Wymsey Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Quite a huge blow for local economy. Even a company like them, who were in the past known to be highly-efficient and forward-thinking, can suffer.
Claridge Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 It's not that it can't, but for sure it won't. The banks are too powerful to let that happen. But I disagree that it wouldn't cover substantial public spending. There has been £375bn of QE since 2009. At a generous estimate of £80k per unit of affordable housing, that's enough for more than 4.5million houses. We're only asking for 200k, which would cost about £16bn, or 4% of that which was given to the banks. Another way of looking at it, £375bn is £6,750 for every man, woman and child in the country. Do you think honestly that your families have benefitted that extent? Clearly not if you're one of the many whose wages have been stagnant for the best part of a decade. The money from QE is just electronic tinkering Its not physical cash that can be used in the real economy . If it was we would end up like Weimar Germany
Guest MattP Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Quite an interesting read from my favourite left wing journo (that's for you Alf ) - one thing is for certain, if anyone thought Cameron was going to use Corbyn's election to take the party to right the thought was ended today, he could be the first PM to occupy the centre left, centre and centre right in British politics. It was a strange but almost refreshing occurance today to see a Conservative audience at a conference giving a standing ovation to a speech that centered around minority rights, prison reform, house building and community cohesion. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11917236/David-Cameron-is-the-new-leader-of-the-British-Left.html David Cameron is the new leader of the British Left It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. At the start of this Conservative Party conference only one issue mattered. Would David Cameron seize the opportunity presented by Jeremy Corbyn’s election to move his party into the vacated ground on the centre-Left? Or would he use the implosion of his opponents and the end of the coalition as the chance to reach out to Tory traditionalists, and start pursuing some old time Thatcherite religion? We now have our answer. An answer mind-blowing in its clarity. David Cameron has just become the leader of the British Left. Yes, there are a few hardened activists still hanging around, muttering to themselves and singing the occasional revolutionary song. But the Labour Party is now to David Cameron’s Conservative Party what George Galloway’s Respect or Dave Nellist’s Trade Union and Socialist Coalition once was to Labour. The subject of some mild curiosity. An occasional annoyance. But nothing more. Prison reform. Ethnic minority rights. Gay rights. A national housing “crusade”. An “all out assault on poverty”. An attack on “the lowest social mobility in the developed world”. These were the main themes of the Conservative Party leader’s – I’ll repeat that, the Conservative Party leader’s – address to his annual conference. I expected David Cameron to attempt to park his tank on Labour’s lawn. Instead he parked the tank, got out, calmly walked up the path, and hung a “Closed” sign on the front door. Assuming the Prime Minister means what he says – quite a big assumption admittedly – Jeremy Corbyn and his shadow cabinet needn’t bother turning up to the House of Commons next week. Or any other week for the next 20 years or so. I was tempted to say that Manchester 2015 represents the Conservative Party’s Clause 4 moment. But in truth, the rewriting of Clause 4 was a politically symbolic but essentially superficial gesture. What we’ve witnessed this week is closer to a Tory Bad Godesberg moment, the historic conference in 1959 that saw the German SDP renounce it’s Marxist ideology and embrace social democracy. It wasn’t just what David Cameron said, but how his party reacted to it. The section of his speech where he said "I want us, the Conservatives, to end discrimination and finish the fight for real equality in Britain today,” was met with a standing ovation. At Labour Party conference it was a pledge to ban Twitter trolls that brought Labour delegates to their feet. David Cameron’s “New Conservative” mission still faces a number of obstacles. One will be internal opposition. There will be some “traditionalists” dismayed by what they will see as his dangerous socially progressive dilettantism. But one interesting thing I noticed in the aftermath of Theresa May’s Enoch Powell tribute turn was the way it jarred with the tone of the rest of the conference. A Conservative Home Secretary delivering a hard anti-immigration message suddenly felt out of place. And as a result, I suspect Cameron will be able to take his party with him on his new progressive journey. A much more significant hurdle will, of course, be aligning the words with the policy, and the policy with delivery. The cut to tax credit is a controversial policy. The trade union bill is a spiteful policy. The welfare reforms remain a misunderstood policy. But David Cameron knows that. He is well aware he will now be judged on his ability to construct a bridge between rhetoric and reality. A third problem for him will be fully embedding New Conservatism at a time when his party is already starting to look beyond him to his replacement. Whoever his successor is will want to have ownership of their own agenda and narrative, rather than be seen to be David Cameron’s brand salesman. But one effect of today is it has put to bed the argument Cameron is a lame duck leader. David Cameron is now a man with a mission. “He doesn’t believe in anything”. “He is only interested in power for power’s sake”. Those old charges will undoubtedly still be levelled. But they will ring rather hollow now. A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents. But there will be no fighting today. The socially progressive Left has a new leader. His name is David Cameron.
Webbo Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 An “all out assault on poverty”. An attack on “the lowest social mobility in the developed world”. These were the main themes of the Conservative Party leader’s – I’ll repeat that, the Conservative Party leader’s – address to his annual conference. The Tories have always been about social mobility.
sphericalfox Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/07/david-cameron-attacks-jeremy-corbyn-conservative-conference David Cameron attacks Jeremy Corbyn in his conference speech Jessica Elgot David Cameron had some strong words for his Labour opponent, Jeremy Corbyn, in his party conference speech, his first major attack on the new party leader. Addressing the Conservative party conference in Manchester, Cameron said of Corbyn: Is Cameron’s attack justified? Here’s the section, line by line. You only really need to know one thing: he thinks the death of Osama bin Laden was a “tragedy”. No. A tragedy is nearly 3,000 people murdered one morning in New York. A tragedy is the mums and dads who never came home from work that day. A tragedy is people jumping from the towers after the planes hit. My friends – we cannot let that man inflict his security-threatening, terrorist-sympathising, Britain-hating ideology on the country we love. “He thinks the death of Osama bin Laden was a tragedy” Corbyn was on Iran’s Press TV talking about the killing of the al-Qaida leader at his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan by US navy Seals. But the context to that sentence is key – Corbyn is having a discussion about extrajudicial killing. He says, before that controversial line: This was an assassination attempt, and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy. “A tragedy is nearly 3,000 people murdered one morning in New York” Corbyn not only does not dispute this, but says it himself in his very next sentence on the same controversial programme in question. He says: “Security-threatening” The Conservatives have previously launched attack ads calling the Labour leader “a threat to our national security, our economic security and your family’s security”, but the prime minister himself had been relatively restrained in his approach to Corbyn thus far. There are a number of things to which Cameron could be referring. Corbyn has made it clear he is opposed to renewing the Trident nuclear deterrent, and told the BBC he would never authorise the use of nuclear weapons as prime minister. He said: Corbyn has also been accused of wanting to take the UK out of Nato, and wanting to disband the British armed forces. I don’t think we should be spending £100bn on renewing Trident. That is a quarter of our defence budget. There are many in the military that do not want Trident renewed because they see it as an obsolete thing they don’t need. They would much rather see it spent on conventional weapons. He has spoken of wanting to see a world where armies are not necessary, telling a local meeting: Wouldn’t it be wonderful if every politician around the world, instead of taking pride in the size of their armed forces, did what the people of Costa Rica have done and abolished their army and took pride in the fact they don’t have an army? Whether that is “security-threatening” or simply expressing a wish for world peace is for the listener’s interpretation. Corbyn has previously expressed opposition to Nato, but the shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, has made it clear that policy will not be on Corbyn’s agenda as leader. “Terrorist-sympathising” Corbyn is a longstanding advocate of engagement with all sides of conflicts, from the Middle East to Northern Ireland, but some of his associations have drawn criticism for the closeness of the relationships. In a 2009 video, Corbyn mentions having invited “friends in Hamas” and “friends in Hezbollah” to the House of Commons. The militant wing of Hamas has been proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the UK since 2001, with the EU declaring the same for the military wing of Hizbollah in 2013. Corbyn was asked by Channel 4 News about his “friends” phrasing, which the MP said he did not mean in a “collective way”. The MP said he had met with the Hamas leadership on several occasions on his nine visits to Israel and the Palestinian territories, including a visit with JewishLabour MP Gerald Kaufman, but pointed out Tony Blair had also met senior figures from Hamas. Does it mean I agree with Hamas and what it does? No. Does it mean I agree with Hezbollah and what they do? No. What it means is that I think to bring about a peace process, you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree. “Britain-hating” This is the most subjective charge levelled by Cameron. Corbyn did not sing the national anthem at a memorial for the Battle of Britain at St Paul’s cathedral, but said he was overcome with emotions thinking about his parents’ wartime experiences – and promised he would be singing in future. In his own conference speech, Corbyn took on his accusers, claiming he loved Britain for its leftwing values. It is this sense of fair play, these shared majority British values that are the fundamental reason why I love this country and its people. These values are what I was elected on: a kinder politics and a more caring society.
Guest MattP Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Sol Campbell. No idea what to say about this. http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/451671/sol-campbell-the-fa-should-be-more-like-the-tory-party-and-maybe-i-could-be-a-lord.thtml "I wish the FA was as diverse as the Conservative party, I think we'd probably have won the World Cup by now. “Because diversity is key. I think it brings different ideas to the table, ideas people maybe have not thought of… I think now is the time for a bit of political manoeuvring and for them to start thinking a little bit differently and allowing diversity at the higher end of the FA. The Tories really have shed the old "nasty, racist" image haven't they?
Guest MattP Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Can people really not see through Corbyn's "kinder politics" nonsense? He has been one of the biggest ranters on the scene for the last twenty years, he hasn't suddenly had a Road to Damascus moment. It's clearly designed to try and stop the media bringing up the disgraceful things and groups he and his chancellor have cuddled upto in the past.
sphericalfox Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Sol Campbell. No idea what to say about this. http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/451671/sol-campbell-the-fa-should-be-more-like-the-tory-party-and-maybe-i-could-be-a-lord.thtml The Tories really have shed the old "nasty, racist" image haven't they? They are more subtle now.
Bellend Sebastian Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Sol Campbell. No idea what to say about this. http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/451671/sol-campbell-the-fa-should-be-more-like-the-tory-party-and-maybe-i-could-be-a-lord.thtml The Tories really have shed the old "nasty, racist" image haven't they? And probably lost the vote of most of my family in the process. Most of whom will be dead soon anyway, so I can see why he's planning ahead
Guest MattP Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 They are more subtle now. Honestly mate you gotta get out the 1980's, it's clear to everyone but the hard left this is a massively different political party now. They have effectively turned into New Labour. Obviously a good move short term given what the opposition has done to itself but whether it will be sustainable long term I have no idea.
Guest MattP Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 And probably lost the vote of most of my family in the process. Most of whom will be dead soon anyway, so I can see why he's planning ahead People have been saying the Tory vote has been dying off since the 1970's. People always head off to the right when they get older, a little more financially secure and start to think about retirement and their pensions.
sphericalfox Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Honestly mate you gotta get out the 1980's, it's clear to everyone but the hard left this is a massively different political party now. They have effectively turned into New Labour. Obviously a good move short term given what the opposition has done to itself but whether it will be sustainable long term I have no idea. Being closet racists is a good thing.
Guest MattP Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Being closet racists is a good thing. Whose the biggest closet racist in the Tories? Priti Patel, Sajid Javid or Adam Afriyie? Ironically under Corbyn the Tories will have more non white faces on the front bench than your lot could dream of, and none of them will have had to shag Cameron to get the role.
bovril Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Whose the biggest closet racist in the Tories? Priti Patel, Sajid Javid or Adam Afriyie? Ironically under Corbyn the Tories will have more non white faces on the front bench than your lot could dream of, and none of them will have had to shag Cameron to get the role. I really couldn't give a shit about all this tribal bollocks and which party is most racist but are you suggesting non-white people can't be racist?
Guest MattP Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 I really couldn't give a shit about all this tribal bollocks and which party is most racist but are you suggesting non-white people can't be racist? No I was being sarcastic to Spherry's silly remarks about Tories being closet racists, which is an incredible irony when you look at the current Labour shadow cabinet.
bovril Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 No I was being sarcastic to Spherry's silly remarks about Tories being closet racists, which is an incredible irony when you look at the current Labour shadow cabinet. You seemed to be implying that the three people listed couldn't be racist. As far as I'm aware they are all British and could conceivably hate foreign people. Like I said, couldn't give a shit. All this "my party's got more ethnics than yours" is a bit pathetic.
Guest MattP Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 You seemed to be implying that the three people listed couldn't be racist. As far as I'm aware they are all British and could conceivably hate foreign people. Like I said, couldn't give a shit. All this "my party's got more ethnics than yours" is a bit pathetic. It was more of a pisstake as to why a supposed racist party would have three people of colour in high level positions. It doesn't matter anyway as anyone who believes the bullshit about the Tories being a racist party isn't ever going to vote for them anyway. It's not my party either, I'm not a member of any party.
Webbo Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 You seemed to be implying that the three people listed couldn't be racist. As far as I'm aware they are all British and could conceivably hate foreign people. Like I said, couldn't give a shit. All this "my party's got more ethnics than yours" is a bit pathetic. In an ideal world you're right but racism is an easy smear against the tories so pointing out the obvious flaws in that argument is fair imo.
bovril Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 To reference the original post about the ex Arsenal centre half, I personally found Sol Campbell's remarks about 'black players coming home in body bags' from Poland / Ukraine 2012 extremely racist, which is why I made the point.
sphericalfox Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Whose the biggest closet racist in the Tories? Priti Patel, Sajid Javid or Adam Afriyie? Ironically under Corbyn the Tories will have more non white faces on the front bench than your lot could dream of, and none of them will have had to shag Cameron to get the role. Them lads are sound, it's all the old closet racist whiteys who have had to curb their tongues in pubic and media (and FT) that make me laugh.
Dr The Singh Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Just to be politically correct, your all racists and *****
Webbo Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 To reference the original post about the ex Arsenal centre half, I personally found Sol Campbell's remarks about 'black players coming home in body bags' from Poland / Ukraine 2012 extremely racist, which is why I made the point. That's a fair point, now you've reminded me of that I don't think I liked that comment at the time.
bovril Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 In an ideal world you're right but racism is an easy smear against the tories so pointing out the obvious flaws in that argument is fair imo. Indeed. In my personal experience racism in the UK is far from a left / right thing, and not always about skin colour. Having said that I still think we're the most open and tolerant society in Europe.
Guest MattP Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Them lads are sound, it's all the old closet racist whiteys who have had to curb their tongues in pubic and media (and FT) that make me laugh. Well it's a better idea than shoving them in the shadow cabinet.
MooseBreath Posted 7 October 2015 Posted 7 October 2015 Them lads are sound, it's all the old closet racist whiteys who have had to curb their tongues in pubic and media (and FT) that make me laugh. Of all the politics of the last few months, surely "but da tories is racist" isn't the full extent of your analysis? Surely?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.