General Election

[daveeb]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Living under labour all I would say is be careful what you wish for

Living under 13 years of Tory sleaze, corruption and mismanagement I'd wish for a change, whoever it is.

Originally Posted by Russ

I’ve never known any post requiring to “move things along”.

I’d call it pretty objective to be honest. I’ve never voted Tory in my life but I have never detested a government as much as the one we’ve had since 2010. Firstly it was the decade of austerity, then it was the era of lies, deception and corruption. It could be argued those factors have always been in government but this shower of shit have just been so blatant about it they’re not even bothering to try and hide it.

People have said the Tories are suffering from “long Boris” and good thing too. I hope he’s made his party unelectable for decades to come. My best hope is some kind of Labour coalition with the Lib Dems or Green Party. I don’t like the direction Starmer is taking Labour but I do think they’re the best of an awful bunch so they need another party in power alongside them to pull back on the reigns where needed.

Hell I’d even vote Plaid Cymru before I’d vote Tory.

Agree with every word of that

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Russ

I’ve never known any post requiring to “move things along”.

I’d call it pretty objective to be honest. I’ve never voted Tory in my life but I have never detested a government as much as the one we’ve had since 2010. Firstly it was the decade of austerity, then it was the era of lies, deception and corruption. It could be argued those factors have always been in government but this shower of shit have just been so blatant about it they’re not even bothering to try and hide it.

People have said the Tories are suffering from “long Boris” and good thing too. I hope he’s made his party unelectable for decades to come. My best hope is some kind of Labour coalition with the Lib Dems or Green Party. I don’t like the direction Starmer is taking Labour but I do think they’re the best of an awful bunch so they need another party in power alongside them to pull back on the reigns where needed.

Hell I’d even vote Plaid Cymru before I’d vote Tory.

Totally agree with this, thanks Russ.

As I mentioned before, the important decision is how to get them out, not who to vote for.

Originally Posted by Russ

I
I hope he’s made his party unelectable for decades to come.

Why on earth would you want this ?
They are still the only really viable opposition (once they lose the next election).
Handing absolute rule to Labour (or anyone) for "decades" is not likely to turn out well for anyone.
I think they call it a dictatorship.

---------- Post added at 02:26 ---------- Previous post was at 02:24 ----------

Originally Posted by Paul

Hmm, thats since 1973 then ?
Labour were in power 1974 to 1979, and 1997 - 2010 were they not ?
I make that 18 years, not 13.

Really, no one questioned this ? I checked again, still looks like 18 to me.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Paul

Why on earth would you want this ?
They are still the only really viable opposition (once they lose the next election).
Handing absolute rule to Labour (or anyone) for "decades" is not likely to turn out well for anyone.
I think they call it a dictatorship.

So doesn’t that mean the past 13 years have been a “dictatorship” too?

Why would I want this? Easy, to punish the current shower of shit for the years of lies, corruptions and dishonesty that they don’t even bother hiding anymore. The contempt they have for the working classes like you and I. They way they’ve decimated funding for the NHS then blamed it on immigrant and striking staff. Speak of which, they way they’ve removed workers’ democratic right to strike and reduce our right to protest. They way they want to removed the ECHR. The way they’ve consistent broken international law. They way they’ve placed “stopping the boats” as their priority when we have a cost of living crisis. The way they have constantly lied about the “benefits” of Brexit. The damn stupid “oven ready deal” lie. Wage stagnation which for many puts us on equal earning terms from
2008.

Unless you’re a millionaire the last 13 years have not turned out well for anyone either.

I could go on and on but I need my breakfast. There are plenty of reasons why the **** Party need to be kept out of office for many years.

[GrimUpNorth]

Originally Posted by Russ

So doesn’t that mean the past 13 years have been a “dictatorship” too?

Why would I want this? Easy, to punish the current shower of shit for the years of lies, corruptions and dishonesty that they don’t even bother hiding anymore. The contempt they have for the working classes like you and I. They way they’ve decimated funding for the NHS then blamed it on immigrant and striking staff. Speak of which, they way they’ve removed workers’ democratic right to strike and reduce our right to protest. They way they want to removed the ECHR. The way they’ve consistent broken international law. They way they’ve placed “stopping the boats” as their priority when we have a cost of living crisis. The way they have constantly lied about the “benefits” of Brexit. The damn stupid “oven ready deal” lie. Wage stagnation which for many puts us on equal earning terms from
2008.

Unless you’re a millionaire the last 13 years have not turned out well for anyone either.

I could go on and on but I need my breakfast. There are plenty of reasons why the **** Party need to be kept out of office for many years.

If the last 13 years aren't a dictatorship, then they certainly in my eyes will go down as the years of lost opportunities.

The rest of your post sums the Conservatives up pretty well, and makes me scratch my head in disbelief when people on here hang on to their every word. The perpetually absent member for Mid Beds sums up the contempt they have for their constituents (the people who pay their wages). They used to be known as the nasty party but that'd make this lot sound nicer than they are.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Paul

Really, no one questioned this ? I checked again, still looks like 18 to me.

You were right to question this - Hugh's figures only cover the Brown and Blair administrations, not the Wilson and Callaghan administrations of the 1970s.

[tweetiepooh]

I would never vote negatively and, because of our system of election would vote for the best MP in my area almost regardless of party.


I do agree that the NHS does need work but financially it's a bottomless pit and would consume all resource put towards it. When I worked for the NHS we understood we got lower pay than the public sector but we had a safe job, annual pay rises (including increment points for many) and a brilliant pension. It seems that all of the "perks" have gone but the pay masters still expect staff to work for lower wages, you can't have both. A further staffing problem was being able to get rid of the "dross", and there are some, and to retain the good staff in positions that they are good at.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

I would never vote negatively and, because of our system of election would vote for the best MP in my area almost regardless of party.

Well this does not make sense as you voted for Steve Brine. Paula Ferguson, who he beat by ~900 votes, was a far more capable and honest individual with significantly more integrity. It seems that your preference in 2019 was not the best MP, rather the best MP wearing a blue rosette.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Yeah the point was though the tories have taken a very different approach to the welfare state since the 70's than they did before in that they used to compete with labour to make it better whereas in the last fifty years they've done all they could to destroy it

But the perceived politics of one party is not a suitable baseline to start from (even assuming it’s true - and given that the NHS has been under Tory control for most of its existence, and about 30 of the last 44 years since 1979, if they really are trying to actually destroy it, they’ve been about as effective as Wile E. Coyote).

The point is, the welfare state introduced by the Attlee government (1945-1951) fundamentally changed the demands placed on whoever has been in power ever since, while at the same time the UK, Europe and the world began to come to terms with the massive economic and social restructuring demanded by the end of world war 2. Both parties have shown differing political priorities since then, but that is when the modern rules of the game were set, and that is why serious academic treatment of ‘modern era’ British government and politics starts with 1945, not friendly but ultimately quite arbitrary figures like ‘50 years’.

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

I do agree that the NHS does need work but financially it's a bottomless pit and would consume all resource put towards it. When I worked for the NHS we understood we got lower pay than the public sector but we had a safe job, annual pay rises (including increment points for many) and a brilliant pension. It seems that all of the "perks" have gone but the pay masters still expect staff to work for lower wages, you can't have both. A further staffing problem was being able to get rid of the "dross", and there are some, and to retain the good staff in positions that they are good at.

IIRC The NHS is run on a lower budget than some equivalent systems, although a lot of them have many things contributing to that budget including top-up payments from users of the service.

Healthcare is expensive.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Damien

IIRC The NHS is run on a lower budget than some equivalent systems, although a lot of them have many things contributing to that budget including top-up payments from users of the service.

Healthcare is expensive.

Agreed. The trouble is that this is a difficult sell to the electorate and there are still plenty of politicians around who will trot out the voter-friendly line lines that "the NHS has enough money, it just needs to be more efficient" or "the money is spent on admin and managers, not healthcare staff".

Yes, it can always be more efficient but the fundamental funding issue remains and no party seems to be willing to tackle this, for fear of making themselves unelectable.

[Pierre]

given that the NHS has been under Tory control for most of its existence, and about 30 of the last 44 years since 1979, if they really are trying to actually destroy it, they’ve been about as effective as Wile E. Coyote)

This is the truth of it.

The NHS is a behemoth, it is too big to control. All the money in the world still wouldn't be enough.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

This is the truth of it.

The NHS is a behemoth, it is too big to control. All the money in the world still wouldn't be enough.

Yet it’s more cost effective than private insurance based systems.

The “truth of it” is we need an honest conversation about funding it (and social care). People are living longer, with more ailments, yet public opinion is being driven to believe we should be paying less.

Insurance based systems all offer less bang for buck. However, like running a public utility like water, energy or a train operator it’s a good way to extract wealth from citizens to shareholders knowing the public have to carry the can for failure anyway.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

Yet it’s more cost effective than private insurance based systems.

The “truth of it” is we need an honest conversation about funding it (and social care). People are living longer, with more ailments, yet public opinion is being driven to believe we should be paying less.

Insurance based systems all offer less bang for buck. However, like running a public utility like water, energy or a train operator it’s a good way to extract wealth from citizens to shareholders knowing the public have to carry the can for failure anyway.

just wait until you have a relative that needs to go into care. You'll learn all about the Extraction of Wealth, very quickly.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

just wait until you have a relative that needs to go into care. You'll learn all about the Extraction of Wealth, very quickly.

I’m more than aware - which is why I included social care in the ‘honest conversation’ Governments (whichever party) need to have.