Join the Labour Party and save your country!

rolf_f

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

You do wonder if mocking her would be such a hobby horse if she was just a another pale stale male.

There are plenty more useless and thick politicians to mock.

I think you're stretching there. She gets mocked because she turns up either with too little research or the inability to remember what she has learned. She plays the sexism / racism card herself when the problem is just that she is terrible at her job but is fortunate to represent a constituency where a win is all but guaranteed. She is a prime example of why Labour are looking so unelectable when the Tories are trying to offer them an open goal.

All of that is true but much also applies to many other MPs - including most of the Government. In that sense, whilst she deserves ridicule for being woefully out of her depth the point is that she gets disproportionately more ridicule because she is female and black; she's far more noticeable.

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

You do wonder if mocking her would be such a hobby horse if she was just a another pale stale male.

There are plenty more useless and thick politicians to mock.

What, like (say) Boris? No shortage of mocking of him and similar politicians on this forum.

Pross

Rolf F wrote:

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

You do wonder if mocking her would be such a hobby horse if she was just a another pale stale male.

There are plenty more useless and thick politicians to mock.

I think you're stretching there. She gets mocked because she turns up either with too little research or the inability to remember what she has learned. She plays the sexism / racism card herself when the problem is just that she is terrible at her job but is fortunate to represent a constituency where a win is all but guaranteed. She is a prime example of why Labour are looking so unelectable when the Tories are trying to offer them an open goal.

All of that is true but much also applies to many other MPs - including most of the Government. In that sense, whilst she deserves ridicule for being woefully out of her depth the point is that she gets disproportionately more ridicule because she is female and black; she's far more noticeable.

Nah, if she gets disproportionately more then it is because she insists on thrusting herself into the limelight and every time she does so she seems to make a fool of herself. Rees-Mogg and Francois get plenty of deserved ridicule too (well, Francois did when he was insisting on being on every news report towards the end of May's rein and suddenly became known). I genuinely can't recall an MP making themselves look quite so foolish as that interview Abbott did in the run up to the last GE though.

ballysmate

Rick Chasey wrote:

You do wonder if mocking her would be such a hobby horse if she was just a another pale stale male.

There are plenty more useless and thick politicians to mock.

I could have put money on you posting something along those lines.

rick_chasey

Pross wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

You do wonder if mocking her would be such a hobby horse if she was just a another pale stale male.

There are plenty more useless and thick politicians to mock.

I think you're stretching there. She gets mocked because she turns up either with too little research or the inability to remember what she has learned. She plays the sexism / racism card herself when the problem is just that she is terrible at her job but is fortunate to represent a constituency where a win is all but guaranteed. She is a prime example of why Labour are looking so unelectable when the Tories are trying to offer them an open goal.

All of that is true but much also applies to many other MPs - including most of the Government. In that sense, whilst she deserves ridicule for being woefully out of her depth the point is that she gets disproportionately more ridicule because she is female and black; she's far more noticeable.

Nah, if she gets disproportionately more then it is because she insists on thrusting herself into the limelight and every time she does so she seems to make a fool of herself. Rees-Mogg and Francois get plenty of deserved ridicule too (well, Francois did when he was insisting on being on every news report towards the end of May's rein and suddenly became known). I genuinely can't recall an MP making themselves look quite so foolish as that interview Abbott did in the run up to the last GE though.

Errr, fairly sure Ester McVey didn't get her own thread and memes on this forum mocking her. Not sure how much more in the limelight you can be than making a speech as a minister.

rolf_f

Pross wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

You do wonder if mocking her would be such a hobby horse if she was just a another pale stale male.

There are plenty more useless and thick politicians to mock.

I think you're stretching there. She gets mocked because she turns up either with too little research or the inability to remember what she has learned. She plays the sexism / racism card herself when the problem is just that she is terrible at her job but is fortunate to represent a constituency where a win is all but guaranteed. She is a prime example of why Labour are looking so unelectable when the Tories are trying to offer them an open goal.

All of that is true but much also applies to many other MPs - including most of the Government. In that sense, whilst she deserves ridicule for being woefully out of her depth the point is that she gets disproportionately more ridicule because she is female and black; she's far more noticeable.

Nah, if she gets disproportionately more then it is because she insists on thrusting herself into the limelight and every time she does so she seems to make a fool of herself. Rees-Mogg and Francois get plenty of deserved ridicule too (well, Francois did when he was insisting on being on every news report towards the end of May's rein and suddenly became known). I genuinely can't recall an MP making themselves look quite so foolish as that interview Abbott did in the run up to the last GE though.

You could be right or it could be subconscious bias - ie the media focusses on Abbott and her mistakes more than other politicians so we are more aware of them. Johnson is allowed to get away with far more than Abbott and his lies are far more important than Abbotts incompetence.

Stevo_666

Ballysmate wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

You do wonder if mocking her would be such a hobby horse if she was just a another pale stale male.

There are plenty more useless and thick politicians to mock.

I could have put money on you posting something along those lines.

There are as yet undiscovered tribes in the heart of the Amazonian rainforest who knew Rick would pipe up about this

I think others have said it already. She's a walking disaster area and that's why she gets the p1ss taken. Oh, and a leftie, which is kind of the point of my thread...

Pross

Rick Chasey wrote:

Pross wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

You do wonder if mocking her would be such a hobby horse if she was just a another pale stale male.

There are plenty more useless and thick politicians to mock.

I think you're stretching there. She gets mocked because she turns up either with too little research or the inability to remember what she has learned. She plays the sexism / racism card herself when the problem is just that she is terrible at her job but is fortunate to represent a constituency where a win is all but guaranteed. She is a prime example of why Labour are looking so unelectable when the Tories are trying to offer them an open goal.

All of that is true but much also applies to many other MPs - including most of the Government. In that sense, whilst she deserves ridicule for being woefully out of her depth the point is that she gets disproportionately more ridicule because she is female and black; she's far more noticeable.

Nah, if she gets disproportionately more then it is because she insists on thrusting herself into the limelight and every time she does so she seems to make a fool of herself. Rees-Mogg and Francois get plenty of deserved ridicule too (well, Francois did when he was insisting on being on every news report towards the end of May's rein and suddenly became known). I genuinely can't recall an MP making themselves look quite so foolish as that interview Abbott did in the run up to the last GE though.

Errr, fairly sure Ester McVey didn't get her own thread and memes on this forum mocking her. Not sure how much more in the limelight you can be than making a speech as a minister.

I'm not sure that McVey falls into your category of 'another pale stale male' though either.

rick_chasey

So tell me why Abbott gets disproportionate amounts of opprobrium then?

ballysmate

Don't think it has been established that the ridicule she gets is disproportionate has it?

Pross

Rick Chasey wrote:

So tell me why Abbott gets disproportionate amounts of opprobrium then?

I've already said, I don't think she does. McVey may be a Minister but I would say she has a lower profile. Abbott has courted the limelight for years and as a result her gaffs have been more widely reported. Stick a picture of Abbott and McVey in front of voters and ask them who they are - I bet you far more will identify Abbott. If you are going to be high profile then expect to receive more scrutiny.

rolf_f

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

So tell me why Abbott gets disproportionate amounts of opprobrium then?

I've already said, I don't think she does. McVey may be a Minister but I would say she has a lower profile. Abbott has courted the limelight for years and as a result her gaffs have been more widely reported. Stick a picture of Abbott and McVey in front of voters and ask them who they are - I bet you far more will identify Abbott. If you are going to be high profile then expect to receive more scrutiny.

Sure Abbott isn't simply more recognisable and more interesting than McVey? Ultimately, McVey is just relatively bland. I think Abbott would always be higher profile than many other politicians whether or not it was in part down to self publicity.

Pross

Rolf F wrote:

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

So tell me why Abbott gets disproportionate amounts of opprobrium then?

I've already said, I don't think she does. McVey may be a Minister but I would say she has a lower profile. Abbott has courted the limelight for years and as a result her gaffs have been more widely reported. Stick a picture of Abbott and McVey in front of voters and ask them who they are - I bet you far more will identify Abbott. If you are going to be high profile then expect to receive more scrutiny.

Sure Abbott isn't simply more recognisable and more interesting than McVey? Ultimately, McVey is just relatively bland. I think Abbott would always be higher profile than many other politicians whether or not it was in part down to self publicity.

Possibly but I think she courts publicity and anyone who does that and then makes mistakes is opening themselves up for ridicule.

Stevo_666

Bercow seemed to enjoy taking the p1ss today

Stevo_666

Yes Mr. McDonnell, I'm sure it will pay for itself no problem...starting price of £196 billion for nationalisation of a limited number of utilities/royal mail and train rolling stock. Then add all the other knock on costs...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50036463

Leftie La-La Land.

briantrumpet

Stevo 666 wrote:

Yes Mr. McDonnell, I'm sure it will pay for itself no problem...starting price of £196 billion for nationalisation of a limited number of utilities/royal mail and train rolling stock. Then add all the other knock on costs...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50036463

Leftie La-La Land.

True.

But Johnson's trying to muscle in to that domain too with his spending promises, whilst cutting taxes. Now, let's see how that's worked out in Trumplandia...

Stevo_666

briantrumpet wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Yes Mr. McDonnell, I'm sure it will pay for itself no problem...starting price of £196 billion for nationalisation of a limited number of utilities/royal mail and train rolling stock. Then add all the other knock on costs...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50036463

Leftie La-La Land.

True.

But Johnson's trying to muscle in to that domain too with his spending promises, whilst cutting taxes. Now, let's see how that's worked out in Trumplandia...

That is Labour spending plans for one single policy - and still an order of magnitude higher than all of Boris' promises.
https://news.sky.com/story/how-much-do-all-of-boris-johnsons-promises-cost-11783796

Roll on tax cuts, after all we can just borrow more can't we? Rick thinks so.

Stevo_666

briantrumpet wrote:

Now, let's see how that's worked out in Trumplandia...

Out of interest, how do you think that has worked out?

Alejandrosdog

Stevo 666 wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Now, let's see how that's worked out in Trumplandia...

Out of interest, how do you think that has worked out?

Quite well according to all the facts.

briantrumpet

Stevo 666 wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Now, let's see how that's worked out in Trumplandia...

Out of interest, how do you think that has worked out?

From what I've read, adding to the deficit, whilst giving the biggest percentage tax cuts to the richest. I can appreciate that a massive tax cut in corporation tax would appeal to you.

Although it improved the tax code in some ways, TCJA will (a) have minimal impact on long-term growth; (b) increase disparities in after-tax income by giving the largest relative and absolute tax cuts to high-income households; (c) make most households worse off after taking into account plausible ways of financing the tax cut; (d) make the government’s troublesome long-term fiscal status even worse; (e) make the tax system more complex and more uncertain; (f) make it harder for policymakers to fight future recessions; (g) reduce health insurance coverage, raise health insurance prices, and (h) reduce charitable giving.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front ... -jobs-act/

surrey_commuter

Lots of reports yesterday that Tory spending pledges have equalled Corbyn at the last election. Deficit next year forecast to be £50bn. Anybody think we will cut our cloth to reflect our reduced circumstances post-Brexit? Come the next recession debt will thump through the 100% of GDP barrier.

rolf_f

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Lots of reports yesterday that Tory spending pledges have equalled Corbyn at the last election. Deficit next year forecast to be £50bn. Anybody think we will cut our cloth to reflect our reduced circumstances post-Brexit? Come the next recession debt will thump through the 100% of GDP barrier.

Yes, but everyone knows that Corbyn would actually intend to meet those pledges whereas everyone knows that Boris is just lying for votes. Or making the Queen lie for him which is a change from lying to her.

briantrumpet

Rolf F wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Lots of reports yesterday that Tory spending pledges have equalled Corbyn at the last election. Deficit next year forecast to be £50bn. Anybody think we will cut our cloth to reflect our reduced circumstances post-Brexit? Come the next recession debt will thump through the 100% of GDP barrier.

Yes, but everyone knows that Corbyn would actually intend to meet those pledges whereas everyone knows that Boris is just lying for votes. Or making the Queen lie for him which is a change from lying to her.

Johnson could always paint the promises on the side of a bus...

rick_chasey

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Lots of reports yesterday that Tory spending pledges have equalled Corbyn at the last election. Deficit next year forecast to be £50bn. Anybody think we will cut our cloth to reflect our reduced circumstances post-Brexit? Come the next recession debt will thump through the 100% of GDP barrier.

Any currently available iteration of Brexit blows a bigger hole in public finances than BoJo's spending promises, and will require some decent fiscal stimulus to not turn it into a rout, so I think you're p!ssing in the wind with that one.

surrey_commuter

Rolf F wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Lots of reports yesterday that Tory spending pledges have equalled Corbyn at the last election. Deficit next year forecast to be £50bn. Anybody think we will cut our cloth to reflect our reduced circumstances post-Brexit? Come the next recession debt will thump through the 100% of GDP barrier.

Yes, but everyone knows that Corbyn would actually intend to meet those pledges whereas everyone knows that Boris is just lying for votes. Or making the Queen lie for him which is a change from lying to her.

I am assuming the lie is in what the additional spending will buy and the speed of the tax cuts.

Would seem strange to take the flak for planning to run a massive deficit and then not do it

surrey_commuter

Rick Chasey wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Lots of reports yesterday that Tory spending pledges have equalled Corbyn at the last election. Deficit next year forecast to be £50bn. Anybody think we will cut our cloth to reflect our reduced circumstances post-Brexit? Come the next recession debt will thump through the 100% of GDP barrier.

Any currently available iteration of Brexit blows a bigger hole in public finances than BoJo's spending promises, and will require some decent fiscal stimulus to not turn it into a rout, so I think you're p!ssing in the wind with that one.

What problem would a fiscal stimulus be fixing?

rolf_f

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Lots of reports yesterday that Tory spending pledges have equalled Corbyn at the last election. Deficit next year forecast to be £50bn. Anybody think we will cut our cloth to reflect our reduced circumstances post-Brexit? Come the next recession debt will thump through the 100% of GDP barrier.

Yes, but everyone knows that Corbyn would actually intend to meet those pledges whereas everyone knows that Boris is just lying for votes. Or making the Queen lie for him which is a change from lying to her.

I am assuming the lie is in what the additional spending will buy and the speed of the tax cuts.

Would seem strange to take the flak for planning to run a massive deficit and then not do it

I think that the lie is that he is trying to bribe people with intentions to spend on things they like knowing that he can't implement it unless he can get a majority via another election and once he has that majority he will have no need to implement those intentions. He'll do whatever he feels like and tell people whatever he feels like. The likelihood that those two things will match up would be roughly zero I would have thought.

rick_chasey

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Lots of reports yesterday that Tory spending pledges have equalled Corbyn at the last election. Deficit next year forecast to be £50bn. Anybody think we will cut our cloth to reflect our reduced circumstances post-Brexit? Come the next recession debt will thump through the 100% of GDP barrier.

Any currently available iteration of Brexit blows a bigger hole in public finances than BoJo's spending promises, and will require some decent fiscal stimulus to not turn it into a rout, so I think you're p!ssing in the wind with that one.

What problem would a fiscal stimulus be fixing?

Monster slump in aggregate demand.

rjsterry

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Lots of reports yesterday that Tory spending pledges have equalled Corbyn at the last election. Deficit next year forecast to be £50bn. Anybody think we will cut our cloth to reflect our reduced circumstances post-Brexit? Come the next recession debt will thump through the 100% of GDP barrier.

Yes, but everyone knows that Corbyn would actually intend to meet those pledges whereas everyone knows that Boris is just lying for votes. Or making the Queen lie for him which is a change from lying to her.

I am assuming the lie is in what the additional spending will buy and the speed of the tax cuts.

Would seem strange to take the flak for planning to run a massive deficit and then not do it

If reports of a rift between Johnson and Javid are accurate then that would suggest Johnson does intend to at least go some way to meeting these spending claims. Johnson prioritises whatever keeps him elected over ideology. The effects of 'austerity' have started to be felt by Tory voters as well as all those nasty lefties, hence the dismal results for the party in 2017 and the decision to at least appear to be turning the spending back on. I suspect he'll end up pleasing nobody. He's already under attack for his promises of extra police being somewhat more generous than the reality.

rolf_f

rjsterry wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Lots of reports yesterday that Tory spending pledges have equalled Corbyn at the last election. Deficit next year forecast to be £50bn. Anybody think we will cut our cloth to reflect our reduced circumstances post-Brexit? Come the next recession debt will thump through the 100% of GDP barrier.

Yes, but everyone knows that Corbyn would actually intend to meet those pledges whereas everyone knows that Boris is just lying for votes. Or making the Queen lie for him which is a change from lying to her.

I am assuming the lie is in what the additional spending will buy and the speed of the tax cuts.

Would seem strange to take the flak for planning to run a massive deficit and then not do it

If reports of a rift between Johnson and Javid are accurate then that would suggest Johnson does intend to at least go some way to meeting these spending claims. Johnson prioritises whatever keeps him elected over ideology.

Yes, but once he has been elected (with a majority) there is no reason for him to prioritise these things. Once it has become OK to lie then any pre-election promise means nothing at all. In theory, once people realise this, maybe they will stop voting for liars but I'm not holding my breath. If they don't then our future is seemingly to be governed on the whim of the PM as the US is governed on the whim of the president.