The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

[EFCNIK]

Well then you and Mr Blackstone have some differences.

Quite.

 

[Boss_Blue]

you're assuming that someone who doesn't speak a particular language can't be @rsed to learn it ??? en serio ?

I was kicked out of Comic-Con for not speaking Klingon.

 

[red1]

Having it your way as we currently do more than likely got an innocent British girl murdered as well as the thousands of other criminal cases we have had to deal with due to OPEN UNCHECKED immigration.

That's the long and short of it. You can quote looney far right wing press at me all you like to try and validate your smug far left wing 'progressive thinking' self but to most people it wont wash.

CLAP CLAP.

Stop hating my country. That's all I'm going to say. And also, communism doesn't work.

 

[red1]

So the British murderer / rapist has done his 10 years, should he be released back into society again?

Release the rapist (that sounds wrong but still) and hang the murderer. No, seriously kill the murderer. Especially the ones that kill in broad daylight. And relax knife laws...I've already gone through this before I think. Sigh...where's Bruce Wayne when you need him...

 

[EFCNIK]

Stop hating my country. That's all I'm going to say. And also, communism doesn't work.

CLAP CLAP

 

[red1]

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-a...d-has-run-out-of-excuses-for-opposing-an-eu-r

I still don't understand why Ed is refusing to back an EU referendum, he's got nothing to lose. The referendum isn't going to happen anyway, if we leave the EU it won't be because of a referendum. It's just mindboggling, it reminds me of the time Brown decided not to call a snap election when he became PM, he would have slaughtered us in the polls, the economy was literally at its peak, the troops were starting to come home from Iraq, it would have been a bloodbath for the Tories in the polls, a total landslide. There's something wrong with Labour leaders, they have seriously bad advisers. Keep it up Ed and we're looking at a second term.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Release the rapist (that sounds wrong but still) and hang the murderer. No, seriously kill the murderer. Especially the ones that kill in broad daylight. And relax knife laws...I've already gone through this before I think. Sigh...where's Bruce Wayne when you need him...

It was midnight, I was in bed mate

 

[edge]

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-a...d-has-run-out-of-excuses-for-opposing-an-eu-r

I still don't understand why Ed is refusing to back an EU referendum, he's got nothing to lose. The referendum isn't going to happen anyway, if we leave the EU it won't be because of a referendum. It's just mindboggling, it reminds me of the time Brown decided not to call a snap election when he became PM, he would have slaughtered us in the polls, the economy was literally at its peak, the troops were starting to come home from Iraq, it would have been a bloodbath for the Tories in the polls, a total landslide. There's something wrong with Labour leaders, they have seriously bad advisers. Keep it up Ed and we're looking at a second term.

Despite Mr ED, the tories have been behind in the polls for two years, nothing that has come out this week would seem to change that.

 

[Harryflashman]

I'm , and I'm i little surprised to find myself typing this , finding myself having a degree of sympathy with Nik's position as regards convicted felons entering the country . However , it's been mentioned earlier in the thread,I think there are already guidelines which allow us to refuse entry to recidivists and serious offenders depending on whether certain criteria is fulfilled regardless of freedom of movement .

As regards the comparisons of British justice and overseas justice certain factors would illustrate that difference and problems . If you are for example a convicted murderer In the UK you are on life licence meaning you are subject to certain restrictions which i presume isn't applicable for those convicted abroad . To continue the daily mail style reactionary type point I'll obviously mention sex offenders and point out that a convicted UK offender would be on the register(for a period of time even for life ) and therefore subject to various restrictions . My point being , rightly or wrongly , in many cases it isn't as simple as completing your sentence and being rehabilitated . I notice that glitter was mentioned I'm pretty sure we now have legislation now allows restrictions to the movement of convicted sex offenders with glitters case being a contributory factor . Where I do differ from nik is of course I care that glitter would go seek to abuse children abroad , personally I struggle that people wouldn't care about that .

I firmly believe in rehabilitation but on this occasion I absolutely understand some of the concerns expressed by nik although its my understanding that such issues are already subject to legislation . I think every case would have to be taken on its merits , a society that considers itself civilised would surely have to look at each set of circumstances individually ?

 

[The Esk]

Tory economic myths part 2:

The UK economy is growing and we're all better off because of it.

FALSE

Whilst the UK economy has got back to the levels experienced in 2007 as measured by GDP, in 2013, real household disposable income per capita, described by the TUC as “the most comprehensive measure of living standards”, was 2.6% below its peak. It was £16,881 in 2013 down from a peak of £17,324 in 2007.

This Government will be the first post war UK Government to preside over an actual fall in living standards over a 5 year term.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Tory economic myths part 2:

The UK economy is growing and we're all better off because of it.

FALSE

Whilst the UK economy has got back to the levels experienced in 2007 as measured by GDP, in 2013, real household disposable income per capita, described by the TUC as “the most comprehensive measure of living standards”, was 2.6% below its peak. It was £16,881 in 2013 down from a peak of £17,324 in 2007.

This Government will be the first post war UK Government to preside over an actual fall in living standards over a 5 year term.

We have to be careful at assigning to much to the government though shouldn't we? I mean in a previous post you mentioned the economic performance from 1997-2010, and sure, the economy did well during that period, but there were some huge external factors involved.

- The Internet took off in a big way, providing an enormous boost to the economy
- The information economy started impacting industries from life sciences to telecoms
- China and India went on the quickest growth the world has ever seen, simultaneously providing a market, but also providing a massive amount of low cost labour and products for the UK market, thus keeping inflation low.
- An enormous increase in the amount of relatively cheap credit available. A big part of the crunch was that we as a society had borrowed too much. How much of the boom therefore was achieved on credit?
- A property boom of enormous proportions that gave people a feeling of wealth

All of those things contributed enormously to the growth period we enjoyed, but they're also now contributing to the stagnation.

- The web is making it easier to get work done by people around the world, either for free or for small sums. We're also seeing things like the sharing economy disrupting industries on a large scale (see the taxi strikes around Europe recently).
- China and India may have originally taken blue collar jobs from the west, but they're increasingly taking white collar ones too. This, plus the above, has meant economic riches have gone to those owning capital more than salaried people
- Credit is nowhere near as accessible now as it was, and the property market has slowed down, thus giving people less cash to play with.

Can we really say that governments have any real control over these things? I'm not sure they do, yet they are all massively influential on our economy.

 

[The Esk]

We have to be careful at assigning to much to the government though shouldn't we? I mean in a previous post you mentioned the economic performance from 1997-2010, and sure, the economy did well during that period, but there were some huge external factors involved.

- The Internet took off in a big way, providing an enormous boost to the economy
- The information economy started impacting industries from life sciences to telecoms
- China and India went on the quickest growth the world has ever seen, simultaneously providing a market, but also providing a massive amount of low cost labour and products for the UK market, thus keeping inflation low.
- An enormous increase in the amount of relatively cheap credit available. A big part of the crunch was that we as a society had borrowed too much. How much of the boom therefore was achieved on credit?
- A property boom of enormous proportions that gave people a feeling of wealth

All of those things contributed enormously to the growth period we enjoyed, but they're also now contributing to the stagnation.

- The web is making it easier to get work done by people around the world, either for free or for small sums. We're also seeing things like the sharing economy disrupting industries on a large scale (see the taxi strikes around Europe recently).
- China and India may have originally taken blue collar jobs from the west, but they're increasingly taking white collar ones too. This, plus the above, has meant economic riches have gone to those owning capital more than salaried people
- Credit is nowhere near as accessible now as it was, and the property market has slowed down, thus giving people less cash to play with.

Can we really say that governments have any real control over these things? I'm not sure they do, yet they are all massively influential on our economy.

My point is that the claims of the Conservative Party are a complete myth, and following on from yesterdays discussions, something which unfathomably the Labour Party are not challenging.

They are using the myth of their economic prowess to attempt to win another 5 years in power - something I obviously oppose!

 

[Bruce Wayne]

My point is that the claims of the Conservative Party are a complete myth, and following on from yesterdays discussions, something which unfathomably the Labour Party are not challenging.

They are using the myth of their economic prowess to attempt to win another 5 years in power - something I obviously oppose!

It's all spin though isn't it? Labour try and convince us 97-10 was all their doing, the Tories try and convince us that 10-12 was all Labour's doing too.

The reality is somewhat different though. I mean Labour had no input in the rise of the web, or the bounty from smart phones, or the rise of India/China, or the human genome project or any of the other things that contributed to those strong years. They probably didn't even have any control over the behaviour of the banks in lending too much and falling on their faces.

The real myth is whatever party saying, with seeming certainty, that if they had been in charge it would all have been different. It's nonsense. They might influence things to an extent, but they can't control things that are far outside their powers of control. A bit of humility and honesty would not go amiss, but it's the run up to the election so the whole cesspool will become more and more seedy as next summer approaches.

 

[The Esk]

It's all spin though isn't it? Labour try and convince us 97-10 was all their doing, the Tories try and convince us that 10-12 was all Labour's doing too.

The reality is somewhat different though. I mean Labour had no input in the rise of the web, or the bounty from smart phones, or the rise of India/China, or the human genome project or any of the other things that contributed to those strong years. They probably didn't even have any control over the behaviour of the banks in lending too much and falling on their faces.

The real myth is whatever party saying, with seeming certainty, that if they had been in charge it would all have been different. It's nonsense. They might influence things to an extent, but they can't control things that are far outside their powers of control. A bit of humility and honesty would not go amiss, but it's the run up to the election so the whole cesspool will become more and more seedy as next summer approaches.

But they have complete control over the things that really matter to people outside of the economy, and to many people the really important matters such as education, healthcare, social care, foreign policy, security and constitutional matters.

Equally I would argue that the macro-economic policies matter hugely too, they enable or make difficult most of the economic activity you are talking about.

To me it is the fundamental dishonesty of saying that the opposition party has an appalling economic record (when it did not) and that ruling party has an excellent economic record (which it doesn't) that I am trying to highlight here.

 

[Chang Elephant]

It's all spin though isn't it? Labour try and convince us 97-10 was all their doing, the Tories try and convince us that 10-12 was all Labour's doing too.

The reality is somewhat different though. I mean Labour had no input in the rise of the web, or the bounty from smart phones, or the rise of India/China, or the human genome project or any of the other things that contributed to those strong years. They probably didn't even have any control over the behaviour of the banks in lending too much and falling on their faces.

The real myth is whatever party saying, with seeming certainty, that if they had been in charge it would all have been different. It's nonsense. They might influence things to an extent, but they can't control things that are far outside their powers of control. A bit of humility and honesty would not go amiss, but it's the run up to the election so the whole cesspool will become more and more seedy as next summer approaches.

That's a good argument for more state intervention in the economy and reining in the financiers. Good point Bruce.