|
Post by Lego Customs! on Apr 27, 2017 10:46:40 GMT -5
Some of you might have forgotten since it's been overshadowed by the Babe of the Year competition but on June 8th we go to the polls again. Thought and opinions? I'm hoping that whatever the outcome, June will mark the end of May. I'm a Labour supporter but I acknowledge it will be tough with the media controlling the message out to the country but fingers crossed the majority of the country will get it right this time. 3rd time lucky?
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 8:09:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2017 11:10:02 GMT -5
I will be Voting Labour.
|
|
gazwefc
Main Eventer
UK Excellent Trader
Joined on: Nov 19, 2008 11:29:30 GMT -5
Posts: 1,217
|
Post by gazwefc on Apr 27, 2017 11:13:42 GMT -5
Some of you might have forgotten since it's been overshadowed by the Babe of the Year competition but on June 8th we go to the polls again. Thought and opinions? I'm hoping that whatever the outcome, June will mark the end of May. I'm a Labour supporter but I acknowledge it will be tough with the media controlling the message out to the country but fingers crossed the majority of the country will get it right this time. 3rd time lucky? I can garentee you that June will see the end of May. It does every year. March, April, May, June 😉 I'm all for UKIP, everytime.
|
|
|
Post by GBGav on Apr 27, 2017 11:21:37 GMT -5
Whatever the polls say, and whoever looks like the likely winner, that person will not win. The polls have been terrible for years and Brexit and Trump have shown us to expect the unexpected. I like more of what Corbyn is saying so I'll probably vote Labour this time.
|
|
Jonny Flashback
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jul 30, 2014 10:55:59 GMT -5
Posts: 1,374
|
Post by Jonny Flashback on Apr 27, 2017 11:50:39 GMT -5
Can't see anything other than another Tory win. Labour are losing votes in areas like mine in the North East due to them raising council tax to the highest in the country even though it is an absolute crap hole. I wouldn't be shocked if they lost their seats in various areas. Still anyone but Tory
|
|
|
Post by greenjack1992 on Apr 27, 2017 12:00:26 GMT -5
Labour all the way for me.
|
|
|
Post by The Undisputed Future on Apr 27, 2017 12:24:07 GMT -5
I'll be spoiling my ballot paper for a few reasons:
1) I live in a safe Labour seat, and I'd bet a lot it'll stay that way. 2) I don't really agree with any of the parties or their messages. 3) I'd feel a lot more inclined to vote for a party, and a lot more enthused in general if First Past The Post was ditched for Proportional Representation, there'd be a lot more parity and it'd be a lot less likely to lead a single party dominating (like the Tories in the South)
But I can say I'd be a lot less downtrodden if somehow we end up with the Tories out of power on the 9th (as unlikely as it seems).
|
|
|
Post by Markw on Apr 27, 2017 12:26:03 GMT -5
Liz Kendall (so yeah Labour, but if anyone asks it's a vote for Liz 'cause I feel absolutely miserable about the state of the Labour Party right now, even though they're still far and away the preferable option). Can't see it being anything other than f***ing depressing.
|
|
|
Post by Markw on Apr 27, 2017 12:27:42 GMT -5
But I can say I'd be a lot less downtrodden if somehow we end up with the Tories out of power on the 9th (as unlikely as it seems). Then for the love of God go and vote Labour.
|
|
|
Post by The Undisputed Future on Apr 27, 2017 12:37:53 GMT -5
But I can say I'd be a lot less downtrodden if somehow we end up with the Tories out of power on the 9th (as unlikely as it seems). Then for the love of God go and vote Labour. There's more chance of hell freezing over than my seat flipping from Labour (I'm in one of their utmost safe seats in the whole country), so no chance of the Tories winning here. I don't really agree with them or the Tories so I wouldn't feel comfortable voting for either from a moral standpoint.
|
|
|
Post by Lego Customs! on Apr 27, 2017 13:03:38 GMT -5
Out of interest, which Labour policies do you disagree with?
|
|
maske2g
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jan 31, 2011 7:00:54 GMT -5
Posts: 2,972
|
Post by maske2g on Apr 28, 2017 5:21:12 GMT -5
The tory's will win. The way they quickly reorganised themselves after the unexpected Brexit result, while Labour made an absolute mockery of themselves tells us exactly who we need to run the Brexit process.
Corbyn has lots of lovley leftie policies, which basically means he is a security risk, we would be a walkover with him in power.
And those are the only things on the mind of most voters. Local issues are rightly 2nd fiddle for the next few years. They will pale in comparison to the national challenges we have.
All this could mean nothing though, because there are so many global black swans that could cause another serious economic crash. That is simply out of the governments hands.
I see smaller parties gaining a few more seats this time but no one can challenge.
|
|
|
Post by Lego Customs! on Apr 28, 2017 6:05:20 GMT -5
How are socialist policies a security risk?
|
|
maske2g
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jan 31, 2011 7:00:54 GMT -5
Posts: 2,972
|
Post by maske2g on Apr 28, 2017 6:37:43 GMT -5
How are socialist policies a security risk? He doesn't support Trident. It's an unfortunately necessary deterrent. He has actually moved this week to say he does support it, which I only just read. But I don't believe him for a second.
He would also have refugees pouring in again. It's not helpful to the countries in trouble, and it's crippling for infrastructure of our country. What happens with a few more hundred thousand here and there? Been to Malmo recently? It's turning Sweden into a 3rd world country according to the U.N. Not to mention almost doubled sexual assault numbers in Germany.
Corbyn is an idealist, and wants a lot of good things. Which is fine. I would hasten to say he is ahead of his time. But unfortunately, until all the world leaders are on that page too, we need a cynical realist. At the moment, not even his own party are on the same page.
Saying that, the world isn't as bad as our dreadful news coverage makes it out to be. Trump actually has some really good policies, that are being held back by the corrupt senate. Sky News has us on the brink of nuclear war, but as a society at large, the world is still achieving remarkable things.
|
|
|
Post by Lego Customs! on Apr 28, 2017 6:46:52 GMT -5
Trident, what's the point really? We're never going to use it. If say Russia fired off a nuclear attack against the UK, we're all dead, but oh yes, we might get a consolation shot in if we managed to fire off a missile in time. That's some comfort. There are far fewer refugees in the UK than the right wing media likes to make out, in fact we have far fewer refugees in this country in total than even Hungary took in one year in 2015. Name a good Trump policy?
|
|
maske2g
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jan 31, 2011 7:00:54 GMT -5
Posts: 2,972
|
Post by maske2g on Apr 28, 2017 7:06:21 GMT -5
Trident, what's the point really? We're never going to use it. If say Russia fired off a nuclear attack against the UK, we're all dead, but oh yes, we might get a consolation shot in if we managed to fire off a missile in time. That's some comfort. There are far fewer refugees in the UK than the right wing media likes to make out, in fact we have far fewer refugees in this country in total than even Hungary took in one year in 2015. Name a good Trump policy? ;) That's just not how it works is it. The point is the G7 (G8 if Russia rejoin) work together to ensure other countries aren't taking liberties. One of the terms that they are laying down for security, is nuclear disarming, and the lack of developing. Obviously North Korea are the country seemingly not paying homage to these rules. Russia are not the enemy either. Stop reading bad news.
That's fine, but it doesn't mean our infrastructure can handle more of them. It simply can't. London is absolutely brimming. I remember certain times of the week, I could get to most places quickly. Can't now, there is traffic non stop from the outskirts, all the way to the middle. My hospital A&E's are absolutely full all the time, and unfortunately, I've had a few lengthy waits with my Dad. You are hard pressed to find another English speaking patient at Whipps Cross and the Royal London.
And it's not just migrants, our welfare system is not sustainable because of our aging population. With 2 years, 20% of our country will be pensioners. When we invented welfare, live expectancy was 42, now it's 78. We simply can't afford it in it's current form. That goes for NHS funding too, and it's hard because the opposite, is also the answer to your next question. Unaffordable healthcare.
Good trump policies.
Repeal Obamacare. Half of America can't even afford it and the benchmark premiums are due up 22%. That is Obama's legacy. Pass the healthcare cost's onto the slaves, and watch a load of them snuff it early because they can't afford it.
Build a wall Is it racist? No more or less racist than passport control at airports, or the wall that Mexico has to it's south. And what good is it for Mexico, if all it's best people leave for America? This is my argument when it comes to REfugees. It's the smart people leaving the country. A few hundred thousand leave a country, but hundred thousands more are born there, yet the best people have all left, so the problems compound over and over again.
He wants to add a 30% tax to American companies that take their businesses elsewhere but sell back to America. It keep's Americans' working, and transfers more profits to the staff rather than the corporations because they have to pay minimum wages, which are higher than in the 3rd world countries. It's all very nice, and idealist, giving jobs to workers to 3rd world countries, but what good is it if 15% of people in your own country are below the poverty line? And China is no longer 3rd world country, they should be handling their own problems.
|
|
maske2g
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jan 31, 2011 7:00:54 GMT -5
Posts: 2,972
|
Post by maske2g on Apr 28, 2017 9:44:39 GMT -5
May I just say as well, I' only just seen the picture in the top. I've never read such garbage in my life. Do not believe such statements, without looking at the numbers behind it.
It is completely forgetting what party was in power in 2008 when the crap hit the fan, and how much worse things were in 2010 when they left. However, I'm not blaming labour, it was the largest global economic crash for centuries. What I will say is, you cannot hit a Royal Flush, if you are dealt 7 and 2!!
Longest decline on workers wages on record.
A Global problem, not local to the UK. In terms of who dealt with it best, Britain was the fastest growing G7 economy in 2016.
Wages still 10% below real terms in 2007.
I point you to this graph, which shows the 4% dip under a labour government in 2009, and wage growth outpacing inflation for 4 of the last 5 years.
www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/wage-growth Most unaffordable houses in history.
Nope. Simply not true. Houses now are around 10-15 more expensive than their 2007 peak in nominal terms (not if you compound the inflation, which is in direct contradiction the their previous point :-), but mortgages are 5.5% cheaper.
Average house price costs.
2007 160k borrowed for 25 years in 2007 at 7.5% mortgate rate. Total repaid over life = 560k. Monthly 1196
2007 250k mortgage borrowed for 25 years now. 2.5% mortgate rate. Total repaid over life = 339k. Monthly 1131.
The reasons we have had NZIRP since 2009, is to keep our borrowing competitive with other countries, but mainly to stop millions of families from going broke via house repossessions. It's a bank of England policy, NOT a tory poicy. And it has SAVED our economy.
400,000 more children growing up in poverty.
Despite the massaged number, this is a tricky one. This has broadly risen in line with the population growth of 3.5 millions people in that time. However, it's also proven to be in line with benefit cuts. I've given my opinion of the welfare system above. But this is a far more complicated problem than simply stopping handouts. A lot of these families are single parents, have disabilities, and probably unemployable. It's a global issue too. Our definition of relative poverty is also fairly softcore. You can be your life a lot of these poor people have Iphones and Playstations.
Millions reliant on foodbank handouts.
Not true in any shape or form. Foodbank handouts in 2016, = 1.1 million. Average use per family = 2. 500,000 is not millions.. 2 uses in a year, is not "Reliant".
Systematic Impoverishment of disabled people. I'm not going to lie, I simply do no know what this means. Are disabled people entitled a more luxurious lifestyle than other non workers? Food, Heating, Clothing, healthcare. What more are people entitled to? My grandmother, gets free taxi's on certain days to go to shopping and to social clubs. What else does she want her own Spa?
Super rich minority doubled their wealth.
This is all DIRECTLY due to low global interest rates making borrowed and printed government money buy assets. People forced up house prices, so if you already owned property, you benefitted. That is a lot more than the 1% too. If you held stocks, they flew up because bonds become unattractive, so money flew into equities. It's mostly paper money and could be just as quickly wiped out with another crunch. The above is a sweeping statement that doesn't look at the "Why". Again, it's bank of England policies and not political.
Any more incorrect, politically motivated, sweeping statements, I'm happy to oblige!
.
|
|
|
Post by The Undisputed Future on Apr 28, 2017 10:04:14 GMT -5
Out of interest, which Labour policies do you disagree with? I think it's more of a sense that the country needs a breath of fresh air altogether, instead of the same LibLabCon trifecta and their complacency which is overseeing a decline in our society. With Proportional Representation, parties wouldn't get complacent and it'd allow people to vote for smaller parties without fear of their vote being wasted, and allow a broader representation of views in the House of Commons. I think the situation with UKIP getting 3.8 million votes and the Green Party getting 1.1 million votes (4.9 million people out of about 30.6 million) then only having 2 MP's (1 each) out of 650 MP's greatly sum up the flaws in our "democratic" system.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 8:09:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2017 10:30:11 GMT -5
I'll be voting for Theresa May. She's the best shot we've got as a nation to give us the best Brexit possible. Jeremy Corbin is one of the biggest drips in politics, not as bad as Blair or Brown were, but still absolutely reprehensible as a human being. Farron is an out-of-touch numpty twat. May is the only sane choice. Whatever the polls say, and whoever looks like the likely winner, that person will not win. The polls have been terrible for years and Brexit and Trump have shown us to expect the unexpected. I like more of what Corbyn is saying so I'll probably vote Labour this time. Trump and Brexit polls were manipulated by media outlets by oversampling left-leaners by ridiculous margins (some as much as D+14). Trump was always ahead in the polls, but if you ask a registered Democrat who they were going to be voting for, they were going to say Hillary. It also didn't take into account the influx of first time or disinterested voters who Trump (and Brexit) both majorly appealed to.
|
|
|
Post by Lego Customs! on Apr 28, 2017 11:37:36 GMT -5
Trident, what's the point really? We're never going to use it. If say Russia fired off a nuclear attack against the UK, we're all dead, but oh yes, we might get a consolation shot in if we managed to fire off a missile in time. That's some comfort. There are far fewer refugees in the UK than the right wing media likes to make out, in fact we have far fewer refugees in this country in total than even Hungary took in one year in 2015. Name a good Trump policy? That's just not how it works is it. The point is the G7 (G8 if Russia rejoin) work together to ensure other countries aren't taking liberties. One of the terms that they are laying down for security, is nuclear disarming, and the lack of developing. Obviously North Korea are the country seemingly not paying homage to these rules. Russia are not the enemy either. Stop reading bad news.
So basically Trident is an empty threat. They’ll never be used and if they are, we’re all screwed any way. I think the £205bn renewal price could be used better for the NHS, schools, housing, armed forces, investment in the country. Of course we need good defences, especially now we are ‘globalising’ by cut ourselves adrift from the rest of the World… but really, the money for Trident could be better spent on things that are actually going to be of use.
That's fine, but it doesn't mean our infrastructure can handle more of them. It simply can't. London is absolutely brimming. I remember certain times of the week, I could get to most places quickly. Can't now, there is traffic non stop from the outskirts, all the way to the middle. My hospital A&E's are absolutely full all the time, and unfortunately, I've had a few lengthy waits with my Dad. You are hard pressed to find another English speaking patient at Whipps Cross and the Royal London.
And it's not just migrants, our welfare system is not sustainable because of our aging population. With 2 years, 20% of our country will be pensioners. When we invented welfare, live expectancy was 42, now it's 78. We simply can't afford it in it's current form. That goes for NHS funding too, and it's hard because the opposite, is also the answer to your next question. Unaffordable healthcare.
Tory underinvestment. The Tories just don’t put enough money into the NHS ever. They can pretend they are putting more money than ever into the NHS but when people inside the NHS unanimously are saying they are not, people are laying on stretchers in overcrowded waiting rooms and corridors, appointments are being cancelled, services being sold off to their friends to make a profit out of people’s health problems, NHS staff leaving in great numbers due to poor wages and working conditions, due to underinvestment. Jeremy Hunt, the worst Health Secretary of all time.
Good trump policies.
Repeal Obamacare. Half of America can't even afford it and the benchmark premiums are due up 22%. That is Obama's legacy. Pass the healthcare cost's onto the slaves, and watch a load of them snuff it early because they can't afford it.
While Obama’s healthcare may not be perfect, because Americans are just set against affordable healthcare for whatever reason, Trump’s healthcare would cover far fewer people than Obama’s. One report suggesting 52m people losing coverage by 2026. Hell, a friend of mine in the US, her dad has cancer and his medication costs him $25,000 per year with Obamacare assistance, without that assistance I hate to imagine how much that will cost, certainly more than they can afford.
Build a wall Is it racist? No more or less racist than passport control at airports, or the wall that Mexico has to it's south. And what good is it for Mexico, if all it's best people leave for America? This is my argument when it comes to REfugees. It's the smart people leaving the country. A few hundred thousand leave a country, but hundred thousands more are born there, yet the best people have all left, so the problems compound over and over again.
The wall… I’m not even going to go there.
He wants to add a 30% tax to American companies that take their businesses elsewhere but sell back to America. It keep's Americans' working, and transfers more profits to the staff rather than the corporations because they have to pay minimum wages, which are higher than in the 3rd world countries. It's all very nice, and idealist, giving jobs to workers to 3rd world countries, but what good is it if 15% of people in your own country are below the poverty line? And China is no longer 3rd world country, they should be handling their own problems.
Can’t really argue with the idea in principal but with his massive tax cut for corporations, it kind of evens out and while we’re at it, who is going to cover the costs? The consumer. The corporations aren’t going to take a hit on their profits if they can help it so what do they do? Raise their prices so the directors can still line their pockets to the same figure.
May I just say as well, I' only just seen the picture in the top. I've never read such garbage in my life. Do not believe such statements, without looking at the numbers behind it.
It is completely forgetting what party was in power in 2008 when the crap hit the fan, and how much worse things were in 2010 when they left. However, I'm not blaming labour, it was the largest global economic crash for centuries. What I will say is, you cannot hit a Royal Flush, if you are dealt 7 and 2!!
Longest decline on workers wages on record.
A Global problem, not local to the UK. In terms of who dealt with it best, Britain was the fastest growing G7 economy in 2016.
Germany was actually the fastest growing G7 economy in 2016 but besides that, what have the Tories done to help wages?
Wages still 10% below real terms in 2007.
I point you to this graph, which shows the 4% dip under a labour government in 2009, and wage growth outpacing inflation for 4 of the last 5 years.
www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/wage-growth
Using the chart that you have provided yourself, if you expand the chart to show 2007-2017 it shows that wage growth is still well below 2007 It did dip under Labour but as the data shows, Labour had restored it to pre-recession levels before the election in 2010 at which point the recovery was killed off. Currently we’re on a downwards trend. As we know, the economy was growing before Labour lost the election and George Osbourne’s austerity for some, tax breaks for others plan strangled that off for years.Most unaffordable houses in history.
Nope. Simply not true. Houses now are around 10-15 more expensive than their 2007 peak in nominal terms (not if you compound the inflation, which is in direct contradiction the their previous point :-), but mortgages are 5.5% cheaper.
Average house price costs.
2007 160k borrowed for 25 years in 2007 at 7.5% mortgate rate. Total repaid over life = 560k. Monthly 1196
2007 250k mortgage borrowed for 25 years now. 2.5% mortgate rate. Total repaid over life = 339k. Monthly 1131.
The reasons we have had NZIRP since 2009, is to keep our borrowing competitive with other countries, but mainly to stop millions of families from going broke via house repossessions. It's a bank of England policy, NOT a tory poicy. And it has SAVED our economy.
The reason house prices are unaffordable is mainly down to the pound not stretching as far as it did back in 2007. The ONS data shows that the average price in 2007 peaked at £190,000, while as of January this year, the average prices hit £218,255. Hell, my house cost £275,000 here in Oxfordshire, which according to Zoopla is an average raise of £72,500 in the past 10 years for similar properties on my road.
400,000 more children growing up in poverty.
Despite the massaged number, this is a tricky one. This has broadly risen in line with the population growth of 3.5 millions people in that time. However, it's also proven to be in line with benefit cuts. I've given my opinion of the welfare system above. But this is a far more complicated problem than simply stopping handouts. A lot of these families are single parents, have disabilities, and probably unemployable. It's a global issue too. Our definition of relative poverty is also fairly softcore. You can be your life a lot of these poor people have Iphones and Playstations.
Not all families are the same as the few demonised in populist Channel 4 documentaries. Yes, there are families that abuse the system but there are also those who are doing all they can to get by. Weak wages, rising living costs, not helped by Brexit and a government that is in denial about this. Hammond didn’t even bother mentioning it during his little stand up routine budget statement Global issue or not, this is the UK in 2017. As you point out, a G7 country with one of the supposed fastest growing economies. Should 4 million children be living in relative poverty?
Millions reliant on foodbank handouts.
Not true in any shape or form. Foodbank handouts in 2016, = 1.1 million. Average use per family = 2. 500,000 is not millions.. 2 uses in a year, is not "Reliant".
According to one source “The Trussell Trust supplied food packages to 554,000 different people, and they're only one of the food bank organisations accounting for less than half the total, meaning packages have been likely distributed to more than a million different individuals, before you even get to estimating how many children were fed on food bank handouts” TT say they distributed 1,109,309 packages in 2015-16, with that number rising to 1,182,954 during 2016-17
Systematic Impoverishment of disabled people. I'm not going to lie, I simply do no know what this means. Are disabled people entitled a more luxurious lifestyle than other non workers? Food, Heating, Clothing, healthcare. What more are people entitled to? My grandmother, gets free taxi's on certain days to go to shopping and to social clubs. What else does she want her own Spa?
It is well documented that disabled people have had their benefits slashed, leaving many house bound. I remember early on in this Tory reign, the blind had to march on Parliament to protest cuts to their vital benefits. How about people being declared fit for work when they are anything but? There was a story about how a paraplegic man in a wheelchair was declared fit for warehouse work by Atos. So many disabled people get declared fit for work because they are able to carry out tasks such as pressing buttons or being able to stand for short periods. Those people then have their money cut off, yet are physically unable to work so have no means to earn money, then have to go through the lengthy process of appealing the DWP’s decision which most of the time ends in a favourable decision for the disabled person. The government even had to admit that their cuts have lead to deaths www.gov.uk/government/statistics/mortality-statistics-esa-ib-and-sda-claimants 50,000+ disabled people have had their motorbility vehicles, whether cars or scooters, taken away under a new government scheme that says that if you can walk 20 metres unaided, you’re fit enough not to need your own transport. This was cut from the previous 50 metre rule.
Super rich minority doubled their wealth.
This is all DIRECTLY due to low global interest rates making borrowed and printed government money buy assets. People forced up house prices, so if you already owned property, you benefitted. That is a lot more than the 1% too. If you held stocks, they flew up because bonds become unattractive, so money flew into equities. It's mostly paper money and could be just as quickly wiped out with another crunch. The above is a sweeping statement that doesn't look at the "Why". Again, it's bank of England policies and not political.
This just goes to show the increasing gap between the richest and poorest which the Tories are in favour of. If the rich get richer… it will probably work out okay for the poor. They are really doing nothing to help those who need the help
Any more incorrect, politically motivated, sweeping statements, I'm happy to oblige!
|
|