Doesn't LBC's views massively change depending on who is presenting?
General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
Poor Torygraph.
Weren't a lot of the old "conspiracy theories" proved right after Thatcher's papers were declassified?
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/
The night time bloke looks like he might be relatively harmless.
I'm not sure if you are serious, but there James O'Brian is amazing (and left wing)
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/james-obrien-chronic-unfairness-buy-to-let/
(12m36 as I know redcafe will cut it)
etc
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ories-election-benefits-welfare-a7729096.html
On the plus side they'll all be receiving an owl delivered note from JK Rowling explaining that it's a price worth paying so Labour can get rid of Corbyn. So at worst, a good news/bad news situation for them all.
On the plus side they'll all be receiving an owl delivered note from JK Rowling explaining that it's a price worth paying so Labour can get rid of Corbyn. So at worst, a good news/bad news situation for them all.
What have I just heard, people giving a crap about the passport changing colour, Jesus wept
I'm not sure whether I'm reading this part of the manifesto correctly, but taking over the national grid seems batshit.
They only really have one progressive presenter in James O'Brien. The rest of them are awful and pretty much unbearable, especially that odious fat feck Nick Ferrari.
Especially if you dont also take over the dno's
The national grid thing seems like something that would have been removed. Non a fan of the policy on tution fees either but can see it may me tactical play. The manifesto isn't that radical really, enough for the papers to spin it as such but they'd do that with anything.
We are not a part of Scandinavia and Scandinavian countries are not facing an unprecedented economic event like Brexit in the next couple of years.
I will be interested to see the costings for all this.
Intuitively this makes me trust Corbyn's Labour less on the economy as it seems fantastical that the country can afford the level of public spending required to fulfill the leaked manifesto in the face of what will be a tumultuous economic period.
Whack 3p on the basic rate of tax & 15p on the top rate and we're all sorted, .
Which is an idea that is open to a great deal of erm... scepticism, obviously.
Alternatively, you can be on the side of cutting income tax (greatest gain for 'the haves') but balancing the budget by increasing / expanding the scope of VAT (greatest loss for 'the have-nots'). Conservatives may not be doing that this time, tbf.
Labour manifesto isn't gonna run well with the media, the Establishment or the wealth creators or anyone who is supportive of the idea that you should have as much control over the spending of the money that they earn & believe that individuals have little or no obligation toward the rest of the society that they live in. ''My 3rd holiday is more important than your breakfast''. The causes of people not having any breakfast are 'complex' obviously.
Anyway, more interestingly than the poorly crafted ideological diatribe - the nervous wreck May was wibbling on about ''controlled intervention in certain markets'' the other morning which I thought was slightly interesting - that would be a bit of a shift of attitude, and is likely to get swiftly shot down / forgotten about, post of the landslide.
Where's the coverage of her being a nervous wreck, btw?
edit - ah, Corcyn's a useless tosser for managing to have it leaked.
TRUST CORBYN LESS !!! FIRST LEAK EVER !!!
(((blue passports)))
.Which is an idea that is open to a great deal of erm... scepticism, obviously.
Alternatively, you can be on the side of cutting income tax (greatest gain for 'the haves') but balancing the budget by increasing / expanding the scope of VAT (greatest loss for 'the have-nots'). Conservatives may not be doing that this time, tbf.
Labour manifesto isn't gonna run well with the media, the Establishment or the wealth creators or anyone who is supportive of the idea that you should have as much control over the spending of the money that they earn & believe that individuals have little or no obligation toward the rest of the society that they live in. ''My 3rd holiday is more important than your breakfast''. The causes of people not having any breakfast are 'complex' obviously.
Anyway, more interestingly than the poorly crafted ideological diatribe - the nervous wreck May was wibbling on about ''controlled intervention in certain markets'' the other morning which I thought was slightly interesting - that would be a bit of a shift of attitude, and is likely to get swiftly shot down / forgotten about, post of the landslide.
Where's the coverage of her being a nervous wreck, btw?
edit - ah, Corcyn's a useless tosser for managing to have it leaked.
TRUST CORBYN LESS !!! FIRST LEAK EVER !!!
(((blue passports)))
Last edited:
Bloke here on BBC Breakfast saying it's just like 1983 - I am doubting somehow he's done a forensic analysis of the '83 manifesto on a strict compare / contrast basis with the rumoured contents of this one - he then interrupts the next woman invited to speak just to say ''Labour are a mess'' This is how politics works I suppose.
I'd take his vote off him,.
I'd take his vote off him,
.I wish Labour could draft him in for PMQs
I can only deduce that the Labour manifesto is designed to appeal to as many liberal pressure groups and demographics as possible to create enough votes in the GE as to make the overthrow of the left in the party very difficult after a Tory cakewalk.
Labour getting some serious stick from what's been leaked so far.
But the whole thing just seems quite uninspired to me. Chuck the kitchen sink at it, and let's see what sticks.
But the whole thing just seems quite uninspired to me. Chuck the kitchen sink at it, and let's see what sticks.
I'm not seeing what is so out there in the manifesto for this comment, could you explain more?
I mean, taking rail franchises into state control as they come up is sensible, its a failed system as it is, and it adds no purchase cost in that way. We currently spend £4.3 billion a year, or a third more in real terms than British Rail cost, just in subsidies for the franchises after all.
Similarly a state owned energy supplier in each region is what you get in Germany, its a much more effective way of controlling prices than a watchdog owned by the companies it is supposed to oversee.
Free education, a return of sure start (that is proven to work) and investment in people and the country seem sensible to me. Especially after brexit, i would argue that such actions will be essential if we are to survive it.
Lets wait to see the costings.
Do you know what the cost of renationalising all these industries will be? What the cost of walking away from trade with Saudi Arabia will be? How the increase in minimum wage and employee rights will affect the attractiveness of the UK as a place to do business for foreign and even domestic investors.
You can talk about how the ideological, moral and ethical factors of all these policies are worthwhile but the crucial question for this country, at this time, is how they can be implemented in the face of the economic turmoil that will most likely occur because of Brexit. Costing them against the current economic climate is misleading, we have to see some justification beyond that.
Costings need to be seen for sure, but given they promise independent judgment that everything is fully costed will be released with the manifesto, at this point I am interested in the reaction to the policies.
More detail next week will be helpful, but I guess at the minute I look at what they propose and see very little that is really much beyond what would be centrist policy all over europe, with a center left take on defense.
More detail next week will be helpful, but I guess at the minute I look at what they propose and see very little that is really much beyond what would be centrist policy all over europe, with a center left take on defense.
Not sure about of all of the renationalising costs... but I suspect the railways would cost nothing to take into public ownership since they would just just take it back gradually as and when existing contracts expire rather than buying anyone out. They already own Network Rail.
Given the opposition are looking at walking away from trade with Europe ("no deal is better than a bad deal" etc.)... I am not sure Saudi Arabian trade should be high on the list of concerns for our economy in that respect.
The minimum wage argument seems to ignore the fact that people with more disposable income will spend more which in turn helps to boost the economy and increase revenues for many businesses. The money goes back into the economy... it doesn't just go under a mattress. A country where people have a higher level of disposable income should be a more attractive proposition for a lot of business investment.
What will the ongoing operational costs of these various renationalisations amount to? How many billions each year?
And a ban on driverless trains? For whose benefit? Not the majority of 'workers' in this scenario.
If they were thinking more creatively/practically, we could remove the driver but institute guards for security on late services (and still be better off).
And a ban on driverless trains? For whose benefit? Not the majority of 'workers' in this scenario.
If they were thinking more creatively/practically, we could remove the driver but institute guards for security on late services (and still be better off).
Last edited:
This might be the most sensible post written in this thread so far.
But - on the minimum wage. They will be increasing it from an already planned increase of £9, to £10 by 2020. A rise of 11% on what is expected anyway. Didn't the Tories increase if from £6.70 to £7.20... Already a 7.5% increase? We seem to have survived.
The twist is that The Tories can't call them out on these figures against the negative impact of Brexit because they have to deny there will even be one! Nice play from the Labour strategists. No doubt McDonnell had a big hand in this.
@rcoobc
It isn't sensible. The increase in corporation tax and employee rights will make it unattractive. The minimum wage is only a small factor. You have to consider that this will be in the light of an economy facing an unprecedented challenge for the short to medium term.
Regarding Saudi Arabia, that is against the assumption that we leave the EU and face an economic slowdown. Walking away from one of our biggest remaining export markets?
@rcoobc
It isn't sensible. The increase in corporation tax and employee rights will make it unattractive. The minimum wage is only a small factor. You have to consider that this will be in the light of an economy facing an unprecedented challenge for the short to medium term.
Regarding Saudi Arabia, that is against the assumption that we leave the EU and face an economic slowdown. Walking away from one of our biggest remaining export markets?
They can't do that specifically but they really don't need to. The tories screaming murder on Labours economic credibility will work until Labour are back in power or the Tories themselves reside over an economic event.
Sadly that economic event is probably around the corner. If we see house prices go down at all it may trigger.
Well indeed, so our first priority has to be to getting a trade agreement and staying in the single market.
Which may or may not be in Labour's manifesto
If it is, then asking to stop selling arms to Saudi Arabia is small in comparison
I think you strongly overestimate the impact of a rise in corporation tax or an improvement in employee rights... or have you seen a big slow down in France or Germany's economy because of their higher rates? Our rates were significantly higher 20 years ago. Our rates at the moment are pretty low in comparison.
I see what you are saying that with a Brexit imposed economic slow down... we should protect our export markets such as Saudi Arabia. I just think maybe we should care a hundred times more about protecting our European export market which is significantly larger and more important.
Marxist? What hyperbolic nonsense from Cable. There's nothing in the leaked manifesto that would be out of place in most other European social democracies in some form or another.
In the case of France their labour laws absolutely cost the economy. They make it so costly to invest in people that businesses have rather invested in automation, whilst this has caused an increase in their productivity but has also caused a chronic unemployment problem for decades. Macron aims to significantly decrease their corporation tax levels too and deconstruct other labour laws to finally modernise their economy.
We are leaving the EU either on reduced trade terms or significantly reduced trade terms. Walking away from one of our largest export markets, at this time, is stupid frankly.
Are you talking about Saudi Arabia? How can anyone say this with a straight face
They aren't significantly higher than South Korea, Japan or India.
The represent 1.3% of the export market. We absolutely should walk away from a country that has human rights abuses, even if it indivudally made us all 1% poorer (which of course it wouldn't).
The EU has to be first, second and third priority
Ok... so how much do you think the lives of innocent Yemeni civilians should be worth? At what point does the cost to our economy become not worth it?
Must be 0.2%. If we get any poorer than 0.2% then we must forget human rights completely.
Anyway human rights aren't a thing anymore as we are leaving the EU so it doesn't matter
Interesting little story in the same week as the police announced no charges will be brought for the 2015 GE:
Greens were offered £250,000 not to stand in Richmond Park byelection
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...0000-not-to-stand-in-richmond-park-byelection
It must really suck when you suffer from politically focused amnesia. Given its prevalence, we should probably get some docs from St Thomas' to check the Palace of Westminster.
Greens were offered £250,000 not to stand in Richmond Park byelection
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...0000-not-to-stand-in-richmond-park-byelection
It must really suck when you suffer from politically focused amnesia. Given its prevalence, we should probably get some docs from St Thomas' to check the Palace of Westminster.
Outside of EU nations I meant. The EU is first, second and third priority but we are not staying in the single market if Labour get in from the noises they are making.
And you really think that the UK walking away from trade with SA is going to save Yemeni lives?
At least through strong trade links you have greater diplomatic influence.
Does that make it morally ok? Would you sell a gun to someone if you knew they would use it to kill an innocent person? I don't know about you... but my conscience wouldn't allow it.
You'd think it's ok though because you made a few quid and if you didn't sell it them... they'd just get one from someone else! Don't think I'd be able to sleep at night personally.
What a crazy story. I'd have had a hard time turning down £250k for something they were doing anyway...
The real reason we export to Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with money funnily. They are one of our key allies in the region.
(I know this is the USA, but it still applies).
The better question is, should we humiliate one of our key allies in an already treacherous region? Will that achieve anything of value whatsoever?