thing that is puzzling, is what the other guys are. What people in this country consider to be 'on the right' is laughable. Ah, the one preoccupied with 'communists". Perhaps you'd care to clarify what you mean by 'communists'. Do you mean, for examples, Marxists who are Leninists, or Marxists who aren't? Stalinists? Trotskyists? Maoists? Anarcho-communists (ie those who share the _iews of Kropotkin rather than those of Bakunin or Proudhon)? Libertarian communists (not to be confused with libertarian conservatives)? " It's like having an argument about which particular species of heroin is the more dangerous for you. People who want to discuss ideas, critique capitalism, no problem. Every Capitalist who's been around the block a few times is aware of the problems. But funnily enough, the Communists were never content with that, no evolutionary development for them, no sir, nearly every one of the groups you've mentioned has killed *enormous numbers* of people through various means. This isn't no right wing bullshit, it's a fact that the re-education programs, the cleansing programs, the cultural revolution programs, the agricultural 'reforms' they all amounted to murdering millions for a distant Utopia. Fuck those people. People on the Right have killed and mass murdered before, just like Anders, but never have they done so on such a vast and systemic scale. Even if I accepted that Hitler was a Capitalist, which I sure fucking do not, then who's next on your list of Capitalist dictators? Huh? A drop in the fucking ocean compared to the dictatorships of the Left. You'd have to blame every death in the Industrial Revolution to now, every war fought by the West, on Capitalism to even get close. Which of course is exactly what the Communists do. See; we kill too many people, we run out of customers. There's an inbuilt limit to how warped a right wing mass murderer can get. It's selfish, but it works. I hate Communists, but I'd hire one to work for me in the morning if he was suited to the job. To do otherwise would make my corporation uncompetitive. The Americans are right about the Communists. This isn't a even a political thing, it's this thing of pure economics. The algorithm does not work. To paraphrase Mao, Communism is poison. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But! But! the conservatives are communists! The only thing that is puzzling, is what the other guys are. What people in this country consider to be 'on the right' is laughable. Ah, the one preoccupied with 'communists". Perhaps you'd care to clarify what you mean by 'communists'. Do you mean, for examples, Marxists who are Leninists, or Marxists who aren't? Stalinists? Trotskyists? Maoists? Anarcho-communists (ie those who share the _iews of Kropotkin rather than those of Bakunin or Proudhon)? Libertarian communists (not to be confused with libertarian conservatives)? It's like having an argument about which particular species of heroin is the more dangerous for you. People who want to discuss ideas, critique capitalism, no problem. Every Capitalist who's been around the block a few times is aware of the problems. But funnily enough, the Communists were never content with that, no evolutionary development for them, no sir, nearly every one of the groups you've mentioned has killed *enormous numbers* of people through various means. This isn't no right wing bullshit, it's a fact that the re-education programs, the cleansing programs, the cultural revolution programs, the agricultural 'reforms' they all amounted to murdering millions for a distant Utopia. Fuck those people. People on the Right have killed and mass murdered before, just like Anders, but never have they done so on such a vast and systemic scale. Even if I accepted that Hitler was a Capitalist, which I sure fucking do not, then who's next on your list of Capitalist dictators? Huh? A drop in the fucking ocean compared to the dictatorships of the Left. You'd have to blame every death in the Industrial Revolution to now, every war fought by the West, on Capitalism to even get close. Which of course is exactly what the Communists do. See; we kill too many people, we run out of customers. There's an inbuilt limit to how warped a right wing mass murderer can get. It's selfish, but it works. I hate Communists, but I'd hire one to work for me in the morning if he was suited to the job. To do otherwise would make my corporation uncompetitive. The Americans are right about the Communists. This isn't a even a political thing, it's this thing of pure economics. The algorithm does not work. To paraphrase Mao, Communism is poison." Hmm.. a rather emotional outburst there....... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"......cut But funnily enough, the Communists were never content with that, no evolutionary development for them, no sir, nearly every one of the groups you've mentioned has killed *enormous numbers* of people through various means. This isn't no right wing bullshit, it's a fact that the re-education programs, the cleansing programs, the cultural revolution programs, the agricultural 'reforms' they all amounted to murdering millions for a distant Utopia. Fuck those people. People on the Right have killed and mass murdered before, just like Anders, but never have they done so on such a vast and systemic scale. Even if I accepted that Hitler was a Capitalist, which I sure fucking do not, then who's next on your list of Capitalist dictators? Huh?.....cut " next on the list ..any of the colonial powers who took part in world war 1 before a communist existed,or perhaps us british who invented modern systematic murder in the boar war ,starving 20.000 boar children under 16 to death in concentration camps,all in the name of empire of course ....where shall we go next, there's so many to choose from . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"......cut But funnily enough, the Communists were never content with that, no evolutionary development for them, no sir, nearly every one of the groups you've mentioned has killed *enormous numbers* of people through various means. This isn't no right wing bullshit, it's a fact that the re-education programs, the cleansing programs, the cultural revolution programs, the agricultural 'reforms' they all amounted to murdering millions for a distant Utopia. Fuck those people. People on the Right have killed and mass murdered before, just like Anders, but never have they done so on such a vast and systemic scale. Even if I accepted that Hitler was a Capitalist, which I sure fucking do not, then who's next on your list of Capitalist dictators? Huh?.....cut next on the list ..any of the colonial powers who took part in world war 1 before a communist existed,or perhaps us british who invented modern systematic murder in the boar war ,starving 20.000 boar children under 16 to death in concentration camps,all in the name of empire of course ....where shall we go next, there's so many to choose from . " Well there were communists of one kind or another around at the time you are talking about, but I absolutely agree with your point here. We could go to the Roman Empire or to Genghiz Khan, or to the extermination of the Tasmans-but that's going back to Britain. How about the killing of a million Armenians by the Turks? Or the atrocities committed by various Africans-the virtual extermination of the Mashona by the Matabele (and the Mashona Robert Mugabes current revenge). There's also the fate meted out to the Amerindians by the Europeans, the executions carried out by Robespierre and his rising capitalist class,the Nanking outrages committed by the Japanese..... as you say, there are so many to choose from!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"......cut But funnily enough, the Communists were never content with that, no evolutionary development for them, no sir, nearly every one of the groups you've mentioned has killed *enormous numbers* of people through various means. This isn't no right wing bullshit, it's a fact that the re-education programs, the cleansing programs, the cultural revolution programs, the agricultural 'reforms' they all amounted to murdering millions for a distant Utopia. Fuck those people. People on the Right have killed and mass murdered before, just like Anders, but never have they done so on such a vast and systemic scale. Even if I accepted that Hitler was a Capitalist, which I sure fucking do not, then who's next on your list of Capitalist dictators? Huh?.....cut next on the list ..any of the colonial powers who took part in world war 1 before a communist existed,or perhaps us british who invented modern systematic murder in the boar war ,starving 20.000 boar children under 16 to death in concentration camps,all in the name of empire of course ....where shall we go next, there's so many to choose from . Well there were communists of one kind or another around at the time you are talking about, but I absolutely agree with your point here. We could go to the Roman Empire or to Genghiz Khan, or to the extermination of the Tasmans-but that's going back to Britain. How about the killing of a million Armenians by the Turks? Or the atrocities committed by various Africans-the virtual extermination of the Mashona by the Matabele (and the Mashona Robert Mugabes current revenge). There's also the fate meted out to the Amerindians by the Europeans, the executions carried out by Robespierre and his rising capitalist class,the Nanking outrages committed by the Japanese..... as you say, there are so many to choose from!!" Nationalism != Capitalism or Communism. That's the crucial difference. You people are confusing your political warlords with your economics ones. Augusto Pinochet is an example of a Capitalist Dictator. Lenin is an example of a Communist Dictator. Neither Winston Churchhill or Adolph Hitler were going to war on behalf of a economic system they wished to enforce. Nationalism is a large scale implementation of Tribalism, the us vs them mentality. It is only tenuously linked to the systems of Communism or Capitalism because it's not about Property Rights or their Abolishment. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"......cut But funnily enough, the Communists were never content with that, no evolutionary development for them, no sir, nearly every one of the groups you've mentioned has killed *enormous numbers* of people through various means. This isn't no right wing bullshit, it's a fact that the re-education programs, the cleansing programs, the cultural revolution programs, the agricultural 'reforms' they all amounted to murdering millions for a distant Utopia. Fuck those people. People on the Right have killed and mass murdered before, just like Anders, but never have they done so on such a vast and systemic scale. Even if I accepted that Hitler was a Capitalist, which I sure fucking do not, then who's next on your list of Capitalist dictators? Huh?.....cut next on the list ..any of the colonial powers who took part in world war 1 before a communist existed,or perhaps us british who invented modern systematic murder in the boar war ,starving 20.000 boar children under 16 to death in concentration camps,all in the name of empire of course ....where shall we go next, there's so many to choose from . Well there were communists of one kind or another around at the time you are talking about, but I absolutely agree with your point here. We could go to the Roman Empire or to Genghiz Khan, or to the extermination of the Tasmans-but that's going back to Britain. How about the killing of a million Armenians by the Turks? Or the atrocities committed by various Africans-the virtual extermination of the Mashona by the Matabele (and the Mashona Robert Mugabes current revenge). There's also the fate meted out to the Amerindians by the Europeans, the executions carried out by Robespierre and his rising capitalist class,the Nanking outrages committed by the Japanese..... as you say, there are so many to choose from!! Nationalism != Capitalism or Communism. That's the crucial difference. You people are confusing your political warlords with your economics ones. Augusto Pinochet is an example of a Capitalist Dictator. Lenin is an example of a Communist Dictator. Neither Winston Churchhill or Adolph Hitler were going to war on behalf of a economic system they wished to enforce. Nationalism is a large scale implementation of Tribalism, the us vs them mentality. It is only tenuously linked to the systems of Communism or Capitalism because it's not about Property Rights or their Abolishment. " Such thinking you are illustrating, is very cloudy. I accept that during the French Revolution, there was cases of Communism and Capitalist thinking behind the motives of some of the key players however. France was a proper melting pot back then. Note I am not British. The UK means nothing to me in a nationalistic sense. I want to say one important thing, as I see it, which is that there is always a split within the two parties e.g. Labour and the Conservatives, Tories and Whigs. The BNP for example, is only a Far Right entity in terms of its politics. It's Economics is on the Far Left. Similar contradictions exist within the main parties. I think political compass (google) is correct, it's not a spectrum between left and right, it's rather a cross with an X and Y axis. Somebody who is on the right, who favours centralisation, is not a Capitalist. This may seem like a semantic argument at first, but it's an important paradox to understand. I quote the PC website: "There's abundant evidence for the need of it. The old one-dimensional categories of 'right' and 'left', established for the seating arrangement of the French National Assembly of 1789, are overly simplistic for today's complex political landscape. For example, who are the 'conservatives' in today's Russia? Are they the unreconstructed Stalinists, or the reformers who have adopted the right-wing _iews of conservatives like Margaret Thatcher ? On the standard left-right scale, how do you distinguish leftists like Stalin and Gandhi? It's not sufficient to say that Stalin was simply more left than Gandhi. There are fundamental political differences between them that the old categories on their own can't explain. Similarly, we generally describe social reactionaries as 'right-wingers', yet that leaves left-wing reactionaries like Robert Mugabe and Pol Pot off the hook." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"......cut But funnily enough, the Communists were never content with that, no evolutionary development for them, no sir, nearly every one of the groups you've mentioned has killed *enormous numbers* of people through various means. This isn't no right wing bullshit, it's a fact that the re-education programs, the cleansing programs, the cultural revolution programs, the agricultural 'reforms' they all amounted to murdering millions for a distant Utopia. Fuck those people. People on the Right have killed and mass murdered before, just like Anders, but never have they done so on such a vast and systemic scale. Even if I accepted that Hitler was a Capitalist, which I sure fucking do not, then who's next on your list of Capitalist dictators? Huh?.....cut next on the list ..any of the colonial powers who took part in world war 1 before a communist existed,or perhaps us british who invented modern systematic murder in the boar war ,starving 20.000 boar children under 16 to death in concentration camps,all in the name of empire of course ....where shall we go next, there's so many to choose from . Well there were communists of one kind or another around at the time you are talking about, but I absolutely agree with your point here. We could go to the Roman Empire or to Genghiz Khan, or to the extermination of the Tasmans-but that's going back to Britain. How about the killing of a million Armenians by the Turks? Or the atrocities committed by various Africans-the virtual extermination of the Mashona by the Matabele (and the Mashona Robert Mugabes current revenge). There's also the fate meted out to the Amerindians by the Europeans, the executions carried out by Robespierre and his rising capitalist class,the Nanking outrages committed by the Japanese..... as you say, there are so many to choose from!! Nationalism != Capitalism or Communism. That's the crucial difference. You people are confusing your political warlords with your economics ones. Augusto Pinochet is an example of a Capitalist Dictator. Lenin is an example of a Communist Dictator. Neither Winston Churchhill or Adolph Hitler were going to war on behalf of a economic system they wished to enforce. Nationalism is a large scale implementation of Tribalism, the us vs them mentality. It is only tenuously linked to the systems of Communism or Capitalism because it's not about Property Rights or their Abolishment. " i think you can atribute ww2 down to economic issues rather than political ideology ,the french demanded the rhur as reparation for ww1 ,churchill said dont we are pushing them too hard,the french ignored him. That gave the final push for a pissed off nation to allow AH to sweep to power and go on a land grab and looting frenzy the like of which has not been seen since. The british empire was an economic system that was totally supported by Winston ..the system was move in and kick anyone there out ,bring order ,law ,Railways,and strip the natural resources, worked well until WW2 and the wonderful Ghandi took us on with a loin cloth and some salt. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
