The government have only two things to say about education, and very irritatingly they are not challenged even though they are meaningless and misleading. Firstly they say spending in Education is higher than it has ever been, well with more pupils than ever before that is true, but not per pupil funding which is going down. Secondly they keep saying 1.8 million pupils are in good or outstanding schools under them. This claim would not survive more than a five minutes scrutiny. For example the definition of good changes randomly with the wind, but if they define it as exam results then if results get better they say the exams are too easy and the exam system is tinkered with. No government has yet been able to define a good or outstanding education but it is a convenient phrase to use that sounds good but does not stand up to intelligent scrutiny.
Maybe look at your own comments earlier in this thread about how education under Blair was so wonderful, then read the facts that Corbyn "mis spoke" that suggest that things, whilst undoubtedly far from perfect snd under strain from years of unregistered immigration, aren't quite as bad as the Labour leader would accidentally have his followers believe.
What exactly is "unregistered immigration" ? and why would you want immigrants to register ?
Tories have now dropped pledges to not raise taxes (income, VAT, NI), the ones that hit the poor and middle classes. Hammond under no illusions that tax rises are a direct result of their plan to Hard Brexit.
Thus goes the last decent reason to vote Tory, and the last line they needed to cross to go from a centre-right party to full-on right nationalist/authoritarian party.
Are you ok Fiiish? When people undergo radical political conversions it can be a positive sign of intellectual rigour. When they start calling fairly boring right of centre parties Nazi's and accuse them of seeking to kill people it's time to see the GP.
The current Conservative Party leadership has allied itself with the alt-right, and has changed its tone severely to become more authoritarian (widespread surveillance, calling those who attempt to scrutinise their policies the enemy, wanting to scrap human rights, threatening to pull out of unilateral international security arrangements and making aggressive comments towards allies of the UK, refusing to honour its international obligations regarding refugees and migrants). There is nothing Centrist about the current Tory leadership - any Tory MP with a remotely liberal bone has either been ousted from the cabinet or has exiled themselves from the front bench or even the House entirely.
And no, I haven't accused them of wanting to kill people, try improving your reading skills. What is the case is that if the Tories continue to undermine support for the most vulnerable in society (the homeless, single parents, children in poverty, those in care, benefits recipients) as well as continue to let A&E wards get worse and worse, we will be seeing huge increases in easily preventable deaths because the Tories are shifting resources away from vital public services to wherever they hold shares. If you're happy to let people die because you want the rich to get richer (and by the sounds of your tone you're more than happy to let this happen) then that's on you. I'd rather take a stand.
I read someone else accusing the Tories of being intent on killing various sections of society today and I thought it was you, looking back I can see it wasn't on this thread (I was probably reading the Guardian), my apologies. That said I still think your Nazi illusion is ridiculous and as for supporting the Tories I've stated many times on here that I've got as many issues with them as I do with Labour.
You produce a long list of woe but the solutions aren't black and white however much you want them to be. The services that governments in the developed world provide are going to have to shrink as tax bases at best remain static and demands constantly rise. I don't see any way round this given the situation we find ourselves in. Rather than howling at reality I'd prefer a rational debate about targeting resources to do the most good. Sorry if you think my utilitarianist attitude is about being happy to let people die but I feel your utopian thinking is far more dangerous.
I didn't use the word Nazi. If you see the facts I'm posting and think 'Nazis' then that's a pretty damning assessment of current Tory policy.
I disagree that wanting a country where the government invests very minor sums of money to stop thousands of preventable deaths is a utopia, I think it is totally achieveable. If thousands of people dying is an acceptable cost to you to make a handful of people richer then that's on you.
Your first year politics student sanctimony is just tedious.
By the way, your contribution to this thread has singularly been to incorrectly accuse me of accusing the Tories of being murderous Nazis, then to insult me and claim I need to see a GP. Before you next contribute to this thread, maybe learn to read and actually find something worth contributing, because so far your posts have been less than worthless.
You referred to the Tories morphing from one nationism to an alt right party (the first Google result for the term alt right immediately links the movement with neo nazi and white supremacist beliefs) and then went on to describe it's progression to a 'full-on right nationalist/authoritarian party'. You're spouting hyperbolic nonsense.
Maybe look at your own comments earlier in this thread about how education under Blair was so wonderful, then read the facts that Corbyn "mis spoke" that suggest that things, whilst undoubtedly far from perfect snd under strain from years of unregistered immigration, aren't quite as bad as the Labour leader would accidentally have his followers believe.
First off I never said state education under Blair was "wonderful" at all, I said it was better than when I went through the system, which I stand by. That's basic strawman tactics which I think we should all avoid.
I also wasn't defending Corbyn either, I think the bloke's a walking, talking disaster on the whole.
You posted the rebutal of figures included in his speech which made him look like he deliberately misled the audience. What you did not include for a fuller context was that he'd clearly got his figures around his neck and basically messed up. Which was acknowledged and accepted by his party and properly reported through the media reports I heard yesterday. Including the one you selectively quoted from.
Although he messed up his figures I still believe that in one of the richest countries on the planet, we can do better than 500,000+ kids getting their education in classrooms with 30 others.
The government have only two things to say about education, and very irritatingly they are not challenged even though they are meaningless and misleading. Firstly they say spending in Education is higher than it has ever been, well with more pupils than ever before that is true, but not per pupil funding which is going down. Secondly they keep saying 1.8 million pupils are in good or outstanding schools under them. This claim would not survive more than a five minutes scrutiny. For example the definition of good changes randomly with the wind, but if they define it as exam results then if results get better they say the exams are too easy and the exam system is tinkered with. No government has yet been able to define a good or outstanding education but it is a convenient phrase to use that sounds good but does not stand up to intelligent scrutiny.
They have been challenged quite a lot actually, from within the proffession, just a shame the opposition haven't made any use of it. There have been numerous strikes and the recent U-turn on funding and grammar schools has caused palatable anger amoungst heads.
You are right about the rating system being a joke, but that would be true of any government. It is often based on the school putting on a show to improve it's rating and falsely awarded. Once passed it will often slip back and not face scrutiny for years. In some ways it is better to have a child at a school in 'special measures', as you know the school is being monitored and something is being done to improve your child's education.
Tories have now dropped pledges to not raise taxes (income, VAT, NI), the ones that hit the poor and middle classes. Hammond under no illusions that tax rises are a direct result of their plan to Hard Brexit.
Thus goes the last decent reason to vote Tory, and the last line they needed to cross to go from a centre-right party to full-on right nationalist/authoritarian party.
Are you ok Fiiish? When people undergo radical political conversions it can be a positive sign of intellectual rigour. When they start calling fairly boring right of centre parties Nazi's and accuse them of seeking to kill people it's time to see the GP.
The current Conservative Party leadership has allied itself with the alt-right, and has changed its tone severely to become more authoritarian (widespread surveillance, calling those who attempt to scrutinise their policies the enemy, wanting to scrap human rights, threatening to pull out of unilateral international security arrangements and making aggressive comments towards allies of the UK, refusing to honour its international obligations regarding refugees and migrants). There is nothing Centrist about the current Tory leadership - any Tory MP with a remotely liberal bone has either been ousted from the cabinet or has exiled themselves from the front bench or even the House entirely.
And no, I haven't accused them of wanting to kill people, try improving your reading skills. What is the case is that if the Tories continue to undermine support for the most vulnerable in society (the homeless, single parents, children in poverty, those in care, benefits recipients) as well as continue to let A&E wards get worse and worse, we will be seeing huge increases in easily preventable deaths because the Tories are shifting resources away from vital public services to wherever they hold shares. If you're happy to let people die because you want the rich to get richer (and by the sounds of your tone you're more than happy to let this happen) then that's on you. I'd rather take a stand.
I read someone else accusing the Tories of being intent on killing various sections of society today and I thought it was you, looking back I can see it wasn't on this thread (I was probably reading the Guardian), my apologies. That said I still think your Nazi illusion is ridiculous and as for supporting the Tories I've stated many times on here that I've got as many issues with them as I do with Labour.
You produce a long list of woe but the solutions aren't black and white however much you want them to be. The services that governments in the developed world provide are going to have to shrink as tax bases at best remain static and demands constantly rise. I don't see any way round this given the situation we find ourselves in. Rather than howling at reality I'd prefer a rational debate about targeting resources to do the most good. Sorry if you think my utilitarianist attitude is about being happy to let people die but I feel your utopian thinking is far more dangerous.
I didn't use the word Nazi. If you see the facts I'm posting and think 'Nazis' then that's a pretty damning assessment of current Tory policy.
I disagree that wanting a country where the government invests very minor sums of money to stop thousands of preventable deaths is a utopia, I think it is totally achieveable. If thousands of people dying is an acceptable cost to you to make a handful of people richer then that's on you.
Your first year politics student sanctimony is just tedious.
By the way, your contribution to this thread has singularly been to incorrectly accuse me of accusing the Tories of being murderous Nazis, then to insult me and claim I need to see a GP. Before you next contribute to this thread, maybe learn to read and actually find something worth contributing, because so far your posts have been less than worthless.
You referred to the Tories morphing from one nationism to an alt right party (the first Google result for the term alt right immediately links the movement with neo nazi and white supremacist beliefs) and then went on to describe it's progression to a 'full-on right nationalist/authoritarian party'. You're spouting hyperbolic nonsense.
The Tories are becoming more authoritarian. We have someone whose record as a Home Secretary was to restrict civil liberties where possible and regress towards an authoritarian stance now as Prime Minister, who wants to carry on this agenda.
And while the Tories are just hard-right, not alt-right at this moment in time, they are allying itself with the alt-right. They are pursuing a foreign policy agenda that panders to alt-right views and is being supported by the alt-right press (The Sun and Mail). There are plenty of dog-whistle statements coming from the party intended to inflame opinions regarding migrants, Muslims and refugees, it is unashamedly pro-Trump, is doing nothing to tackle xenophobia in this country, and is becoming very jingoistic in its tone (making threats over Gibraltar and over security in Europe, 'red white and blue Brexit' etc.). Any policies that possibly anchored the Tories to the centre have now been shelved or abandoned, it is hellbent on pursuing an agenda where civil liberties and welfare are eroded in favour of a transfer of power to centralised government and big business. My main argument last time for voting Tory was that, in a time of economic turmoil, they would have had the steadiest hand on the tiller. Now they have let go of the tiller and want to pursue an agenda I cannot endorse. No party can now claim to be the party of economic competence, so if the government is going to piss away billions of pounds I'd rather it went to the people rather than to the 1%.
So ... having caught up with the last few pages, it seems that:
- if you vote Tory, you are supporting a party that only cares about the rich and is willing to let lots of people die. - if you vote Labour, you are a caring person who is sensitive to the needs of others.
What a load of sanctimonious crap. It really is not as simple as making sweeping statements. There are many nuances on both sides and it is insulting to 'ordinary' people to make such generic comments.
Incidentally, and before people make what they may feel is the obvious comment, I am, by nature, a Labour supporter. But just denigrating an entire swathe of the population as all being the same, just because they vote in a particular way, is completely wrong.
While numbers of pupils in oversized classes has increased, the number of primary school aged children has increased by about half a million over that period.
Build new schools? It's not as if they didn't see it coming.
I don't think they did!
I was a governor in Lewisham from 2003 to 2015, we had the predicted number of pupils for the next 3 years every year, it was generally pretty accurate give or take 1-2%.
For some reason between about 2008 and 2012 each year there was in excess of 20% more that applied for primary school places than expected. Ultimately there were far more people moving into the borough with young children/babies. This means that around 80% of primary schools in lewisham now have an extra class of 30 pupils in each year group.
This isn't meant to be in anyway controversial, but if I look now at the school where I was a governor, in excess of 60% of the children have english as a second language, that vast majority of those are not refugee's but economic migrants. When I first became a governor in 2003 it was less than 5%.
The measure to predict places was always births, thats where it fell down IMHO, as I don't think anyone took account of migration. It was the same in neighbouring boroughs, not sure of the country as a whole.
I was Chair of Governors of a Primary school in Medway for about 10 years during the last Labour government with immigration and new house building being very significant - we planned the expansion of that school from one form entry to two over a 5-7 year period and never was there more than 30 in any class. There was plenty of budget as well to accommodate that expansion.
Overcrowding in schools is not a unforeseen demographic issue - it is one purely related to a squeeze in funding.
Plus the fact that some local schools like where my grandaughter goes too hasnrt expanded in line with new estates being built around it. I. E no structure plan.
You are right Chippy.
When a population expands it gets the benefits of tax increases, more local spending power, more people entering the job market etc. It also puts a pressure on local services like housing, schools, health etc.
Only our government, local or national, can respond to this by building or hiring more of what is needed, where it is needed. It is my belief that Labour where OK at this, but I also think that for Labour the Public Sector is a sacred cow that must be protected as it is. I think the Public Sector needs a revolution within it but that does not mean starving it of funds or always privatising. They also continued John Major's PFI funding way beyond where it was needed.
The Tories however have not even tried and it could be argued they have deliberately undermined certain sectors. They would argue they are spending more on schools, but they would have to as there are more children going and year-on-year inflation.
They have not kept up with these demands and if you add to this the money they have spunked on Free Schools, Grammar Schools and coercing local schools into academies (which is included in total education spend) you can see that they are spending far less on the kids of hard working families. Things are about to get a whole lot worse in this area with the new funding formula.
Health & Social Care have been an absolute disaster. They say they have ring fenced money but this again does not take account of increased use through ageing population or inflation. They have also taken money from some parts of the NHS and then given the money back as 'additional money'. Training new doctors and nurses being the most startling incidence but there are others.
New plans revolve around treating more people at home (which I support) but they have dismantled community based services, social care and discharge teams and not replaced them. So they have saved money in Social Care but then spent considerably more in Health because there is no method of discharging people from expensive hospital beds (circa £750 per day) to Social Care (Circa £100 per day).
They have also cocked up prevention strategies meaning more and more people are getting unwell quicker as there is nothing to stop/help. Obviously the more unwell you are the more expensive it is to put right. Prevention went in the very early days of the coalition, it was seen as a non job and is very hard to evidence. You just see the effects years later.
I am like Fiiish but saw the signs in 2011, I have voted Labour twice in my life and have voted for all the other parties (bar UKIP). None of them are good enough, but the Tories are an absolute disaster for this country.
Without resorting to Hyperbole (too much) what they have done in Social Care and prevention is a national disgrace and we will take years to get over it. Surely the self styled party of business would get the simple economic equation that sometimes you have to spend money to save money.
So ... having caught up with the last few pages, it seems that:
- if you vote Tory, you are supporting a party that only cares about the rich and is willing to let lots of people die. - if you vote Labour, you are a caring person who is sensitive to the needs of others.
What a load of sanctimonious crap. It really is not as simple as making sweeping statements. There are many nuances on both sides and it is insulting to 'ordinary' people to make such generic comments.
Incidentally, and before people make what they may feel is the obvious comment, I am, by nature, a Labour supporter. But just denigrating an entire swathe of the population as all being the same, just because they vote in a particular way, is completely wrong.
A lot of people are voting Tory because they think they're the most stable party or the most financially competent or the ones who are going to get the best Brexit deal. Those reasons may be true.
But there is a cost for voting Tory and it will be counted in human misery. They have gone beyond reducing the welfare state to a safety net and have knowingly allowed thousands of people to slip into abject poverty. Our NHS and social services are on life support and being kept alive only by those volunteering their free time or working unpaid over their hours. Eventually, if the Tories get another 5 years, we will pass the breaking point. I would rather sort this out now rather than wait until the cataclysmic failure across the country's social services leads to a maelstrom of deaths, suffering, crime and social unrest.
So ... having caught up with the last few pages, it seems that:
- if you vote Tory, you are supporting a party that only cares about the rich and is willing to let lots of people die. - if you vote Labour, you are a caring person who is sensitive to the needs of others.
What a load of sanctimonious crap. It really is not as simple as making sweeping statements. There are many nuances on both sides and it is insulting to 'ordinary' people to make such generic comments.
Incidentally, and before people make what they may feel is the obvious comment, I am, by nature, a Labour supporter. But just denigrating an entire swathe of the population as all being the same, just because they vote in a particular way, is completely wrong.
Assuming you're around 25 years old as the name suggests you have presumably only ever experienced a Tory led administration as an adult.
During that time young people have had a particular poor hand dealt them under a Tory PM in my view. Given that, I'm genuinely interested in why you feel another 5 years of Tory rule are in your (or your peer groups) best interests?
I'm 26 and I'll definitely be voting Conservative. I don't happen to buy into a lot of people's dogmatic preconceptions of the Conservatives... They're just incredibly lazy... A strong economy, as a young person will always be my #1 priority. On top of that I have a belief that I should provide for myself rather than the state handing me everything, it's not their responsibility, its their responsibility to provide me with a safety net should everything go wrong for me or a member of my family, as well as safety on the World Stage (that means nuclear bombs thank you, Mr Corbyn). I believe that The Conservatives are much better placed to do all these things than anyone else over the next 5 years, again though, unlike how many in here are about Conservatives, I'm not dogmatic enough to go "I'll never vote Labour" I probably would have voted for them in 1997, but I was 6 at the time... Since I've been 18 however I have only ever voted Conservative, no to the electoral reform referendum, and to Remain.
I think your problem is that a lot of people today who hate The Tories do so because of Thatcher. My personal view of that era is that if you want to keep producing coal, bring back the steam train... Young people didn't see those times, and a lot of older people need to remember that no government since hers has reversed the things she did. I think the other problem is that, the left more than anyone, fail to understand that people can have views that are not the same as theirs, it seems to massively unsettle them in a way that varies from concerning to hilarious, that people don't mindlessly follow some mantra about Tories wanting the poor poorer and the weak dead, all whilst giving the rich a load of kickbacks.
Oh, and if you want to use the NHS and how much the Tories hate it line, just look at Wales.
The myth that the Tories manage the economy better. National debt after Brown bailed out the banks was about £700bn. After seven years of austerity and severe cuts to services it is now £1848bn. By all means vote for five more years of chaos. Brexit was invented by them, engineered by them and will cost the country dearly.
Can Anybody Find Any Significant Difference Between May’s Policies and the British National Party Manifesto of 2005?
I was struck by how entirely similar Theresa May’s discourse is to that of the British National Party candidate I fought in Blackburn in 2005. That led me to turn to the BNP 2005 Manifesto, and I can see little significant difference between it and current Tory policy.
The British National Party in 2005 advocated:
– Severe cuts in immigration – Leaving the EU – Bringing back grammar schools – Increased military spending – More “security” and “strong leadership” – Foreign policy driven by “British national interest” not human rights – Reduce development aid
Indeed, the few differences I can find between the BNP 2005 manifesto and the current Tory platform are in areas like the NHS, where the Tories are more right wing than the BNP were.
Thankfully it was still considered by most people socially beyond the pale to support the BNP in 2005. Today the media portray anyone perceptibly to the left of those positions as mad. Society has changed markedly – and not for the better.
Can Anybody Find Any Significant Difference Between May’s Policies and the British National Party Manifesto of 2005?
I was struck by how entirely similar Theresa May’s discourse is to that of the British National Party candidate I fought in Blackburn in 2005. That led me to turn to the BNP 2005 Manifesto, and I can see little significant difference between it and current Tory policy.
The British National Party in 2005 advocated:
– Severe cuts in immigration – Leaving the EU – Bringing back grammar schools – Increased military spending – More “security” and “strong leadership” – Foreign policy driven by “British national interest” not human rights – Reduce development aid
Indeed, the few differences I can find between the BNP 2005 manifesto and the current Tory platform are in areas like the NHS, where the Tories are more right wing than the BNP were.
Thankfully it was still considered by most people socially beyond the pale to support the BNP in 2005. Today the media portray anyone perceptibly to the left of those positions as mad. Society has changed markedly – and not for the better.
The BNP: - opposes ALL immigration - supports racial separatism - opposes feminism - are anti-semitic - believes in a 'white' commonwealth - supports economic protectionism - opposes same-sex marriage - wishes to re-introduce capital punishment etc etc etc
Just picking and choosing certain similarities of policy can be used against any other party.
What is virtually undetectable with the Tories is any underlying ideal or aspiration. OK, they like to say never mind the ideals, we can sort out the real and practical problems. The latest of this is to say if they are not the government there will be a coalition of chaos. So we are left with whether they can actually solve the practical problems, and what kind of characters they are. Therein is the judgement. They will up the ante by saying they can address the practicalities of Brexit. This is something they have giving no indication they know how to do, and the risk of chaos over Europe with their mindset is a worse risk than a non Tory government. I say this because the socialists, the greens, the UKIP's, the nationalists, the religious fundamentalists, the extreme right or leftists, even the Liberals have some kind of guiding ideology to fall back on. To an extent politicians of the non Tory ilk can be held to account against their ideals. There don't seem to be ideals amongst Tory politicians. They come across as people who will equivocate their way to power and control whatever it takes.
It is hard not to sound hyperbolic when criticising May's Tories because she has taken them to the hard right, they are capitalising on jingoism and xenophobia and they are endorsing policies that are leading and will lead to an increase in poverty and preventable death.
Maybe look at your own comments earlier in this thread about how education under Blair was so wonderful, then read the facts that Corbyn "mis spoke" that suggest that things, whilst undoubtedly far from perfect snd under strain from years of unregistered immigration, aren't quite as bad as the Labour leader would accidentally have his followers believe.
What exactly is "unregistered immigration" ? and why would you want immigrants to register ?
No transition controls or records leads to problems in the future, like the huge increase in demand for school places a decade later. Fairly clear, I would have thought?
From Immigration Watch Summary This study of Labour’s immigration record shows that the initial leap in net migration in 1998 from 48,000 to 140,000 was largely due to factors outside the government’s control. Thereafter, however, there was a deliberate policy of loosening immigration controls in almost every sector – a policy that was not declared in any of the three election manifestos. These policies accounted for two thirds of the 3.6 million net foreign migration under Labour. The other third was due to their decision not to impose transition controls on migrants from the new East European members of the EU – the only aspect of their record on immigration for which they have apologised.
@stonemuse Where is the sensationalism in picking out two manifestos, albeit 11 years between them, and making comparisons? Open to argument yes, but sensationalist no.
If you examine what Fiiish is saying it is that the whole of this countries politics have moved to the right, so what the (unpalatable for many) BNP were saying 11 years ago is now being said by the (considered mainstream) Conservative Party. 11 years on the BNP have moved even further to the right based on your assessment/list above.
If you are comfortable with that crack on and vote for them but be honest about why you are voting for them.
Assuming you're around 25 years old as the name suggests you have presumably only ever experienced a Tory led administration as an adult.
During that time young people have had a particular poor hand dealt them under a Tory PM in my view. Given that, I'm genuinely interested in why you feel another 5 years of Tory rule are in your (or your peer groups) best interests?
I'm 26 and I'll definitely be voting Conservative. I don't happen to buy into a lot of people's dogmatic preconceptions of the Conservatives... They're just incredibly lazy... A strong economy, as a young person will always be my #1 priority. On top of that I have a belief that I should provide for myself rather than the state handing me everything, it's not their responsibility, its their responsibility to provide me with a safety net should everything go wrong for me or a member of my family, as well as safety on the World Stage (that means nuclear bombs thank you, Mr Corbyn). I believe that The Conservatives are much better placed to do all these things than anyone else over the next 5 years, again though, unlike how many in here are about Conservatives, I'm not dogmatic enough to go "I'll never vote Labour" I probably would have voted for them in 1997, but I was 6 at the time... Since I've been 18 however I have only ever voted Conservative, no to the electoral reform referendum, and to Remain.
When I was 26 the monthly statistic on the economy that used to generate headlines and be pored over by politicians and ‘commentators’ was the ‘UK Balance of Payments’ - the difference between what the UK receives in income from exports and services and what leaves the country to pay for imports and services from abroad.
It still published – but not commented on in the mainstream media. The UK has had one of the worst Balance of Payments deficit of any developed economy for sometime – as shown in detail in the article linked below:
To describe the UK economy as ‘strong’ is a bit like believing that someone you know who has a a new car and a big house stuffed with the latest consumer goods must be financially well off when it’s all bought on credit.
The balance of payments has always had the ability to confuse (me at least). But you make it sound as if we are not paying our way! We do actually pay for our imports you know! If someone in the UK buys, say, a Mercedes they either pay cash or get it on some form of credit deal. Either way, the dealer gets his money and pays Daimler AG's subsidiary their cut. Daimler doesn't care whether it gets dollars, yen, euros or pounds. It's all hard currency. And they'll have hedged Sterling's value to make sure they don't lose out too much on any currency fluctuations. I suspect that realisation - post globalisation and following the removal of exchange control restrictions (thank you Maggie) - is why the figures are never headline news these days.
Surely, a problem only arises if GBP ceases to have a value and no one will accept it anymore? Then you end up with an economy like Venezuela or Zimbabwe. I seem to remember some on here extolling the virtues of the Venezuelan economy and its left wing handouts subsidised by its industry not so many years ago and it's not looking quite so good now for the poor there now is it?
So, as long as we broadly don't pay ourselves too much without earning it and don't therefore devalue the currency too much there shouldn't be a problem regarding the BoP. Of course, that's exactly the sort of problem Corbyn's tax the rich and give it to the poor concepts would lead to if he ever got into power.
Overall what you’re saying is similar to arguing that if your credit card company continues to let you buy stuff on tick (or even increases your credit limit – as is quite common) then there can’t be anything wrong with your personal finances.
I'm not sure you can legitimately make that comparison. First off, in the main it is individuals and companies that are acquiring imports rather than Government (stuff like US fighter planes excepted). So, if Mini import components to build Minis they pay actual money for them, there is no long-term credit element. Of course, in these days of globalisation, the waters are muddied further by the fact that vast swathes of UK industry is foreign owned. So, maybe if Mini is importing tyres made by Michelin in France, it's not ultimately UK plc that pays for them but BMW in Germany. In any event, setting aside any export credit guarantees from the exporting country and time lags in the payment process, the producer is getting actual real money. The issue is that they will probably want payment in Euros or whatever and the UK importer will have to buy Euros with GBPs in order to pay for the goods. All the time the pound is falling in value, that process becomes more expensive for us. But the process will only stop when pounds become an unacceptable currency for anybody to deal in. In this regard the Government's debt levels, while horrendous, are neither here nor there.
So ... having caught up with the last few pages, it seems that:
- if you vote Tory, you are supporting a party that only cares about the rich and is willing to let lots of people die. - if you vote Labour, you are a caring person who is sensitive to the needs of others.
What a load of sanctimonious crap. It really is not as simple as making sweeping statements. There are many nuances on both sides and it is insulting to 'ordinary' people to make such generic comments.
Incidentally, and before people make what they may feel is the obvious comment, I am, by nature, a Labour supporter. But just denigrating an entire swathe of the population as all being the same, just because they vote in a particular way, is completely wrong.
A lot of people are voting Tory because they think they're the most stable party or the most financially competent or the ones who are going to get the best Brexit deal. Those reasons may be true.
But there is a cost for voting Tory and it will be counted in human misery. They have gone beyond reducing the welfare state to a safety net and have knowingly allowed thousands of people to slip into abject poverty. Our NHS and social services are on life support and being kept alive only by those volunteering their free time or working unpaid over their hours. Eventually, if the Tories get another 5 years, we will pass the breaking point. I would rather sort this out now rather than wait until the cataclysmic failure across the country's social services leads to a maelstrom of deaths, suffering, crime and social unrest.
The Tory party have always had a faction where what you describe has been on the agenda. Fortunately this rabid right wing of the party has been held at bay by a largely credible and effective opposition and a general move for all parties to the centre ground.
It would appear that the politics of the whole western world is shifting to the right in large steps. That combined with a discredited and largely ineffective opposition, the Tories on the right of the party are taking their place in the sun.
@stonemuse Where is the sensationalism in picking out two manifestos, albeit 11 years between them, and making comparisons? Open to argument yes, but sensationalist no.
If you examine what Fiiish is saying it is that the whole of this countries politics have moved to the right, so what the (unpalatable for many) BNP were saying 11 years ago is now being said by the (considered mainstream) Conservative Party. 11 years on the BNP have moved even further to the right based on your assessment/list above.
If you are comfortable with that crack on and vote for them but be honest about why you are voting for them.
Your message stated how 'entirely similar' the agendas are. I pointed out the significant dis-similarities. I dislike sensationalism on either side.
And read my post before that one where I clearly stated that, by nature, I am a labour supporter so why the fuck would I vote Tory?
Looks like we are heading to another 'project fear' election ...so disappointing.
Instead of being fixed on emphasising the weaknesses of the other parties, why not emphasise your own parties positives? So much better, yet none of them will do that.
At least Corbyn is, in the main, honest. The problem is, as I have said before, his aim is not to win the election but to re-fashion the Labour Party in his own image.
So ... having caught up with the last few pages, it seems that:
- if you vote Tory, you are supporting a party that only cares about the rich and is willing to let lots of people die. - if you vote Labour, you are a caring person who is sensitive to the needs of others.
What a load of sanctimonious crap. It really is not as simple as making sweeping statements. There are many nuances on both sides and it is insulting to 'ordinary' people to make such generic comments.
Incidentally, and before people make what they may feel is the obvious comment, I am, by nature, a Labour supporter. But just denigrating an entire swathe of the population as all being the same, just because they vote in a particular way, is completely wrong.
A lot of people are voting Tory because they think they're the most stable party or the most financially competent or the ones who are going to get the best Brexit deal. Those reasons may be true.
But there is a cost for voting Tory and it will be counted in human misery. They have gone beyond reducing the welfare state to a safety net and have knowingly allowed thousands of people to slip into abject poverty. Our NHS and social services are on life support and being kept alive only by those volunteering their free time or working unpaid over their hours. Eventually, if the Tories get another 5 years, we will pass the breaking point. I would rather sort this out now rather than wait until the cataclysmic failure across the country's social services leads to a maelstrom of deaths, suffering, crime and social unrest.
The Tory party have always had a faction where what you describe has been on the agenda. Fortunately this rabid right wing of the party has been held at bay by a largely credible and effective opposition and a general move for all parties to the centre ground.
It would appear that the politics of the whole western world is shifting to the right in large steps. That combined with a discredited and largely ineffective opposition, the Tories on the right of the party are taking their place in the sun.
I agree with everything you have written.
For all of Cameron's flaws he anchored the party to the centre. He enacted several liberal reforms including same sex marriage in spite of opposition from the right of the party, who would often give him a harder time than the Opposition, behind closed doors at least.
But the world has moves rightwards, but not for any good reason. A group of very rich, very powerful people want to divert attention away from the fact that they are the prime source of inequality, misery and corruption and have done this by convincing people across Europe and the USA that it is in fact poor people, Muslims and the disabled who are in fact to blame for their misery and when the left and centre parties attempt to defend these vulnerable groups they are called loonies and traitors.
So ... having caught up with the last few pages, it seems that:
- if you vote Tory, you are supporting a party that only cares about the rich and is willing to let lots of people die. - if you vote Labour, you are a caring person who is sensitive to the needs of others.
What a load of sanctimonious crap. It really is not as simple as making sweeping statements. There are many nuances on both sides and it is insulting to 'ordinary' people to make such generic comments.
Incidentally, and before people make what they may feel is the obvious comment, I am, by nature, a Labour supporter. But just denigrating an entire swathe of the population as all being the same, just because they vote in a particular way, is completely wrong.
A lot of people are voting Tory because they think they're the most stable party or the most financially competent or the ones who are going to get the best Brexit deal. Those reasons may be true.
But there is a cost for voting Tory and it will be counted in human misery. They have gone beyond reducing the welfare state to a safety net and have knowingly allowed thousands of people to slip into abject poverty. Our NHS and social services are on life support and being kept alive only by those volunteering their free time or working unpaid over their hours. Eventually, if the Tories get another 5 years, we will pass the breaking point. I would rather sort this out now rather than wait until the cataclysmic failure across the country's social services leads to a maelstrom of deaths, suffering, crime and social unrest.
The Tory party have always had a faction where what you describe has been on the agenda. Fortunately this rabid right wing of the party has been held at bay by a largely credible and effective opposition and a general move for all parties to the centre ground.
It would appear that the politics of the whole western world is shifting to the right in large steps. That combined with a discredited and largely ineffective opposition, the Tories on the right of the party are taking their place in the sun.
I agree with everything you have written.
For all of Cameron's flaws he anchored the party to the centre. He enacted several liberal reforms including same sex marriage in spite of opposition from the right of the party, who would often give him a harder time than the Opposition, behind closed doors at least.
But the world has moves rightwards, but not for any good reason. A group of very rich, very powerful people want to divert attention away from the fact that they are the prime source of inequality, misery and corruption and have done this by convincing people across Europe and the USA that it is in fact poor people, Muslims and the disabled who are in fact to blame for their misery and when the left and centre parties attempt to defend these vulnerable groups they are called loonies and traitors.
But I thought it was the 'poor' people who voted for Trump and Brexit?
This is a five year old article regarding an aspect of the Tory governing establishment.
I feel that within this ruling class there are the occasional tweaks and shifts, somebody is in one day out the next, and then back in and so on, but it looks to me from the outside that fundamentally there is a coterie of Tory politicians who seek power beyond anything else.
Assuming you're around 25 years old as the name suggests you have presumably only ever experienced a Tory led administration as an adult.
During that time young people have had a particular poor hand dealt them under a Tory PM in my view. Given that, I'm genuinely interested in why you feel another 5 years of Tory rule are in your (or your peer groups) best interests?
I'm 26 and I'll definitely be voting Conservative. I don't happen to buy into a lot of people's dogmatic preconceptions of the Conservatives... They're just incredibly lazy... A strong economy, as a young person will always be my #1 priority. On top of that I have a belief that I should provide for myself rather than the state handing me everything, it's not their responsibility, its their responsibility to provide me with a safety net should everything go wrong for me or a member of my family, as well as safety on the World Stage (that means nuclear bombs thank you, Mr Corbyn). I believe that The Conservatives are much better placed to do all these things than anyone else over the next 5 years, again though, unlike how many in here are about Conservatives, I'm not dogmatic enough to go "I'll never vote Labour" I probably would have voted for them in 1997, but I was 6 at the time... Since I've been 18 however I have only ever voted Conservative, no to the electoral reform referendum, and to Remain.
When I was 26 the monthly statistic on the economy that used to generate headlines and be pored over by politicians and ‘commentators’ was the ‘UK Balance of Payments’ - the difference between what the UK receives in income from exports and services and what leaves the country to pay for imports and services from abroad.
It still published – but not commented on in the mainstream media. The UK has had one of the worst Balance of Payments deficit of any developed economy for sometime – as shown in detail in the article linked below:
To describe the UK economy as ‘strong’ is a bit like believing that someone you know who has a a new car and a big house stuffed with the latest consumer goods must be financially well off when it’s all bought on credit.
The balance of payments has always had the ability to confuse (me at least). But you make it sound as if we are not paying our way! We do actually pay for our imports you know! If someone in the UK buys, say, a Mercedes they either pay cash or get it on some form of credit deal. Either way, the dealer gets his money and pays Daimler AG's subsidiary their cut. Daimler doesn't care whether it gets dollars, yen, euros or pounds. It's all hard currency. And they'll have hedged Sterling's value to make sure they don't lose out too much on any currency fluctuations. I suspect that realisation - post globalisation and following the removal of exchange control restrictions (thank you Maggie) - is why the figures are never headline news these days.
Surely, a problem only arises if GBP ceases to have a value and no one will accept it anymore? Then you end up with an economy like Venezuela or Zimbabwe. I seem to remember some on here extolling the virtues of the Venezuelan economy and its left wing handouts subsidised by its industry not so many years ago and it's not looking quite so good now for the poor there now is it?
So, as long as we broadly don't pay ourselves too much without earning it and don't therefore devalue the currency too much there shouldn't be a problem regarding the BoP. Of course, that's exactly the sort of problem Corbyn's tax the rich and give it to the poor concepts would lead to if he ever got into power.
Overall what you’re saying is similar to arguing that if your credit card company continues to let you buy stuff on tick (or even increases your credit limit – as is quite common) then there can’t be anything wrong with your personal finances.
I'm not sure you can legitimately make that comparison. First off, in the main it is individuals and companies that are acquiring imports rather than Government (stuff like US fighter planes excepted). So, if Mini import components to build Minis they pay actual money for them, there is no long-term credit element. Of course, in these days of globalisation, the waters are muddied further by the fact that vast swathes of UK industry is foreign owned. So, maybe if Mini is importing tyres made by Michelin in France, it's not ultimately UK plc that pays for them but BMW in Germany. In any event, setting aside any export credit guarantees from the exporting country and time lags in the payment process, the producer is getting actual real money. The issue is that they will probably want payment in Euros or whatever and the UK importer will have to buy Euros with GBPs in order to pay for the goods. All the time the pound is falling in value, that process becomes more expensive for us. But the process will only stop when pounds become an unacceptable currency for anybody to deal in. In this regard the Government's debt levels, while horrendous, are neither here nor there.
Sorry, but that's bollocks!
The Conservative Party bang on about being the only ones who can be trusted with the economy. George was going to clear the debt by 2020 but it's OK, because we're all in this together. Instead, they have more than doubled the debt and what have we got to show for it? Are we building hospitals, schools, homes, prisons or infrastructure. A few moves on the latter, but mostly still all talk.
And yet the debt has spiralled to a level that would have the Sun, Mail, Express, Telegraph, Times all seething with rage and spewing bile IF Labour had done exactly the same thing. No mind that they may actually have spent it on something tangible, other than in areas that most benefit the outside interests of a number of MPs and their friends.
@stonemuse Where is the sensationalism in picking out two manifestos, albeit 11 years between them, and making comparisons? Open to argument yes, but sensationalist no.
If you examine what Fiiish is saying it is that the whole of this countries politics have moved to the right, so what the (unpalatable for many) BNP were saying 11 years ago is now being said by the (considered mainstream) Conservative Party. 11 years on the BNP have moved even further to the right based on your assessment/list above.
If you are comfortable with that crack on and vote for them but be honest about why you are voting for them.
Your message stated how 'entirely similar' the agendas are. I pointed out the significant dis-similarities. I dislike sensationalism on either side.
And read my post before that one where I clearly stated that, by nature, I am a labour supporter so why the fuck would I vote Tory?
Looks like we are heading to another 'project fear' election ...so disappointing.
Instead of being fixed on emphasising the weaknesses of the other parties, why not emphasise your own parties positives? So much better, yet none of them will do that.
At least Corbyn is, in the main, honest. The problem is, as I have said before, his aim is not to win the election but to re-fashion the Labour Party in his own image.
I am not sure where you are going with this so help me. I don't have a party, if you had read my posts you would know that. Therefore I have no party to promote, the thrust of the part of the thread I am commenting on is about the Conservatives and why they don't deserve to be voted for.
As you are a Labour supporter could you put forward your reasons for why I should vote Labour, as you haven't made them yet. I really am a vote up for grabs so I value your opinion and look forward to hearing your positive promotion of Labour and/or Jeremy Corbyn.
Comments
Firstly they say spending in Education is higher than it has ever been, well with more pupils than ever before that is true, but not per pupil funding which is going down.
Secondly they keep saying 1.8 million pupils are in good or outstanding schools under them. This claim would not survive more than a five minutes scrutiny. For example the definition of good changes randomly with the wind, but if they define it as exam results then if results get better they say the exams are too easy and the exam system is tinkered with.
No government has yet been able to define a good or outstanding education but it is a convenient phrase to use that sounds good but does not stand up to intelligent scrutiny.
It's a nebulous commodity.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right
I also wasn't defending Corbyn either, I think the bloke's a walking, talking disaster on the whole.
You posted the rebutal of figures included in his speech which made him look like he deliberately misled the audience. What you did not include for a fuller context was that he'd clearly got his figures around his neck and basically messed up. Which was acknowledged and accepted by his party and properly reported through the media reports I heard yesterday. Including the one you selectively quoted from.
Although he messed up his figures I still believe that in one of the richest countries on the planet, we can do better than 500,000+ kids getting their education in classrooms with 30 others.
You are right about the rating system being a joke, but that would be true of any government. It is often based on the school putting on a show to improve it's rating and falsely awarded. Once passed it will often slip back and not face scrutiny for years. In some ways it is better to have a child at a school in 'special measures', as you know the school is being monitored and something is being done to improve your child's education.
And while the Tories are just hard-right, not alt-right at this moment in time, they are allying itself with the alt-right. They are pursuing a foreign policy agenda that panders to alt-right views and is being supported by the alt-right press (The Sun and Mail). There are plenty of dog-whistle statements coming from the party intended to inflame opinions regarding migrants, Muslims and refugees, it is unashamedly pro-Trump, is doing nothing to tackle xenophobia in this country, and is becoming very jingoistic in its tone (making threats over Gibraltar and over security in Europe, 'red white and blue Brexit' etc.). Any policies that possibly anchored the Tories to the centre have now been shelved or abandoned, it is hellbent on pursuing an agenda where civil liberties and welfare are eroded in favour of a transfer of power to centralised government and big business. My main argument last time for voting Tory was that, in a time of economic turmoil, they would have had the steadiest hand on the tiller. Now they have let go of the tiller and want to pursue an agenda I cannot endorse. No party can now claim to be the party of economic competence, so if the government is going to piss away billions of pounds I'd rather it went to the people rather than to the 1%.
- if you vote Tory, you are supporting a party that only cares about the rich and is willing to let lots of people die.
- if you vote Labour, you are a caring person who is sensitive to the needs of others.
What a load of sanctimonious crap. It really is not as simple as making sweeping statements. There are many nuances on both sides and it is insulting to 'ordinary' people to make such generic comments.
Incidentally, and before people make what they may feel is the obvious comment, I am, by nature, a Labour supporter. But just denigrating an entire swathe of the population as all being the same, just because they vote in a particular way, is completely wrong.
When a population expands it gets the benefits of tax increases, more local spending power, more people entering the job market etc. It also puts a pressure on local services like housing, schools, health etc.
Only our government, local or national, can respond to this by building or hiring more of what is needed, where it is needed. It is my belief that Labour where OK at this, but I also think that for Labour the Public Sector is a sacred cow that must be protected as it is. I think the Public Sector needs a revolution within it but that does not mean starving it of funds or always privatising. They also continued John Major's PFI funding way beyond where it was needed.
The Tories however have not even tried and it could be argued they have deliberately undermined certain sectors. They would argue they are spending more on schools, but they would have to as there are more children going and year-on-year inflation.
They have not kept up with these demands and if you add to this the money they have spunked on Free Schools, Grammar Schools and coercing local schools into academies (which is included in total education spend) you can see that they are spending far less on the kids of hard working families. Things are about to get a whole lot worse in this area with the new funding formula.
Health & Social Care have been an absolute disaster. They say they have ring fenced money but this again does not take account of increased use through ageing population or inflation. They have also taken money from some parts of the NHS and then given the money back as 'additional money'. Training new doctors and nurses being the most startling incidence but there are others.
New plans revolve around treating more people at home (which I support) but they have dismantled community based services, social care and discharge teams and not replaced them. So they have saved money in Social Care but then spent considerably more in Health because there is no method of discharging people from expensive hospital beds (circa £750 per day) to Social Care (Circa £100 per day).
They have also cocked up prevention strategies meaning more and more people are getting unwell quicker as there is nothing to stop/help. Obviously the more unwell you are the more expensive it is to put right. Prevention went in the very early days of the coalition, it was seen as a non job and is very hard to evidence. You just see the effects years later.
I am like Fiiish but saw the signs in 2011, I have voted Labour twice in my life and have voted for all the other parties (bar UKIP). None of them are good enough, but the Tories are an absolute disaster for this country.
Without resorting to Hyperbole (too much) what they have done in Social Care and prevention is a national disgrace and we will take years to get over it. Surely the self styled party of business would get the simple economic equation that sometimes you have to spend money to save money.
But there is a cost for voting Tory and it will be counted in human misery. They have gone beyond reducing the welfare state to a safety net and have knowingly allowed thousands of people to slip into abject poverty. Our NHS and social services are on life support and being kept alive only by those volunteering their free time or working unpaid over their hours. Eventually, if the Tories get another 5 years, we will pass the breaking point. I would rather sort this out now rather than wait until the cataclysmic failure across the country's social services leads to a maelstrom of deaths, suffering, crime and social unrest.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/04/can-anybody-find-significant-difference-mays-policies-british-national-party-manifesto-2005/
Can Anybody Find Any Significant Difference Between May’s Policies and the British National Party Manifesto of 2005?
I was struck by how entirely similar Theresa May’s discourse is to that of the British National Party candidate I fought in Blackburn in 2005. That led me to turn to the BNP 2005 Manifesto, and I can see little significant difference between it and current Tory policy.
The British National Party in 2005 advocated:
– Severe cuts in immigration
– Leaving the EU
– Bringing back grammar schools
– Increased military spending
– More “security” and “strong leadership”
– Foreign policy driven by “British national interest” not human rights
– Reduce development aid
Indeed, the few differences I can find between the BNP 2005 manifesto and the current Tory platform are in areas like the NHS, where the Tories are more right wing than the BNP were.
Thankfully it was still considered by most people socially beyond the pale to support the BNP in 2005. Today the media portray anyone perceptibly to the left of those positions as mad. Society has changed markedly – and not for the better.
- opposes ALL immigration
- supports racial separatism
- opposes feminism
- are anti-semitic
- believes in a 'white' commonwealth
- supports economic protectionism
- opposes same-sex marriage
- wishes to re-introduce capital punishment
etc etc etc
Just picking and choosing certain similarities of policy can be used against any other party.
Sensationalist nonsense again.
OK, they like to say never mind the ideals, we can sort out the real and practical problems. The latest of this is to say if they are not the government there will be a coalition of chaos.
So we are left with whether they can actually solve the practical problems, and what kind of characters they are. Therein is the judgement.
They will up the ante by saying they can address the practicalities of Brexit. This is something they have giving no indication they know how to do, and the risk of chaos over Europe with their mindset is a worse risk than a non Tory government.
I say this because the socialists, the greens, the UKIP's, the nationalists, the religious fundamentalists, the extreme right or leftists, even the Liberals have some kind of guiding ideology to fall back on. To an extent politicians of the non Tory ilk can be held to account against their ideals.
There don't seem to be ideals amongst Tory politicians. They come across as people who will equivocate their way to power and control whatever it takes.
From Immigration Watch
Summary
This study of Labour’s immigration record shows that the initial leap in net migration in 1998 from 48,000 to 140,000 was largely due to factors outside the government’s control.
Thereafter, however, there was a deliberate policy of loosening immigration controls in almost every sector – a policy that was not declared in any of the three election manifestos. These policies accounted for two thirds of the 3.6 million net foreign migration under Labour.
The other third was due to their decision not to impose transition controls on migrants from the new East European members of the EU – the only aspect of their record on immigration for which they have apologised.
If you examine what Fiiish is saying it is that the whole of this countries politics have moved to the right, so what the (unpalatable for many) BNP were saying 11 years ago is now being said by the (considered mainstream) Conservative Party. 11 years on the BNP have moved even further to the right based on your assessment/list above.
If you are comfortable with that crack on and vote for them but be honest about why you are voting for them.
It would appear that the politics of the whole western world is shifting to the right in large steps. That combined with a discredited and largely ineffective opposition, the Tories on the right of the party are taking their place in the sun.
I agree with everything you have written.
And read my post before that one where I clearly stated that, by nature, I am a labour supporter so why the fuck would I vote Tory?
Looks like we are heading to another 'project fear' election ...so disappointing.
Instead of being fixed on emphasising the weaknesses of the other parties, why not emphasise your own parties positives? So much better, yet none of them will do that.
At least Corbyn is, in the main, honest. The problem is, as I have said before, his aim is not to win the election but to re-fashion the Labour Party in his own image.
But the world has moves rightwards, but not for any good reason. A group of very rich, very powerful people want to divert attention away from the fact that they are the prime source of inequality, misery and corruption and have done this by convincing people across Europe and the USA that it is in fact poor people, Muslims and the disabled who are in fact to blame for their misery and when the left and centre parties attempt to defend these vulnerable groups they are called loonies and traitors.
Which of these two Tory policies do you most admire, cutting disabillity benefits or the Rape Clause?
I feel that within this ruling class there are the occasional tweaks and shifts, somebody is in one day out the next, and then back in and so on, but it looks to me from the outside that fundamentally there is a coterie of Tory politicians who seek power beyond anything else.
https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2012/10/10/revealed-at-last-the-hunt-bottomley-link/
The Conservative Party bang on about being the only ones who can be trusted with the economy. George was going to clear the debt by 2020 but it's OK, because we're all in this together. Instead, they have more than doubled the debt and what have we got to show for it? Are we building hospitals, schools, homes, prisons or infrastructure. A few moves on the latter, but mostly still all talk.
And yet the debt has spiralled to a level that would have the Sun, Mail, Express, Telegraph, Times all seething with rage and spewing bile IF Labour had done exactly the same thing. No mind that they may actually have spent it on something tangible, other than in areas that most benefit the outside interests of a number of MPs and their friends.
I am not sure where you are going with this so help me. I don't have a party, if you had read my posts you would know that. Therefore I have no party to promote, the thrust of the part of the thread I am commenting on is about the Conservatives and why they don't deserve to be voted for.
As you are a Labour supporter could you put forward your reasons for why I should vote Labour, as you haven't made them yet. I really am a vote up for grabs so I value your opinion and look forward to hearing your positive promotion of Labour and/or Jeremy Corbyn.