Dont know yet but at the moment being strongly pro European is a significant position by and of itself.
UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
- Status
She and the Lib/Dems have no policies other than Remain.
The key is reversing the Tory cuts whatever happens.
And yet student numbers doubled from 1992 to 2016. Would this have happened if the old funding arrangements had remained?
Even the Tories are promising to do that!
Boris will be shit in the debate. As in really REALLY shit. The shittest shit that has ever shat out of some steaming pile of shit. But Corbyn will somehow feck it all up by refusing to give a straight answer to one question and that's all the talking heads will talk about, and for some mad reason Corbyn's own talking head in the studio will be silent and ineffective.
of course we believe them
*RULE BRITANNIA INTENSIFIES*
Does somebody want to tell him Jeremy Corbyn isn't in government?
I hope someone checked on that poor lad afterwards, he sounded like he was about to burst into tears after he finished his little speech
It isn't, we know what that's like and britain is still shit. How will she make Britain better by remaining?
Laura interviewing Boris on the BBC News. Boy, is she smouldering.
He keeps calling her Laura, and she keeps calling him Prime Minster, as she squirms in her chair
He keeps calling her Laura, and she keeps calling him Prime Minster, as she squirms in her chair
You may turn out to be right about no policies, but it's a wait and see at the moment because no manifestos are out yet. As of now it's just aspirations. Some will become policies, some won't, the ones that do will have to have costs put on them, and the methods of financing those will have to be laid out. As an ex-Labour voter I'm still open to persuasion and I'm willing to change my mind believe it or not. Looking forward to the policies when they arrive.
Bit of a stretch to say that me not voting Labour lets the Tories in.
Ha! This will be a laugh. Please let.me know which historical levels of homelessness we are currently lower than?
Low corporation tax has led to low investment. Police officer numbers low. Fire brigade struggling with low numbers. NHS short by 10s of thousands of nurses and doctors.
Record levels of employment due to 0 hour contracts. This is a contributory factor to record levels of poverty for working people. Make something of yourself but with no investment from the government in public services. And if you can't then join the massive poverty pile.
Yes, if it was just you. Obviously.
But if there are others going though the same mental gymnastics then there's a very real chance that's exactly what will happen. Then you'll end up with your least favoured party running the country (into the ground) for another five years.
I disagree with that because of all the vulnerable people who are needlessly suffering under the Tory government.
If his Twitter is correct then this guy is a Tory member and wants to be a politician...so the Beeb doing a great job vetting their audience. Obviously we should give Laura at least a day to report that he's not an impartial figure - right?!
I would remove your full name from the post first of all otherwise someone will just go vote in your name
Secondly you can vote wherever you are on the electoral roll but you need to have an address where you can in theory receive post in that constituency even if its your parents. You can also in theory keep yourself on the electoral register where you are and go vote in that constituency.
Thirdly if you're still abroad you can register for a proxy vote if you trust anyone to do it for you or postal both options which require you to definitly have an address in the constituency.
I wish that was my actual name.Thanks for the information. I will now make sure the electoral roll has my family address, which is where I can receive post. Then I'll figure out the proxy/postal vote.
Cheers. I'd been on that link before but it didn't really clarify whether I should register as living abroad or whether I should just do a single postal vote or if it mattered (legally?). E.g. some referendums you can't vote in if living abroad depending on the conditions. Voting in a GE is fine for many years but implies there could be some rules around it.
For most people tactical voting makes no difference, FPTP and the abundance of safe seats sees to that. Would you suggest tactical voting event even where there’s a zero chance of your chosen candidate winning?
No doubt others are, but I surely can’t be blamed for what those guys do?
Obviously this is Warrens plan not Labour but it's relevant to the direction against billionaires discussed recently.
Just look at that decimated wealth i mean people wouldn't even bother getting out of bed for that. Disaster #VoteTorySaveTheBillionaire
Last edited:
Not to mention the massive reduction in social care spending since 2010. This has put much more pressure on the NHS. It's actually probably the biggest contributor to the NHS struggling.
GDP only dipped for 1 year in 2009. After that it grew year on year. By 2010 it was larger than 2008 again.
So % of GDP as a metric is perfectly valid and goes against your post.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/281744/gdp-of-the-united-kingdom-uk-since-2000/
People have the right to be billionaires and aspire to make as much money as possible. This is what Labour don’t seem to grasp.
So you're all talk with nothing to back it up. Cool.
Two thoughts about those figures:
1. They are just a raw and simple mathematical calculation that doesn't take into account the improvement it would make to the wealth and quality of life of the middle and working classes and boost that would bring commercially as their disposable income increases. Trickle down economics is proven to be absolute nonsense and just a cheap trick politicians and the rich use to rob the poor. Trickle up economics is capitalism 101. The more people have to spend, the more people buy.
2. The most striking thing to me about that chart is just how abstract wealth is when you reach those levels. Those Billionaires would still all have huge dicks. Instead of Zuckerberg looking down at his 12 inch dick and then looking across to the next urinal at Jeff Bezo's gloriously thicc 15 inch whopper with envy, he would be looking down at his 9 inch dick and looking across at Bezo's 12 inch dick with the same envy.
Aspiring politician and Tory member. QT delivers again.
I'm not sure you can just look at GDP% to determine that but i do in some way share the view it's austerity light and Osbourne oversold it considering borrowing.
GDP per capita growth has been sluggish during the same period so when we've increased NHS at very low levels it might not look bad on certain charts but the reality is an underfunded service, no escaping that reality.
I really can't figure a direct way of easily estimating the GDP I'd like but to take a comparison i don't think the world would implode if we matched even Germany so a 5% increase.
None of that states you can't be a billionaire or aspire to make as much money as possible. It's about additional societal control so that it's achievable but with limitations to ensure society is balanced.
I'd assume a lot of Bezos wealth is in stock but even then if along that journey he'd had to give some stock to employees or if he'd have chosen to increase his employees salaries further or even give a decent percentage to climate change efforts. He would still be supremely rich with more money that he could ever need.
We've removed a lot of ways to become supremely rich down the centuries. No one looks back and thinks yeah it was just envy politics.
No. I'm saying just be honest with yourself and admit that you want to vote tactically to avoid a Labour government and you know in the UK that will lead to a Conservative government
Actually it's good that there's an astonishing amount of student debt that the government will have to write off anyway and that one fifth of universities are close to financial collapse
GDP only dropped for one year, but that's against a backdrop of spending that assumed perpetual 5%+ growth. Depressed GDP didn't refer to solely a drop, but to a colossal drop in the forecasted growth that spending was based on.
Had we experienced that growth for the 3 years from 2008 to 1.82T rather than 1.64T. Working on the assumption of 38.5% spend to GDP (we spent more at that point) that would have given a further £70b of spending in 2011...
As you alude to sluggish GDP growth is what needs to be tackled, which is occurring across the majority of the western world.
Fixing that is the question and I'd look to Singapore or even Ireland for the solution.
Last edited:
Do you have any comprehension of how much a billion dollars is? We aren’t talking about living comfortably, we are talking about hoarding an amount of money that ruins societyz
Why are people who earn 4-5 times the average wage more willing to throw in their political lot with people who earn 1000 or even 10,000 times the average wage than they are with the average worker?
I think people have very little concept of what a billion looks like and how ludicrous an amount of money it is. A billion in the bank at even 1% would accrue £10,000,000 in interest a year. It would take your average civil servant 435 years or someone on minimum wage 633 years to earn that much. If that civil servant had started working when Stonehenge was built they'd be about 1/10th of their way towards their first billion now (£100m). It's an obscene and unimaginable amount of money for an individual to own.
Edit: corrected the maths
I think people have very little concept of what a billion looks like and how ludicrous an amount of money it is. A billion in the bank at even 1% would accrue £10,000,000 in interest a year. It would take your average civil servant 435 years or someone on minimum wage 633 years to earn that much. If that civil servant had started working when Stonehenge was built they'd be about 1/10th of their way towards their first billion now (£100m). It's an obscene and unimaginable amount of money for an individual to own.
Edit: corrected the maths
Last edited:
Has Jeff Bezos ruined America? In the grand scheme of things it isn't an awful lot when it comes to redistributing it. Going after the billionaires is not the answer.
£100,000 actually and I doubt their wealth is in money but in stocks and shares and property etc - but I'm not getting in the argument.
So who will the billionaires vote for?
£100,000 actually and I doubt their wealth is in money but in stocks and shares and property etc - but I'm not getting in the argument.
Ah yeah I ballsed up my maths, I meant 1%. Apologies
- Status