Made me lol
The Conservative Party
- Thread starter dave_blue12
- Start date
Made me lol
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
no - because it just gets tiresome as it descends into personal spats that quickly wander off topic - a look on other posts in the politics threads will surely indicate what I mean - the usual suspects just gang up and it ends up in a cat fight. Been there before and I find it tiresome so now I just post stuff and people can take it as they find it - most of the responses to the port you refer to were aimed at me not at the content and thats just not grown up debate.
In regard to the TY vid I posted - I stuck it on as there is someone else who has posted Chunky Mark's stuff on here and I wondered if he had missed it. Unfortunately I can't remember who it was.
Anyway off to watch the rags get spanked now. Bye.
No, the replies pointed out that it showed a lack of comprehension. And it did.
Hit and run posting is no way to debate.
Last edited:
Ancient Citizen
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 15,712
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
Many thanks for proving my point
Banned Tosspot
Well-Known Member
Wooooooosh!
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
So true - the Tory Party of today has regressed from that of the 70's and 80's when the shop keepers daughter and the aspiring accountant didn't have to have first gone to the "right" school and Uni...
Theresa May is the daughter of a vicar and a housewife and went to a state school. She also got a Second Class degree in Geography.
Aren't more of Labour's key members of the shadow cabinet privately educated than the equivalent Conservatives?
Indaparkside
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2015
- Messages
- 15,742
It doesn’t matter who you vote for there all in it for their own pockets. Just one party will do more damage to the nhs, the poor and look after the rich more than the other.And that is this shower of twats in government
This actually annoys me whoever in Parliament it's aimed at. These people can earn a damn sight more out of Parliament than they ever could inside it, and an MP's salary is simply not especially impressive for a professional person.
The vast majority of people (from all parties) go into Parliament for the best of reasons, whether you agree with their politics or not. Sure, there are charlatans, as there are in every walk of life, but most just want to make a difference and improve the country. The compromises required of a Parliamentary career soon knocks the idealism out of them, but I won't have it that they're there for money. It's pretty miserable for a start, and that most people think £75k is a year is a lot is beside the point - it isn't for the kind of people we want in there.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
Quite possibly - the modern day politician appears to be the product of some Uni or other - the point I was making was that outside the Conservatives being and Old Etonion is not a pre-requisite for career progression
smudgedj
Well-Known Member
All 48 letters are in.
Chippy_boy
Well-Known Member
In order to have decent public services and welfare, needs money. Lots of money, sustainably, forever. Not "borrow it now and sod the consequences", because that is not sustainable. OK, it might improve things in the short term - as often happens when Labour regain power - but as time wears on, we run out of money.
Once people get their heads around this - and unfortunately many Labour supporters still have not (you included, it would seem) - then it opens up a fundamental and actually much more important question: how do we engineer a situation where the country generates as much money as possible, and in so doing, creates as much tax revenue as possible - to pay for excellent public services, forever? That is the key question, but unless we solve that, everything else is just a quick fix, doomed to long term failure.
The simple answer is that we need business to be successful. We need more businesses, and more successful, profitable businesses. That is the engine room which provides the state with the money it needs. How to achieve this is obviously complicated, and involves all sorts of dynamics such as workforce skills, cutting red tape, encouraging investment - all sorts of stuff. But at the core, this is what it's about: how do we get businesses to be most successful.
Sadly, this is not at the forefront of Labour's mind. In fact it's possibly not on their mind at all, and if it is, it's probably them thinking how can they fuck businesses over, so they can replace them with public sector services which consume - rather than generate - even more of our money.
Tony Blair was the only Prime Minister in my memory who actually grasped this. Of course he had his many flaws, not least his appetite for spending beyond our means, but at least he didn't try to fuck business over. And until Labour change and realise that successful businesses are essential for the long term provision of decent public services, they will forever be mainly in opposition and when in power, only briefly. Because borrowing and taxing ever more is not sustainable.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
According to the FT today forecasts say there will not be enough money raised by the Govt to meet their commitment to end austerity for a decade - yep 10 whole years. Good luck with that promise as part of the next GE manifesto Saint Teresa.
Putting aside the point that ten year forecasts amount to wetting a finger and sticking it in the air, what do you want to do then? Borrow?
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
Some borrowing is required yes - however how about starting by telling the truth to the electorate?
"Some" borrowing is always required, no matter how well things are going. What truth do you want telling? That spending needs to roughly match income and if not we have to borrow? How much borrowing is "some" ?