Election 2019, Week 1

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Mr K

The funny thing is the SE of the UK is sinking and NW of the UK is rising. It's due to a geological process called ‘isostatic rebound'. Coupled with climate change, i wouldn't be anywhere near the Thames if I were you..... Could solve a lot of our problems if the SE went under.

Interesting theory. Shame about the floods, though.

---------- Post added at 02:09 ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

Wokingham could get very crowded then. Enjoy

Why do you think we are protecting ourselves against the hordes?

**Joke

---------- Post added at 02:11 ---------- Previous post was at 02:09 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

There’s no evidence for that statement at all. That’s just the usual BS bingo card along with anti-Semitism that the Tories wheel out. “We’re better than Greece and/or Venezuela” doesn’t strike me as a good slogan for the Conservative bus.

The fact remains a senior Downing Street advisor told us they don’t care.

Really? Well, that says it all about your perspective, jfman.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by pip08456

As National security has been protected why publish?

Transparency so we can make informed decisions. The security services have no issues, so why not?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

It's a matter of who and what you focus on. If you focus on things like price controls, as in Venezuela, any planned gains are more than wiped out by what should've been the wider concerns and impact. Being free and easy with money, whether from borrowing or from oil resources, rarely works out well. Our economy is in a far, far better state than Venezuela or Greece, unless and until Corbyn gets in.

Link

All that in a country that should be rich from oil revenues. If the government had been prepared to subsidise the producers in some way, it might have not turned out so disastrous. The UK effectively does a simliar thing by having a zero VAT rate.

And none of that has any bearing on the Labour proposals here. It’s lovely scaremongering though.

---------- Post added at 07:32 ---------- Previous post was at 07:25 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Interesting theory. Shame about the floods, though.

---------- Post added at 02:09 ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 ----------



Why do you think we are protecting ourselves against the hordes?

**Joke

---------- Post added at 02:11 ---------- Previous post was at 02:09 ----------



Really? Well, that says it all about your perspective, jfman.

There’s no link between the proposals in Venezuela and what Labour Party are proposing here. It’s the “socialist” bogeyman being wheeled out once more.

The Venezuelan economy is also suffering from US sanctions. It’s not like them to get involved in South American politics because of ideology...

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, I live in the Thames Valley and it rained today. We even have puddles but it's not made the news yet.

That’s really surprising, as we all know that we we talk about the weather on the tv or radio in the UK we only mean southeast

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

And none of that has any bearing on the Labour proposals here. It’s lovely scaremongering though.

---------- Post added at 07:32 ---------- Previous post was at 07:25 ----------



There’s no link between the proposals in Venezuela and what Labour Party are proposing here. It’s the “socialist” bogeyman being wheeled out once more.

The Venezuelan economy is also suffering from US sanctions. It’s not like them to get involved in South American politics because of ideology...

Venezuela had problems long before any sanctions were applied, and mostly the sanctions are aimed at individuals.

To allow continued humanitarian assistance to the Venezuelan people, OFAC issued licenses authorizing transactions involving the delivery of food, agricultural commodities, and medicine; personal remittances; the work of international organizations; and communications services.

The earliest sets of sanctions were terrorism-related(financial support for Hezbollah) and Drug Trafficking-related. Obama then added ones for "Antidemocratic Actions, Human Rights Violations, and Corruption".


Venezuela targeted freebies at the poor without looking at the bigger picture. EG if Corbyn starts forcing companies to give away part of their shares for nothing, then who in their right mind is going to invest in any UK company.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Venezuela had problems long before any sanctions were applied, and mostly the sanctions are aimed at individuals.
The earliest sets of sanctions were terrorism-related(financial support for Hezbollah) and Drug Trafficking-related. Obama then added ones for "Antidemocratic Actions, Human Rights Violations, and Corruption".

Venezuela targeted freebies at the poor without looking at the bigger picture. EG if Corbyn starts forcing companies to give away part of their shares for nothing, then who in their right mind is going to invest in any UK company.

More Venezuela chat. If Corbyn did this... if Corbyn did that...

There’s no evidence at all that Corbyn intends to follow the same policies. For a start EU membership, or single market alignment and a customs union, would be totally unsustainable. (That would be the Labour deal that will protect jobs, protect the NHS and protect workers rights).

If you read the actual Labour proposal you’ll find out it’s quite boring really. Employees at no point own shares, nor does the state, and the maximum dividend any employee can get is £500 (or about 25p an hour onto their salary for a full time employee).

[papa smurf]

Jeremy Corbyn's £1.2TRILLION election bill revealed (that's £43,000 per household): Dossier exposes eye-watering cost of Labour plans to nationalise public services, give Britons a four-day week and guaranteed income



Oh dear the true cost of Marxist Britain.



The astonishing figure, based on the additional cost of Labour's policies over a five-year Parliament, is contained in a Tory dossier produced despite furious objections from Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell over the use of civil servants in its creation.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...yns-plans.html

[jfman]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Jeremy Corbyn's £1.2TRILLION election bill revealed (that's £43,000 per household): Dossier exposes eye-watering cost of Labour plans to nationalise public services, give Britons a four-day week and guaranteed income

Oh dear the true cost of Marxist Britain.

The astonishing figure, based on the additional cost of Labour's policies over a five-year Parliament, is contained in a Tory dossier produced despite furious objections from Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell over the use of civil servants in its creation.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...yns-plans.html

A laughable article. Unsubstantiated figures, antisemitism and the IRA all get an outing in there.

Might as well have a front page headline “LOOK! A SQUIRREL!”.

Interestingly the national debt is up £1 TRILLION since the the coalition and we’ve nothing to show for it.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by jfman

A laughable article. Unsubstantiated figures, antisemitism and the IRA all get an outing in there.

Compiled by civil servants ignore at your peril,unless your wolfie smith,or a member of the Tooting popular front.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Compiled by civil servants ignore at your peril,unless your wolfie smith.

If you carefully read the sentence it doesn’t actually confirm servants were involved.

It confirms John McDonnell was furious at the fact the proposal that they could be. It doesn’t say who actually pulled the figures. Could have been Dominic “the Conservatives hate the poor” Cummings in between briefings for all we know.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by jfman

If you carefully read the sentence it doesn’t actually confirm servants were involved.

It confirms John McDonnell was furious at the fact the proposal that they could be.

Turn it into a conspiracy theory if it makes the figures go down better.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Turn it into a conspiracy theory if it makes the figures go down better.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...h-labour-plans

Substantiated article confirming the Civil Service would not publish figures. If that was true then, it’s even more likely to be the case now as the Civil Service is governed by even stricter impartiality rules in the pre-election period.

It suits the Mail though to not be specific.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by jfman

https://www.theguardian.com/business...h-labour-plans

Substantiated article confirming the Civil Service would not publish figures. If that was true then, it’s even more likely to be the case now as the Civil Service is governed by even stricter impartiality rules in the pre-election period.

It suits the Mail though to not be specific.

Now lets see how the Conservatives own figures add up as then the undecided's can form our own opinions about each parties financial figures.

Oh hang on the The business minister Kwasi Karteng has decided that us the voters have no right to know what the Conservative financials figures are as well.

https://news.sky.com/story/sophy-rid...ments-11858673

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...tics-live-news

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

A laughable article. Unsubstantiated figures, antisemitism and the IRA all get an outing in there.

Might as well have a front page headline “LOOK! A SQUIRREL!”.

Interestingly the national debt is up £1 TRILLION since the the coalition and we’ve nothing to show for it.

You seem to be very picky when it comes to your take on Corbyn and McDonnell. Of course the full horror of what this dreadful duo have in store for our country does not appear in their manifesto, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. I believe the majority of the population has been spooked by what McDonnell has been saying and the media has done a pretty good job of reminding us of Corbyn's record.

These two Marxists are dangerous and people absolutely do need to be reminded what they stand for.

Incidentally, as has been pointed out before, the national debt is so high because we had to bring down the deficit, so we do have rather a lot to show for it, actually.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by denphone

Now lets see how the Conservatives own figures add up as then the undecided's can form our own opinions about each parties financial figures.

Oh hang on the The business minister Kwasi Karteng has decided that us the voters have no right to know what the Conservative financials figures are as well.

https://news.sky.com/story/sophy-rid...ments-11858673

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...tics-live-news

While the sums won't add up for their manifesto we can comfortably say they will spend less as they continue to roll back the purpose and function of the state. The relentless attack on the poor will continue, the benefits freeze resume, working terms and conditions reduce. Inequality will rise, food bank use continue to rocket, the fifth richest country in the world will continue to claim it "can't afford" to do otherwise.

What little remaining state assets that can have profit extracted from them will be privatised. The NHS falling prey to US venture capitalists and insurance companies.

---------- Post added at 10:48 ---------- Previous post was at 10:42 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

You seem to be very picky when it comes to your take on Corbyn and McDonnell. Of course the full horror of what this dreadful duo have in store for our country does not appear in their manifesto, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. I believe the majority of the population has been spooked by what McDonnell has been saying and the media has done a pretty good job of reminding us of Corbyn's record.

These two Marxists are dangerous and people absolutely do need to be reminded what they stand for.

Incidentally, as has been pointed out before, the national debt is so high because we had to bring down the deficit, so we do have rather a lot to show for it, actually.

More utterly baseless hyperbolic nonsense from Conservative Party HQ there old boy. I'd have thought you'd have tired of regurgitating it by now.