Join the Labour Party and save your country!

kingstongraham

Got to love the '90s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gi5j7jjhm4M

Stevo_666

Alain Quay wrote:

Re; your beyond tedious gloatfest, most people recognise that a healthy democracy is paramount, not the success of any one political party. The UK is effectively a one party state party and a glance around the world or at history will tell us it's not a great situation to be in. Competence, scrutiny, integrity, transparency, accountability, etc. all suffer and the public loses. I do agree though and have always felt that Corbyn is an utter disaster and a populist leader who shares many more similarities with the current U.S. President than he would ever admit.

Do you think I am unhappy that the opposition is a big pile of steaming leftiebollox?

Anyhow, if it's that tedious why are you even reading this, never mind posting replies?

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

Alain Quay wrote:

Re; your beyond tedious gloatfest, most people recognise that a healthy democracy is paramount, not the success of any one political party. The UK is effectively a one party state party and a glance around the world or at history will tell us it's not a great situation to be in. Competence, scrutiny, integrity, transparency, accountability, etc. all suffer and the public loses. I do agree though and have always felt that Corbyn is an utter disaster and a populist leader who shares many more similarities with the current U.S. President than he would ever admit.

Do you think I am unhappy that the opposition is a big pile of steaming leftiebollox?

Anyhow, if it's that tedious why are you even reading this, never mind posting replies?

Alain has a point Stevo, your gloating at the collapse of democracy is tedious, just as if the EU folded, you d gloat over that too, if it meant eco collapse or even war, i really dont think that would stop you.

We need an effective opposition (who ever is in power) we needed one against Blair, we didnt and it led to the Iraq war, a decent opp to the Tories has led to Brexit and ideological austerity, just maybe if you spent 13 hrs in AE as my mtb ing mate did on Sunday, you might (doubtful though) see that cuts should only go so far.

surrey_commuter

It could be argued that a lack of credible opposition allows Hammond to deliver an economically sensible budget as their is no need for costly political gimmicks.

Singapore is a one party state and has done alright.

mamba80

Surrey Commuter wrote:

It could be argued that a lack of credible opposition allows Hammond to deliver an economically sensible budget as their is no need for costly political gimmicks.

Singapore is a one party state and has done alright.

Free Schools and Grammar at the expense of mainstream? cant really compare a state of 5m with one of 66m... i m surprised.
Zimbabwe is also a one party state

rjsterry

Surrey Commuter wrote:

It could be argued that a lack of credible opposition allows Hammond to deliver an economically sensible budget as their is no need for costly political gimmicks.

Singapore is a one party state and has done alright.

Depends what you mean by alright. I mean you could say the same about China. I'd say £500M for grammar schools sounds like a political gimmick. It's supposedly to improve opportunities for bright but poor children, yet there is no evidence that as a national policy it will achieve this

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Alain Quay wrote:

Re; your beyond tedious gloatfest, most people recognise that a healthy democracy is paramount, not the success of any one political party. The UK is effectively a one party state party and a glance around the world or at history will tell us it's not a great situation to be in. Competence, scrutiny, integrity, transparency, accountability, etc. all suffer and the public loses. I do agree though and have always felt that Corbyn is an utter disaster and a populist leader who shares many more similarities with the current U.S. President than he would ever admit.

Do you think I am unhappy that the opposition is a big pile of steaming leftiebollox?

Anyhow, if it's that tedious why are you even reading this, never mind posting replies?

Alain has a point Stevo, your gloating at the collapse of democracy is tedious, just as if the EU folded, you d gloat over that too, if it meant eco collapse or even war, i really dont think that would stop you.

We need an effective opposition (who ever is in power) we needed one against Blair, we didnt and it led to the Iraq war, a decent opp to the Tories has led to Brexit and ideological austerity, just maybe if you spent 13 hrs in AE as my mtb ing mate did on Sunday, you might (doubtful though) see that cuts should only go so far.

You're mixing me up with someone who gives a sh1t about having a decent opposition. Why do you think I started this thread in the first place? Apart from having a bit of a laugh Looks like I succeeded on both fronts...

Read my original post if you need to remind yourself

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Alain Quay wrote:

Re; your beyond tedious gloatfest, most people recognise that a healthy democracy is paramount, not the success of any one political party. The UK is effectively a one party state party and a glance around the world or at history will tell us it's not a great situation to be in. Competence, scrutiny, integrity, transparency, accountability, etc. all suffer and the public loses. I do agree though and have always felt that Corbyn is an utter disaster and a populist leader who shares many more similarities with the current U.S. President than he would ever admit.

Do you think I am unhappy that the opposition is a big pile of steaming leftiebollox?

Anyhow, if it's that tedious why are you even reading this, never mind posting replies?

Alain has a point Stevo, your gloating at the collapse of democracy is tedious, just as if the EU folded, you d gloat over that too, if it meant eco collapse or even war, i really dont think that would stop you.

We need an effective opposition (who ever is in power) we needed one against Blair, we didnt and it led to the Iraq war, a decent opp to the Tories has led to Brexit and ideological austerity, just maybe if you spent 13 hrs in AE as my mtb ing mate did on Sunday, you might (doubtful though) see that cuts should only go so far.

You're mixing me up with someone who gives a sh1t about having a decent opposition. Why do you think I started this thread in the first place? Apart from having a bit of a laugh Looks like I succeeded on both fronts...

Read my original post if you need to remind yourself

as i ve alluded to earlier Stevo, your are just a Troll and the above proves it, check out Autism might help you, oft goes undiagnosed.

rjsterry

Stevo 666 wrote:

Alain Quay wrote:

Re; your beyond tedious gloatfest, most people recognise that a healthy democracy is paramount, not the success of any one political party. The UK is effectively a one party state party and a glance around the world or at history will tell us it's not a great situation to be in. Competence, scrutiny, integrity, transparency, accountability, etc. all suffer and the public loses. I do agree though and have always felt that Corbyn is an utter disaster and a populist leader who shares many more similarities with the current U.S. President than he would ever admit.

Do you think I am unhappy that the opposition is a big pile of steaming leftiebollox?

Anyhow, if it's that tedious why are you even reading this, never mind posting replies?

I think perhaps the point is that maybe you should be unhappy that the opposition is quite ineffective. People get slack when they don't have something to push against.

ballysmate

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Alain Quay wrote:

Re; your beyond tedious gloatfest, most people recognise that a healthy democracy is paramount, not the success of any one political party. The UK is effectively a one party state party and a glance around the world or at history will tell us it's not a great situation to be in. Competence, scrutiny, integrity, transparency, accountability, etc. all suffer and the public loses. I do agree though and have always felt that Corbyn is an utter disaster and a populist leader who shares many more similarities with the current U.S. President than he would ever admit.

Do you think I am unhappy that the opposition is a big pile of steaming leftiebollox?

Anyhow, if it's that tedious why are you even reading this, never mind posting replies?

Alain has a point Stevo, your gloating at the collapse of democracy is tedious, just as if the EU folded, you d gloat over that too, if it meant eco collapse or even war, i really dont think that would stop you.

We need an effective opposition (who ever is in power) we needed one against Blair, we didnt and it led to the Iraq war, a decent opp to the Tories has led to Brexit and ideological austerity, just maybe if you spent 13 hrs in AE as my mtb ing mate did on Sunday, you might (doubtful though) see that cuts should only go so far.

Stevo started a light hearted thread about the plight of the Labour Party and true he and I as well as others have heaped scorn on it, particularly Corbyn.
An effective opposition? The Labour Party is a reflection of its membership, as I assume are the Libdems. It is their responsibility to come up with policies that appeal to a wider electorate, not the incumbent governing party.

Btw, your first paragraph is nonsense even by your standards.

Lookyhere

Ballysmate wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Alain Quay wrote:

Re; your beyond tedious gloatfest, most people recognise that a healthy democracy is paramount, not the success of any one political party. The UK is effectively a one party state party and a glance around the world or at history will tell us it's not a great situation to be in. Competence, scrutiny, integrity, transparency, accountability, etc. all suffer and the public loses. I do agree though and have always felt that Corbyn is an utter disaster and a populist leader who shares many more similarities with the current U.S. President than he would ever admit.

Do you think I am unhappy that the opposition is a big pile of steaming leftiebollox?

Anyhow, if it's that tedious why are you even reading this, never mind posting replies?

Alain has a point Stevo, your gloating at the collapse of democracy is tedious, just as if the EU folded, you d gloat over that too, if it meant eco collapse or even war, i really dont think that would stop you.

We need an effective opposition (who ever is in power) we needed one against Blair, we didnt and it led to the Iraq war, a decent opp to the Tories has led to Brexit and ideological austerity, just maybe if you spent 13 hrs in AE as my mtb ing mate did on Sunday, you might (doubtful though) see that cuts should only go so far.

Stevo started a light hearted thread about the plight of the Labour Party and true he and I as well as others have heaped scorn on it, particularly Corbyn.
An effective opposition? The Labour Party is a reflection of its membership, as I assume are the Libdems. It is their responsibility to come up with policies that appeal to a wider electorate, not the incumbent governing party.


Btw, your first paragraph is nonsense even by your standards.

Point here is that Stev celebrates a lack of opposition, he wants an extreme right wing government, of course its not for the Gov to help Labour et el, has anyone said otherwise?

there is nothing light hearted about this guy unless you know him? and i 'd go along with the opinion he would celebrate the collapse of the EU and whatever it led too, he comes across as the ultimate im alrigt jack kinda guy.

ballysmate

Lookyhere wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Alain Quay wrote:

Re; your beyond tedious gloatfest, most people recognise that a healthy democracy is paramount, not the success of any one political party. The UK is effectively a one party state party and a glance around the world or at history will tell us it's not a great situation to be in. Competence, scrutiny, integrity, transparency, accountability, etc. all suffer and the public loses. I do agree though and have always felt that Corbyn is an utter disaster and a populist leader who shares many more similarities with the current U.S. President than he would ever admit.

Do you think I am unhappy that the opposition is a big pile of steaming leftiebollox?

Anyhow, if it's that tedious why are you even reading this, never mind posting replies?

Alain has a point Stevo, your gloating at the collapse of democracy is tedious, just as if the EU folded, you d gloat over that too, if it meant eco collapse or even war, i really dont think that would stop you.

We need an effective opposition (who ever is in power) we needed one against Blair, we didnt and it led to the Iraq war, a decent opp to the Tories has led to Brexit and ideological austerity, just maybe if you spent 13 hrs in AE as my mtb ing mate did on Sunday, you might (doubtful though) see that cuts should only go so far.

Stevo started a light hearted thread about the plight of the Labour Party and true he and I as well as others have heaped scorn on it, particularly Corbyn.
An effective opposition? The Labour Party is a reflection of its membership, as I assume are the Libdems. It is their responsibility to come up with policies that appeal to a wider electorate, not the incumbent governing party.


Btw, your first paragraph is nonsense even by your standards.

Point here is that Stev celebrates a lack of opposition, he wants an extreme right wing government, of course its not for the Gov to help Labour et el, has anyone said otherwise?

there is nothing light hearted about this guy unless you know him? and i 'd go along with the opinion he would celebrate the collapse of the EU and whatever it led too, he comes across as the ultimate im alrigt jack kinda guy.

As he, like I voted to remain, presumably because that's how he thought the UK would best prosper, I fail to see how he would celebrate the collapse of the EU. Where has he said anywhere that he would celebrate war? :?
The country having voted remain, perhaps he , like me , feels that the UK should fight for the best deal it can, rather than bend over and grab its ankles , as some on here would wish us to do.

Stevo_666

Lookyhere wrote:

Point here is that Stev celebrates a lack of opposition, he wants an extreme right wing government, of course its not for the Gov to help Labour et el, has anyone said otherwise?

there is nothing light hearted about this guy unless you know him? and i 'd go along with the opinion he would celebrate the collapse of the EU and whatever it led too, he comes across as the ultimate im alrigt jack kinda guy.

Another expert at reading in between the lines and inferring what their left wing insticts tell them that a stereotypical nasty tory would say. Please feel free to quote me where I've said these things you claim. Or Im calling leftiebollox on you - again.

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Alain Quay wrote:

Re; your beyond tedious gloatfest, most people recognise that a healthy democracy is paramount, not the success of any one political party. The UK is effectively a one party state party and a glance around the world or at history will tell us it's not a great situation to be in. Competence, scrutiny, integrity, transparency, accountability, etc. all suffer and the public loses. I do agree though and have always felt that Corbyn is an utter disaster and a populist leader who shares many more similarities with the current U.S. President than he would ever admit.

Do you think I am unhappy that the opposition is a big pile of steaming leftiebollox?

Anyhow, if it's that tedious why are you even reading this, never mind posting replies?

Alain has a point Stevo, your gloating at the collapse of democracy is tedious, just as if the EU folded, you d gloat over that too, if it meant eco collapse or even war, i really dont think that would stop you.

We need an effective opposition (who ever is in power) we needed one against Blair, we didnt and it led to the Iraq war, a decent opp to the Tories has led to Brexit and ideological austerity, just maybe if you spent 13 hrs in AE as my mtb ing mate did on Sunday, you might (doubtful though) see that cuts should only go so far.

You're mixing me up with someone who gives a sh1t about having a decent opposition. Why do you think I started this thread in the first place? Apart from having a bit of a laugh Looks like I succeeded on both fronts...

Read my original post if you need to remind yourself

as i ve alluded to earlier Stevo, your are just a Troll and the above proves it, check out Autism might help you, oft goes undiagnosed.

At least my punctuation and grammar isn't too bad

ballysmate

Perhaps Mamba would have a better grasp of English if he had attended a Grammar School...

tangled_metal

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Alain Quay wrote:

Re; your beyond tedious gloatfest, most people recognise that a healthy democracy is paramount, not the success of any one political party. The UK is effectively a one party state party and a glance around the world or at history will tell us it's not a great situation to be in. Competence, scrutiny, integrity, transparency, accountability, etc. all suffer and the public loses. I do agree though and have always felt that Corbyn is an utter disaster and a populist leader who shares many more similarities with the current U.S. President than he would ever admit.

Do you think I am unhappy that the opposition is a big pile of steaming leftiebollox?

Anyhow, if it's that tedious why are you even reading this, never mind posting replies?

Alain has a point Stevo, your gloating at the collapse of democracy is tedious, just as if the EU folded, you d gloat over that too, if it meant eco collapse or even war, i really dont think that would stop you.

We need an effective opposition (who ever is in power) we needed one against Blair, we didnt and it led to the Iraq war, a decent opp to the Tories has led to Brexit and ideological austerity, just maybe if you spent 13 hrs in AE as my mtb ing mate did on Sunday, you might (doubtful though) see that cuts should only go so far.

You're mixing me up with someone who gives a sh1t about having a decent opposition. Why do you think I started this thread in the first place? Apart from having a bit of a laugh Looks like I succeeded on both fronts...

Read my original post if you need to remind yourself

as i ve alluded to earlier Stevo, your are just a Troll and the above proves it, check out Autism might help you, oft goes undiagnosed.

At least my punctuation and grammar isn't too bad

Is that a result of a grammar school education Stevo?

surrey_commuter

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

It could be argued that a lack of credible opposition allows Hammond to deliver an economically sensible budget as their is no need for costly political gimmicks.

Singapore is a one party state and has done alright.

Depends what you mean by alright. I mean you could say the same about China. I'd say £500M for grammar schools sounds like a political gimmick. It's supposedly to improve opportunities for bright but poor children, yet there is no evidence that as a national policy it will achieve this

In what way has Singapore not done alright since independence?

TM seems to believe in grammar schools so not sure it counts as a gimmick.

rjsterry

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

It could be argued that a lack of credible opposition allows Hammond to deliver an economically sensible budget as their is no need for costly political gimmicks.

Singapore is a one party state and has done alright.

Depends what you mean by alright. I mean you could say the same about China. I'd say £500M for grammar schools sounds like a political gimmick. It's supposedly to improve opportunities for bright but poor children, yet there is no evidence that as a national policy it will achieve this

In what way has Singapore not done alright since independence?

TM seems to believe in grammar schools so not sure it counts as a gimmick.

I've very little idea, but from what little I've read it sounds like a pretty oppressive place, with legally sanctioned indefinite detention without trial. I guess it depends whether you toe the party line.

As for TM's 'belief' in grammar schools, a belief in what? That despite evidence to the contrary, grammar schools will not just be colonised by those with the means to tutor their children for the entrance exam, and will actually improve the prospects of bright but poor children or a belief that an appeal to traditionalism will buy a more secure majority? The latter is at least a more realistic aspiration.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

It could be argued that a lack of credible opposition allows Hammond to deliver an economically sensible budget as their is no need for costly political gimmicks.

Singapore is a one party state and has done alright.

Depends what you mean by alright. I mean you could say the same about China. I'd say £500M for grammar schools sounds like a political gimmick. It's supposedly to improve opportunities for bright but poor children, yet there is no evidence that as a national policy it will achieve this

In what way has Singapore not done alright since independence?

TM seems to believe in grammar schools so not sure it counts as a gimmick.

I've very little idea, but from what little I've read it sounds like a pretty oppressive place, with legally sanctioned indefinite detention without trial. I guess it depends whether you toe the party line.

As for TM's 'belief' in grammar schools, a belief in what? That despite evidence to the contrary, grammar schools will not just be colonised by those with the means to tutor their children for the entrance exam, and will actually improve the prospects of bright but poor children or a belief that an appeal to traditionalism will buy a more secure majority? The latter is at least a more realistic aspiration.

Singapore is one of the most prosperous places on the planet.

The Grammar school debate has been done to death and I don't think anybody is going to change their position

rjsterry

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Singapore is one of the most prosperous places on the planet.Commuter

I'm sure, but at the cost of being a place where political dissent is not tolerated. It's not just about the money.

The Grammar school debate has been done to death and I don't think anybody is going to change their position

True enough.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Singapore is one of the most prosperous places on the planet.Commuter

I'm sure, but at the cost of being a place where political dissent is not tolerated. It's not just about the money.

The Grammar school debate has been done to death and I don't think anybody is going to change their position

True enough.

I suppose my interest is that from an economic theory basis it should not be thriving yet the absence of political opposition seems to have given them leeway to plan decades in advance.

rjsterry

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Singapore is one of the most prosperous places on the planet.Commuter

I'm sure, but at the cost of being a place where political dissent is not tolerated. It's not just about the money.

The Grammar school debate has been done to death and I don't think anybody is going to change their position

True enough.

I suppose my interest is that from an economic theory basis it should not be thriving yet the absence of political opposition seems to have given them leeway to plan decades in advance.

Which theory? Clearly economic success and authoritarian government can work quite happily together - China is the obvious example. A lot of people will generally keep their head down if life is fairly comfortable and the repression is just something that happens to 'other' people.

tangled_metal

I used to know a few Malaysians (Chinese ethnicity) who wanted to move to Singapore. One made it a year after graduating over here. He was really driven. The reason that move to Singapore was remarkable after just one year was because it was so expressive to live there. He needed to earn a tidy kitty to get himself set up. The money was better once you got over there.

BTW for Chinese ethnicity in Malaysia it wasn't an equal place. They could not go to the good schools that did English style A levels so had to do baccalaureates. That meant they couldn't get to good universities. Even with a levels Chinese Malaysians often didn't get into tree good universities. Without good university degrees you didn't get on. There were loads of other state designed prejudice. This was told to me by several Chinese Malaysians back about 20 years ago so perhaps better now.

I only say this because they all reckoned things were better for them over in Singapore. I guess authoritarian states can be better than democratic states that has discriminatory systems in place for certain ethnicities. Imagine the UK only allowing those of Scottish or Irish ethnicity to do low paid, unskilled jobs.

rjsterry

Blimey. The fuss about the 1% Class 4 NIC rise. :shock:

It tells you something about the state of British politics when Hammond appears to have more opposition to that move from his own backbenchers than the Opposition.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry wrote:

Blimey. The fuss about the 1% Class 4 NIC rise. :shock:

It tells you something about the state of British politics when Hammond appears to have more opposition to that move from his own backbenchers than the Opposition.

JC not figured out if this is hammering the poor or shutting a loophole for the rich.

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Blimey. The fuss about the 1% Class 4 NIC rise. :shock:

It tells you something about the state of British politics when Hammond appears to have more opposition to that move from his own backbenchers than the Opposition.

JC not figured out if this is hammering the poor or shutting a loophole for the rich.

Probably neither. This is a fairly dull budget from my point of view at least. The most important stuff is what was announced in the last few budgets that is now taking effect this year, e.g. apprentice levy, CT rate reductions, debt rules etc.

rjsterry

Does seem a bit of a storm in a teacup. IDS has now weighed in, suggesting that there's no need to raise taxes as the OBR is being far too pessimistic. Probably an indication that Hammond is about right. Will be interesting to see if there is a Libdems/Student fees effect at the next GE (presumably even less chance of an early one now).

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Blimey. The fuss about the 1% Class 4 NIC rise. :shock:

It tells you something about the state of British politics when Hammond appears to have more opposition to that move from his own backbenchers than the Opposition.

JC not figured out if this is hammering the poor or shutting a loophole for the rich.

Probably neither. This is a fairly dull budget from my point of view at least. The most important stuff is what was announced in the last few budgets that is now taking effect this year, e.g. apprentice levy, CT rate reductions, debt rules etc.

imo dull is good when it comes to budget. The devil is always in the detail so best to wait a few day before taking a view.

rjsterry

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Blimey. The fuss about the 1% Class 4 NIC rise. :shock:

It tells you something about the state of British politics when Hammond appears to have more opposition to that move from his own backbenchers than the Opposition.

JC not figured out if this is hammering the poor or shutting a loophole for the rich.

Probably neither. This is a fairly dull budget from my point of view at least. The most important stuff is what was announced in the last few budgets that is now taking effect this year, e.g. apprentice levy, CT rate reductions, debt rules etc.

According to the IFS analysis the bottom 3 decides will be slightly better off, with the abolition of Class II NIC cancelling out the increase in Class IV, 4th decile will be neutral and above that will be paying more. Quite surprised that McDonnell is against this as on face value it is fairly progressive.

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Blimey. The fuss about the 1% Class 4 NIC rise. :shock:

It tells you something about the state of British politics when Hammond appears to have more opposition to that move from his own backbenchers than the Opposition.

JC not figured out if this is hammering the poor or shutting a loophole for the rich.

Probably neither. This is a fairly dull budget from my point of view at least. The most important stuff is what was announced in the last few budgets that is now taking effect this year, e.g. apprentice levy, CT rate reductions, debt rules etc.

imo dull is good when it comes to budget. The devil is always in the detail so best to wait a few day before taking a view.

We usually get the 'Big 4' going through it with a fine toothcomb and sending reports on the day or by the morning after and flushing out any significant stuff.

I've still not seen anything that particularly bothers me.