The Conservative Party

Bluemanc100 said:
If Corbyn gets anywhere near No.10 then those responsible should hang their heads in shame
I blame May personally for believing she could strengthen her majority at the last GE. Two clueless fucking spin-doctors / advisors at the root of that decision....
Click to expand...
But you are nevertheless happy for a Conservative Government to have brought this country to an existential crisis because of it's own internal psychodrama and to threaten the Union and to have been found in contempt of Parliament and to have acted unlawfully and to have politically compromised the Head of State.
Not sure any Labour Government or Leader (including Jezz) would ever have done that.
Think about it and get over yourself.
 
Len Rum said:
But you are nevertheless happy for a Conservative Government to have brought this country to an existential crisis because of it's own internal psychodrama and to threaten the Union and to have been found in contempt of Parliament and to have acted unlawfully and to have politically compromised the Head of State.
Not sure any Labour Government or Leader (including Jezz) would ever have done that.
Think about it and get over yourself.
Click to expand...

Existential crisis?

An existential crisis is a moment at which an individual questions if their life has meaning, purpose, or value. It may be commonly, but not necessarily, tied to depression or inevitably negative speculations on purpose in life.

Christ you lot dont half repeat what you hear on Twatter or from your remain MP without actually understanding it.

Count me out, i dont feel like that and i will wager neither does 99% of the nation.

Existential crisis my arse!
 
Len Rum said:
But you are nevertheless happy for a Conservative Government to have brought this country to an existential crisis because of it's own internal psychodrama and to threaten the Union and to have been found in contempt of Parliament and to have acted unlawfully and to have politically compromised the Head of State.
Not sure any Labour Government or Leader (including Jezz) would ever have done that.
Think about it and get over yourself.
Click to expand...
Ha Ha,, that’s me told

I was about to say “how does fuck off sound” but I resisted
 
blueinsa said:
Existential crisis?
An existential crisis is a moment at which an individual questions if their life has meaning, purpose, or value. It may be commonly, but not necessarily, tied to depression or inevitably negative speculations on purpose in life.
Christ you lot dont half repeat what you hear on Twatter or from your remain MP without actually understanding it.
Count me out, i dont feel like that and i will wager neither does 99% of the nation.
Existential crisis my arse!
Click to expand...
Your arse is having an existential crisis?
Is there something you want to tell us?
 
BobKowalski said:
I’d waive the rules. Let them strike. Could do with a few months of peace and quiet. Do us all the world of good.
Click to expand...
They've not thought that through.

If they refuse to work in parliament the opposition take control of the business. 2nd ref, making no deal Brexit illegal. Motion agreeing Boris is a **** could all pass uncontested.
 
jay_mcfc said:
You really should go for that job I mentioned yesterday.

Deficit already expected to be at 50bn by year end, debt 1.7 trillion and with Brexit, 40 new hospitals, raising the minimum wage and 10,000 new police officers (and new stations) I cannot wait to see your graphs in 2023.
Click to expand...

Here you go mate, a repost of a one I did for Worsley to explain why people get so muddled up about these things.


Knowing what it is and understanding what it is and its effects are two completely different things.

It is like knowing a poem by heart means you know the poem, but it does not mean you understand the poem.

If countries spend more than they get back from tax they normally have to borrow money to make up the difference, that is obvious.

Governments borrow all the time, and almost all have a national debt. It makes sense to borrow money not just to fill emergency deficits, but to pay for investment that will help make a country more productive. Many people want to lend money to governments because they are safe and secure. If you have a pension, it's a sure bet that some of your savings will have been lent to governments. I promise to the bearer on your bank notes has an immense psychological power.

This is where the national debt comes in. This is everything the government has borrowed, not just this year, but in previous years. This can go back a very long time. Osborne sanctioned the payment of the last debts owed from WW1 and I am pretty sure we will still owe money from WW2 to the Yanks under the lend lease plan, although I may be wrong on that.

If the government covers a deficit by borrowing money, then that will increase the national debt. When times are good and tax income is higher than spending, governments can pay back part of the debt and it will come down, or if the debts are considered manageable as they are they can use the extra revenue to invest. This led to the Tory phrase "didn't fix the roof whilst the sun was shining" although that phrase ignored the huge investments that had been made, it indicates that the Tories would have preferred to pay off debt.

The difference between the deficit and the national debt is crucial. The deficit is a snapshot of how the country's finances are doing in any one year. The national debt takes into account what has happened in the past too, hence the national debt is increasing.

A country with a smaller national debt can easily run a big deficit for a few years. A country with a big debt will find it harder to run a deficit as it will finds it harder and more expensive to borrow money.

Our country has had times when national debt has exceeded 200% of GDP, The Napoleonic Wars and WW2 being prime examples. They had to borrow to cover the deficit caused by those wars.

However no country can run huge deficits every year for ever. The bigger the national debt that builds up, the more expensive it is to meet interest payments. At some point it becomes more difficult and more expensive for governments to borrow extra money because people become reluctant to lend to them. The Conservative government overstated our problems with their maxed out credit nonsense, this was a purely political move aimed at cutting public spending. The bank crash of 2008 was the perfect crisis that they could exploit for ideological reasons. In fact UK debt is not that much of an issue, even now it is still lower than it was for most of the last century apart from around the end of the World Wars. Our national debt is comparable to Norway's, less than Germany and the US and more than Spain and Switzerlands. There is nothing special about our debt although the way the Government go on about it you would think impending doom is round every corner. The UK differs though to those who are worse off than ourselves in that. First more than 70 per cent of UK government debt is held within the UK by things like pension funds. It is a mistake to think that our national debt is all owed to other governments or foreign speculators. Secondly UK debt is more long-term than many other countries. On average our debts have a pay-back period of 12 years. Countries like Greece need to keep paying back debts and are forced to borrow more to make up for that. The UK does not face any problems refinancing its debts.
Governments need to borrow money all the time as previous loans need to be paid back, or simply because tax does not come in evenly over a year. Even with today's low interest rates the UK government has not had any difficulty borrowing although you never hear that from the Chancellor because it does not suit his ideological reasoning. Our debt repayments are actually lower now than they were 20 years ago.

You can eliminate the deficit by
  1. Devaluation of exchange rate (make exports cheaper – imports more expensive) This is politically loaded and can lead to inflation, inflation is hated by neo-liberals.
  2. Reduce domestic consumption and spending on imports (e.g. tight fiscal policy/higher taxes) Again politically loaded.
  3. Supply side policies to improve the competitiveness of domestic industry and exports. Singapore on Thames dreamland.
Running a deficit of 11% as you indicated should be no problem at all to an economy such as ours and it isnt that big a deal. Mcdonell knows this and the Tories counter with magic money tree nonsense.

Basically it is all political choice and if you baffle the population, simplify the arguments down to a basic level you can get around to building the Singapore on Thames those with Capital crave. (see point 3) the supply side measures include wage cuts, reduction of union powers, freeing the market even more etc. Supply side policies can improve the competitiveness of the economy and help make exports more attractive. This can improve the current account position, but it may take considerable time to have an effect. For example, if the government pursued a policy of privatisation and deregulation it may help to increase the efficiency of the economy because of the profit motive in the private sector. This increased efficiency would translate into lower costs of production and more exports. If Brexit happens this will be crucial for the economy according to the pro-capitalist nutjobs on the further right of the Tory party.

As Karl Marx said

"The will of the capitalist is certainly to take as much as possible"
 
Bluemanc100 said:
If Corbyn gets anywhere near No.10 then those responsible should hang their heads in shame
.
Click to expand...
I will not apologise nor hang my head in my shame for wanting to make the country a better place for you

gavvo said:
If Corbyn gets anywhere near no 10 then the electorate should hang their heads in shame.
Click to expand...

I will not apologise nor hang my head in my shame for wanting to make the country a better place for you

Chippy_boy said:
If Corbyn gets anywhere number 10, we may as well all hang ourselves.
Click to expand...

I will not apologise nor hang my head in my shame for wanting to make the country a better place for you



Cotswold Knight said:
Biggest scumbag in British politics ever
Click to expand...

I will not apologise nor hang my head in my shame for wanting to make the country a better place for you
 
Rascal said:
I will not apologise nor hang my head in my shame for wanting to make the country a better place for you
Click to expand...

And nor should you. It's not your wanting I have issue with. It's that the party you would prefer to lead the country have zero chance of achieving it, and in fact would make things much, much worse.

Do you think every other failed communist or hard left socialist state set out with the intention of ruining their economy and the impoverishment of millions of their citizens? Of course they did not, but that was the effect nevertheless.

That alternatives to capitalism fail every single time is beyond debate, and yet Marxist McDonnell wants to smash the capitalist system and bring about systemic change. The guy - and anyone of similar views - must be clinically insane. Either that or be on the payroll of the Russians or something.
 
Chippy_boy said:
And nor should you. It's not your wanting I have issue with. It's that the party you would prefer to lead the country have zero chance of achieving it, and in fact would make things much, much worse.

Do you think every other failed communist or hard left socialist state set out with the intention of ruining their economy and the impoverishment of millions of their citizens? Of course they did not, but that was the effect nevertheless.

That alternatives to capitalism fail every single time is beyond debate, and yet Marxist McDonnell wants to smash the capitalist system and bring about systemic change. The guy - and anyone of similar views - must be clinically insane. Either that or be on the payroll of the Russians or something.
Click to expand...

The Russian state is no longer a de facto dictatorship roughly based on the ideals of Marx, its a pseudo fascist state based on the ideals of Putin.

Socialism is not afraid of the market, Lenin himself saw that the market could be a good thing as long as it was regulated accordingly. Labour want to regulate in the interests of the many not destroy capitalism for good. To think that is the plan is wrong headed mate, it is simply not going to happen even as much as I would like to see it. Its Social Marketisation based on the Nordic model rather than out right anti=capitalism.
 
Rascal said:
The Russian state is no longer a de facto dictatorship roughly based on the ideals of Marx, its a pseudo fascist state based on the ideals of Putin.

Socialism is not afraid of the market, Lenin himself saw that the market could be a good thing as long as it was regulated accordingly. Labour want to regulate in the interests of the many not destroy capitalism for good. To think that is the plan is wrong headed mate, it is simply not going to happen even as much as I would like to see it. Its Social Marketisation based on the Nordic model rather than out right anti=capitalism.
Click to expand...
Under true Socialism the market disappears according to Marx.
"The abolition of bourgeois individuality, bourgeois independence, and bourgeois freedom is undoubtedly aimed at.
By freedom is meant, under the present bourgeois conditions of production, free trade, free selling and buying. But if selling and buying disappears, free selling and buying disappears also. This talk about free selling and buying, and all the other “brave words” of our bourgeois about freedom in general, have a meaning, if any, only in contrast with restricted selling and buying, with the fettered traders of the Middle Ages, but have no meaning when opposed to the Communistic abolition of buying and selling, of the bourgeois conditions of production, and of the bourgeoisie itself.

You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society.

In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away with your property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend."
 
Last edited:
George Hannah said:
Under true Socialism the market disappears according to Marx.
"The abolition of bourgeois individuality, bourgeois independence, and bourgeois freedom is undoubtedly aimed at.
By freedom is meant, under the present bourgeois conditions of production, free trade, free selling and buying. But if selling and buying disappears, free selling and buying disappears also. This talk about free selling and buying, and all the other “brave words” of our bourgeois about freedom in general, have a meaning, if any, only in contrast with restricted selling and buying, with the fettered traders of the Middle Ages, but have no meaning when opposed to the Communistic abolition of buying and selling, of the bourgeois conditions of production, and of the bourgeoisie itself.

You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society.

In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away with your property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend."
Click to expand...


Once again George ... you are confusing Marxism and Communism with Democratic Socialism
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top