General election? June 8th?

As I said earlier. General framing of stories is by omission, not by lying.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

That used to be true but not anymore for most of the tabloids. You used to be able to read through the spin to get to the real story but they've moved on to deliberate misrepresentation of the facts to create a false impression. You can no longer glean truth from what they write.

I read all sh*te. All papers present a view across the political spectrum. Its sensible to read as many as you can to get balance. Checks and balances.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Yet keep posting links to order-order. You're a paragon of consistency.

Yet keep posting links to order-order. You're a paragon of consistency.

Okay... This is a personal favourite as its just clips of Newsnight

https://order-order.com/2017/05/16/bungling-burgon-cant-answer-basic-questions-claims-hes-put-trial/

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

It is great to finally have at least one of the two main parties putting the case for a large increase in public investment when the government’s borrowing costs are so low. It is great to see one party prepared to raise taxes to stop the growing squeeze on the NHS and the new squeeze on education. It is great that Labour have a fiscal rule which tries to represent current macroeconomic understanding rather than the wisdom of the George Osborne. Let’s hope this lasts beyond this election.

Unemployment rate is the lowest in 42 years...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39945782

#****brexit #****thetories

Unemployment rate is the lowest in 42 years...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39945782

 

#****brexit #****thetories

Not bad Balders.

Of course, it would be even better if people were getting jobs that paid substantially above the cost of living. Unemployment figures don't do a very good job of reflecting under-employment in the economy.

From a sky news twitter.

 

Where's the seeds for the mystical money tree.?

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

And there the gibbering Tory reveals why the Tories in fact don't get econmics at all... The vast majority of debt since 1945 has been created by Tory governments. The vast majority of debt has been repaid by Labour governments. Why? Because Tories have got it into their posh dimwitted skulls that a national economy is like a household budget. They refuse to invest in the economy because they think that doing so is like frivolously buying a sofa. And the idiots that vote for them go along with this painful charade, to the detriment of the nation.

Not bad Balders.

 

Of course, it would be even better if people were getting jobs that paid substantially above the cost of living. Unemployment figures don't do a very good job of reflecting under-employment in the economy.

It's still good news though, right??? Better than a high unemployment rate?? Or would you prefer a very low cost of living, coupled with a high unemployment rate???

Full employment, with a low cost of living would be where we need to be, but considering what has happened, both domestically and globally over the last 10 years, it is still a bit of positive news.

And there the gibbering Tory reveals why the Tories in fact don't get econmics at all... The vast majority of debt since 1945 has been created by Tory governments. The vast majority of debt has been repaid by Labour governments. Why? Because Tories have got it into their posh dimwitted skulls that a national economy is like a household budget. They refuse to invest in the economy because they think that doing so is like frivolously buying a sofa. And the idiots that vote for them go along with this painful charade, to the detriment of the nation.

I would suggest that employment figures are a good indicator of economic competence. An economy with low unemployment is viewed generally as healthy, whilst those with high unemployment are viewed as unhealthy. In terms of unemployment, EVERY Labour government has left office with unemployment rates higher than when they came to office. Some Tory governments have been as inept, but some have brought unemployment down.

So if I believed in job destruction over and above job creation, then Labour would definitely get my vote

I would suggest that employment figures are a good indicator of economic competence. An economy with low unemployment is viewed generally as healthy, whilst those with high unemployment are viewed as unhealthy. In terms of unemployment, EVERY Labour government has left office with unemployment rates higher than when they came to office. Some Tory governments have been as inept, but some have brought unemployment down.

 

So if I believed in job destruction over and above job creation, then Labour would definitely get my vote

Whatever your political allegiance these aren't typical times.

Normally with unemployment this low you'd see record consumer demand, growing wages, low call on things like housing benefit and record tax receipts leading to very healthy public finances. Instead there is flat demand and wages, very heavy levels of private and public debt and a still running a budget deficit whilst supposedly in a boom. Its not good. If we get a downturn we'll be seriously effed.

The Corbynists are getting their excuses in early. There's already widespread paranoia among the more fanatical doe-eyed dimwits about the 'MSM' having fixed the election. Now, Len McCluskey, the de facto muscle behind Corbyn, is saying that if Labour wins 200 seats that will be a - I quote - 'success'.

It will also be the worst electoral result for Labour since the 1930s. Some success.

It's clear now that the Corbynistas aren't even pretending they can win a majority, or come remotely close to the number of seats they presently have. So McCuskey's intervention is merely part of a strategy to keep Corbyn in power until a rule change at the September party conference will ensure a locked-in and permanent majority for Corbynism, regardless of who the actual leader is.

En Marche.

It's clear now that the Corbynistas aren't even pretending they can win a majority, or come remotely close to the number of seats they presently have. So McCuskey's intervention is merely part of a strategy to keep Corbyn in power until a rule change at the September party conference will ensure a locked-in and permanent majority for Corbynism, regardless of who the actual leader is.

And with that, the lame dog can be finally shot.

The Corbynists are getting their excuses in early. There's already widespread paranoia among the more fanatical doe-eyed dimwits about the 'MSM' having fixed the election. Now, Len McCluskey, the de facto muscle behind Corbyn, is saying that if Labour wins 200 seats that will be a - I quote - 'success'.

 

It will also be the worst electoral result for Labour since the 1930s. Some success.

 

It's clear now that the Corbynistas aren't even pretending they can win a majority, or come remotely close to the number of seats they presently have. So McCuskey's intervention is merely part of a strategy to keep Corbyn in power until a rule change at the September party conference will ensure a locked-in and permanent majority for Corbynism, regardless of who the actual leader is.

 

En Marche.

I think the party will split, David Milliband will return to politics and the current jokers will fade into insignificance. The reborn Labour party will be a force again and represent the working class providing a good opposition / potential future government.

I think the party will split, David Milliband will return to politics and the current jokers will fade into insignificance. The reborn Labour party will be a force again and represent the working class providing a good opposition / potential future government.

I think that would happen with proportional representation. With our current system it would likely just split the vote, very few get elected and rebels would gradually disappear, like the SDP last time.

I think that would happen with proportional representation. With our current system it would likely just split the vote, very few get elected and rebels would gradually disappear, like the SDP last time.

So the only hope for the Labour party is for Corbyn to quit? And until he does, we're a one party state?

So the only hope for the Labour party is for Corbyn to quit? And until he does, we're a one party state?

Pretty much, unless the leavers somehow get control of the Labour name.

I think the party will split, David Milliband will return to politics and the current jokers will fade into insignificance. The reborn Labour party will be a force again and represent the working class providing a good opposition / potential future government.

They would need to re-take Scotland where they used to have 40+ seats. If that doesn't happen then even a revamped model will struggle to make any inroads !

Pretty much, unless the leavers somehow get control of the Labour name.

That's depressing even for a centreie (or even a rightie)

In fact, I've never seen such a bunch of ineffectual and inept politicians in my lifetime ... and I apply that to ALL the mainstream parties...

Looks like the JBP (Johnny Bognor Party) will make it's second appearance on my ballot paper in this coming election. The JBP managed one vote in the last general election, so with a bit of gentle persuasion, I maybe able to get a 100% increase in support.

So I appeal to anyone planning to spoil their ballot. Don't waste your vote. Vote JBP!!

That's depressing even for a centreie (or even a rightie)

 

In fact, I've never seen such a bunch of ineffectual and inept politicians in my lifetime ... and I apply that to ALL the mainstream parties...!

I'd really like to see proportional representation for that reason, it would encourage choice and renewal off the two parties system. You could have Corbyn and Farage leading 'extreme' parties with 10% of the seats each, Greens on around 5%, LDs probably c12% and new SDP party on around 20%, the Tories on about 35% hardcore and a fight for the floating voters in the middle.

The whole red v blue system just makes voting a pointless exercise for huge amounts of the population. I have never voted for anyone other than Lib Dems my whole life purely because where I live it's just a straight choice between them and the Tories - a vote for anyone else is not even worth the walk down to the polling station.

We end up with a choice between a bunch of complete c**ts in the blue corner vs a bunch of idiots in the red to run the country - great!

The Corbynists are getting their excuses in early. There's already widespread paranoia among the more fanatical doe-eyed dimwits about the 'MSM' having fixed the election. Now, Len McCluskey, the de facto muscle behind Corbyn, is saying that if Labour wins 200 seats that will be a - I quote - 'success'.

 

It will also be the worst electoral result for Labour since the 1930s. Some success.

 

It's clear now that the Corbynistas aren't even pretending they can win a majority, or come remotely close to the number of seats they presently have. So McCuskey's intervention is merely part of a strategy to keep Corbyn in power until a rule change at the September party conference will ensure a locked-in and permanent majority for Corbynism, regardless of who the actual leader is.

 

En Marche.

As said, the ducks are lining up for a mass demonstration just after the election, instigated by momentum and such groups. They will trash the centre of London stating that the system is rigged and all that.

basically, (again) not accepting the result. That area of the 'Left' in this country is highly vindictive and nasty.

As said, the ducks are lining up for a mass demonstration just after the election, instigated by momentum and such groups. They will trash the centre of London stating that the system is rigged and all that.

basically, (again) not accepting the result. That area of the 'Left' in this country is highly vindictive and nasty.

Not just this country. Have you seen BAMN and the despicable antifa? Countries like Australia, Canada and America are suffering from the same type of thing abd identity politics is another strand of that. I think it's very sad that the only party to vote for is the Conservatives. It's in the interests of everyone that we have a credible opposition that aren't a bunch of hard left wing loons.

What is it with politicians and numbers? Michael Gove's turn this morning...

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/michael-gove-numbers-hopelessly-wrong/

What is it with politicians and numbers? Michael Gove's turn this morning...

 

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/michael-gove-numbers-hopelessly-wrong/

Not just Gove. Maybot herself was at it this week as well. Since when was incompetence evidence of 'strong and stable' government?

And as for the Tory party manifesto - talk about missing an open goal. It's a truly terrible piece of work that in any other election would have Tory candidates watching the polls with their nails bitten down to their wrists.

As it is, May's missed open goal is easily than matched by Corbyn's and his front-bench's repeated own goals.

Did anyone at the game last night observe someone shouting 'Vote Labour!!!' in a very northern accent while walking through the crowds in the Industrial estate south of the Chapel?

That's depressing even for a centreie (or even a rightie)

 

In fact, I've never seen such a bunch of ineffectual and inept politicians in my lifetime ... and I apply that to ALL the mainstream parties...

 

Looks like the JBP (Johnny Bognor Party) will make it's second appearance on my ballot paper in this coming election. The JBP managed one vote in the last general election, so with a bit of gentle persuasion, I maybe able to get a 100% increase in support.

 

So I appeal to anyone planning to spoil their ballot. Don't waste your vote. Vote JBP!!

Fully agree, I would not trust any of the current crop of political leaders to lead a dog let alone our country. Corbyn may get all the stick in the foreign owned main stream media but May is just as frightening a prospect and Farron is just irrelevant. I won’t spoil my ballot I will vote for the party with policies nearest to beliefs. My hope is that out of the political cluster F**k of the last 18 months a new political movement can emerge lead by people of quality and conviction.

Fully agree, I would not trust any of the current crop of political leaders to lead a dog let alone our country. Corbyn may get all the stick in the foreign owned main stream media but May is just as frightening a prospect and Farron is just irrelevant. I won’t spoil my ballot I will vote for the party with policies nearest to beliefs. My hope is that out of the political cluster F**k of the last 18 months a new political movement can emerge lead by people of quality and conviction.

Agree we got terrible leaders of 3 main party's. Hence why I'm not voting and the fact that the country has a debt of 2 trillion pounds and not been mentioned and that we somehow are going to be world beaters by being 1 against 27 in Europe,proves we are living in LA LA land.The value of my savings have been eroded big time and no sign of the pound recovering its previous value.

Sent from my Be Touch 3 using Tapatalk

The Corbynists are getting their excuses in early. There's already widespread paranoia among the more fanatical doe-eyed dimwits about the 'MSM' having fixed the election. Now, Len McCluskey, the de facto muscle behind Corbyn, is saying that if Labour wins 200 seats that will be a - I quote - 'success'.

 

It will also be the worst electoral result for Labour since the 1930s. Some success.

 

It's clear now that the Corbynistas aren't even pretending they can win a majority, or come remotely close to the number of seats they presently have. So McCuskey's intervention is merely part of a strategy to keep Corbyn in power until a rule change at the September party conference will ensure a locked-in and permanent majority for Corbynism, regardless of who the actual leader is.

 

En Marche.

So are you not voting this time around?

It's worth taking the opportunity to make the point that ITV have completely lost their fu cking minds. Two hours primetime.

It's worth taking the opportunity to make the point that ITV have completely lost their fu cking minds. Two hours primetime.

I had to turn off. WTF is going on? That Welsh women is so ****ing annoying, Lucas & Krankie are head & shoulders above the other 3. Don't agree with anything they say, but they're grown up competent politicians. Farron is doing himself no favours at all, why is he staring at camera, it's freaky

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Shame the red and blue 'leaders' couldn't be arsed to debate live. Says it all about the state of our voting system.

Corbyn should have done it.

Shame the red and blue 'leaders' couldn't be arsed to debate live. Says it all about the state of our voting system.

Weird how these set piece tv debates, that are only a few years old over here, suddenly determined how good our system is

Weird how these set piece tv debates, that are only a few years old over here, suddenly determined how good our system is

Well they have been proved to be popular with the viewers so it's a shame that the two donkeys we have to choose between couldn't be arsed. Just shows up what an outdated farce the old red v blue ****** is. No wonder young people can't be bothered to vote, a choice between a bunch of snobs or union infested weirdos.

Well they have been proved to be popular with the viewers

So has Great British Bake Off

Well they have been proved to be popular with the viewers so it's a shame that the two donkeys we have to choose between couldn't be arsed. Just shows up what an outdated farce the old red v blue ****** is. No wonder young people can't be bothered to vote, a choice between a bunch of snobs or union infested weirdos.

Big Brother is also popular

Big Brother is also popular

What is your point?

It's a democracy, surely the more people engaged in politics, the more information the electorate have the better?

In the leaders debate 80% of the leaders debateing were against Brexit, yet 78 % of the public want to get on with it.

Maybe they need to get better engaged with democracy.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

In the leaders debate 80% of the leaders debateing were against Brexit, yet 78 % of the public want to get on with it.

 

Maybe they need to get better engaged with democracy.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

What does 'get better engaged with democracy' mean?

Theresa May's "Dementia Tax" (the socialists 'clever' name for it) is causing a bit of a stir in the Trousers household. Lady Trousers thinks its unreasonable for the state to be able to tap into the equity in our house (less £100k) to finance the (potential) cost of our care in old age. One of her observations is that someone with a similar lifestyle to us living in, say, Carlisle, could (would?) end up paying less for their elderly care than us simply because their house is likely to be worth less than ours (on a like-for-like basis), due to us living in the inflated house prices world that is the south east of England.

Maybe there will be regional nuances in the final policy details that levels things out, but without knowing how the policy will work in practice, it does seems a tad "unfair" on the surface.

Does Lady Trousers have a fair point?

Yes. Personally I think it's a disastrous policy. But on balance Less disastrous than the labour manifesto.

Personally. I think I'd rather 1p on NI solely for post retirement care.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

It's a funny one.

Imagine if the policy already existed and the Tories said they were going to remove consideration of property equity from the calculation. Left Labour types would be going mad, saying it was a gift to rich property owners, an outrage, a favour for the Shires etc. When the Tories introduce it, it's a "Dementia Tax" (possibly one of the most callous, uncaring and insensitive pieces of spin I can think of).

This whole issue touches on the previous discussion about the NHS and the difficulty of funding ever older populations through their health and social care needs. Fundamentally, I think it's a bit perverse to means test based only on liquid cash and not broader wealth. Presumably, though, there are ways round this involving intra-familial transfers of property....

Lady Trousers thinks its unreasonable for the state to be able to tap into the equity in our house (less £100k) to finance the (potential) cost of our care in old age.

Are you suggesting its fairer if other people pay extra tax so you can get free care and keep your money?

It's a funny one.

 

Imagine if the policy already existed and the Tories said they were going to remove consideration of property equity from the calculation. Left Labour types would be going mad, saying it was a gift to rich property owners, an outrage, a favour for the Shires etc. When the Tories introduce it, it's a "Dementia Tax" (possibly one of the most callous, uncaring and insensitive pieces of spin I can think of).

 

This whole issue touches on the previous discussion about the NHS and the difficulty of funding ever older populations through their health and social care needs. Fundamentally, I think it's a bit perverse to means test based only on liquid cash and not broader wealth. Presumably, though, there are ways round this involving intra-familial transfers of property....

Agree the issues are complex. I do find the hypocrisy from some sections of the entitled middle class a bit nauseating though. You get endless resistance to paying tax for public services, especially when 'poor people who haven't contributed as much as me' are involved - but as soon as it comes down to them needing services they want someone else to pay.

Are you suggesting its fairer if other people pay extra tax so you can get free care and keep your money?

Assume that's addressed at Lady Trousers? I'll ask her and let you know

Assume that's addressed at Lady Trousers? I'll ask her and let you know

She can think of it as clawing back overpayments in her salary due to waste in the NHS

She can think of it as clawing back overpayments in her salary due to waste in the NHS

Neville Southall has spoken... only 3 weeks to save the planet folks!

There used to be private insurance policies for this kind of thing, but they seem to have disappeared. I guess its just too expensive.

Personally I'd favour a scheme where a charge is put on the house and its only sold to meet the costs after the death of the owner and spouse.