The British Politics Thread

[Uppercut]

When I saw you'd posted I thought you'd be absolutely tearing into AV. Little disappointed tbh.

[Goughy]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

When I saw you'd posted I thought you'd be absolutely tearing into AV. Little disappointed tbh.

I dont think it needs me to do that. It is an awkward and flawed system on the face of it without me further laying the boot in. However, without reading recent posts in detail, the context of the conversation seems to be the system used to elect the new Labour leader and as far as Im concerned then any organisation or institution can use whatever system they want to use or keeps their members happy. To that end, I have no opinion.

If Im being honest, the prospect of reading and responding to a few pages on electoral systems was something I found of little interest. What did interest me was your repeated use of "disenfranchised" regarding FPTP which is overly dramatic, wholly inaccurate and makes a mockery of the challenges faced by those that really are disenfranchised. Akin to sportsmen referring to themselves as 'slaves' when they dont like their contract.

[shivfan]

Is the honeymoon over?

New Statesman - New poll puts Labour ahead for first time since 2007

"The latest daily YouGov poll has Labour up two to 40 per cent, the Tories unchanged on 39 per cent and the Lib Dems down from a post-conference high of 15 per cent to 12. If repeated at the election on a uniform swing, the latest figures would give Labour a majority of 10 seats."

[sledger]

Yawn, never pay attention to the polls.

[cpr]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

That would be AWSUUUMMM.

Maybe by the next election I'll be in the country's most marginal seat with a much better vote than all you ****s.

The irony is, i've just moved from Sale East and Wythenshawe to Salford, so as a non Labour voter, my votes not counted for anything since i turned 18 (even then, living under Stretford and Urmston, was a safe Labour seat, though don't get me started on that boundary change!!!!).

[shivfan]

So, now the Con-Dem Coalition will be cutting 500,000 public sector jobs, and they apparently seem to expect the private sector to come up with two million jobs to replace them....

Newsflash, Tories, monetarist economics don't work! Thatcher learnt that, Reagan learnt that, and the American Republicans are still learning that. However, it's the people who suffer from their mistakes....

why are the Tories expecting the private sector to come to the aid of the economy? weren't they the ones who put us in this mess in the first place? This makes as much sense as building aircraft carriers without planes to land on them.

[sledger]

Bit worried for my Mum as she works in the public sector, even more worried because she works for the Ministry of Justice...where a load of the cuts are likely to fall....and there has been talk of her being made redundant some point in the near future anyway....eeep.

[four_or_six]

In two minds about this. Slightly worried, as my other half works in the public sector. At the same time, I think things went OTT in the public sector under labour and think we need to think about how much we're overspending by.

[Pothas]

Osborne has magically found an extra 3 billion in 'administration savings' which means job cuts I would imagine.

Its ok because 'we are all in this together' ****ing ****.

[Uppercut]

It's kinda insane how many people are so passionate about the government continuing to spend money they don't actually have. I guess the tax cuts make it a bit more feasible to complain but there still needs to be some kind of realism.

[four_or_six]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

It's kinda insane how many people are so passionate about the government continuing to spend money they don't actually have. I guess the tax cuts make it a bit more feasible to complain but there still needs to be some kind of realism.

I think these people are in the minority, it's just that they make quite a lot of noise. If you have big cuts in a lot of the private sector, no-one really takes much notice. The cuts don't seem anything different to what we had in my company in the last couple of years, probably less drastic actually.

[sledger]

Originally Posted by Pothas

Osborne has magically found an extra 3 billion in 'administration savings' which means job cuts I would imagine.

Its ok because 'we are all in this together' ****ing ****.

Really hate it when any politcian says this.

[Scaly piscine]

Shadow chancellor just seems to spend every 3rd minute talking complete rambling ****e. I realise that they won't have a full chance to analyse things but it's just amateurish in the extreme.

[Pothas]

I quite like Johnson but there is no doubt that Ed Balls would have made a stronger reply.

[Goughy]

Originally Posted by shivfan

Newsflash, Tories, monetarist economics don't work!

Newsflash? Where? In the Socialist Worker?

You cant say that monetarist economics dont work as you have to established what their aims are first.

The cutbacks are ugly. A legacy of the country being mismanaged for a longtime with the economy being incompetently run and too politicised for a decade or more. Too much previous govt faffing has been one of the problems.

I would be very worried with police and FCO cut backs. These are services you cant expect individuals or communities to provide themselves. Local govt has been bloated for a long time and that is less of an issue.

These are very tough and, dare I say it, brave decisions. Decisions Im glad that I am not having to make. You cant spend what you dont have and being decisive in tackling a problem rather than popular is often the right, if difficult, way to go.