Sharpe's Fox Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 just seen the Ted Heath thing in the news crazy to think we had a nonce as a PM.
Strokes Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 Just now, Sharpe's Fox said: just seen the Ted Heath thing in the news crazy to think we had a nonce as a PM. Hmmm, I’m not sure it can be as cut and dry as that. It’s not like he has been able to defend himself (or anyone on his behalf because obviously he is dead), either legally or literally.
lifted*fox Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 34 minutes ago, MattP said: So you voted for Cameron's Bullingdon Boys' gov but can't stand the least privileged Tory cabinet in history? How bizarre. Bizarre lol. yeah crazy right! changing an opinion on something, bonkers, unheard of.
Sharpe's Fox Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 12 minutes ago, Strokes said: Hmmm, I’m not sure it can be as cut and dry as that. It’s not like he has been able to defend himself (or anyone on his behalf because obviously he is dead), either legally or literally. Nah he were a nonce and I reckon Thatcher, who was obviously a mentalist, covered it up like Savile and Hillsborough. Bloke never married and liked sailing. Classic nonce. 1
Strokes Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 3 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said: Nah he were a nonce and I reckon Thatcher, who was obviously a mentalist, covered it up like Savile and Hillsborough. Bloke never married and liked sailing. Classic nonce. Probably. I reckon McDonnell jerks off to Schindler’s List whist dresses in a nazi costume, so it’s fair to assume such things.
Guest MattP Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 8 minutes ago, Strokes said: Probably. I reckon McDonnell jerks off to Schindler’s List whist dresses in a nazi costume, so it’s fair to assume such things. Corbyn has form for covering up noncing as well, he's probably at it on his allotment. http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/08/31/corbyns-silence-over-child-abuse-in-islington-is-typical-of-how-he-picks-and-chooses-his-causes/
Sharpe's Fox Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 11 minutes ago, Strokes said: Probably. I reckon McDonnell jerks off to Schindler’s List whist dresses in a nazi costume, so it’s fair to assume such things. Nah my man Johnny Mac is a champ of social justice that you'd accuse him of such is pretty disgusting imho
Strokes Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 3 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said: Nah my man Johnny Mac is a champ of social justice that you'd accuse him of such is pretty disgusting imho Social justice I don’t know why you don’t all just say what is you really want. It’s not about helping people poorer than you, it’s about fùcking up people richer than you. If you can’t beat em, beat em up. Social justice, whatever.
Sharpe's Fox Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 6 minutes ago, Strokes said: Social justice I don’t know why you don’t all just say what is you really want. It’s not about helping people poorer than you, it’s about fùcking up people richer than you. If you can’t beat em, beat em up. Social justice, whatever. You're actually not wrong mate that's my politics 1
Strokes Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 Just now, Sharpe's Fox said: You're actually not wrong mate that's my politics Its a shame there aren’t more on here quite so open and honest. Even if a bit disturbing.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 5 October 2017 Posted 5 October 2017 1 hour ago, toddybad said: I'm not actually as wedded to the left as you think but can't see any answers to.the problems I see in everyday life from the Tories. I voted tory in 2010. They need to show they have answers. Saying they'll build 25000 council houses is basically doing nothing. You claim to be the economics expert yet you don't seem to have any new ideas either, instead simply banging on about markets that have been tested to death over the last 40 years. Do any of your text books tell you what to do once markets stop bringing prosperity to the people? I've never professed to be anything of the sort, there's quite a difference between claiming to be an expert and correcting basic errors or asking for a view that's actually informed. I have said that housing is one of the least free markets there is with government having absolute say over what you can and can't do with land. I have said it should be opened up, reduce planning laws and let the market run free. I backed this up with how it will help. In fact, I read just yesterday from the NBER that productivity would be 7% higher in New York if it loosened land use regs back to the levels in 1980. Regs here are even more restrictive. If all US states moved just halfway towards Texas' light touch regulation then productivity would be up 13%, consumption up 12%. There is a huge cost to our prosperity as a result of restricting supply around high TFP areas such as London, Oxford, and Cambridge. Let's create new towns close to London, let's actually develop brownfield sites quickly, let's redraw the greenbelt to enable us to use suitable land and actually protect what needs protecting. There's plenty of good stuff in the housing white paper about tackling housebuilders holding onto land or oligopolistic tendencies in the industry but that now seems to have been watered down. Housing cost is currently the biggest driver of poverty, and it wont be solved with rent controls. Similarly the council housing plan is pathetic, Help to Buy the absolute textbook example of well-imtention but ultimately flawed government intervention. Use the Georgian model for housebuilding again. Release state owned land, the government can even act as a housebuilders so long as it operates like any other market actor by making a profit and reinvesting that. I absolutely believe that the Northern Powerhouse plan deserved more. Invest in connections between cities in the north. Create free enterprise zones, encourage our Silicon Valley to be in Manchester or Leeds. It's seeming death is a tragedy. We should be doing all we can to stop foreign companies using the week pound to snap up our highly productive, innovative firms. We should use leaving Europe to our advantage and solidify London as start-up capital of Europe with incentives. The government should make sure we are at the forefront of technology. Instead of alienating uber, get uber working on driverless cars here. Get developing magnetic induction in roads or whatever. Continue to devlove powers to regions and cities. I've offered up an equity solution to university funding. Whether it's Corbyn' s system or the current one, universities have little incentive to produce high quality graduates because all their income from a student is front-loaded. Let them share in the liability and encourage universities to produce skilled and productive workers. Absolutely throw our weight behind James Dyson's tech uni. Continue the free schools program and give parents choice on their children's schooling. Improve FE at local levels, particularly in the north east or on our coasts. I have said I would offer a basic income. I have suggested it might be time for us to look at an SHI model for the NHS. We should absolutely push through with changes to social care funding so those with valuable property fund their own care. I'd take public pay decisions out of central government hands and ensure decisions are made by those actually running services in local areas. Not a domestic policy but I have suggested a sovereign wealth fund kind of thing would be better for the aid budget and reduce contributions in the long run. We should be building onshore wind farms and encouraging investment in gas power stations as an ancilliary service, something we are actively discouraging at the moment. We should be opening the railways up to competition. No more franchises to protect monopoly over routes. The government should stop setting ridiculous price increases(lest we forget who is responsible for setting fares). In the last year I've regularly travelled between London and Rugby, and between London and Oxford, both of which I feel run well because I have choice of operators and are pretty damn cheap. On that, we need to get rid of this absurdity of an inefficient government owned Network Rail that **** about with pretty much everything unsuccessfully. Many of these things I've mentioned on here before, some I haven't and if I actually thought about it I could offer up some more. Maybe I can set up my own party with a slogan of 'Plans by the many, not by the few' and we can all sing 'KingGTF's on fire, Jeremy is terrified' at conference. I can whip out 'Capitalism and Freedom' on budget day whilst John McDonnell lauds Mao's little red book.
Guest Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 4 hours ago, KingGTF said: I've never professed to be anything of the sort, there's quite a difference between claiming to be an expert and correcting basic errors or asking for a view that's actually informed. I have said that housing is one of the least free markets there is with government having absolute say over what you can and can't do with land. I have said it should be opened up, reduce planning laws and let the market run free. I backed this up with how it will help. In fact, I read just yesterday from the NBER that productivity would be 7% higher in New York if it loosened land use regs back to the levels in 1980. Regs here are even more restrictive. If all US states moved just halfway towards Texas' light touch regulation then productivity would be up 13%, consumption up 12%. There is a huge cost to our prosperity as a result of restricting supply around high TFP areas such as London, Oxford, and Cambridge. Let's create new towns close to London, let's actually develop brownfield sites quickly, let's redraw the greenbelt to enable us to use suitable land and actually protect what needs protecting. There's plenty of good stuff in the housing white paper about tackling housebuilders holding onto land or oligopolistic tendencies in the industry but that now seems to have been watered down. Housing cost is currently the biggest driver of poverty, and it wont be solved with rent controls. Similarly the council housing plan is pathetic, Help to Buy the absolute textbook example of well-imtention but ultimately flawed government intervention. Use the Georgian model for housebuilding again. Release state owned land, the government can even act as a housebuilders so long as it operates like any other market actor by making a profit and reinvesting that. I absolutely believe that the Northern Powerhouse plan deserved more. Invest in connections between cities in the north. Create free enterprise zones, encourage our Silicon Valley to be in Manchester or Leeds. It's seeming death is a tragedy. We should be doing all we can to stop foreign companies using the week pound to snap up our highly productive, innovative firms. We should use leaving Europe to our advantage and solidify London as start-up capital of Europe with incentives. The government should make sure we are at the forefront of technology. Instead of alienating uber, get uber working on driverless cars here. Get developing magnetic induction in roads or whatever. Continue to devlove powers to regions and cities. I've offered up an equity solution to university funding. Whether it's Corbyn' s system or the current one, universities have little incentive to produce high quality graduates because all their income from a student is front-loaded. Let them share in the liability and encourage universities to produce skilled and productive workers. Absolutely throw our weight behind James Dyson's tech uni. Continue the free schools program and give parents choice on their children's schooling. Improve FE at local levels, particularly in the north east or on our coasts. I have said I would offer a basic income. I have suggested it might be time for us to look at an SHI model for the NHS. We should absolutely push through with changes to social care funding so those with valuable property fund their own care. I'd take public pay decisions out of central government hands and ensure decisions are made by those actually running services in local areas. Not a domestic policy but I have suggested a sovereign wealth fund kind of thing would be better for the aid budget and reduce contributions in the long run. We should be building onshore wind farms and encouraging investment in gas power stations as an ancilliary service, something we are actively discouraging at the moment. We should be opening the railways up to competition. No more franchises to protect monopoly over routes. The government should stop setting ridiculous price increases(lest we forget who is responsible for setting fares). In the last year I've regularly travelled between London and Rugby, and between London and Oxford, both of which I feel run well because I have choice of operators and are pretty damn cheap. On that, we need to get rid of this absurdity of an inefficient government owned Network Rail that **** about with pretty much everything unsuccessfully. Many of these things I've mentioned on here before, some I haven't and if I actually thought about it I could offer up some more. Maybe I can set up my own party with a slogan of 'Plans by the many, not by the few' and we can all sing 'KingGTF's on fire, Jeremy is terrified' at conference. I can whip out 'Capitalism and Freedom' on budget day whilst John McDonnell lauds Mao's little red book. Ok, now that's quite an interesting set of proposals. Actually an interesting set of proposals that bridges the gap between left and right in some ways. On housing I have backed Labour's plan to get the council's building very significant numbers of houses as we clearly don't build what we need now. Their approach would both give the nation houses and potentially bring about a reduction in houses prices generally, both of which I think are necessary. If we could get housing working like a real market and standing on its own two feet then your alternative suggestion would be an interesting proposition. I tend to have a negative view of developers as 1- they hang on to land they could be developing such you note as an issue that child be dealt with, 2- houses are being built smaller and smaller with price's getting bigger and bigger. Way smaller than the supposed minimum room sizes that exist theoretically but not practically. I fear deregulation.would see a cartel of developers building ever smaller properties and setting this as the market norm. I guess your argument is that compete deregulation would allow new players to enter the market with better quality homes to win business. I'd be prepared to see if this worked but as a possible right wing friendly alternative to what we have now you would think this would be a potential tory policy. They currently seem to wedded to schemes which will keep property prices high and do nothing to reduce the housing shortfall. Re the northern.powerhouse we are in agreement. The argument that London should see such a vastly disproportionate spend on transport compared to the rest of the country is ridiculous.If the rest of the country had seen a decent level of investment after Maggie snagged their industries 40 years ago the north might have stood a chance of recovering. It is a moral duty to give those cities of the north the infrastructure to allow them to sell private investment and bring jobs and industry back to the north. Labour actually had some decent ideas for this within their industrial.strategy but it didn't receive much attention even when talked about! Unfortunately I don't think Osborne did any nor than just pay lip service to the idea of rebuilding the north and a railway was the height of his ambitions. As somebody who was interested in science and technology in.my younger years, induction within roads has been something I've been frustrated with the slow progress with for years. We should have been building this into our infrastructure plans for the last decade or more. Make every new public building or commercial.building include solar paneling and electrical access points for vehicle repowering. Build tidal lagoons. Build onshore wind farms. Provide incentives for builders to utilise solar roof tiles (not sure how that fits with the housing free market but still...), use policy to incentivese working from home to get rush hour traffic off of our roads, give business reason to move shipments around the country by rail instead of road, build the clean energy technologies of tomorrow now and become a world leader in their use and research. Use policy to make fossil fuel worthless in this country and retrain staff working in dirty energy to work within the new clean energy market. We have to think big and he bold when it comes to energy imo. Hinckley point should be scrapped. Re universities you know my views on.student debt. I can live with students paying a much smaller contribution - the £3k at least was vaguely sensible with the debts being produced. £9k+ per year is not sensible nor sustainable. I'd add that industry needs a stake in higher and further education. I wonder if an increase in corporation tax might be easier for business to swallow if a portion of the income generated (and we could argue just about those last few words i'm sure) was ringfenced and policy altered to ensure that fe colleges and universities were giving our young education and training in the areas needed by industry. We don't need a generation of film.critics and David Beckham buographers. We do need scientists and engineers. So make those courses cheaper. Use the additional corporation tax to give industry high quality graduate engineers who have studied modules developed with business. Perhaps if industry had a stake in this way it might be more inclined to see psaying tax as in its own interest. Basic income is an interesting one. Something the greens pushed over recent years and labour seem to be toying with the idea. Do you know much about where it had actually been implemented (I'm thinking possibly Scandinavia but not sure if I'm just thinking that as there always seems to be a Norwegian model for everything) and the results of this? Rather like with housing, rail.does need a real shake up. Again, I've backed the labour renationisation.model as what we currently have is a mess. Again you've gone for the free market model. Why haven't the Tories already gone down this route? This is precisely what I've been talking about recently - there c are real world issues that need solving. Here is a possible solution that could have been tried to the satisfaction of tory party members yet they've just opted for the status quo. I can't understand why there is such a dirty of talent within the party to just make bold changes. I'm not saying it would work.or wouldn't work.but surely it's worth trying something to deal with the issues people have with the railways?! Not sure what your last paragraph is there for. Corbyn has won admirers amongst left leaning voters because of the clarity of his vision for change. Many of his policies prove extremely popular through polling etc. The fact the left currently has energy and ac real commitment to change is exciting people. It is easy.to mock some of the ways in which this comes out but it is refreshing to see people energised by politics. The challenge for the right is to energise its politicians, members, supporters and potential voters through bold policy that redefines what the right is and offers hope and change to the country. One or two of your suggestions would actually sit quite comfortably within a Tory manifesto and would be radical enough to instill some excitement. They are precisely the sort of policies that should be advanced. The only qualms I have are whether true free markets can work given greed, cartels etc that we see in our current markets, as well as the fact that you need inefficient practices in.the real world that industry doesn't tend to accept (building roads, rail and phone lines to extremely isolated areas for example). As the Tories seem unlikely to step away from the idea of markets any time soon then let them go for true free markets to either prove or bury their convictions forever.
SMX11 Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 7 hours ago, KingGTF said: I've never professed to be anything of the sort, there's quite a difference between claiming to be an expert and correcting basic errors or asking for a view that's actually informed. I have said that housing is one of the least free markets there is with government having absolute say over what you can and can't do with land. I have said it should be opened up, reduce planning laws and let the market run free. I backed this up with how it will help. In fact, I read just yesterday from the NBER that productivity would be 7% higher in New York if it loosened land use regs back to the levels in 1980. Regs here are even more restrictive. If all US states moved just halfway towards Texas' light touch regulation then productivity would be up 13%, consumption up 12%. There is a huge cost to our prosperity as a result of restricting supply around high TFP areas such as London, Oxford, and Cambridge. Let's create new towns close to London, let's actually develop brownfield sites quickly, let's redraw the greenbelt to enable us to use suitable land and actually protect what needs protecting. There's plenty of good stuff in the housing white paper about tackling housebuilders holding onto land or oligopolistic tendencies in the industry but that now seems to have been watered down. Housing cost is currently the biggest driver of poverty, and it wont be solved with rent controls. Similarly the council housing plan is pathetic, Help to Buy the absolute textbook example of well-imtention but ultimately flawed government intervention. Use the Georgian model for housebuilding again. Release state owned land, the government can even act as a housebuilders so long as it operates like any other market actor by making a profit and reinvesting that. I absolutely believe that the Northern Powerhouse plan deserved more. Invest in connections between cities in the north. Create free enterprise zones, encourage our Silicon Valley to be in Manchester or Leeds. It's seeming death is a tragedy. We should be doing all we can to stop foreign companies using the week pound to snap up our highly productive, innovative firms. We should use leaving Europe to our advantage and solidify London as start-up capital of Europe with incentives. The government should make sure we are at the forefront of technology. Instead of alienating uber, get uber working on driverless cars here. Get developing magnetic induction in roads or whatever. Continue to devlove powers to regions and cities. I've offered up an equity solution to university funding. Whether it's Corbyn' s system or the current one, universities have little incentive to produce high quality graduates because all their income from a student is front-loaded. Let them share in the liability and encourage universities to produce skilled and productive workers. Absolutely throw our weight behind James Dyson's tech uni. Continue the free schools program and give parents choice on their children's schooling. Improve FE at local levels, particularly in the north east or on our coasts. I have said I would offer a basic income. I have suggested it might be time for us to look at an SHI model for the NHS. We should absolutely push through with changes to social care funding so those with valuable property fund their own care. I'd take public pay decisions out of central government hands and ensure decisions are made by those actually running services in local areas. Not a domestic policy but I have suggested a sovereign wealth fund kind of thing would be better for the aid budget and reduce contributions in the long run. We should be building onshore wind farms and encouraging investment in gas power stations as an ancilliary service, something we are actively discouraging at the moment. We should be opening the railways up to competition. No more franchises to protect monopoly over routes. The government should stop setting ridiculous price increases(lest we forget who is responsible for setting fares). In the last year I've regularly travelled between London and Rugby, and between London and Oxford, both of which I feel run well because I have choice of operators and are pretty damn cheap. On that, we need to get rid of this absurdity of an inefficient government owned Network Rail that **** about with pretty much everything unsuccessfully. Many of these things I've mentioned on here before, some I haven't and if I actually thought about it I could offer up some more. Maybe I can set up my own party with a slogan of 'Plans by the many, not by the few' and we can all sing 'KingGTF's on fire, Jeremy is terrified' at conference. I can whip out 'Capitalism and Freedom' on budget day whilst John McDonnell lauds Mao's little red book. Very good post whilst I don't agree with every potential solution it is certainly a lot more radical than what the 'Conservatives' have offered. They only appear to run on that they are good administrators and that line looks increasing wrong. The main problem is that most of the MP's in parliament and on the government's benches don't believe in light touch regulation or free markets. I can't see us moving away from the highly regulated market economy without a real change in the Zeitgeist, hopefully it swings the right way.
Alf Bentley Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 Blimey! The campaign to depose Theresa is being led by Grant Schapps of all people. That's a bit like facing the prospect of being assassinated by Noddy.
Buce Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 10 hours ago, Strokes said: Hmmm, I’m not sure it can be as cut and dry as that. It’s not like he has been able to defend himself (or anyone on his behalf because obviously he is dead), either legally or literally. Savile?
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 13 hours ago, toddybad said: You're the most right wing left winger I've ever heard of. Perhaps it will play out life the 70s. Perhaps. But the current economic system has stopped working. It's been failing for a decade. Something has to change and only one party is offering an alternative. The current system is wreaking misery. What is not working about growth for nearly 5 consecutive years and the highest levels of employment on record? There are problems yes, and the government are working on resolving them. I think they deserve a chance, getting so many people into jobs, getting business growing, new start-ups is all important steps forward. The more people are employed and with less migration there comes a point that business will have to begin to pay better, with near full employment people would have tremendous leverage to be headhunted and move, good business will have to pay good rates for the best staff. In Stoke land is being developed that has stood empty for over 30 years to the North of the city, this is a great thing. Yes it appears to be warehousing but its better to see the land being redeveloped when it has stood in decline for so long. It a pretty much a given that Corbyns policies and hate for private business will cause higher levels of unemployment, probably long term in the public sector to because he economic plan will not work. You say that the current system is broken but the system Corbyn is proposing has never ever worked anywhere at any point. Its too extreme we need business and we need the rich. This policy of hate and class war is ridiculous. Having a low rate of taxation will make Britain an attractive place to operate for the best businesses and the best entrepreneurs across the globe.
Guest Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 2 hours ago, Foxin_mad said: What is not working about growth for nearly 5 consecutive years and the highest levels of employment on record? There are problems yes, and the government are working on resolving them. I think they deserve a chance, getting so many people into jobs, getting business growing, new start-ups is all important steps forward. The more people are employed and with less migration there comes a point that business will have to begin to pay better, with near full employment people would have tremendous leverage to be headhunted and move, good business will have to pay good rates for the best staff. In Stoke land is being developed that has stood empty for over 30 years to the North of the city, this is a great thing. Yes it appears to be warehousing but its better to see the land being redeveloped when it has stood in decline for so long. It a pretty much a given that Corbyns policies and hate for private business will cause higher levels of unemployment, probably long term in the public sector to because he economic plan will not work. You say that the current system is broken but the system Corbyn is proposing has never ever worked anywhere at any point. Its too extreme we need business and we need the rich. This policy of hate and class war is ridiculous. Having a low rate of taxation will make Britain an attractive place to operate for the best businesses and the best entrepreneurs across the globe. Fox, wages and living standards have been falling for a decade and personal debt is at record levels. You can't pretend that life for ordinary people is fine. I've said multiple times that you don't have to vote labour, you can seek change via a Tory party that has sought its own answers to the many problems that face us. Denying there's a problem is the biggest issue imho.
Guest Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 58 minutes ago, MattP said: The public baffle me. I suspect the lack of a viable alternative might explain those results.
Innovindil Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 3 minutes ago, toddybad said: Fox, wages and living standards have been falling for a decade and personal debt is at record levels. You can't pretend that life for ordinary people is fine. I've said multiple times that you don't have to vote labour, you can seek change via a Tory party that has sought its own answers to the many problems that face us. Denying there's a problem is the biggest issue imho. Can you define ordinary people for me please?
Guest Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 The many not the few Okay that was a joke. Define it how you like but the fact you are doing well when we know that average wages are falling and average debts are rising suggests you might not be the norm.
Guest MattP Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 9 minutes ago, Innovindil said: Can you define ordinary people for me please? The many not the Jew.
Innovindil Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 (edited) 12 minutes ago, toddybad said: The many not the few Okay that was a joke. Define it how you like but the fact you are doing well when we know that average wages are falling and average debts are rising suggests you might not be the norm. My brother and his missus, both on minimum wage (his missus working part time) and my other brother, a single parent living on benefits, are also doing well. Are they ordinary people? I was looking at a study on struggling people the other day, I'll post a couple of snippets from it that I found interesting. As a heads up, this was conducted in 2013, so the figures may be skewed. A "live for now" culture and poor financial skills were also found to be likely causes. One in five of those surveyed said they would rather have £200 now than £400 in four months' time, with one quarter of people saying they prefer to live for today rather than plan for tomorrow. The report also revealed that a worrying number of Britons lack financial knowledge. Some 12pc of those questioned believed the Bank of England's base rate, which has been at a historic 0.5pc low for more than four years, was over 10pc. More than one third of people did not understand the impact that inflation has on their savings and 16pc could not identify the correct balance on a bank statement. So, we've got lower than balls interest rates, I think it costs atm £400 to borrow £5000 over 5 years, you're going to get people in debt pretty easy, sounds like a bargain to have a better today to me. Couple that with people having the financial literacy of a turnip, and unsurprisingly, you'll get people struggling. What I don't understand is how this live for today **** tomorrow attitude can be blamed on the government. But admittedly, I could be missing something. Edit, those last 2 paragraphs were supposed to go back to normal font, no idea how to do it. /facepalm Edited 6 October 2017 by Innovindil
Carl the Llama Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 Tbh if you have no money now of course you won't want to wait 4 months for a bigger sum, you've got to eat today. 2
Alf Bentley Posted 6 October 2017 Posted 6 October 2017 20 minutes ago, toddybad said: I suspect the lack of a viable alternative might explain those results. I'm sure that's part of it. I suspect part of it is also the fact that most people don't pay much attention to politics most of the time. Back in June, a few more held clear views (generally more negative about May) because the election caught their attention. A lot of people will only have got a subliminal impression of recent events - and many will mistrust all politicians, anyway.
Recommended Posts