Buce Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 31 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Go to Love the left though! Shouting 'Need more Money for Our NHS, SAVE OUR NHS, TORY SCUM SHITS' May gives money, 'not that money its the wrong kind of money, that's tory scum shit money' 'taking off the poor blah blah' Nothing has been taken off the poor, the personal allowance has risen more in 5 years of Tory rule than it did in 17 years of Labour, of course they just brought in a load of in work benefits, instead of letting people keep what they earn bribes for votes eh?. At the end of the day if you want better services YOU have to pay, every ****er has to pay, May is absolutely correct on this one. We can not live in this ****ing stupid world where we are constantly bashing the rich, who already pay the majority of tax in this country anyway. Corbyn is an absolute belled for this class war shit he has stoked, that actually makes people believe dangerous shit like this, the young have been brainwashed, the sooner the crinkly old twat ****s off the better. This politics of envy is a disgrace. 1 29 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Its the wrong kind of tax. We need borrowing not Tory Scum borrowing we need Red flag Labour borrowing! Make the rich men pay...….bastards Requisitions the businesses......****ers We need a better a Britain, a redder Britain, as Britain that is equally shit for everyone Keep the Red Flag Flying 8 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Its funny that Labour and voters claim to be 'progressive', yet they are still pedalling failed policies from the 1970s with a dour old man who has no o-levels, no experience of leadership and who looks like a crap 1970s geography teacher. The hard left unions are run by the same kind of hideous dinosaurs like Len McCluskey. 2 Do you ever stop and read what you've written? You're capable of advancing reasonable arguments - hell, I've even agreed with you a couple of times recently - but this is just ranting. 2
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 3 minutes ago, Buce said: I disagree. It would be political suicide for either party, I suspect, because as a nation we are quite conservative (lower-case 'c'), but more so for the Tories because of who their voter base is. I suppose it remains to be seen. To be honest it has no interest to me overall. It absolutely should be legalised for medical purposes where research demonstrates benefits, whether that is in pain or other areas. That said I would rather it be on sale safely, regulated and taxed. It seems there is already quite high usage, a blind eye is turned. Like Hague says the only ones really benefitting are criminal gangs.
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 2 minutes ago, Buce said: Do you ever stop and read what you've written? You're capable of advancing reasonable arguments - hell, I've even agreed with you a couple of times recently - but this is just ranting. Yes, Toddy set me off with the crap he put before. Its annoying to see someone moaning every day requesting more spending for 'public services', when more spending is delivered apparently it is the wrong kind of 'tory' spending, then he goes off on one about the 'right' being happy because the poor will be paying more tax (which they wont be)? What? Bonkers? I thinks its fair to say. I am extremely critical of this government, I am still not certain of this particular policy either. But at the end of the day May is trying to do what she thinks the people of the country want. I still maintain that however incompetent she is, things would be many times worse with Corbyn. In the past May was criticised for not trying new things, she is trying new things, she has suggested social care reform which went don't like a lead balloon, she has suggested more funding for the NHS than the Labour manifesto last year.
Guest Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 39 minutes ago, Buce said: I disagree. It would be political suicide for either party, I suspect, because as a nation we are quite conservative (lower-case 'c'), but more so for the Tories because of who their voter base is. I doubt it would be political suicide. The vast majority couldn't give a damn either way on this issue and would certainly support the loosening of rules around medicinal marijuana.
Alf Bentley Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 53 minutes ago, Strokes said: Doesn’t give the NHS enough money (apparently) - evil Tory scum. Gives NHS more money - evil Tory scum. Hilarious I haven't seen anyone describe the Tories as "evil scum" for giving the NHS more money. The criticisms I've seen/heard on here and elsewhere are: - They're not planning to increase it enough - They're making a preposterous attempt to present it as a "Brexit dividend", while budgeting for no Brexit dividend in the next few years and while accepting that there will be tax rises - The tax rises to fund it will hit those on low/middle incomes, not the rich (pure speculation, frankly, as they won't announce the tax rises until autumn) I welcome this much-needed increase in NHS spending (how about tackling social care, though?). The "Brexit dividend" spin is transparently ridiculous, but I'll wait to hear where they're going to get the £20bn from before judging that. It might not all be funded through tax rises, anyway. It might be partly funded by loosening policy on deficit/debt. Regarding the criticism that it is not enough.... That could be seen as ungenerous carping by critics, as it is a welcome move, public funds are not unlimited and Tories will always spend less and tax less than Labour. But there is some justification for that criticism in historic terms. The 3.4% p.a. real terms increase is slightly lower than the post-war average, on a par with spending under Thatcher/Major and much lower than under Blair/Brown - it is only a big increase compared to the austerity years since 2010. The graph in the article is instructive - not least for anyone who claims "Tory and Labour, they're all the same".
Alf Bentley Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 37 minutes ago, Buce said: Do you ever stop and read what you've written? You're capable of advancing reasonable arguments - hell, I've even agreed with you a couple of times recently - but this is just ranting. Seconded. Come on, @Foxin_mad, "you're better than this" (as Matt has said to me a couple of times ). You make some decent points from your perspective, some of which I even agree with. There are even decent, or at least arguable points buried in the bile spouted in your posts that Buce quoted (re. Labour's in-work benefits, Tory increases in tax threshold). Why bury them in a load of ranting? You clearly have a visceral hatred of the Left, I get that. But would you be more persuaded if Lefties started lumping personal abuse on Tories, peddling straw-man parodies of your views and depicting you as a ranter while ranting themselves? It's not likely to make for a decent atmosphere for debate, either, is it? Sorry if that sounds preachy...
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said: Seconded. Come on, @Foxin_mad, "you're better than this" (as Matt has said to me a couple of times ). You make some decent points from your perspective, some of which I even agree with. There are even decent, or at least arguable points buried in the bile spouted in your posts that Buce quoted (re. Labour's in-work benefits, Tory increases in tax threshold). Why bury them in a load of ranting? You clearly have a visceral hatred of the Left, I get that. But would you be more persuaded if Lefties started lumping personal abuse on Tories, peddling straw-man parodies of your views and depicting you as a ranter while ranting themselves? It's not likely to make for a decent atmosphere for debate, either, is it? Sorry if that sounds preachy... Its not even a hatred of the left particularly, I can fully respect the views of the left. What I hate is the tribe mentality, I can not stand Corbyn or any of the current Labour front bench, I think some are doing it in some kind of blind faith. I find it very hard to believe that any of his policies would be a success. What is annoying is that when people spend months complaining about a lack of investment, they then moan when there is an investment. It think the last part happened all the time from certain members of the left. The right or 'Tories' are portrayed as heatless and uncaring just because they have different views on borrowing, spending and taxation. I am not a 'Tory', although I may have voted Tory, I will vote for whichever party I feel offers the best options. Sometimes that 'could' be Labour. I will try not to get wound up in future. Edited 19 June 2018 by Foxin_mad
Guest Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 9 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Its not even a hatred of the left particularly, I can fully respect the views of the left. What I hate is the tribe mentality, I can not stand Corbyn or any of the current Labour front bench, I think some are doing it in some kind of blind faith. I find it very hard to believe that any of his policies would be a success. What is annoying is that when people spend months complaining about a lack of investment, they then moan when there is an investment. It think the last part happened all the time from certain members of the left. The right or 'Tories' are portrayed as heatless and uncaring just because they have different views on borrowing, spending and taxation. I am not a 'Tory', although I may have voted Tory, I will vote for whichever party I feel offers the best options. Sometimes that 'could' be Labour. I will try not to get would up in future. I haven't complained about investment being increased. I pointed out that it isn't being increased enough. The independent analysis (I think it was the IFS but can't recall exactly) reckon more than this is needed just to maintain the currently falling apart services and more like 5% is needed to actually start to see improvements - which imo as somebody that sees what is going on - are needed.
Alf Bentley Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 17 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Its not even a hatred of the left particularly, I can fully respect the views of the left. What I hate is the tribe mentality, I can not stand Corbyn or any of the current Labour front bench, I think some are doing it in some kind of blind faith. I find it very hard to believe that any of his policies would be a success. What is annoying is that when people spend months complaining about a lack of investment, they then moan when there is an investment. It think the last part happened all the time from certain members of the left. The right or 'Tories' are portrayed as heatless and uncaring just because they have different views on borrowing, spending and taxation. I am not a 'Tory', although I may have voted Tory, I will vote for whichever party I feel offers the best options. Sometimes that 'could' be Labour. I will try not to get would up in future. Fair enough. Although my views of Labour under Corbyn are more mixed than yours (some good stuff, some bad), I think that I know where you're coming from when you refer to "blind faith" and "tribe mentality". Many on the Labour Left tend to see the world in terms that are too black and white for me - Palestinians, Irish Republicans, public sector & the poor are "good"; Israelis, Ulster Unionists, private business & the rich are "bad" etc. Life ain't that simple - and it gets them into trouble. It seems like a quest for moral superiority among some on the Left. But you get a similar thing on the Right. While Leftists sometimes overlook the bad stuff done by Hamas, the IRA, public sector inefficiencies or irresponsible individuals, Rightists sometimes use the free market, budgetary responsibility or public opinion as inflexible pretexts for the acceptance of all sorts of social deprivation or injustice (think Windrush or financial savings on Grenfell renovation). That's where the "heartless and uncaring" bit comes from, I think, especially when there is growing inequality (a wider socioeconomic phenomenon; I'm not trying to blame the Tories for that situation - only their response to it). Fair point that the response to the NHS spending increase shouldn't just be carping from the Left - though there's still room for measured criticism. Anyway, got to work!
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 28 minutes ago, toddybad said: I haven't complained about investment being increased. I pointed out that it isn't being increased enough. The independent analysis (I think it was the IFS but can't recall exactly) reckon more than this is needed just to maintain the currently falling apart services and more like 5% is needed to actually start to see improvements - which imo as somebody that sees what is going on - are needed. Its being increased by more than the Labour manifesto suggested however. They are putting funding in now, I think next the NHS needs real reform. As I have said before the failing in the NHS are not just funding issues, there are elements of bad management, poorly run third party services, an absolutely horrendous area of waste is procurement.
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 18 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said: Fair enough. Although my views of Labour under Corbyn are more mixed than yours (some good stuff, some bad), I think that I know where you're coming from when you refer to "blind faith" and "tribe mentality". Many on the Labour Left tend to see the world in terms that are too black and white for me - Palestinians, Irish Republicans, public sector & the poor are "good"; Israelis, Ulster Unionists, private business & the rich are "bad" etc. Life ain't that simple - and it gets them into trouble. It seems like a quest for moral superiority among some on the Left. But you get a similar thing on the Right. While Leftists sometimes overlook the bad stuff done by Hamas, the IRA, public sector inefficiencies or irresponsible individuals, Rightists sometimes use the free market, budgetary responsibility or public opinion as inflexible pretexts for the acceptance of all sorts of social deprivation or injustice (think Windrush or financial savings on Grenfell renovation). That's where the "heartless and uncaring" bit comes from, I think, especially when there is growing inequality (a wider socioeconomic phenomenon; I'm not trying to blame the Tories for that situation - only their response to it). Fair point that the response to the NHS spending increase shouldn't just be carping from the Left - though there's still room for measured criticism. Anyway, got to work! No one is perfect but I don't genuinely believe that there are many that want to see anyone in genuine suffering. With regards to Grenfell and Windrush, mistakes have been made but again I don't genuinely believe anyone wanted what happened to happen. Hopefully we can learn and move on. With regards to economic differences, there will always be so; whilst there are differences in human beings. If one person is more educated than another, then I think it is correct that they should earn more, if they do a more high pressure job than another it is correct they should earn more. I don't think we are ever going to be in a position where are warehouse worker is earning nearly the same as a biochemist. If that ever does happen then really what is the point of all this free education being proposed?
Guest Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 25 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: Its being increased by more than the Labour manifesto suggested however. They are putting funding in now, I think next the NHS needs real reform. As I have said before the failing in the NHS are not just funding issues, there are elements of bad management, poorly run third party services, an absolutely horrendous area of waste is procurement. And that's fine but: - you have to invest fully until such a time as you identify and make those efficiencies, not cut first and hope they appear - I think TM has referred to efficiencies but only in the half hearted way where they haven't been identified. I'd be happy to see a government led review which identified potential savings (remove Langley reforms, do national level procurement, have the NHS as an employer instead of individual trusts etc). But instead they've previously just cut and left it to trusts that are up to their eyeballs in crisis management to make savings. You can be pleased with the increase but have to also admit the failings. The fact they've allowed services to reach crisis point means it now takes more money just to get back to normal.
Guest Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 25 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: No one is perfect but I don't genuinely believe that there are many that want to see anyone in genuine suffering. With regards to Grenfell and Windrush, mistakes have been made but again I don't genuinely believe anyone wanted what happened to happen. Hopefully we can learn and move on. With regards to economic differences, there will always be so; whilst there are differences in human beings. If one person is more educated than another, then I think it is correct that they should earn more, if they do a more high pressure job than another it is correct they should earn more. I don't think we are ever going to be in a position where are warehouse worker is earning nearly the same as a biochemist. If that ever does happen then really what is the point of all this free education being proposed? Nobody has ever proposed people shouldn't earn more. The left just generally thinks there's a level of differential where it becomes unacceptable and unsustainable.
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 5 minutes ago, toddybad said: And that's fine but: - you have to invest fully until such a time as you identify and make those efficiencies, not cut first and hope they appear - I think TM has referred to efficiencies but only in the half hearted way where they haven't been identified. I'd be happy to see a government led review which identified potential savings (remove Langley reforms, do national level procurement, have the NHS as an employer instead of individual trusts etc). But instead they've previously just cut and left it to trusts that are up to their eyeballs in crisis management to make savings. You can be pleased with the increase but have to also admit the failings. The fact they've allowed services to reach crisis point means it now takes more money just to get back to normal. I suppose they are trying to strike a balance. At the end of the day you have unfunded proposals from a Labour party, basing spending plans on mostly unfounded predictions of revenues raised from rich bashing. Or you tackle a problem for a services which everyone uses, if people want more services EVERYONE has to pay more. The reason funding has been restricted for so many years, gets back into the loop of financial crash/taxation/borrowing etc. If people are happy to pay a lot more, then great. Lets put it into public services. An extra 10p from ALL would make a huge difference.
Buce Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 2 hours ago, toddybad said: I doubt it would be political suicide. The vast majority couldn't give a damn either way on this issue and would certainly support the loosening of rules around medicinal marijuana. Medicinal maybe, but not recreational. The Tory press would have a field day with it - you can see on here the kind of ill-informed bullshit that the pig-headed and the ignorant will swallow.
Guest Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 Barnier: UK will lose access to EU security databases after Brexit https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/19/barnier-uk-will-lose-access-to-eu-security-databases-after-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Guest Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 And it looks like it'll be Grieve vs May in a vote this week unless she backs down (as usual). Brexit: No 10 will not accept 'meaningful vote' amendment https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/19/brexit-no-10-to-re-table-its-meaningful-vote-amendment-after-lords-defeat?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 I wonder if the Tories are preparing for an election in the Autumn. 1. NHS Funding 2. Legal weed Surely that would win a few votes amongst the young! Joke by the way! I can not honestly see how Brexit can happen without an election, its going to end up as a constitutional mess between lords/Parliament with no clear support for any type of Brexit. I think now we need an election with the parties standing for what it is they 'Truly' believe in, in terms of Brexit. If May wants to deliver a hard Brexit, let her stand on that and get a majority. If we want no Brexit the Lib Dems, for cake Brexit that Corbyn doesn't really want but feels he has to Labour. If Labour could install a semi competent front bench, and I suppose go down the route of the EEA Swiss style agreement, they would have my vote. Without I would have to hope for a resurgent lib dems!
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 29 minutes ago, toddybad said: I'd be hoping for much the same as you re labour Realistically the current position is much the same as the Tories. They both want out of the EEA, Single market and customs union. Corbyn for some reason thinks he can negotiate something like the customs union with no freedom of movement and where we can negotiate our own deals, which sounds broadly similar to the Tories, the only cloudy areas are the European courts role. I doubt the EU will go for either. Corbyn is anti Europe he always has been and always will be, he would rather a hard Brexit its only the moderates in his party preventing him.
Buce Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 Brexit: No 10 will not accept 'meaningful vote' amendment Final showdown with Tory rebels likely after No 10 says it cannot accept peers’ version The government “cannot accept” a Lords amendment giving parliament a “meaningful vote” on a Brexit deal, and will re-table its rejected version, Downing Street has said, setting up a final showdown with Tory rebels on the issue this week. Theresa May put off a likely Commons defeat last week by promising rebels a compromise on the issue in the EU withdrawal bill. However, the eventual government amendment did not go as far as one drafted by Dominic Grieve, the Tory former attorney general. When the bill returned to the Lords on Monday, peers passed another amendment, based on Grieve’s proposals and tabled by Lord Hailsham, by 119 votes, a bigger majority than the first time the issue was in the upper house. Asked if May was confident about getting her version through the Commons, her spokesman said the Lords had agreed with the Commons on the majority of issues with the bill voted about on Monday, such as customs union membership and environmental protections. He said on Tuesday: “But we cannot accept the amendment on meaningful vote agreed in the Lords. Agreeing to amendable motions would allow parliament to direct government on its approach to exiting the EU, binding the prime minister’s hands and making it harder to secure a good deal for the UK. “It also does not meet the reasonable tests set out last week by the prime minister and the secretary of state for exiting the European Union that any new amendment must respect the referendum result, cannot undermine the negotiations or change the constitutional role of parliament and government. “Our original amendment struck the right balance between respecting the tests set out by the government as well as delivering on the aims of Dominic Grieve’s own amendment. That’s why we will be re-tabling our original amendment today and will look to overturn the Lords decision tomorrow.” Re-tabling the government’s amendment, which has been roundly rejected by Grieve and other Tory rebels, sets up a vote on the issue on Wednesday, when the ping-pong process return the bill to the Commons. Earlier on Tuesday, Grieve had said he and the other rebels were not trying to bring down the government, but said a meaningful vote before leaving the EU may help to avoid a crisis moment. Grieve was criticised in some newspapers over the weekend when he suggested he could “collapse the government” and said he woke up in a cold sweat thinking about it. He said: “One of the reasons I’ve supported [this amendment] is precisely to avoid a situation where the government would immediately collapse,” he said. “And I’ve been misreported on that, it was suggested I want to collapse the government, I don’t.” Grieve said the new amendment was “a mechanism by which the House of Commons could express a view, without moving to a motion of no confidence, which could collapse the government. “All of us must hope this doesn’t happen. But there is a risk it will happen, and if we have no deal at the very end it is a serious crisis.” Several MPs have suggested Grieve’s amendment is unnecessary. The Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat said MPs would be “looking for a new government” if the current one failed to deliver a Brexit deal that could pass the Commons. Grieve said he did not want to leave such a situation to chance. “If we get to a situation where we are three weeks away from no deal … the idea that it’s a good moment to get a new prime minister, have a general election … it doesn’t seem to me a good moment, if it can be avoided,” he said.
Guest MattP Posted 19 June 2018 Posted 19 June 2018 Good decision, judging by the vote last week they have the numbers to get it through anyway.
Guest Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 18 hours ago, Foxin_mad said: I suppose they are trying to strike a balance. At the end of the day you have unfunded proposals from a Labour party, basing spending plans on mostly unfounded predictions of revenues raised from rich bashing. Or you tackle a problem for a services which everyone uses, if people want more services EVERYONE has to pay more. The reason funding has been restricted for so many years, gets back into the loop of financial crash/taxation/borrowing etc. If people are happy to pay a lot more, then great. Lets put it into public services. An extra 10p from ALL would make a huge difference. The Sun seem to think that the Tories are gong to tax the rich (!). It seems Labour were right about taxing the rich to spend on pubic services after all. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6575699/philip-hammond-to-make-the-wealthy-pay-lions-share-of-new-taxes-to-fund-nhs-extra-20bn/
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 20 June 2018 Posted 20 June 2018 1 hour ago, toddybad said: The Sun seem to think that the Tories are gong to tax the rich (!). It seems Labour were right about taxing the rich to spend on pubic services after all. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6575699/philip-hammond-to-make-the-wealthy-pay-lions-share-of-new-taxes-to-fund-nhs-extra-20bn/ Well May is a red Tory after all. Next thing she will be singing red flag with Corbyn.
Recommended Posts