All things Labour Party

Well, if you are going to mention kowtowing. Do keep up sunshine.

Problem is I'm streets ahead of you, pal. Kowtowing is widely used as a metaphor -google Osborne and kowtow if you don't believe me. The reference to Chinese business couldn't have made things any clearer to the reader. Everyone apart from you,it seems

So you think it's a bad idea to build economic relations with China?

it was obviously meant as a joke. No doubt the next week, the shadow health secretary will be making funnies about harold shipman or something

That was clearly a " joke" but that wasn't the issue . The issue was poor delivery and poor reaction to what Osborne actually proposed. It was as if he had written the speech and was going to deliver it come what may . It's not easy reacting to a budget or spending review , but this was completly hopeless.He then compounded it and pulled out of the normal Daily Politics interview directly after and put up his deputy instead . As Andrew Neil said " Ed balls always found the time" . The faces on the labour benches told the story and even Burnham fell into a bloody great big elephant trap over police budgets . Poor poor excuse for an opposition on today's evidence

Corbyn and McDonnell promised us an opposition that would offer the electorate a real alternative to the rampant Nasty Party - and they've delivered.

We've now got an opposition that is totally ****ing stupid.

Great.

Just seen Corbyn on PMQT

What the **** is that all about, head down, read question with no emotion, sit down.

Just weird.

Because he wanted to or because he had to?

Because he had to - because his economic assumptions and policy have been wrong, not just once or twice but consistently miles out; because before today the Conservatives had stupidly committed to ring fencing 70% of the budget; because today they compounded that error by adding police and defence; because they decided to increase health and pensions above the rate of inflation which meant he had to decimate other services to save money which then created an outcry which then led to a backtrack.

Economically inept and weak. The worst chancellor I can remember by a long way.

Economically inept and weak. The worst chancellor I can remember by a long way.

A quick glance at the performance of the first world's top 5 economies measured by GDP growth published by the World Bank shows that the UK has gone from bottom of the league in 2010 to top of the league now. So let's bring back Gordy out of retirement eh?

You might not like Osborne, or his politics. I don't. But to say that he has mismanaged the economy is just rubbish. Either that or your memory is very very short.

Corbyn and McDonnell promised us an opposition that would offer the electorate a real alternative to the rampant Nasty Party - and they've delivered.

 

We've now got an opposition that is totally ****ing stupid.

 

Great.

How do you 'like' on this site?

A quick glance at the performance of the first world's top 5 economies measured by GDP growth published by the World Bank shows that the UK has gone from bottom of the league in 2010 to top of the league now. So let's bring back Gordy out of retirement eh?

 

You might not like Osborne, or his politics. I don't. But to say that he has mismanaged the economy is just rubbish. Either that or your memory is very very short.

You are confusing fiscal policy with monetary policy, which is apt because Osborne does the same, constantly trying to claim credit for the independent actions of the Bank of England. The economy's recovery is down to an extended period of record low interest rates, quantitative easing and being outside the eurozone - none of which is attributable to Osborne. If anything Brown is more responsible as it was him that gave the BoE independence.

Osborne has been largely neutral on tax take and public spending - despite the rhetoric neither have changed much. What he has done is redistribute income within the existing envelope in a way which is unhelpful to the economy. Money has been taken out of the economy by 1) reducing corporation tax - the beneficiaries of which are largely overseas. 2) Creating disincentives to work by taking money away from the economically active and giving it to the retired 3) transferring money from the salaried to the wealthy - who are more likely to spend that money overseas.

You are confusing fiscal policy with monetary policy, which is apt because Osborne does the same, constantly trying to claim credit for the independent actions of the Bank of England. The economy's recovery is down to an extended period of record low interest rates, quantitative easing and being outside the eurozone - none of which is attributable to Osborne. If anything Brown is more responsible as it was him that gave the BoE independence.

 

Osborne has been largely neutral on tax take and public spending - despite the rhetoric neither have changed much. What he has done is redistribute income within the existing envelope in a way which is unhelpful to the economy. Money has been taken out of the economy by 1) reducing corporation tax - the beneficiaries of which are largely overseas. 2) Creating disincentives to work by taking money away from the economically active and giving it to the retired 3) transferring money from the salaried to the wealthy - who are more likely to spend that money overseas.

Riiiiiight

A quick glance at the performance of the first world's top 5 economies measured by GDP growth published by the World Bank shows that the UK has gone from bottom of the league in 2010 to top of the league now. So let's bring back Gordy out of retirement eh?

 

You might not like Osborne, or his politics. I don't. But to say that he has mismanaged the economy is just rubbish. Either that or your memory is very very short.

Nothing like a steroidal increase in household debt to keep the party going. Plus ca change...

Credit where it's due: the huge amount of effort by Corbynoids in the comments sections of today's newspapers is impressive. I've never seen so many long-winded attempts to explain McDonnell's 'joke' by the shiny-faced devotees. Or so much evidence that they have the tinniest of ears for political symbolism, or for the simple idea that Labour needs to communicate to an electorate beyond their no doubt fascinating selves.

A word of advice, though. If you have to explain a joke, it probably isn't very funny.

Meanwhile, an incompetent, politically inept Chancellor romps on, made by Corbyn/McDonnell's New New Labour to look like a political genius.

What have Labour's natural constituency done to deserve this? ****ed over by Osborne and betrayed by Corbynism.

Because he had to - because his economic assumptions and policy have been wrong, not just once or twice but consistently miles out; because before today the Conservatives had stupidly committed to ring fencing 70% of the budget; because today they compounded that error by adding police and defence; because they decided to increase health and pensions above the rate of inflation which meant he had to decimate other services to save money which then created an outcry which then led to a backtrack.

 

Economically inept and weak. The worst chancellor I can remember by a long way.

Yet people lap it up because of his eton-sneer and air of superiority. Sad.

 

You might not like Osborne, or his politics. I don't. But to say that he has mismanaged the economy is just rubbish. Either that or your memory is very very short.

Osborne is basically a New Labour chancellor, this was an Alister Darling review ,following on from an Alister Darling " deficit reduction " plan .

Austerity? My arse . That's still to come , most likely when our children or grandchildren get a politician with the balls to sort out the mess we'll leave them . There's not much difference in real terms spending since 2010 and whilst some indidual areas have faced cuts , overall there's been pretty much naff all. Ask the Irish or the Greeks about austerity , our version is just smoke and mirrors.

The country was ready for austerity, voted for austerity and then this " so called " Tory party tinkered around the edges. The worst thing is the country thinks it has had austerity when the reality is so different. What a wasted opportunity , history will judge these " one nation " clowns as harshly as that bumbling idiot Heath. It suits Labour to bang on about " cuts" , suits Tories to pretend there are " cuts" . Its like some sort of wwf bout , fixed and fake with everybody playing the part the public expect . Someone needs to tell the king he's bollocko .

Osborne is basically a New Labour chancellor, this was an Alister Darling review ,following on from an Alister Darling " deficit reduction " plan .

 

Austerity? My arse . That's still to come , most likely when our children or grandchildren get a politician with the balls to sort out the mess we'll leave them . There's not much difference in real terms spending since 2010 and whilst some indidual areas have faced cuts , overall there's been pretty much naff all. Ask the Irish or the Greeks about austerity , our version is just smoke and mirrors.

 

The country was ready for austerity, voted for austerity and then this " so called " Tory party tinkered around the edges. The worst thing is the country thinks it has had austerity when the reality is so different. What a wasted opportunity , history will judge these " one nation " clowns as harshly as that bumbling idiot Heath. It suits Labour to bang on about " cuts" , suits Tories to pretend there are " cuts" . Its like some sort of wwf bout , fixed and fake with everybody playing the part the public expect . Someone needs to tell the king he's bollocko .

Good post.

It suits Labour to bang on about " cuts" , suits Tories to pretend there are " cuts" ....

And somehow people are losing their jobs as a result of the "cuts", and services are being pruned back due to the "cuts". They may not be as deep as might have been feared, they might not affect as wide a part of the population as might have happened, but trust me, they are real.

In respect of this 'Spending Review' GO is gambling that the (conveniently ) revised GDP figures will turn out as rosy as they have been painted - exactly the aspiration that he slated Gordon Brown for.

http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/budgets/Budgets%202015/Autumn/SR_Nov_2015_opening_remarks.pdf

"...this is not the end of 'austerity'", "A swathe of Departments will see real-terms cuts", "He's going to need his luck to hold out.".

Osborne is basically a New Labour chancellor, this was an Alister Darling review ,following on from an Alister Darling " deficit reduction " plan .

 

Austerity? My arse . That's still to come , most likely when our children or grandchildren get a politician with the balls to sort out the mess we'll leave them . There's not much difference in real terms spending since 2010 and whilst some indidual areas have faced cuts , overall there's been pretty much naff all. Ask the Irish or the Greeks about austerity , our version is just smoke and mirrors.

 

The country was ready for austerity, voted for austerity and then this " so called " Tory party tinkered around the edges. The worst thing is the country thinks it has had austerity when the reality is so different. What a wasted opportunity , history will judge these " one nation " clowns as harshly as that bumbling idiot Heath. It suits Labour to bang on about " cuts" , suits Tories to pretend there are " cuts" . Its like some sort of wwf bout , fixed and fake with everybody playing the part the public expect . Someone needs to tell the king he's bollocko .

Osborne just wants to get elected as next Tory leader and become PM. He's not worried how much he needs to borrow to fund his portrayal of all things to everyone. Criminal abuse of office Imo.

Brown just wants to get elected as next Labour leader and become PM. He's not worried how much he needs to borrow to fund his portrayal of all things to everyone. Criminal abuse of office IMO.

#nmbab

#nmbab

The difference is though that Brown's overspend was by a couple of percentage points of GDP knowing it would be covered by economic growth, which it was right up to when the financial crisis hit. You can argue he should have seen it coming or should have been running a surplus at that point in the economic cycle, which is true - but at the point he made the decisions it was affordable and public debt was only around 38% of GDP. Osborne knows we are deeply deeply in the schitt but is still cutting taxes and funding giveaways.

And somehow people are losing their jobs as a result of the "cuts", and services are being pruned back due to the "cuts". They may not be as deep as might have been feared, they might not affect as wide a part of the population as might have happened, but trust me, they are real.

There is a debate to have about how and where money is spent , but Government is not and has not cut its spending in real terms by anything other than a minuscule amount . It's a strange definition of " austerity " .

There is a debate to have about how and where money is spent , but Government is not and has not cut its spending in real terms by anything other than a minuscule amount . It's a strange definition of " austerity " .

The police don't seem to agree with you http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11/26/police-budget-cuts-paris-osborne_n_8656118.html?1448556823

There is a debate to have about how and where money is spent , but Government is not and has not cut its spending in real terms by anything other than a minuscule amount . It's a strange definition of " austerity " .

Did you see the 'debate' between David Cameron and the leader of Oxfordshire CC ? Government spending has been cut by what might appear, to some, to be a relatively small amount, but with the number of 'ring fenced' budgets, the relative impact on those areas left to bear the weight of the cuts is harsh. GO has played a 'get out of jail free' card this time around, with regard to Tax Credits and the Police budget, but it only needs the GDP / growth figures to fall a couple of decimal points below his forecast and the whole house of cards starts to fall.

This may not be 'austerity' as defined by the Greek or Irish experience, but we were never going to end up in a similar position.

Osborne is basically a New Labour chancellor, this was an Alister Darling review ,following on from an Alister Darling " deficit reduction " plan .

 

Austerity? My arse . That's still to come , most likely when our children or grandchildren get a politician with the balls to sort out the mess we'll leave them . There's not much difference in real terms spending since 2010 and whilst some indidual areas have faced cuts , overall there's been pretty much naff all. Ask the Irish or the Greeks about austerity , our version is just smoke and mirrors.

 

The country was ready for austerity, voted for austerity and then this " so called " Tory party tinkered around the edges. The worst thing is the country thinks it has had austerity when the reality is so different. What a wasted opportunity , history will judge these " one nation " clowns as harshly as that bumbling idiot Heath. It suits Labour to bang on about " cuts" , suits Tories to pretend there are " cuts" . Its like some sort of wwf bout , fixed and fake with everybody playing the part the public expect . Someone needs to tell the king he's bollocko .

Spot on. There's no real austerity.

Just wait: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34930317

Spot on. There's no real austerity.

Until it affects services you rely on.

Until it affects services you rely on.

What great changes of public spending has there been?

https://www.southampton.gov.uk/news/article.aspx?id=tcm:63-368186

http://www.hampshirechronicle.co.uk/news/13805808.Hundreds_of_job_losses_at_Hampshire_County_Council/?ref=rss

Extrapolate across all Councils, take into account that this is a pattern being repeated over several years, and bear in mind that more 'deprived' areas will have proportionately greater reductions in funding.

Not necessarily 'great' changes unless you are one of those, like me, losing your job, or a user of one of the services being chopped.

https://www.southampton.gov.uk/news/article.aspx?id=tcm:63-368186

http://www.hampshirechronicle.co.uk/news/13805808.Hundreds_of_job_losses_at_Hampshire_County_Council/?ref=rss

 

Not necessarily 'great' changes unless you are one of those, like me, losing your job, or a user of one of the services being chopped.

So you agree, no great changes. Far too many are employed by the public sector anyway.

You're welcome to your opinion, but if someone says they are losing their job it might be an idea to have just a little ****ing respect.

You're welcome to your opinion, but if someone says they are losing their job it might be an idea to have just a little ****ing respect.

What does that have to do with anything? Because someone is losing their job we can't have a view on austerity. Dry your eyes.

You can have an opinion and still show respect.

What is it about the Internet that makes people think it's ok to be a ****. If someone you knew came up to you in real life and said they just lost their job, only a complete tosser would say "well, there is too many people employed in the public sector anyway".

You can have an opinion and still show respect.

 

What is it about the Internet that makes people think it's ok to be a ****. If someone you knew came up to you in real life and said they just lost their job, only a complete tosser would say "well, there is too many people employed in the public sector anyway".

People don't try and use losing their own job for justification that austerity is too severe and is having a large impact on British life.

People don't try and use losing their own job for justification that austerity is too severe and is having a large impact on British life.

Not sure I did that, tbh. My point wasn't about me, it's about the 'service users' finding services reduced or withdrawn. Unless you are personally part of this audience you will probably feel that the cuts are insignificant. That doesn't mean they are not there.

So you agree, no great changes. Far too many are employed by the public sector anyway.

You are entitled to your opinions, you may even be wrong.

You are confusing fiscal policy with monetary policy, which is apt because Osborne does the same, constantly trying to claim credit for the independent actions of the Bank of England. The economy's recovery is down to an extended period of record low interest rates, quantitative easing and being outside the eurozone - none of which is attributable to Osborne. If anything Brown is more responsible as it was him that gave the BoE independence

Brown deserves credit for stopping that slimy c*nt blair dragging us into the eurozone. That is the most important economic decision to have been taken in the last couple of decades.

What great changes of public spending has there been?

Not necessarily 'great' changes

So you agree, no great changes.

Not sure I did that, tbh.

As above.

Sour Mash; "As above."

People don't try and use losing their own job for justification that austerity is too severe and is having a large impact on British life.

Not sure I did that, tbh. My point wasn't about me,......

Try quoting the appropriate text.

Sour Mash; "As above."

 

 

 

 

Try quoting the appropriate text.

Fair enough, so you do agree that there haven't been great changes, which was my original post.

As I have posted, it's a matter of perspective and experience. In my experience there have been great changes, in yours there probably haven't been any. For Local Authorities there have been large chunks of funding withdrawn, luckily the Police dodged the purge this time around, ( although they have been cut in preceding budgets ). If the GDP / growth figures don't work in his favour, then GO may have to start considering the major funding areas that have up to now been protected or deferred, because it's only in pensions and benefits that deep 'cuts' can be acheived. ( See the IFS response to the Chancellor's statement ).

Normally know what to expect when you come to these political threads but fck me now austerity hasn't happened? Cuts are a mere figment of imagination?

Nothing like Greece - Don't worry about being reliant on food banks, nothing like being in a refugee camp in Sudan you lucky bastrds.

You are worried about the estate being more unsafe? Try living in Baltimore

You can have an opinion and still show respect.

 

What is it about the Internet that makes people think it's ok to be a ****. If someone you knew came up to you in real life and said they just lost their job, only a complete tosser would say "well, there is too many people employed in the public sector anyway".

But surely you know he is a complete tosser? And not a very bright one either.

As I have posted, it's a matter of perspective and experience. In my experience there have been great changes, in yours there probably haven't been any. For Local Authorities there have been large chunks of funding withdrawn, luckily the Police dodged the purge this time around, ( although they have been cut in preceding budgets ). If the GDP / growth figures don't work in his favour, then GO may have to start considering the major funding areas that have up to now been protected or deferred, because it's only in pensions and benefits that deep 'cuts' can be acheived. ( See the IFS response to the Chancellor's statement ).

Classy reply as ever Badger. Sorry to hear about your job.

Normally know what to expect when you come to these political threads but fck me now austerity hasn't happened? Cuts are a mere figment of imagination?

Nothing like Greece - Don't worry about being reliant on food banks, nothing like being in a refugee camp in Sudan you lucky bastrds.

 

You are worried about the estate being more unsafe? Try living in Baltimore

Slowing down the rate you increase spending is not cutting . Nobody is denying that there have been cuts in certain areas , but that's an argument over priorities and where the money we spend is spent . You can even argue that we need more government spending , but " cuts" in overall government spending are non existent or minuscule at best .

This government is doing exactly what Alister Darling planned to do and it's only sustainable whilst we have growth .

It seems that Corbyn's mealy-mouthed and fake pacifism is going to split the Labour party wide apart next week. The fact that, contrary to his ill-deserved reputation, he never actually articulates a principled political argument makes things worse. His arguments, such as they are, always take the form of "I'm not happy with [...fill in the blank...]." And that's it!

So his and the Corbynists' arguments against military participation in Syria takes the form of mumbling: "It's never worked before so why should it now." As an argument it is little more than a lie.

This has meant, among other things, that Corbyn's record is bloodstained by his refusal to support military intervention by NATO in Kosovo, which successfully halted an ongoing genocide, as well as in Bosnia after the mass killings, under the UN's direct gaze, of thousands of Bosnian Muslim men and boys at Srebenica. To be clear: Corbyn opposed both of these highly successful military interventions - and had he got his way, the massacres and genocide would only have continued.

Corbyn also opposed British intervention in the Sierra Leone civil war - an intervention that successfully ended the war and stopped appalling butchery. Corbyn also advocated standing by and doing nothing as the genocide in Rwanda unfolded.

Corbyn would also presumably have opposed any British participation in the aerial campaign in support of Kurdish forces driving IS out of Kobani. The fact that the bombing was conducted almost exclusively by the Americans seems to have been an excuse for his silence. No one could doubt though that the aerial campaign was necessary - least of all the Kurds, who welcomed it.

The shame of all this is not only that Corbyn is by default an apologist for genocidal murderers (his "friends" in the IRA and Hamas no doubt give him endless lectures on the virtues of pacifism). It is that his political inarticulacy prevents any serious discussion of a reasoned alternative to Cameron's position. One thing clearly absent from yesterday's debate was any reference to Syrian civilians. No-fly zones have been particularly effective in the past in preventing slaughter from the skies, and with Assad's barrel bomb attacks on civilian populations now routine, but any discussion is off the agenda right now. He could have put it there, but his knee-jerk anti-Westernism prevents him.

Worse, as we saw with the appalling Corbynist Diane Abbott when she chaired a Stop the War debate on Syria, Syrian civilian women were ejected from the meeting room for having the temerity to want to speak. Stop the War's, and Corbynists', pro-Putin line must not be allowed challenged by these raggedy civilians who should be happy to sacrifice their lives for Corbynists/Stop the War's "principles".

The sooner this mumbling ****wit is gone the sooner Labour can resume its responsibility as an effective opposition.

It seems that Corbyn's mealy-mouthed and fake pacifism is going to split the Labour party wide apart next week. The fact that, contrary to his ill-deserved reputation, he never actually articulates a principled political argument makes things worse. His arguments, such as they are, always take the form of "I'm not happy with [...fill in the blank...]." And that's it!

 

So his and the Corbynists' arguments against military participation in Syria takes the form of mumbling: "It's never worked before so why should it now." As an argument it is little more than a lie.

 

This has meant, among other things, that Corbyn's record is bloodstained by his refusal to support military intervention by NATO in Kosovo, which successfully halted an ongoing genocide, as well as in Bosnia after the mass killings, under the UN's direct gaze, of thousands of Bosnian Muslim men and boys at Srebenica. To be clear: Corbyn opposed both of these highly successful military interventions - and had he got his way, the massacres and genocide would only have continued.

 

Corbyn also opposed British intervention in the Sierra Leone civil war - an intervention that successfully ended the war and stopped appalling butchery. Corbyn also advocated standing by and doing nothing as the genocide in Rwanda unfolded.

 

Corbyn would also presumably have opposed any British participation in the aerial campaign in support of Kurdish forces driving IS out of Kobani. The fact that the bombing was conducted almost exclusively by the Americans seems to have been an excuse for his silence. No one could doubt though that the aerial campaign was necessary - least of all the Kurds, who welcomed it.

 

The shame of all this is not only that Corbyn is by default an apologist for genocidal murderers (his "friends" in the IRA and Hamas no doubt give him endless lectures on the virtues of pacifism). It is that his political inarticulacy prevents any serious discussion of a reasoned alternative to Cameron's position. One thing clearly absent from yesterday's debate was any reference to Syrian civilians. No-fly zones have been particularly effective in the past in preventing slaughter from the skies, and with Assad's barrel bomb attacks on civilian populations now routine, but any discussion is off the agenda right now. He could have put it there, but his knee-jerk anti-Westernism prevents him.

 

Worse, as we saw with the appalling Corbynist Diane Abbott when she chaired a Stop the War debate on Syria, Syrian civilian women were ejected from the meeting room for having the temerity to want to speak. Stop the War's, and Corbynists', pro-Putin line must not be allowed challenged by these raggedy civilians who should be happy to sacrifice their lives for Corbynists/Stop the War's "principles".

 

The sooner this mumbling ****wit is gone the sooner Labour can resume its responsibility as an effective opposition.

Great post.

The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

I really despair, because at times like these, we (that's righties and lefties) need strong opposition. What we have right now, is a complete farce...

Next week's bi-election will be interesting as poeple draw reference to Corbyn's mandate, which is not legitimate with a floored vote to get him elected, as this will be a watershed moment. If Labour perform badly, Corbyn will be gone IMO. However, if Labour go well, this will add legitimacy to his leadership...

Great post.

 

The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

 

I really despair, because at times like these, we (that's righties and lefties) need strong opposition. What we have right now, is a complete farce...

 

Next week's bi-election will be interesting as poeple draw reference to Corbyn's mandate, which is not legitimate with a floored vote to get him elected, as this will be a watershed moment. If Labour perform badly, Corbyn will be gone IMO. However, if Labour go well, this will add legitimacy to his leadership...

The UKIP leaflets write themselves - tragedy when Bin Laden died, waving the little Red book in the commons, Ken's drivel from last night, a general refusal to support "our boys"/protect us/take on the enemy/etc.

It's a pretty safe Labour seat so they'll still win, with the victory presented by the rabid Corbynistas as the greatest victory since Culloden.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3336470/The-Labour-love-Mao-continues-Left-winger-Diane-Abbott-believes-Chinese-dictator-murdered-millions-did-good-harm.html

Ah, but lefties don't mind other lefties who murder and butcher far more people than Hitler ever did. Remember, lefties can do no wrong.

I don't think Corbyn will make it to the bi-election...

He believes he's the son of God and the world is run by invisible aliens and today David Icke spoke out in favour of Jeremy Corbyn over Syria. Mr Icke, who also contends the Queen and most of the world's leaders are the result of humans breeding with reptiles who live inside the moon, said that if Mr Corbyn's shadow cabinet quits it'll be good for Labour.

The UKIP leaflets write themselves - tragedy when Bin Laden died, waving the little Red book in the commons, Ken's drivel from last night, a general refusal to support "our boys"/protect us/take on the enemy/etc.

 

It's a pretty safe Labour seat so they'll still win, with the victory presented by the rabid Corbynistas as the greatest victory since Culloden.

The reality is that Corbyn is a flea-bitten sheep's carcass concealing the wolf's internal organs of John "ballot, bullet and bomb" McDonnell, Diane "Mao did more good than bad" Abbott and Ken "Iraq has made all Muslims bombers" Livingstone.

As Bertrand Russell once said, as if with Corbynists in mind: "Our great democracies still tend to think that a stupid man is more likely to be honest than a clever man, and our politicians take advantage of this prejudice by pretending to be even more stupid than nature made them."