LiberalFox Posted 23 July 2017 Share Posted 23 July 2017 2 minutes ago, cityfanlee23 said: Never understood all this "Magic money tree" bollocks, we've always had a magic money tree, the Gov owns a bank ffs. All this austerity bullshit is the biggest lie in economic history, anyone who thinks austerity works whilst running a BOT deficit needs to lock themselves in a dark room before they convince any more idiots it works! Agree, "austerity" needs to lower consumption but leave investment unharmed. A classic example would be continuing rationing in the post war years. That lowered the consumption of imported food and applied to wealthy people as well as the poor, in fact rationing affected the wealthy more because they would have otherwise been the biggest consumers. We've become slaves to foreign investment and our own productivity has shown very little growth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiberalFox Posted 23 July 2017 Share Posted 23 July 2017 12 minutes ago, The Floyd said: It's currently regulated by the diagnosis of gender dysphoria I assume. If you allow everyone to legally change their gender - inadvertently allowing everyone to self-diagnose themselves with gender dysphoria - then it creates a grey area as to who is illegible for surgery and who isn't, and if people are offended enough by having to prove it to acquire legal standing, then I'm sure they'll be offended if asked to prove it for medical procedure. It doesn't really follow. I'd imagine you would still need a diagnosis of gender dysphoria to have surgery. No grey area really. People self diagnose themselves with things all the time but many treatments require a medical professional to confirm the diagnosis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Floyd Posted 23 July 2017 Share Posted 23 July 2017 1 minute ago, LiberalFox said: It doesn't really follow. I'd imagine you would still need a diagnosis of gender dysphoria to have surgery. No grey area really. People self diagnose themselves with things all the time but many treatments require a medical professional to confirm the diagnosis. It's not really comparable to someone self-diagnosing themselves with a common cold. If you allow someone to change their gender legally, how do you then say 'sorry you're not enough of X gender to change medically'? Judging by the offence taken previously, there is absolutely a grey area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 23 July 2017 Author Share Posted 23 July 2017 @The Floyd What do you actually understand of the Gender Reasignment proposal? The consultation won't be published until the autumn, so I'm suprised anyone can have a hard and firm view on what's happening here? I sense, some of your points and pre-emotive concerns, whereas a wait and see approach would probably be more sensible, especially as on a cross party matter that this will no doubt become, suitable checks and balances will be brought in where needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Floyd Posted 23 July 2017 Share Posted 23 July 2017 3 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said: @The Floyd What do you actually understand of the Gender Reasignment proposal? The consultation won't be published until the autumn, so I'm suprised anyone can have a hard and firm view on what's happening here? I sense, some of your points and pre-emotive concerns, whereas a wait and see approach would probably be more sensible, especially as on a cross party matter that this will no doubt become, suitable checks and balances will be brought in where needed. Well considering that I labelled it as merely an idea and proposal in my original posts, I'm quite aware that it's just that. Though not 'pre-emotive', of course it's all largely hypothetical. The majority of discussion on any forum is hypothetical. We read snippets of news and interpret it differently, just like in this instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 Brexit economy: sterling fall hits public finances and fails to boost trade https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/24/brexit-economy-sterling-fall-hits-public-finances-and-fails-to-boost-trade?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 15 hours ago, toddybad said: While Hammond looks for a magic money tree, Labour has found one https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jul/23/while-hammond-looks-for-a-magic-money-tree-labour-has-found-one?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard So they found £4.3 billion of the £350 billion they have already pledged to spend, without taking into account the other things they promised and cant afford to pay for. They really are going to be adding an unsustainable amount of debt onto an already unsustainable amount of debt. Interesting the article posted about the IMF it basically says that the reason Britain can borrow at low rates is because we have a track record of fiscal competence, what Labour are suggesting is fiscal incompetence similar to that of Greece. The reason we are fiscally competent is because we can say hold on a minute, we need to cut back on spending here. Actually spending has increased since 2010 and will continue to do so. Departmental budgets have been cut, and mostly it should have been possible to do this through efficiency savings, unfortunately the management in the public sector decided to remove staff from the frontline instead of themselves, which is why I argue these cuts should have been made by some form of value for money independent job assessment. The problem is we have a real shitstorm of events that no recent government has ever planned for, the rising age of the population is a big problem, the baby boomers who have had it all and still want it all, the persistent lack of house building by governments since the late 80/90s has been a problem, (of course Labour preceded over one of the largest house price booms in living history, properties literally doubled in price!), power infrastructure is dated, road and rail infrastructure needs improvement. Personally now I would invest within reason particularly with Brexit any saving we make from leaving the EU, into infrastructure projects, housing, road and rail, all should be done as much as possible by British companies and staff, plan it now and refuse to involve Euro companies if they give us a bad deal. We need to also spend money on innovation, we are a country that invented many of the worlds finest inventions, we need to get back to that. We must encourage more R&D, the tidal barrage in the Severn Estuary would be one project that could be a global leader and that is the kind of thing a Brexit Britain needs to be showing the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 1 hour ago, toddybad said: Brexit economy: sterling fall hits public finances and fails to boost trade https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/24/brexit-economy-sterling-fall-hits-public-finances-and-fails-to-boost-trade?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Another nonsense article form the Guardian. Actually track the £ against the dollar over the last year. In May 2016 it was 1 pound to 1 dollar 38 cents now it is 1 pound to 1 dollar 30 cents. It has lost around 6% and rising recently, its not quite the disaster they make it. But of course the wannabe broadsheet loves a bit of hyperbolic nonsense! Currencies will fluctuate all the time, the pound was last year on a general downward trend. With Brexit everyone is guessing until a deal is in place, it may end up making no difference, it may make a positive difference it may have a massive negative effect. No one knows. Facts remain Britain has always been and will continue to be one of the top economies in the world, with one of the biggest consumer markets. Anyone who fails to do trade with us is missing out on a huge market place, and in a strange way with the British spirit against adversity that will only strengthen our resolve and make us more determined to deliver a success. The decision has been made and now we have to get on and make the best of it. If everyone walks around believing it will be shit it probably will be, if everyone pulls together we could make it a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 (edited) https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jul/24/britain-is-fast-becoming-the-sick-man-of-europe-experts-debate-brexit-data So reading all this the IMF growth forecast for 2017 puts us at >1.7% - just below Germany who is at 1.8% and above France (1.5%) and Italy (1.3%) and yet we are the "sick man of Europe" according to the Guardian? Their agenda is so obvious and they don't even seem to care anymore providing they please the pro-EU readers, @Foxin_mad has it right, in reality a tabloid that's a wannabe broadsheet. Edited 24 July 2017 by MattP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BlueBrett Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 Guck Frowth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 1 minute ago, MattP said: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jul/24/britain-is-fast-becoming-the-sick-man-of-europe-experts-debate-brexit-data So reading all this the IMF growth forecast for 2017 puts us at >1.7% - just below Germany who is at 1.8% and above France (1.5%) and Italy (1.3%) and yet we are the "sick man of Europe". Their agenda is so obvious and they don't even seem to care anymore providing they please the pro-EU readers, @Foxin_mad has it right, in reality a tabloid that's a wannabe broadsheet. The Britain hating paper. Stop funding it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 Media is 'obsessed' with chlorine-washed chicken, says Liam Fox https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/24/us-chlorinated-chicken-not-ruled-out-by-no-10-in-pursuit-of-trade-deals?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Lovely. Gm tainted and chlorine washed. In the words of bernard matthews, "Boooootiful". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopfkino Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 3 minutes ago, toddybad said: Media is 'obsessed' with chlorine-washed chicken, says Liam Fox https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/24/us-chlorinated-chicken-not-ruled-out-by-no-10-in-pursuit-of-trade-deals?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Lovely. Gm tainted and chlorine washed. In the words of bernard matthews, "Boooootiful". Nobody is going to force you to eat it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 Just now, KingGTF said: Nobody is going to force you to eat it If we pretend it's not an issue of political party, do you genuinally want to see our tough food regulations watered down to allow the import of foodstuffs that would currently be illegal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 Haven't the EU scientists said that chlorinated chicken is harmless? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopfkino Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, toddybad said: If we pretend it's not an issue of political party, do you genuinally want to see our tough food regulations watered down to allow the import of foodstuffs that would currently be illegal? I won't be choosing to buy it and cook it myself, if I'm served it and don't notice a different then I won't care. If I do, then I won't be returning to eat it again. So I don't actually care Edited 24 July 2017 by KingGTF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 There are things of genuine concern like hormone fed beef or GM crops but Chlorinated Chicken is nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 5 minutes ago, KingGTF said: I won't be choosing to buy it and cook it myself, if I'm served it and don't notice a different then I won't care. If I do, then I won't be returning to eat it again. So I don't actually care Chances are the yanks will want a TTIP style agreement. That allowed for companies to sue the state if regulations or legislation was passed which impacted upon business. If regulations forced companies to note GM, chlorination or hormone additions etc then real questions are raised about whether our government would be subject to legal action and whether this means these things will end up hidden from consumers. Fair enough you might not mind but many will. This is the opposite of taking back control of our own country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopfkino Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 (edited) 15 minutes ago, toddybad said: Chances are the yanks will want a TTIP style agreement. That allowed for companies to sue the state if regulations or legislation was passed which impacted upon business. If regulations forced companies to note GM, chlorination or hormone additions etc then real questions are raised about whether our government would be subject to legal action and whether this means these things will end up hidden from consumers. Fair enough you might not mind but many will. This is the opposite of taking back control of our own country. Oh I'm in full agreement, the sovereignty argument was absolute nonsense. As soon as you negotiate the FTAs that also underpinned the argument to leave, you lose that control and sovereignty as you outlined. But an agreement I'm sure will be reached and I imagine labelling will be allowed. If not then my stance will change but at the moment, I'm of the opinion if you don't like it, don't eat it. Just as I wouldn't go to crappy chain restaurants, I won't be choosing to eat crappy foods. If people are willing to, then I would suggest the price will probably be low enough for it to benefit them. Edited 24 July 2017 by KingGTF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiberalFox Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 I don't want a free trade deal with America. I'd rather we were poorer than gave up our rights to that lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 15 minutes ago, KingGTF said: Oh I'm in full agreement, the sovereignty argument was absolute nonsense. As soon as you negotiate the FTAs that also underpinned the argument to leave, you lose that control and sovereignty as you outlined. But an agreement I'm sure will be reached and I imagine labelling will be allowed. If not then my stance will change but at the moment, I'm of the opinion if you don't like it, don't eat it. Just as I wouldn't go to crappy chain restaurants, I won't be choosing to eat crappy foods. If people are willing to, then I would suggest the price will probably be low enough for it to benefit them. But we will be making our own agreements and we can break those agreements too. That's sovereignty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 10 minutes ago, LiberalFox said: I don't want a free trade deal with America. I'd rather we were poorer than gave up our rights to that lot. Give up our rights to what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 1 minute ago, Webbo said: But we will be making our own agreements and we can break those agreements too. That's sovereignty. Because we child veto anything we didn't like within the eu, I'm struggling why we didn't have sovereignty before. Oh we did. 3 minutes ago, Webbo said: Give up our rights to what? Lose our rights to make laws affecting business without our taxes being used to pay off business in a TTIP style agreement. 50 minutes ago, toddybad said: If we pretend it's not an issue of political party, do you genuinally want to see our tough food regulations watered down to allow the import of foodstuffs that would currently be illegal? What's your answer to this webbo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 51 minutes ago, toddybad said: If we pretend it's not an issue of political party, do you genuinally want to see our tough food regulations watered down to allow the import of foodstuffs that would currently be illegal? Tough food regulations Someone is forgetting the horse meat scandal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiberalFox Posted 24 July 2017 Share Posted 24 July 2017 4 minutes ago, Webbo said: Give up our rights to what? You can be sure if we chase a free trade deal with the USA it will be loaded in their favour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts