The General Election Thread

[gordondaviesmoustache]

zero-hours contracts have been a fact-of-life in the catering industry since the 'working-time directive' came into force in the mid-nineties.

Nothing to see here.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

these three feckers have nothing to offer so i'l be locking the door on polling day and staying in as i have done for the last 35 years worth of elections

I feel the same about what's on offer but democracy (such as it is) is too important to me not to vote. I don't vote slavishly for one party but make a decision based on whether I think the outgoing government is worthy of another term or whether we need a new one. So I voted Labour when Major went to the polls as I thought he was a complete wash-out but I also voted Conservative when Callaghan lost to Thatcher.

But this time I can't get excited about any of them. I don't particularly think that Cameron deserves another 5 years as god knows what further misery he'll inflict on the ordinary person (I suspect quite a lot). But I don't see Miliband & Balls as delivering anything worthwhile either. Bury South has moved from a key marginal to reasonably safe Labour these days so it probably doesn't matter but I've no idea what I'm going to do on May 7th and don't expect to have one even as I pick up my ballot paper.

 

[Len Rum]

these three feckers have nothing to offer so i'l be locking the door on polling day and staying in as i have done for the last 35 years worth of elections

I feel the same about what's on offer but democracy (such as it is) is too important to me not to vote. I don't vote slavishly for one party but make a decision based on whether I think the outgoing government is worthy of another term or whether we need a new one. So I voted Labour when Major went to the polls as I thought he was a complete wash-out but I also voted Conservative when Callaghan lost to Thatcher.

But this time I can't get excited about any of them. I don't particularly think that Cameron deserves another 5 years as god knows what further misery he'll inflict on the ordinary person (I suspect quite a lot). But I don't see Miliband & Balls as delivering anything worthwhile either. Bury South has moved from a key marginal to reasonably safe Labour these days so it probably doesn't matter but I've no idea what I'm going to do on May 7th and don't expect to have one even as I pick up my ballot paper.

You were voting UKIP a few months back.
Make your mind up mate!

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

these three feckers have nothing to offer so i'l be locking the door on polling day and staying in as i have done for the last 35 years worth of elections

I feel the same about what's on offer but democracy (such as it is) is too important to me not to vote. I don't vote slavishly for one party but make a decision based on whether I think the outgoing government is worthy of another term or whether we need a new one. So I voted Labour when Major went to the polls as I thought he was a complete wash-out but I also voted Conservative when Callaghan lost to Thatcher.

But this time I can't get excited about any of them. I don't particularly think that Cameron deserves another 5 years as god knows what further misery he'll inflict on the ordinary person (I suspect quite a lot). But I don't see Miliband & Balls as delivering anything worthwhile either. Bury South has moved from a key marginal to reasonably safe Labour these days so it probably doesn't matter but I've no idea what I'm going to do on May 7th and don't expect to have one even as I pick up my ballot paper.

You were voting UKIP a few months back.
Make your mind up mate!

LOL. I was but that was born of my frustration at the complacency and lack of genuine ideas from the main parties. Plus I thought they might actually be a serious party. But they're clearly not so I won't be voting for them.

 

[Damocles]

What's particularly populist about UKIP?

All parties claim to care about ordinary people and that their polices are best for them.

That's populism.

Labour is probably the most populist party in the current elections - it promises to protect the people against the allegedly nasty policies of their main opponents. Populism is quite easy when you think money grows on trees like Labour does.

It's a specific designation

<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_populism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_populism</a>

 

[SWP's back]

worse thing about a labour win is apart from them being shit at the job the progress we have made under dave would all be wasted. i'm old and would get by but you'd have to feel for the kids just started out, new business's and poor but ggers watching negative equity return to their property.

That's the exact opposite of the worst thing, the worst thing is that not much will change aNd it will become evident how similar labour and Tories really are. They are 90% the same on most things and aligned on most of the big moral questions. House prices and shares could do with a correction as both have been irresponsibly pumped to not reflect true economic value by low interest rates and quantitative easing. Bubbles now exist everywhere which is a threat to recovery and we know frim 02-09 that governments happily ignore bubbles even when they risk everything

Shares could do with a correction?

What's your thinking behind that?

And you got your dates wrong as well.

 

[EalingBlue2]

worse thing about a labour win is apart from them being shit at the job the progress we have made under dave would all be wasted. i'm old and would get by but you'd have to feel for the kids just started out, new business's and poor but ggers watching negative equity return to their property.

That's the exact opposite of the worst thing, the worst thing is that not much will change aNd it will become evident how similar labour and Tories really are. They are 90% the same on most things and aligned on most of the big moral questions. House prices and shares could do with a correction as both have been irresponsibly pumped to not reflect true economic value by low interest rates and quantitative easing. Bubbles now exist everywhere which is a threat to recovery and we know frim 02-09 that governments happily ignore bubbles even when they risk everything

Shares could do with a correction?

What's your thinking behind that?

And you got your dates wrong as well.

The mortgage bubble in the U.S. Really accelerated from 2002 and really only cleaned out by 2009 as the full aftermath of Lehman brothers washed out - so happy with those dates.

If you look at company profits and long term projections vs the value of most of the world's big bourse and there is a definite mismatch with easy credit and government fiscal doping resulting in bubbles that sooner or later will need to correct , the sooner he bubble bursts the better if it isn't real.

My thinking is if a market booms without fundamental rational economic facts driving the growth then if it doesn't correct you are building for trouble.

House prices the worst example as rationally so many houses are ridiculously over priced and it is entirely based on psychology not reality.

 

[whp.blue]

That's the exact opposite of the worst thing, the worst thing is that not much will change aNd it will become evident how similar labour and Tories really are. They are 90% the same on most things and aligned on most of the big moral questions. House prices and shares could do with a correction as both have been irresponsibly pumped to not reflect true economic value by low interest rates and quantitative easing. Bubbles now exist everywhere which is a threat to recovery and we know frim 02-09 that governments happily ignore bubbles even when they risk everything

Shares could do with a correction?

What's your thinking behind that?

And you got your dates wrong as well.

The mortgage bubble in the U.S. Really accelerated from 2002 and really only cleaned out by 2009 as the full aftermath of Lehman brothers washed out - so happy with those dates.

If you look at company profits and long term projections vs the value of most of the world's big bourse and there is a definite mismatch with easy credit and government fiscal doping resulting in bubbles that sooner or later will need to correct , the sooner he bubble bursts the better if it isn't real.

My thinking is if a market booms without fundamental rational economic facts driving the growth then if it doesn't correct you are building for trouble.

House prices the worst example as rationally so many houses are ridiculously over priced and it is entirely based on psychology not reality.

Isn't that the premiss of our capitalist system ? anything is worth what someone else is willing to pay for it.
It is all about perspective.

Poor schools have as much effect on house prices as anything and this pushes up the price of houses that fall into the catchment area of the few good schools.

Just because you feel the price isn't rational has nothing to do with it, other people who may have a lot more money than you may see houses as being undervalued. I understand that if that then prices certain people out of the market they feel very hard done by but that has always been the case.

 

[SWP's back]

That's the exact opposite of the worst thing, the worst thing is that not much will change aNd it will become evident how similar labour and Tories really are. They are 90% the same on most things and aligned on most of the big moral questions. House prices and shares could do with a correction as both have been irresponsibly pumped to not reflect true economic value by low interest rates and quantitative easing. Bubbles now exist everywhere which is a threat to recovery and we know frim 02-09 that governments happily ignore bubbles even when they risk everything

Shares could do with a correction?

What's your thinking behind that?

And you got your dates wrong as well.

The mortgage bubble in the U.S. Really accelerated from 2002 and really only cleaned out by 2009 as the full aftermath of Lehman brothers washed out - so happy with those dates.

If you look at company profits and long term projections vs the value of most of the world's big bourse and there is a definite mismatch with easy credit and government fiscal doping resulting in bubbles that sooner or later will need to correct , the sooner he bubble bursts the better if it isn't real.

My thinking is if a market booms without fundamental rational economic facts driving the growth then if it doesn't correct you are building for trouble.

House prices the worst example as rationally so many houses are ridiculously over priced and it is entirely based on psychology not reality.

Well you shouldn't be as the markets fell from mid-2008.

You're also clearly lacking in knowledge on equity prices and price equity ratios. There is no bubble, we are back at where we were 12 years ago based on market capitalisation, just with larger profits and a higher dividend yield.

 

[EalingBlue2]

Shares could do with a correction?

What's your thinking behind that?

And you got your dates wrong as well.

The mortgage bubble in the U.S. Really accelerated from 2002 and really only cleaned out by 2009 as the full aftermath of Lehman brothers washed out - so happy with those dates.

If you look at company profits and long term projections vs the value of most of the world's big bourse and there is a definite mismatch with easy credit and government fiscal doping resulting in bubbles that sooner or later will need to correct , the sooner he bubble bursts the better if it isn't real.

My thinking is if a market booms without fundamental rational economic facts driving the growth then if it doesn't correct you are building for trouble.

House prices the worst example as rationally so many houses are ridiculously over priced and it is entirely based on psychology not reality.

Well you shouldn't be as the markets fell from mid-2008.

You're also clearly lacking in knowledge on equity prices and price equity ratios. There is no bubble, we are back at where we were 12 years ago based on market capitalisation, just with larger profits and a higher dividend yield.

A bit of basic science a bubble forms before it bursts and it forms over a period of time. By 2008 the bubble was already deflating and then it burst the problem was caused over a decade.

The rational economic value of any property is net rental yield in perpetuity even at today's low discount rate thats probably about 12 years rent, how much property is that true of now? As for earnings they are sustained on the back of an economy in US and Europe that has had free money and on the back of those countries running up trillions of dollars protecting the market and business. When the tap dries which it is starting to do the markets will correct.

I would also suggest that 12 years ago we were a few years out from the start of the biggest contraction the modern world has known

 

[Lucky13]

Just a coincidence.

 

[Len Rum]

Just a coincidence.

Ha Ha, good poster.
Mind you nobody runs up debt like George Osborne.
A cool half a trillion in five years, about 200 bn more than he predicted when he became Chancellor.
Makes previous Labour Chancellors look like pussy cats.

 

[whp.blue]

Just a coincidence.

Looks like labour are 2 for 2

had the choice of Brothers for their Leader and 2nd in command and picked the stupid one twice

 

[urmston]

What's particularly populist about UKIP?

All parties claim to care about ordinary people and that their polices are best for them.

That's populism.

Labour is probably the most populist party in the current elections - it promises to protect the people against the allegedly nasty policies of their main opponents. Populism is quite easy when you think money grows on trees like Labour does.

It's a specific designation

<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_populism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_populism</a>

Wikipedia!

Using the definition of the word that has been in respected and scholarly dictionaries for just a teeny, weeny bit longer than any Wikipedia article which any nerd, crank or nutter can edit, populism essentially means to appeal to the people claiming you have their interests at heart.

That's why Labour is the most populist party in the UK, and has been for decades. They are forever going on about how they want to look after the ordinary person, and to protect them from nasty types bent on fooling, exploiting and betraying them.

You can't get much more populist than that.

You are of course free to use the word in its more limited, modern sense so loved by lefties, but that doesn't alter its wider meaning.

It seems like populism is a bit like racism now, a negative quality which self-proclaimed caring, liberal and progressive people can so easily spot in others, but are never, ever guilty of themselves.

 

[101toMR]

There isn't anything wrong with a party being populist as long as they really are and do what they say they are going to do. In fact a genuine populist party would be a refreshing change.

 

[Tanzeylee]

these three feckers have nothing to offer so i'l be locking the door on polling day and staying in as i have done for the last 35 years worth of elections

So it was you that let the witch in !

Oh i wish Maggie was alive and well she'd sort these head chopin wanabe terrorists out

You do have a valid point...

 

[Moriati]

The election is a sideshow, as our politicians are almost powerless.
Meaningful economic growth in UK, as well in the West as a whole is a thing of the past, to be replaced by figures both inflated by unsustainable immigration and borrowing, and outright fiddled to put the best gloss on the harsh truth. Our politicians are little more than figureheads to put a brave face on world economic events and globalisation. They cannot deliver on either economic growth or increased spending.
It will make absolutely no difference whether Miliband or Cameron ends up being Prime Minister – neither will be in control of the country.

 

[urmston]

There isn't anything wrong with a party being populist as long as they really are and do what they say they are going to do. In fact a genuine populist party would be a refreshing change.

Agreed.

I was noting the use of the word populist as a pejorative term, something which is becoming increasingly common and trendy with certain types, and reminding someone of its real meaning.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

My thinking is if a market booms without fundamental rational economic facts driving the growth then if it doesn't correct you are building for trouble.

House prices the worst example as rationally so many houses are ridiculously over priced and it is entirely based on psychology not reality.

House prices are at least as much about supply and demand as psychology. The psychology probably creates a demand (for certain areas or the belief that "now is a good time to buy") but the supply is very limited.

 

[SWP's back]

The mortgage bubble in the U.S. Really accelerated from 2002 and really only cleaned out by 2009 as the full aftermath of Lehman brothers washed out - so happy with those dates.

If you look at company profits and long term projections vs the value of most of the world's big bourse and there is a definite mismatch with easy credit and government fiscal doping resulting in bubbles that sooner or later will need to correct , the sooner he bubble bursts the better if it isn't real.

My thinking is if a market booms without fundamental rational economic facts driving the growth then if it doesn't correct you are building for trouble.

House prices the worst example as rationally so many houses are ridiculously over priced and it is entirely based on psychology not reality.

Well you shouldn't be as the markets fell from mid-2008.

You're also clearly lacking in knowledge on equity prices and price equity ratios. There is no bubble, we are back at where we were 12 years ago based on market capitalisation, just with larger profits and a higher dividend yield.

A bit of basic science a bubble forms before it bursts and it forms over a period of time. By 2008 the bubble was already deflating and then it burst the problem was caused over a decade.

The rational economic value of any property is net rental yield in perpetuity even at today's low discount rate thats probably about 12 years rent, how much property is that true of now? As for earnings they are sustained on the back of an economy in US and Europe that has had free money and on the back of those countries running up trillions of dollars protecting the market and business. When the tap dries which it is starting to do the markets will correct.

I would also suggest that 12 years ago we were a few years out from the start of the biggest contraction the modern world has known

Pmsl. Just admit you're wrong. The market collapsed in 2008.

You're on my territory now and not armed.

Try 1929 ans 1972 for bigger contractions also.