Join the Labour Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Those who cannot remember history are doomed to repeat the same mistakes. Take one look at the wikipedia page for WW1 and WW2 and it does not take much imagination to realise that both conflicts were horrific. I would rather the population know about what true conflict is really like so that when they are excercising their democratic right they might have some thought for where things will lead.0
-
Ballysmate wrote:rjsterry wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Fairly sure you guys ought to see my postion is not pariticularly politically correct, judging by this thread.
I do like how Brits only ever recite poetry in November. Why is that?
If you can’t see a hierarchy of war death remembrance as being uncomfortable for some, then I’d hazard a guess that your worldview is quite Anglo-centric. Nothing really ought to be above criticism and this is included.
I think the lessons learned argument is rather overplayed, given how those in power led the U.K. to Iraq, and, over the pond, how the US continued its involvement in Vietnam long after they knew it was an unwinnable attritional war. There are countless other examples. Those lessons are not ever “learned” in the same way financial markets will never not crash from time to time. Each time “it’s different”.
There might be a lesson learned in the value of a unified Europe, but those seem to be lost in the many circles too, judging by the war rhetoric coming out of parts of the U.K. re-Brexit.
If you are English, then an Anglo-centric world view is fairly unavoidable. That doesn't mean you can't see other points of view. I'm not suggesting Remembrance Day is beyond criticism - the fact that it's taken 100 years to invite the German president over for the ceremony is pretty shameful, as is the general omission of the part the various nations colonial troops played, not to mention Turkey getting barely a mention, but I think suggesting that the thing should be abandoned because a few EDL idiots have tried to make all about them is an over-reaction.
The whole point of Remembrance Day in the UK is to pay tribute to those from the UK who died in service. Countries around the world hold similar events to honour their fallen, it is not just a UK thing. If you would take the trouble to look at any of the war memorials, up and down the country, you will see them inscribed with the names of local people who were killed in the wars.So of course it's UK centric, including Scots, Welsh and Irish btw, not just English.
Why should the German President be invited previously? The whole event is to remember the war dead, not to make a point of apportioning blame or forgiveness. Should the HoS of Germany have to appear at the Ceremonies held throughout the allied countries on a rolling rota, as some sort of penance? Of course not.
Perhaps during this years commemorations, Turkey isn't mentioned so often in because it was joined with the Central Powers, fighting the Allies in WW! and pretty much remained neutral in WW2.
Penance?! Rotas? Wtf are you talking about? He was invited as a sign of friendship and reconciliation. Seeing as we've been on friendly terms with Germany for quite a while now, it's surprising it's taken this long to invite him over. The Turkish president was at the international Armistice Day event in France with Macron, Merkel, etc.The Royal British Legion took a similar approach. In a statement, it said: “As a champion of remembrance, the Royal British Legion promotes the message of reconciliation after conflict and hope for a peaceful future, and we encourage the nation to embrace these core principles.”
By the way, I am quite familiar with a number of war memorials: a new one has been erected near my home to mark those soldiers who came from the Wrythe, who had not previously been commemorated on the Carshalton memorial or the much grander one in Sutton.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
"Join the Labour Party if you believe a government should always spend beyond it's means."0
-
rjsterry wrote:
Penance?! Rotas? Wtf are you talking about? He was invited as a sign of friendship and reconciliation. Seeing as we've been on friendly terms with Germany for quite a while now, it's surprising it's taken this long to invite him over. The Turkish president was at the international Armistice Day event in France with Macron, Merkel, etc.The Royal British Legion took a similar approach. In a statement, it said: “As a champion of remembrance, the Royal British Legion promotes the message of reconciliation after conflict and hope for a peaceful future, and we encourage the nation to embrace these core principles.”
By the way, I am quite familiar with a number of war memorials: a new one has been erected near my home to mark those soldiers who came from the Wrythe, who had not previously been commemorated on the Carshalton memorial or the much grander one in Sutton.
We have been on friendly terms with most of the 200 odd nations in the world, so why not invite them to remember the British and Irish dead? You think it shameful that it has taken 100 years to invite the German Head of State, but does he have to go to Australian, Canadian, Indian, New Zealand and Caribbean ceremonies as well in the new spirit of reconciliation?
To single out an invite to the Germans in tantamount to saying "This was your fault but we now forgive you".The Turkish president was at the international Armistice Day event in France with Macron, Merkel, etc.
He was there at an international event along with world leaders from over 100 countries. Our Head of State was at the Cenotaph, attending an event to remember British and Irish dead.
My point about the memorials wasn't their number, but their significance to local communities in the way they commemorate the British and Irish dead, in an attempt to show why Remembrance Day is Anglo-centric, as you put it and not international in flavour.0 -
Ballysmate wrote:rjsterry wrote:
Penance?! Rotas? Wtf are you talking about? He was invited as a sign of friendship and reconciliation. Seeing as we've been on friendly terms with Germany for quite a while now, it's surprising it's taken this long to invite him over. The Turkish president was at the international Armistice Day event in France with Macron, Merkel, etc.The Royal British Legion took a similar approach. In a statement, it said: “As a champion of remembrance, the Royal British Legion promotes the message of reconciliation after conflict and hope for a peaceful future, and we encourage the nation to embrace these core principles.”
By the way, I am quite familiar with a number of war memorials: a new one has been erected near my home to mark those soldiers who came from the Wrythe, who had not previously been commemorated on the Carshalton memorial or the much grander one in Sutton.
We have been on friendly terms with most of the 200 odd nations in the world, so why not invite them to remember the British and Irish dead? You think it shameful that it has taken 100 years to invite the German Head of State, but does he have to go to Australian, Canadian, Indian, New Zealand and Caribbean ceremonies as well in the new spirit of reconciliation?
To single out an invite to the Germans in tantamount to saying "This was your fault but we now forgive you".The Turkish president was at the international Armistice Day event in France with Macron, Merkel, etc.
He was there at an international event along with world leaders from over 100 countries. Our Head of State was at the Cenotaph, attending an event to remember British and Irish dead.
My point about the memorials wasn't their number, but their significance to local communities in the way they commemorate the British and Irish dead, in an attempt to show why Remembrance Day is Anglo-centric, as you put it and not international in flavour.
I think you are muddling my post with RC's. He made the point about it being a Remembrance Sunday being Anglo-centric. If you read my post you'll see that I said that that was not an issue and to be expected. I didn't say it was shameful that the German president hadn't been invited before now. I would like to see a bit more emphasis on reconciliation within Remembrance Day as that is a theme that has come out of a lot of interviews with veterans of both world wars, latterly the Falklands War (less so Iraq and Afghanistan) and from my own grandparents' perspective. Just my view, but these are themes that the organisers of Remembrance Day are also discussing.
I understand your point about the local significance of memorials which is why I mentioned one very close to my home.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
“Strong and stable.”
I’ll just leave that there.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
We done the UN poverty envoy on the UK yet?
https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ns-un-saysThe UK government has inflicted “great misery” on its people with “punitive, mean-spirited, and often callous” austerity policies driven by a political desire to undertake social re-engineering rather than economic necessity, the United Nations poverty envoy has found.
Philip Alston, the UN’s rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, ended a two-week fact-finding mission to the UK with a stinging declaration that despite being the world’s fifth largest economy, levels of child poverty are “not just a disgrace, but a social calamity and an economic disaster”.
About 14 million people, a fifth of the population, live in poverty, and 1.5 million are destitute, unable to afford basic essentials, he said, citing figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.0 -
Political news aside from brexit? Surely not.You live and learn. At any rate, you live0
-
Rick Chasey wrote:We done the UN poverty envoy on the UK yet?
https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ns-un-saysThe UK government has inflicted “great misery” on its people with “punitive, mean-spirited, and often callous” austerity policies driven by a political desire to undertake social re-engineering rather than economic necessity, the United Nations poverty envoy has found.
Philip Alston, the UN’s rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, ended a two-week fact-finding mission to the UK with a stinging declaration that despite being the world’s fifth largest economy, levels of child poverty are “not just a disgrace, but a social calamity and an economic disaster”.
About 14 million people, a fifth of the population, live in poverty, and 1.5 million are destitute, unable to afford basic essentials, he said, citing figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Alignment with Trump's USA going well then.0 -
Or maybe this, depending how you want to look at it:
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Yes, the rate of increase has slowed. Still adding to the debt though.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
They started with the the mess left by the last Labour govt, but the annual net borrowing figure is clearly headed in the right direction.rjsterry wrote:Yes, the rate of increase has slowed. Still adding to the debt though.
Which party do you think might have done a better job of reducing the deficit?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
But didn't Labour start with the mess left by the Tories? And is it any bigger than the mess we are in? (Since you are a Brexit-change denier I can guess your answer).0
-
Stevo 666 wrote:
They started with the the mess left by the last Labour govt, but the annual net borrowing figure is clearly headed in the right direction.rjsterry wrote:Yes, the rate of increase has slowed. Still adding to the debt though.
Which party do you think might have done a better job of reducing the deficit?
The last chancellor to actually reduce the overall debt - rather than just add more slowly - was Gordon Brown but I think it makes very little difference which party is in charge.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Assumptions again - and wrong again.Robert88 wrote:But didn't Labour start with the mess left by the Tories? And is it any bigger than the mess we are in? (Since you are a Brexit-change denier I can guess your answer)."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Look at the graph and cast your mind back when Gordon Brown as the new Chancellor of the Exchequer after the '97 GE promised to follow the Tories fiscal discipline for the first few years of the Blair administration, then started to turn the spending taps on.rjsterry wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
They started with the the mess left by the last Labour govt, but the annual net borrowing figure is clearly headed in the right direction.rjsterry wrote:Yes, the rate of increase has slowed. Still adding to the debt though.
Which party do you think might have done a better job of reducing the deficit?
The last chancellor to actually reduce the overall debt was Gordon Brown but I think it makes very little difference which party is in charge.
I notice you didn't answer my question
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Look at the graph and cast your mind back when Gordon Brown as the new Chancellor of the Exchequer after the '97 GE promised to follow the Tories fiscal discipline for the first few years of the Blair administration, then started to turn the spending taps on.rjsterry wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
They started with the the mess left by the last Labour govt, but the annual net borrowing figure is clearly headed in the right direction.rjsterry wrote:Yes, the rate of increase has slowed. Still adding to the debt though.
Which party do you think might have done a better job of reducing the deficit?
The last chancellor to actually reduce the overall debt was Gordon Brown but I think it makes very little difference which party is in charge.
I notice you didn't answer my question
Well looking at that graph it looks like el Gordon was happy with a £40bn pa deficit whereas we now have £20bn pa. that just slows our progress towards unsustainable debt0 -
So the answer is effectively 'no other party'rjsterry wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:I notice you didn't answer my question
That would be the "it makes no difference" bit. They're just tinkering around the edges.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Depends whether they can tip it over onto a surplus. Obviously if Labour got in then all bets are off and we would be chasing after Italy and Greece.Surrey Commuter wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Look at the graph and cast your mind back when Gordon Brown as the new Chancellor of the Exchequer after the '97 GE promised to follow the Tories fiscal discipline for the first few years of the Blair administration, then started to turn the spending taps on.rjsterry wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
They started with the the mess left by the last Labour govt, but the annual net borrowing figure is clearly headed in the right direction.rjsterry wrote:Yes, the rate of increase has slowed. Still adding to the debt though.
Which party do you think might have done a better job of reducing the deficit?
The last chancellor to actually reduce the overall debt was Gordon Brown but I think it makes very little difference which party is in charge.
I notice you didn't answer my question
Well looking at that graph it looks like el Gordon was happy with a £40bn pa deficit whereas we now have £20bn pa. that just slows our progress towards unsustainable debt"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
Rick Chasey wrote:Curious the numbers get more debate than the impact the numbers have on people.
How many people could follow a debate about the impact of rising debt levels?0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Depends whether they can tip it over onto a surplus. Obviously if Labour got in then all bets are off and we would be chasing after Italy and Greece.Surrey Commuter wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Look at the graph and cast your mind back when Gordon Brown as the new Chancellor of the Exchequer after the '97 GE promised to follow the Tories fiscal discipline for the first few years of the Blair administration, then started to turn the spending taps on.rjsterry wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
They started with the the mess left by the last Labour govt, but the annual net borrowing figure is clearly headed in the right direction.rjsterry wrote:Yes, the rate of increase has slowed. Still adding to the debt though.
Which party do you think might have done a better job of reducing the deficit?
The last chancellor to actually reduce the overall debt was Gordon Brown but I think it makes very little difference which party is in charge.
I notice you didn't answer my question
Well looking at that graph it looks like el Gordon was happy with a £40bn pa deficit whereas we now have £20bn pa. that just slows our progress towards unsustainable debt
Iirc Hammond is planning on running a £20bn deficit indefinitely. That is about 1% of GDP so reducing total as % of GDP by a tiny amount. Of course when we go into the next recession the total will soar over 100% of GDP. We will come out of recession but never go into budget surplus, only reducing total debt as % of GDP. Then the next recession will hit and we will be at 120% debt to GDP.
As our current debt servicing charge is £46bn a year can somebody tell me why the above does not matter.0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Curious the numbers get more debate than the impact the numbers have on people.
How many people could follow a debate about the impact of rising debt levels?
That UN report at the top of this page is pretty easy to read, SC.
Even by your standards!0 -
Sorry, I can't.Surrey Commuter wrote:As our current debt servicing charge is £46bn a year can somebody tell me why the above does not matter."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Curious the numbers get more debate than the impact the numbers have on people.
How many people could follow a debate about the impact of rising debt levels?
That UN report at the top of this page is pretty easy to read, SC.
Even by your standards!
I assumed it was claptrap and did not bother - is it worth reading?
So you are fine with living beyond your means and impoverishing future generations?0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Curious the numbers get more debate than the impact the numbers have on people.
How many people could follow a debate about the impact of rising debt levels?
That UN report at the top of this page is pretty easy to read, SC.
Even by your standards!
I assumed it was claptrap and did not bother - is it worth reading?
So you are fine with living beyond your means and impoverishing future generations?
You may be able to read flowery claptrap but you have failed the comprehension element.
That is not a UN report - which is why it is so full of emotive words0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Curious the numbers get more debate than the impact the numbers have on people.
How many people could follow a debate about the impact of rising debt levels?
That UN report at the top of this page is pretty easy to read, SC.
Even by your standards!
I assumed it was claptrap and did not bother - is it worth reading?
So you are fine with living beyond your means and impoverishing future generations?
Is there a real difference between impoverishing current and future generations?
Here's the actual report if you can muster the attention span.
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/ ... ov2018.pdf
https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pag ... 1&LangID=E
The key point is that the effects of austerity measures have been disproportionately imposed on those on the lowest incomes. It's not a question of whether as a country we should live within our means, but which bit of society should bear the burden of that. It has been a political rather than a fiscal decision to reduce public spending in certain areas rather than others, and not to place more emphasis on raising revenue.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Curious the numbers get more debate than the impact the numbers have on people.
How many people could follow a debate about the impact of rising debt levels?
That UN report at the top of this page is pretty easy to read, SC.
Even by your standards!
I assumed it was claptrap and did not bother - is it worth reading?
So you are fine with living beyond your means and impoverishing future generations?
Is there a real difference between impoverishing current and future generations?
Here's the actual report if you can muster the attention span.
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/ ... ov2018.pdf
The key point is that the effects of austerity measures have been disproportionately imposed on those on the lowest incomes. It's not a question of whether as a country we should live within our means, but which bit of society should bear the burden of that. It has been a political rather than a fiscal decision to reduce public spending in certain areas rather than others, and not to place more emphasis on raising revenue.
i started reading it and got frustrated with the emotive language
As said before it is not a UN report
Mock me all you want but I need something more factual - do you not think it would have been useful in para one to define poverty?
Seems a bit harsh to chose to let future generations pick up the tab for our excess spending0
