Br-ex-ilection 2019

[The G Man]

 Anyone who thinks being a member of the EU caused austerity is naive to think that’s why people voted to leave.

 

Austerity policies by the conservative government caused austerity, which in turn left the weak, the poor, the vulnerable and those without hope of a better future, through no fault of their own, looking for an out.  Farage and co, along with the hard right sold the idea that Europe was the enemy, used disinformation, lies, underhand targeting of social media, racism, fear of immigration etc, etc, etc.  So the disaffected voted for what was sold as the solution, without a clue as to what might happen.  

 

No one, not one person can tell me, you or anyone else, in what way they will be better off leaving the EU, not a soul.  Three years now, I’m still none the wiser what any benefit of leaving the EU holds.

 

They've held up two boxes, one full of useful things like medicine, regulation, employment and human rights, free movement and trade with your neighbours and as a block to your advantage, £20

 

The other box was full of, well nothing substantial, nothing of use, nothing of fact, but they promise, once you look under all the trash, you’ll find a genie with three wishes and a bag of magic beans that will solve all.  The price?  We’ll tell you once you’ve committed to buy.

 

you decide for yourself which box is leave and which is remain.

 

Johnson is a tool, a liar, a philanderer, a racist, misogynistic, did I mention a liar?  If that kind of leadership is inspiring to you enough to vote for it, God help us.

[Ekona]

6 hours ago, Adrian@TORQEN said:

No, it won’t, you’re missing  the point, it’s a prerogative that can be used to overrule the parliament, just as he tried, after lying to the queen. We’re in very dangerous territory if the judicial review won’t be available anymore. 

Without teaching you to suck eggs mate, Parliamentary Sovereignty means that no government can pass a law that another can’t undo. That means whatever the next government do, the following one can change.  

[Ekona]

Sorry, dp. 

Edited December 6, 2019 by Ekona

[Umster]

Door knocked today by a Labour campaigner. Had they not been trying to drum up support, I honestly feel I would have been called a Tory 

 

The whole Jezza takeover of Labour really has scared me. You're either with them or against them. Don't even dare question the Jezza manifesto. Never had that feeling from any other party campaigner. 

[Sargara]

On 06/12/2019 at 09:22, Umster said:

After the Andrew Neil malarkey, not sure how anyone could justify voting for Boris. Andrew has raised some valid points and is probably the first person to hold our PM to account, but he's too busy taking selfies will day time TV presenters. 

 

BJs behaviour has made my mind up, I know which of the 2 evils is lesser. 

 

I'm not a Conservative fan by any stretch but I don't really have a choice. I voted for Brexit and the only party that's honouring it that's standing in my area are the Conservatives. My other choices are Libdem, Labour or Greens. I suspect many other areas will be the same as me and that is why we will see another Tory majority because the LD and SNP will eat into Labours votes.

Edited December 8, 2019 by Sargara

[Umster]

45 minutes ago, Sargara said:

 

I'm not a Conservative fan by any stretch but I don't really have a choice. I voted for Brexit and the only party that's honouring it that's standing in my area are the Conservatives. 

I don't think you're alone nor do I think you're wrong for doing that. I see your point of view and understand why you'd vote for them. It's fair enough. 

[Adrian@TORQEN]

Last hurrah...

 

https://metro.co.uk/2019/12/10/investigation-finds-88-tory-ads-misleading-compared-0-labour-11651802/

[Ekona]

Hang on, that says that the vast majority was for the whole building hospitals thing, which can’t be delivered in the next parliamentary session. Fine, I don’t disagree with that, however neither can FTTP to every home that Labour have promised, no? Or did they just not mention that in any advert, so that doesn’t count in that little fact check?

 

Genuine question. 

[docwra]

Boris lies about everything from how many kids he has to how many nurses he is going to introduce. 
The media focuses on Corbyns 2Bn trees claim. Despite it being valid. 

Tories promise to build 40 new hospitals ......... except funding is only in place for 6.
Ekona brings up Labours broadband promise. Which could be a reality if they nationalise Openreach. 

Is it just me that sees the issue with this?  The bit the Tories lie about is absolutely essential and far, far more important than what Labour "might" be lying about, its not a realistic comparison. 

[ATTAK Z]

For anyone who is about to vote for their Labour candidate tomorow I would ask:

 

Would you be happy with the following starting Friday 13th November ?

 

1) Diane Abbott as Home Secretary

2) Angela Raynor as Secretary of State for Education

3) John McDonnell as Chancellor of the Exchequer

 

 

[Adrian@TORQEN]

Just now, ATTAK Z said:

For anyone who is about to vote for their Labour candidate tomorow I would ask:

 

Would you be happy with the following starting Friday 13th November ?

 

1) Diane Abbott as Home Secretary

2) Angela Raynor as Secretary of State for Education

3) John McDonnell as Chancellor of the Exchequer

 

 

Yeah, forget about the lies and disaster tories did in 9 years through austerity and brexit, forget about the Labour policies and manifesto, let's focus on some people Labour might bring in government.

 

Makes a very valid point to me why I would vote for Conservatives.

As if Priti Patel, Nicky Morgan, Michael Gove are any different. 

Short reminder (I know, Corbyn propaganda...)
 

 

[coldel]

6 minutes ago, ATTAK Z said:

For anyone who is about to vote for their Labour candidate tomorow I would ask:

 

Would you be happy with the following starting Friday 13th November ?

 

1) Diane Abbott as Home Secretary

2) Angela Raynor as Secretary of State for Education

3) John McDonnell as Chancellor of the Exchequer

 

 

I think historically, the Tories seem more capable of running the country, Labour just appear to me to always have clowns in their cabinet (well more buffonish than the Tories who are not exempt from that either).

 

The Labour manifesto shouts of a desperation that their leadership isn't strong enough so the spending pledges have to be substantial - raises in taxes to cover the spending would be higher than seen for half a century, even when they point at corporation tax increases what is obvious to those that understand, is that businesses wont just pay those out their own pockets, that cost gets passed straight onto the customer, that's all of us, double whammy. 

 

Corrbyn is untrustworthy, not anywhere near the pathological liar that is Boris, but still has a fair few skeletons in the closet. 

 

But as I have said, I would not vote for either party this time around.

[ATTAK Z]

13 minutes ago, Adrian@TORQEN said:

 

Makes a very valid point to me why I would vote for Conservatives.
 

Think you may wish to go back and edit that Adrian ... or was that a hint of sarcasm ?

[Adrian@TORQEN]

Just now, ATTAK Z said:

Think you may wish to go back and edit that Adrian ... or was that a hint of sarcasm ?

Yes, meant to be sarcasm, Sir.

[coldel]

Diane Abbot is one that is definitely stealing a living, astonishing that someone so error prone continues to be in such a senior role.

[ATTAK Z]

@Adrian@TORQENOK I get it now

Edited December 11, 2019 by ATTAK Z

[Adrian@TORQEN]

1 minute ago, coldel said:

Diane Abbot is one that is definitely stealing a living, astonishing that someone so error prone continues to be in such a senior role.

While I kindly agree with you, she's not technically anything right now, not an MP as the parliament has been dissolved nor a shadow secretary. I would imagine a new shadow cabinet will be announced after the elections or if Labour win, a new cabinet. I haven't seen her in front of the cameras in this campaign, perhaps for a reason.

[Adrian@TORQEN]

3 minutes ago, ATTAK Z said:

OK I get it now

Sorry for the confusion, you must remember English is not my first language, sometimes I miss stuff or don't mean what it appears to be at a first glance.  

[coldel]

6 minutes ago, Adrian@TORQEN said:

While I kindly agree with you, she's not technically anything right now, not an MP as the parliament has been dissolved nor a shadow secretary. I would imagine a new shadow cabinet will be announced after the elections or if Labour win, a new cabinet. I haven't seen her in front of the cameras in this campaign, perhaps for a reason.

Thats a very politicians style response Ade! She is for all intents and purposes the shadow home secretary, ignoring the technicality that parliament was dissolved for the election. To assume she will have no role if Labour got in, is simply conjecture and most likely to be untrue. Plenty of other MPs haven't been in front of the cameras also, it doesn't mean they are all being binned off. 

 

There is a very good chance if Labour got in she would be Home Secretary, I guess anyone voting Labour has to take that chance.

Edited December 11, 2019 by coldel

[ATTAK Z]

20 minutes ago, Adrian@TORQEN said:

 I haven't seen her (DA) in front of the cameras in this campaign, perhaps for a reason.

I think we all know the reason

[coldel]

Just now, ATTAK Z said:

I think we all know the reason

At least she can be incompetent away from the public eye, rather than incompetent in full view of it.

 

Home Secretary, I mean what could possibly go wrong...

[ATTAK Z]

Yes but what about the under-educated Labour Government's Secretary of State for Education ?

[Adrian@TORQEN]

Just now, coldel said:

At least she can be incompetent away from the public eye, rather than incompetent in full view of it.

 

Home Secretary, I mean what could possibly go wrong...

Imagine if she would send vans on the road with the very kind message: "In the UK illegally? Go home or face arrest!" like in the Operation Valken.

 

Or if she would do some secret meetings in Israel without advising her boss, the PM.

 

That would be absolutely terrible. Oh, wait!

 

 

[Adrian@TORQEN]

Have we covered this letter in this thread yet? 

 

======

Economists’ letter to the Financial Times

25 November 2019

The UK economy needs reform. For too long it has prioritised consumption over investment,
short-term financial returns over long-term innovation, rising asset values over rising wages,
and deficit reduction over the quality of public services. The results are now plain. We have
had ten years of near zero productivity growth. Corporate investment has stagnated. Average
earnings are still lower than in 2008. A gulf has arisen between London and the South East
and the rest of the country. And public services are under intolerable strain - which the
economic costs of a hard Brexit would only make worse. We now moreover face the urgent
imperative of acting on the climate and environmental crisis.

Given private sector reluctance, what the UK economy needs is a serious injection of public
investment, which can in turn leverage private finance attracted by the expectation of higher
demand. Such investment needs to be directed into the large-scale and rapid decarbonisation

of energy, transport, housing, industry and farming; the support of innovation- and export-
oriented businesses; and public services. It is clear that this will require an active and green

industrial strategy, aimed at improving productivity and spreading investment across the
country. Experience elsewhere (not least in Germany) suggests a National Investment Bank
would greatly help. With long-term real interest rates now negative, it makes basic economic
sense for the government to borrow for this, spreading the cost over the generations who will
benefit from the assets. As the IMF has acknowledged, when interest payments are low and
investment raises economic growth, public debt is sustainable.

At the same time, we need a serious attempt to raise wages and productivity. A higher
minimum wage can help do this, alongside tighter regulation of the worst practices in the gig
economy. Bringing workers onto company boards and giving them a stake in their companies,
as most European countries do in some form, will also help. The UK’s outlier rate of
corporation tax can clearly be raised, not least for the highly profitable digital companies.
As economists, and people who work in various fields of economic policy, we have looked
closely at the economic prospectuses of the political parties. It seems clear to us that the
Labour Party has not only understood the deep problems we face, but has devised serious
proposals for dealing with them. We believe it deserves to form the next government.

Yours
David G. Blanchflower
Bruce V. Rauner Professor of Economics, Dartmouth College; Professor of Economics.
University of Stirling; former member of the Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee
Victoria Chick
Emeritus Professor of Economics, University College London
Lord Meghnad Desai
Emeritus Professor of Economics, London School of Economics and Political Science

 

=========

 

Full letter here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YD3R8a7Qi6t9MwSVHiuQ_b7lMmw5GhRO/view

[coldel]

3 minutes ago, Adrian@TORQEN said:

Imagine if she would send vans on the road with the very kind message: "In the UK illegally? Go home or face arrest!" like in the Operation Valken.

 

Or if she would do some secret meetings in Israel without advising her boss, the PM.

 

That would be absolutely terrible. Oh, wait!

 

 

You see this is where the 'attack the opposition' approach falls over, I agree we shouldnt be sending go home vans around...so back on point, she is an utter liability and should be nowhere near an MP seat let alone in the cabinet. Who in their right mind after her unmitigated disasters keeps her that close.