General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
That has potential to catch on (seen it twice now)...
You are just spouting right wing economic theory. Your only answer to is to cut business rates and workers rights. Thats what we've done for the past 7 years and growth is mediocre.
I've only just found out about Theresa May saying she's in favour of fox hunting (don't how I missed that). feck me and she'll get a landslide apparently all the same.
Disgusting bitch.
Disgusting bitch.
You are just spouting left wing economic theory?
The UK has been the best or among the very best performing economies in the G7 for the past 4 or 5 years in terms of growth. You can argue that the Tories have issued morally reprehensible cuts on the most vulnerable in society but the bottom line is that, relatively speaking, their economic policy has worked.
I never said that we should cut employee rights either. Corbyn wants to introduce a whole raft of measures that will significantly harm the UK attractiveness as a place to do business. Increasing employee rights to the level that he wants to is just one of those.
France and Italy are particularly suffering from global businesses withdrawing, or not investing due to employment rights, and the associated cost of doing business.
The most Tory use of the word 'but' I've ever seen. Bravo for that alone.
The best type of economic theory
When is the average person going to see some of the benefits of that growth? We've had marginally better growth, nothing significant, and the price we've paid for that? Crumbling public services and a work force in ever more precarious jobs
You always mention those two nations but never Germany or the Northern European nations. It's like they don't fit your narrative
Well, yes, but the whole crux of any Labour argument has to be that the economic recovery has not been felt by the ordinary person. That seems...basic, to me. Like, it should probably be the central point to just about any Labour manifesto at the moment, irrespective of whether it's Tony Blair or Jeremy Corbyn putting it forward. Even if Labour's plans are too extreme, which is a fair enough opinion, I'm not sure what the point of Labour would be if they were planning to largely agree with the Tories economic agenda.
"So yeah, I suppose those people drowned, but the water was quite warm at the time."
You are the one who said that growth had been 'mediocre', relatively speaking, it has not.
I also said that after Brexit we should increase public spending but also that we need to remain attractive as a place to do business in.
Real economy has to pay for borrowing somewhere along the line. Where is that going to come from under Corbyn's economic plan?
''the reasons for having to make morally reprehensible cuts are complex''
Pienaar on BBC news has just decribed the idea of re-nationalising the railways as 'eccentric' - maybe we should hold a referendum on it
Pienaar on BBC news has just decribed the idea of re-nationalising the railways as 'eccentric' - maybe we should hold a referendum on it
UKIP seem to be not standing in a lot of Labour 1st, UKIP 2nd seats.
Or.... it reinvigorates the economy because the money is not being hoarded by the 0.1%, instead the working classes have a disposable income once more and can actually afford to spend on something other than bills.
They're calling themselves Tories again these days.
And onwards and upwards to a job which will pay them a living wage... in the long run, I'd say they'll be better off.
If there should be state involvement the priority ought to be those areas where the private sector has abandoned or increasingly overlooked communities. As it stands this is a clumsy, ideologically driven policy, and one that will do nothing for such residents.
Similarly with energy, the renationalisation veers away from the practical. Why not invest all of those billions in renewables and urban regeneration? Give power to the people (in more ways than one) by devolving it to them.
There's going to have to be a lot more tax rises than just corporation tax to pay for everything in the manifesto. Maybe a lot got trimmed out today (doubt it judging from reports), but there's massive amounts of extra spending there at the moment that doesn't seem covered by the raises already known about.
This "minimum wage leads to unemployment" is one of the more annoying punchlines perpetrated around. When has that every happened? It's not like you don't have literally hundreds of real world minimum wage implementations or raises to study its effects and make a solid case for it if it were true. But no, no one ever does it.
Looks like a myth to me.
May is taking calls on LBC right now btw.
Have Walt Boggis, Nate Bunce, and Frank Bean phoned in?
"I'm sorry - I'm not playing a Cliff Richard song for your auntie's birthday."
It's the ones that I manage people in, and have direct experience.
The importance of valence issues in 4 images...
Good attempt at a dodge but I'm sure you're aware of Germany, why do they succeed despite unions and relatively high corp tax?
Good attempt at a dodge, get over yourself.
In fairness there's been minimal time for the public to find out about them, could change over the next month. But also large support for the Tory pledge to reduce immigration to 10s of thousands.
I don't think most people have strong opinions on anything but taxes, benefits and immigration.
Tories could be proposing scrapping all workers rights, legalising bullfighting and privatising the fire service and they'd still win if people viewed them more positively on the aforementioned three areas than the other parties.
Tories could be proposing scrapping all workers rights, legalising bullfighting and privatising the fire service and they'd still win if people viewed them more positively on the aforementioned three areas than the other parties.
This is also true
Happy to enlighten you
Interesting chat between Alastair Campbell and Tony Blair.
I get the sentiment for the first one (though too far imo) but a big problem for with the first one is that because of how low wages are in some jobs and the rules in place, financially it makes no sense for some people to accept employment as they will be worse off. If you have bills to pay, children to look after, then not sure how people can complain.
When you ask those same survey respondents about that, they'll immediately say 'well not those people of course'. Polling on policy is largely bullshit.