General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time

How do you intend to vote in the 2017 General Election if eligible?

  • Conservatives

    Votes: 80 14.5%
  • Labour

    Votes: 322 58.4%
  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 57 10.3%
  • Green

    Votes: 20 3.6%
  • SNP

    Votes: 13 2.4%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 29 5.3%
  • Independent

    Votes: 3 0.5%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 2 0.4%
  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 11 2.0%
  • Other (UUP, DUP, BNP, and anyone else I have forgotten)

    Votes: 14 2.5%

  • Total voters
    551
  • Poll closed .
Appreciate the reply, especially given the volume of people having a pop at your post which I didn't think was fair (each allowed to their opinion after all).

I have to reject your notion of my post being short termism though because NHS funding is exactly the opposite. It will always grow and will always be there until problems are fixed. The longer the problems remain and are allowed to worsen, the longer it takes to fix it. No party will want to be the one to take the NHS agenda out of a political manifesto however only the Labour party are making an accountable pledge to address key measures that affect us all each and every day. Therefore suggesting that Labour's previous borrowing and spending across the board previously led to a lack of funding being available thereafter is a very weak counter that is inherently flawed and barely worth raising for aforementioned reasons.

I won't repeat myself as I made my point on NHS constitutional standards being abysmal right now and again, I'm not seeking to have a pop at you or your views, I'm just attempting to offer a different perspective considering my experience of dealing with these very issues each and every day in my job within the NHS.

I'm talking relatively by the way. Of course costs go up, as demand does, but it's impossible to deny that interest payments is wasted money. The same reason people don't like the Glazers. The difference is the NHS can't just create a new sponsorship deal every few days like the Glazers seem to do.

By the way, the NHS is also a bottomless pit. I have a friend who wrote a PhD that concluded that more money to the NHS didn't necessarily mean better outcomes. You get a rise in pointless visits, a population that is too drugged is ironically more susceptible to viruses as they evolve through the drugs. I didn't get a chance to read it, but he just mentioned some of the basics.

Also, sometimes you have to squeeze hard to iron out inefficiencies.

I can't question your feeling on the ground, but just saying don't take it as clear as black and white. Some people attack Conservatives with no understanding about what they are trying to achieve and why they do what they do. It sometimes feels like people view conservatives as the dark side, but much of what they do is based on economic stability and efficiency long term. Hence the strong and stable message.
 
You seem to believe there's never been a recession under the Tories, standard condescending bollocks

I'm not saying the crash wouldn't have happened if Tories were in power. That would be ridiculous. I'm saying Tories are tighter on purse strings, which leaves the government debt better controlled and reduces the swings of boom and bust.
 
I convinced myself i wasnt staying up for this one but i can already sense i definitely will end up doing so :lol:
 
I'm talking relatively by the way. Of course costs go up, as demand does, but it's impossible to deny that interest payments is wasted money. The same reason people don't like the Glazers. The difference is the NHS can't just create a new sponsorship deal every few days like the Glazers seem to do.

By the way, the NHS is also a bottomless pit. I have a friend who wrote a PhD that concluded that more money to the NHS didn't necessarily mean better outcomes. You get a rise in pointless visits, a population that is too drugged is ironically more susceptible to viruses as they evolve through the drugs. I didn't get a chance to read it, but he just mentioned some of the basics.

Also, sometimes you have to squeeze hard to iron out inefficiencies.

I can't question your feeling on the ground, but just saying don't take it as clear as black and white. Some people attack Conservatives with no understanding about what they are trying to achieve and why they do what they do. It sometimes feels like people view conservatives as the dark side, but much of what they do is based on economic stability and efficiency long term. Hence the strong and stable message.


It really is amazing how the tory get away with it.
 
I'm not saying the crash wouldn't have happened if Tories were in power. That would be ridiculous. I'm saying Tories are tighter on purse strings, which leaves the government debt better controlled and reduces the swings of boom and bust.

Any real proof of that? Apart from them saying thats the case
 
I'm not saying the crash wouldn't have happened if Tories were in power. That would be ridiculous. I'm saying Tories are tighter on purse strings, which leaves the government debt better controlled and reduces the swings of boom and bust.

Thats not true historically nor specifically with regards to the Blair/Brown governments, until the crash.
 
They're different to the ones in the polling station. The ones outside some polling stations are to gauge turnout. I've never seen one personally. Think they're used more in marginal seats.
But you still don't need to take a polling card in fact it is written clearly on the card that you don't need to bring it.
 
I'm not saying the crash wouldn't have happened if Tories were in power. That would be ridiculous. I'm saying Tories are tighter on purse strings, which leaves the government debt better controlled and reduces the swings of boom and bust.
You do know that the deficit has gone up over the last 7 years right? Tories give tax cuts for the top 5% that increases the debt.
 
No I meant that there wouldn't be a vote on Brexit if they hadn't called for it. We wouldn't be pulling out of the EU if the Tories hadn't called the referendum.

I don't think that the call for a general election had anything to do with Brexit I think it was all about increasing the majority that the Tories had and the length of her tenure as PM. Labout infighting caused the General election.

As for damaging our outcome by voting Labour. Since she has called the election every time somebody has disagreed with May's opinion she's changed her mind and done a U-Turn. Heaven for bid she actually gets around to negotiating with the leaders of the EU they will eat her alive.

The thing is we are voting on a leader for 5 years not just somebody to negotiate Brexit (which the Tories called for). We need someone with a strong manifesto. We don't know what the Tory manifesto is we here platitudes about strong and stable rather than content. Labour has produced a manifesto I can get behind so I voted for the next 5 years.

What do I want with Brexit anyway. Stay in the Common Market, Keep workers rights allow me to move freely throughout Europe. That's what Labour are offering so my views mesh with them.

From May's point of view, if there was no brexit I'm not entirely convinced she would gamble on an election. Better 3/4 years a primeminster than 1! Would you take that gamble and have no real tenure for your CV so to speak?

I think the u turns were a few oversights on policies that weren't considered. I'd say it's effective she's listened and adapted. This is strong for negotiation.

Don't underestimate the importance of Brexit and all it entails. There are a lot of big businesses planning their futures around the vote. I know as I was working for a law firm in the city who were dealing with most of the top companies. Believe me Brexit is a massive deal that could impact the UK for many years to come. Big businesses don't move HQs lightly.

Your desire on brexit fits with the remainers profile. That's not what Labour are offering. That's a pipe dream that they can state as an aim as currently no worry of actually having to deliver it and easy to say oops we didn't get the deal.
 
What do I want with Brexit anyway. Stay in the Common Market, Keep workers rights allow me to move freely throughout Europe. That's what Labour are offering so my views mesh with them.

So we'd remain in the single market, and continue both FoM and the primacy of the ECJ. Throw in signifiant annual contributions and one wonders how that is Brexit of any sort.
 
No I meant that there wouldn't be a vote on Brexit if they hadn't called for it. We wouldn't be pulling out of the EU if the Tories hadn't called the referendum.

I don't think that the call for a general election had anything to do with Brexit I think it was all about increasing the majority that the Tories had and the length of her tenure as PM. Labout infighting caused the General election.

As for damaging our outcome by voting Labour. Since she has called the election every time somebody has disagreed with May's opinion she's changed her mind and done a U-Turn. Heaven for bid she actually gets around to negotiating with the leaders of the EU they will eat her alive.

The thing is we are voting on a leader for 5 years not just somebody to negotiate Brexit (which the Tories called for). We need someone with a strong manifesto. We don't know what the Tory manifesto is we here platitudes about strong and stable rather than content. Labour has produced a manifesto I can get behind so I voted for the next 5 years.

What do I want with Brexit anyway. Stay in the Common Market, Keep workers rights allow me to move freely throughout Europe. That's what Labour are offering so my views mesh with them.

Theresa wants less parliamentary opposition to her Brexit path, Fledge

Specifically she wants an easy Commons win on any vote that might be proposed around it ---> Final deal, a vote on having a vote on the Final deal, 2nd referendum rebellion, increased security around wheat fields...

stuff like that
 
Key phrase is "long term". Seven years isn't long enough to vanquish the damage Labour have done. By 2022 we'll be above Greece.
I was having real doubts about my new tech start up - Magic Beans Inc. but this election has really gave me the push to carry on. But really it's sad how easily blaming the former Labour government trick works.
 
You do know that the deficit has gone up over the last 7 years right? Tories give tax cuts for the top 5% that increases the debt.

You realise the size of the annual deficit is decreasing and decreasing from a high Labour induced position? Yes this does mean the total deficit is still increasing but at a slower rate than would otherwise be the case.

Tax cuts for the top 5% is not as black and white as it seems. Cuts to tax percentage at the top end can actually increase tax income. Rich people are financially free, thus if you make it cheaper to do business you will encourage businesses to the UK, hence the talk of cutting corporation tax.

Also, people are less likely to invest in complicated tax avoidance which costs a ton of cash to financial advisers and requires expensive maintenance.

As a simple example better to pay £10 tax and £10 financial advice/ restructuring than £25 tax, but at under £20 may as well pay the tax. Overly simplified, but you get the idea!
 
You do know that the deficit has gone up over the last 7 years right?

This is incorrect, It has actually gone down.

During an earlier discussion on the deficit, Colin provided the following graph:


:confused:

ukgs_chartDp01t.png


http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_deficit_analysis
 
I think i can see us going through anotger GE in october. It is possible that nobody could get the numbers required to pass a budget
 
From May's point of view, if there was no brexit I'm not entirely convinced she would gamble on an election. Better 3/4 years a primeminster than 1! Would you take that gamble and have no real tenure for your CV so to speak?

I think the u turns were a few oversights on policies that weren't considered. I'd say it's effective she's listened and adapted. This is strong for negotiation.

Don't underestimate the importance of Brexit and all it entails. There are a lot of big businesses planning their futures around the vote. I know as I was working for a law firm in the city who were dealing with most of the top companies. Believe me Brexit is a massive deal that could impact the UK for many years to come. Big businesses don't move HQs lightly.

Your desire on brexit fits with the remainers profile. That's not what Labour are offering. That's a pipe dream that they can state as an aim as currently no worry of actually having to deliver it and easy to say oops we didn't get the deal.

conversely though - re your last para, Tories (altho they are actually saying nothing) are hinting that they block the free movement OK & withdraw from ECHR, but then be told to piss off out of the single market in retaliation & calling that a negotiation (and the will of the people) despite the fact that no negotiating will have been done because it's all inevitable. Also they are claiming (by evasion) that something else might happen taht's different to this when it can't really.
 


It really is amazing how the tory get away with it.

Well that is not overly simplified at all! You do realise relatively modest growth from a high point is still better than massive growth from a low point. The UK has been in fairly decent shape in the tory reign. Unemployment is historically low.

Also, there is no question low growth will be impacted by brexit. The fact we have any growth is amazing when most businesses are considering leaving. Why do you think London house prices have stagnated. Brexit is terrible for business.
 
conversely though - re your last para, Tories (altho they are actually saying nothing) are hinting that they block the free movement OK & withdraw from ECHR, but then be told to piss off out of the single market in retaliation & calling that a negotiation (and the will of the people) despite the fact that no negotiating will have been done because it's all inevitable. Also they are claiming (by evasion) that something else might happen taht's different to this when it can't really.

Truth is outcome is likely to be similar whoever does the negotiating! Controlling immigration is a big desire for brexit which doesn't complement free movement of labour so the whole thing is a bit of game playing marketing.
 
Well that is not overly simplified at all! You do realise relatively modest growth from a high point is still better than massive growth from a low point. The UK has been in fairly decent shape in the tory reign. Unemployment is historically low.

Also, there is no question low growth will be impacted by brexit. The fact we have any growth is amazing when most businesses are considering leaving. Why do you think London house prices have stagnated. Brexit is terrible for business.
7 years since Tories took power. 10 years since the Financial Crisis.
  • They have never ran a balanced budget
  • The Bank of England have been quantitative easing since 2009, producing a bubble of growth.
  • We sit at 90% Debt to GDP
Great job
 
Truth is outcome is likely to be similar whoever does the negotiating! Controlling immigration is a big desire for brexit which doesn't complement free movement of labour so the whole thing is a bit of game playing marketing.

If people believe that, they can swap sides quite easily away from Conservative = Best Brexit then, as you said I think.

But it does mean that Theresa saying Theresa will do best is rather disingenuous.
 
I'm not saying the crash wouldn't have happened if Tories were in power. That would be ridiculous. I'm saying Tories are tighter on purse strings, which leaves the government debt better controlled and reduces the swings of boom and bust.
Thatch was all about boom and bust. Hate to say it but look at her borrowing record too. They are only tight on the poors purse strings.

The labour govt had to bail out reckless bankers, probably tory bankers too.
 
Me too. Weather has gone nice now.

They should put that info on the polling card or something. Might reduce the hostility towards them.

I don't think anyone should be rude to anyone else, but I don't like tellers at all. They normally present themselves as a required part of the process, at least at the polling stations I have visited. In my experience people are more likely to naively assume they are required to give their voter number to the teller rather than give them abuse or hostility for asking for it.

Plus that note claims they are 'part of the democratic process' which isn't at all true.
 
So we'd remain in the single market, and continue both FoM and the primacy of the ECJ. Throw in signifiant annual contributions and one wonders how that is Brexit of any sort.
Brexit was a vote on whether we stay in or leave the EU. There was no vote on what that would mean. Carrying on exactly as we were only outside the EU would technically fulfill the requirement. If they wanted to be more specific they should have stated it in the vote.
 
Countries used to borrow money to fight wars, paying it back when the war was over. The Thatcher/Reagan era was the start of government borrowing at a time when there was no existential threat. It has continued ever since. Austerity is the right thing to do, but the reason for it is to cut the debt. What's happened, however, is that the Tories have slowed down the amount that the government is borrowing, while cutting vital services and making people suffer. And the debt has doubled. The country is, in reality, bankrupt.
 
Theresa wants less parliamentary opposition to her Brexit path, Fledge

Specifically she wants an easy Commons win on any vote that might be proposed around it ---> Final deal, a vote on having a vote on the Final deal, 2nd referendum rebellion, increased security around wheat fields...

stuff like that
At least we now know how crop circles are formed.