Election Predictions

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12368

phil wrote:

I grew up in the New Labour years and let me tell you all, I owe everything I have to New Labour. Under New Labour my working class family could afford to give me a decent quality of life, despite never being particularly affluent or well off. I went to good schools, good colleges, got into a good university and now I have a good job. I grew up in a fairly rubbish town like Hartlepool, but throughout my life I never felt as though I was missing out.

Now, I work with vulnerable families in the North East and I hear on a daily basis, teenagers telling me that there's no point in school because they're stuck exactly where they are forever. University isn't for people like them. There are no jobs, so why bother training? I speak to parents on 0 hours contract that get a bus for an hour to a factory, only to be sent home once they get there without any money for their ticket. Schools are cutting back on teaching staff, meaning class sizes are growing. They're also cutting back on teaching assistants, so there is no one in the class to help. Doctors surgeries are giving appointments for people feeling suicidal a week later, whilst 999 or 111 are saying they can't do anything, only the GP can. Private landlords are getting away with charging £500/600 a month for a three bedroom house in the worst parts of the county, despite the house being unsafe to live in. There are no punishments for them and no council houses for people to move to instead.

The reality is, unless you are on a comfortable wage (which I feel like I am and do not deny) the country is bloody shit at the minute. That's not the immigrants fault, or the Labour party's fault. It is the fault of a government that has cut back and cut back on public services for a decade. No one denies that, even Boris Johnson admits it. To out this right we don't need a bit of an increase in spending, we need a radical plan. We definitely don't need the Tory party saying "we'll build 40 hospitals and hire 20,000 new Police" when that isn't true and doesn't even fill the gap they've made since 2010.

But the reality is, no Labour party will ever form a government with out the support of the Blairites. For all Blair's faults, no Labour Leader should ever criticise the positive impact Blair had on our country. The next Labour (majority) Prime Minister will be one that defends New Labour's record. If that never happens, there will never be another Labour majority government.

Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk

Yep, Phil. The Tories have a lot to answer for but the answer to them isn't Corbyn.
When people were calling Blair and Brown everything from a pig to a dog I said in ten years time you'll be wanting them back. They made mistakes, everybody does. Up to the banking crisis, that is the World banking crisis, we were doing alright and i would have those days back in a flash, which is why I resent the fact that momentum and corbyn have hi jacked the party and are taking us backward. Under Blair people were accepting that there was an alternative to the tories and we were slowly moving forward but alas...................
As for you horden, get yer arse back on here so I can re=educate you. therethere

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12368

Mr Irrelevant wrote:

My main memories of childhood tellies is how friggin unreliable they were. ‘Lennie the telly’ and his box of replacement valves was in our house more than I was!

How true.

The Fat Man · **Joined:** Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:03 pm **Posts:** 2107

loan_star wrote:

Had we kept spending like the last Labour government were, our debt would be far greater than it currently is.

Nope. If you stop borrowing in a recession, that slows the economy, slows down tax revenue and exacerbates the situation. Governments aren't households and there is no need to balance the books all the time, given the mechanisms they have to raise funds. It's not a 'magic money tree', but it's not far off. Most economists said this in the face of the austerity agenda, but no-one listened. Indeed, if I could be arsed to find the posts, I said it on here. Austerity was never never going to balance the budget, it was just going to make things worse.

The Fat Man · **Joined:** Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:03 pm **Posts:** 2107

loan_star wrote:

Bang on wrong.
You get paid £100 a week and spend £200 you have a deficit of £100 and a debt of £100.
You make cut backs and get your spending down £10 a week until you are on a break even, your deficit is zero but your debt would be close on £600 by the time you get your spending in check.
If you cant understand basic budgeting like that then you shouldn't even be trusted with a vote.

Nope, you're wrong. You haven't factored in the multiplier effect or a whole host of different economic factors that mean you can't compare an economy with a household. You've simply bought into the tories very simple narrative as to why austerity had to happen. It didn't, and it's been a disaster.

An edit here; if you can't understand basic economics like that, you shouldn't be trusted with a vote.

The Fat Man · **Joined:** Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:03 pm **Posts:** 2107

Mr Ripper wrote:

The current government is proposing sensible spending plans which won’t lead to recession and a huge increase in the cost of living for us all.

Corbyn and his pals proposals for nationalisation and corporation tax will lead to recession, increased unemployment and a rise in prices in the shops. You can’t tax business and not expect them to have to increase their prices to cover their costs unless you think that they are operating as a charity and prepared to go bust.

Wrong! The reasons the tories don't like big spending promises is not that they lead to a recession, but the opposite; they overheat the economy (thanks to the multiplier effect) because there's so much money flooding around and it leads to inflation. They don't like inflation because this leads to the devaluation of assets. In short, inflation hits those who own things. For most of society, inflation isn't that much of a problem, as it devalues the debt we owe.

The irony, of course, is that austerity has resulted in years of stupidly low interest rates. Those with assets (unless it's property) have made next to nothing from them. If we spent our way out of the financial crisis, everything would have been better. The second impact of low interest rates is that any economic growth has resulted from personal borrowing, not government borrowing. In short, we've borrowed to buy consumer goods. If the government had borrowed the same, it could have used that to invest in infrastructure; such borrowing has beneficial economic effects for years to come, not just the short-term. Consumer borrowing just stores up the economic problems for the future (unless we have an inflationary period to wipe away that debt).

Bluestreak · **Posted:** Sat Nov 23, 2019 9:43 pm

Excellent post Fat Man, the multiplier effect is a part of basic economic theory going back a long way and is still very relevant now and your references to the effects of inflation on groups is key.

The Fat Man · **Joined:** Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:03 pm **Posts:** 2107

Look at this graph for GDP over the last 60 odd years:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdom ... s/ihyp/pn2

Look at the last decade and compare it to the period from 1997 (the last labour government). Of course, there's the 2008 financial crisis in there that led to a massive recession. But I'd say that was a crisis that was not domestic; it was started by the US sub prime mortgage crisis and it spread to all western economies. Growth, under austerity, is consistently lower than growth under previous years. And that's not bloody surprising. Governments are able, through public spending and infrastructure projects, to stimulate economic activity when times are hard. The tories, for ideological reasons, refused to do so. Also, that graph gives credence to one of Gordon Brown's central claims; he attempted to end 'boom and bust' economic policy. From 1997 the peaks and troughs were lower (except for the global crisis). What's interesting about that graph is that for all the previous troughs in economic activity, there's usually followed a peak. There was no peak following the 2008 crisis. Why; austerity. Simple as. We need a government to spend, spend, and spend some more if we're to see any return to prosperity for all. And remember, we're about the exit the EU which will have a devastating impact upon economic activity. The tories modest spending proposals will do nothing to address the economic effects of that.

The Fat Man · **Joined:** Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:03 pm **Posts:** 2107

Bluestreak wrote:

Excellent post Fat Man, the multiplier effect is a part of basic economic theory going back a long way and is still very relevant now and your references to the effects of inflation on groups is key.

Cheers. There's no doubt about it, austerity was ideological and not based on economic theory. It's such a shame that such an important subject (economics) isn't taught in school; if it was, we'd probably be more, as a society, willing to question the blatant misinformation that politicians spread on a daily basis.

horden · **Posted:** Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:17 pm

derwent wrote:

Two excellent posts by Ripper and Mr I.
Two things my grannie used to say ( but not the only two :laugh:

)
Make putting food on the table an absolute priority and if you can't afford it you can't have it.(referring to "luxuries")
Absolutely true, not made up, not racist, not defending the elderly, not trying to educate anyone.
For absolute clarity it was thrown at us by my dad, who was quoting his mam. We were all clamouring for a tele, our first one and we couldn't afford it.
Eventually we got one, a 17 inch, black and white Ferguson, from Binns. I think it was £97 !!!!
A bit different to the one that is in our living room now. :laugh:

Message to PJ and the two Y's.( I'd include Dibble but I don't who he is today)
Tv's were available, they were mostly black and white, you could buy then at Binns, my dad was real, so was his mam and she was my grannie, so no ageist remarks please.
I don't remember the first programme we watched on it but the first one I watched on my first colour tele was Thunderbirds.

You always used to tell me you were Labour, but clearly this wasn't true. You , as I said you were all along were a tory at heart , but one with a guilty conscience. Bliars Labour gave you a chance to be a tory, consume in all its glory yet allow you to be able to sleep at night.

ToTheHartlepool2-0 · **Joined:** Sat Jan 31, 2015 6:08 pm **Posts:** 1333

Can somebody please tell me what Labour has actually done for Hartlepool? I go back to the Ted Leadbitter years personally. Or Easington for that matter?

horden · **Posted:** Sat Nov 23, 2019 11:52 pm

How you measure what Labour has done for Hartlepool and Easington is to see what deterioration always takes place when the tories are in power, that's the gauge, though you could go deeper and mention libraries, care homes, council jobs , bus services, sure start centres, benefit cuts etc

RemotePoolie · **Joined:** Tue Feb 19, 2019 8:34 am **Posts:** 597

phil wrote:

I grew up in the New Labour years and let me tell you all, I owe everything I have to New Labour. Under New Labour my working class family could afford to give me a decent quality of life, despite never being particularly affluent or well off. I went to good schools, good colleges, got into a good university and now I have a good job. I grew up in a fairly rubbish town like Hartlepool, but throughout my life I never felt as though I was missing out.

Now, I work with vulnerable families in the North East and I hear on a daily basis, teenagers telling me that there's no point in school because they're stuck exactly where they are forever. University isn't for people like them. There are no jobs, so why bother training? I speak to parents on 0 hours contract that get a bus for an hour to a factory, only to be sent home once they get there without any money for their ticket. Schools are cutting back on teaching staff, meaning class sizes are growing. They're also cutting back on teaching assistants, so there is no one in the class to help. Doctors surgeries are giving appointments for people feeling suicidal a week later, whilst 999 or 111 are saying they can't do anything, only the GP can. Private landlords are getting away with charging £500/600 a month for a three bedroom house in the worst parts of the county, despite the house being unsafe to live in. There are no punishments for them and no council houses for people to move to instead.

The reality is, unless you are on a comfortable wage (which I feel like I am and do not deny) the country is bloody shit at the minute. That's not the immigrants fault, or the Labour party's fault. It is the fault of a government that has cut back and cut back on public services for a decade. No one denies that, even Boris Johnson admits it. To out this right we don't need a bit of an increase in spending, we need a radical plan. We definitely don't need the Tory party saying "we'll build 40 hospitals and hire 20,000 new Police" when that isn't true and doesn't even fill the gap they've made since 2010.

But the reality is, no Labour party will ever form a government with out the support of the Blairites. For all Blair's faults, no Labour Leader should ever criticise the positive impact Blair had on our country. The next Labour (majority) Prime Minister will be one that defends New Labour's record. If that never happens, there will never be another Labour majority government.

Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk

I grew up under new labour as well and went into secondary just as the Tories came into power. The change in society for the worse was nigh instantaneous. Everything you have said above I have witnessed firsthand, austerity and cutbacks have asset stripped this nation to a bare bones husk. Within three or so years young me was learning what foodbanks were, and how friends I knew had families living on the breadline. In a way, I feel lucky, I'd hate to know how dire school is now when some kids can't even afford lunch.

But apparently all this will be fixed when we get Brexit...

accrington fan · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm **Posts:** 19859

ToTheHartlepool2-0 wrote:

Can somebody please tell me what Labour has actually done for Hartlepool? I go back to the Ted Leadbitter years personally. Or Easington for that matter?

or it should be what actually could labour have done for hartlepool seeing as the tories have been in power for the majority of the time from the 1930,s onwards. you can have the best MP in the country but if they are in opposition then thats it. what have the tories done for hartlepool or the north of england as a whole. the northern powerhouse. i give up.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12368

Mr Horden, I don't really care what you think I am so i'm not going to argue with you on it anymore because we have an impasse.
I have voted labour all my life and if voting for Blair makes me a tory then that's your opinion and of course I'll fight for your right to have that opinion, i just don't agree with you.
The next tory to get my vote will be the first.
In the last election I voted labour, so I have voted for Corbyn already but to be honest I was voting for Caroline Flint, as usual and I happen to think she is a brilliant MP. In fact so do most people round here, of all persuasions.
I have a heavy heart deserting her but I can't bring myself to help Corbyn et al into power.
That is my position and i hope you will respect that as i respect you and your opinions. If you can't or won't then we'll leave it at that.
We are both of the same opinion on a lot of things, but not Corbyn.
That is the freedom of choice that we all defend, or should do.
We'll have to have a pint sometime. You paying of course.

Mr Ripper · **Posted:** Sun Nov 24, 2019 1:55 pm

The Fat Man wrote:

Wrong! The reasons the tories don't like big spending promises is not that they lead to a recession, but the opposite; they overheat the economy (thanks to the multiplier effect) because there's so much money flooding around and it leads to inflation. They don't like inflation because this leads to the devaluation of assets. In short, inflation hits those who own things. For most of society, inflation isn't that much of a problem, as it devalues the debt we owe.

The irony, of course, is that austerity has resulted in years of stupidly low interest rates. Those with assets (unless it's property) have made next to nothing from them. If we spent our way out of the financial crisis, everything would have been better. The second impact of low interest rates is that any economic growth has resulted from personal borrowing, not government borrowing. In short, we've borrowed to buy consumer goods. If the government had borrowed the same, it could have used that to invest in infrastructure; such borrowing has beneficial economic effects for years to come, not just the short-term. Consumer borrowing just stores up the economic problems for the future (unless we have an inflationary period to wipe away that debt).

Soz but not wrong. You’re just being selective in your response.

You say that spending is needed but don’t address my point about the Conservative spending plans, instead suggesting by your silence on this that their intentions are not to invest at all.

You don’t address the effects of over spending and unemployment in the private sector if companies are taxed out of competitiveness.

You intimate that you would like to see high inflation but don’t recognise or acknowledge the associated higher interest rates that would accompany this and the effect that would have on mortgages and people’s ability to meet their payments.

We don’t have a perfect choice in this election and this is probably why a lot of people are picking the bits that they like and ignoring the bad shit that they’d have to swallow alongside that.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:02 pm

You mean conservative spending plans that are in the main to make up for what they removed over the last 10 years? The spending plans that are in the realms of fantasy island. 40 new hospitals.

So let's deconstruct that little gem. They didnt saybthey were doctors surgeries or one life centres they said they were hospitals. 40 new hospitals that cost at least £150m each. Over 5 years?

The tories aren't building them construction companies are. There are not enough construction companies with that sort of collateral to make them happen. I doubt you could find 5 firms in the uk left that could or would be prepared to fund that. Certainly not more than 1 hospital at a time. There are not enough sub-contract firms with enough credit or skilled workers to to build that many.

Most of the larger firms are already full to the rafters with other state projects whether that be crown estate buildings or the department for education.

In other words its another hollow promise from the master of deception. Johnson couldn't lie straight in bed. 50,000 new nurses. Where are they coming from then once he gets his brexit? 20,000 new police officers are suddenly going to appear and strangely that's the same number they got rid of during this last 10 years.

Here's a prediction for you. If they get anywhere near building 40 hospitals I guarantee the main contractors will be from either rep of ireland Spain or the usa. Enjoy Brexit everyone.

Mr Ripper · **Posted:** Sun Nov 24, 2019 4:09 pm

If you want to make that even remotely believable please can you tell everyone what the procurement strategy has been confirmed as and how you know. Otherwise it’s just more speculative bollox.

Ta.

The Fat Man · **Joined:** Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:03 pm **Posts:** 2107

Mr Ripper wrote:

Soz but not wrong. You’re just being selective in your response.

You say that spending is needed but don’t address my point about the Conservative spending plans, instead suggesting by your silence on this that their intentions are not to invest at all.

You don’t address the effects of over spending and unemployment in the private sector if companies are taxed out of competitiveness.

You intimate that you would like to see high inflation but don’t recognise or acknowledge the associated higher interest rates that would accompany this and the effect that would have on mortgages and people’s ability to meet their payments.

We don’t have a perfect choice in this election and this is probably why a lot of people are picking the bits that they like and ignoring the bad shit that they’d have to swallow alongside that.

Wow. For years, tories have told us that we shouldn't spend our way out of this hole. Now, because they've suggested a modest increase in spending, we should spend more, but just what the tories suggest (and no more). At least be consistent in your approach.

For the crowding out thesis, there's no evidence to sustain it; it's just, like austerity, an article of faith for the tory party. It justifies their ideological belief in a small state. Did New Labour's spending crowd out the private sector?

And yes, interest rates may rise, but they would do so alongside an increase in wages and employment. That's not ideal, but it would be more egalitarian.

And of course I'm being selective; my initial post was long enough to start with. But your post made a bald assertion that was, and is, just wrong. Not even monetarists would agree with what you said.

Mr Ripper · **Posted:** Sun Nov 24, 2019 5:46 pm

Soz again, but you still don’t answer or respond to the points I made about private sector companies and the effects of taxation and inflation. I have direct experience of working in the private sector. I know the effects that will happen with the overspending promises of Corbyn. Some fancy economists agreed the other day too that his plans are reckless and unaffordable but unfortunately I can’t remember their name as I’ve got loads of other shit to deal with on a day to day basis at the minute. It’s easy to work in the public sector and not fully understand the pressures on small and medium sized businesses.

loan_star · **Posted:** Sun Nov 24, 2019 6:01 pm

Mr Ripper wrote:

Soz again, but you still don’t answer or respond to the points I made about private sector companies and the effects of taxation and inflation. I have direct experience of working in the private sector. I know the effects that will happen with the overspending promises of Corbyn. Some fancy economists agreed the other day too that his plans are reckless and unaffordable but unfortunately I can’t remember their name as I’ve got loads of other shit to deal with on a day to day basis at the minute. It’s easy to work in the public sector and not fully understand the pressures on small and medium sized businesses.

The Institute of Fiscal Studies?

Sussex UK · **Joined:** Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:34 pm **Posts:** 3573

A basic guide to Maths for Labour voters..what a great stocking filler.

PJPoolie · **Joined:** Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:28 pm **Posts:** 15342

When is the work starting on those 40 hospitals?

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Sun Nov 24, 2019 6:30 pm

Mr Ripper wrote:

If you want to make that even remotely believable please can you tell everyone what the procurement strategy has been confirmed as and how you know. Otherwise it’s just more speculative bollox.

Ta.

I dont need to. I know what happening in the industry and how close a couple of the big boys are to going under. If you are in the industry you should know how little labour there is to go round and how little credit the smaller firms now get. The amount of mid sized firms going bust is frightening as well. And yes I do know.

The Fat Man · **Joined:** Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:03 pm **Posts:** 2107

Mr Ripper wrote:

Soz again, but you still don’t answer or respond to the points I made about private sector companies and the effects of taxation and inflation. I have direct experience of working in the private sector. I know the effects that will happen with the overspending promises of Corbyn. Some fancy economists agreed the other day too that his plans are reckless and unaffordable but unfortunately I can’t remember their name as I’ve got loads of other shit to deal with on a day to day basis at the minute. It’s easy to work in the public sector and not fully understand the pressures on small and medium sized businesses.

Easy. The multiplier effect, as I said earlier. You do know what that is? Government spends more, more money is in circulation, so we can buy more. Government spending increases economic activity as a whole. By a different means (quantitative easing) that’s been the only thing that’s kept the whole economy afloat the last decade. Difference is, that sort of spending is not investment in infrastructure, which has better long term benefits.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Sun Nov 24, 2019 6:37 pm

anyone know who will actually build the hospitals then? British firms only we dont want no foreigners. And no foreign labour either. British jobs for british people.

And 40 new hospitals will mean around 400,000 extra qualified health workers doctors nurses etc. And where are they going to be plucked from?

The Fat Man · **Joined:** Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:03 pm **Posts:** 2107

And the IFS is a right leaning think tank that are routinely rolled out to comment on economic policy. They’re not representative of all economists.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Sun Nov 24, 2019 8:07 pm

Also regarding these make believe hospitals they will be at least 2 years in the endering planning and design phases and then 3 years to build. Pretty good going to build 40 of them in a 5 year parliament period. Of course it will be another lie and they will claim it was doctors surgerys and walk in centres. But it seems johnsons lies are acceptable in this weird world.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Sun Nov 24, 2019 8:10 pm

Did anyone notice Farage's value battle buses roll into town yesterday? Two blue double decker outrage buses heading to the marina where farage then went onto the wetherspoons followed by the pot house. He certainly knows his target victims doesn't he?

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12368

Lecturers and support staff at 60 universities are out on strike for eight days.
Excellent timing. There must be an election looming.
Is this a glimpse of things to come if labour get in. Unions flexing their muscles to see what they can get from their mates in Parliament.
Royal Mail workers were stopped by the courts from disrupting the Xmas post.
Not to mention the postal vote community, many of which aren't mobile enough to attend their local polling station, so let's organise it so their votes get "lost" in the post. I'm not generally a big fan of judges but they called that one right. I wonder how many postal votes will now get "lost" behind a hedge or chewed by the "dog".
That kind, caring group called Momentum are no doubt behind it all.
I wonder if they see postal voters as the elderly and consider the grey voters as tory.
It's all in a good cause. Tactical effort to get rid of Boris,so that justifies it.......well done.
I've never been a fan of jumping from the frying pan into the fire but each to their own.
Sits back, fills a bowl of popcorn and awaits the outrage bus. :laugh:

PJPoolie · **Joined:** Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:28 pm **Posts:** 15342

I mean why should working people have rights or any sort of security anyway!?

More zero hours contracts I say, people who have worked at ASDA for decades sign this awful contract or get sacked. Who would want to return to those awful times when people had a job for a life, a voice and a decent pension to retire on?

The thought of a Prime Minister who holds those sort of values quite frankly turns my stomach.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12368

I'm not sure you are looking for my opinion on your points,PJ.
But here goes.

Everybody should have rights including uni students to the education they've paid for (or their parents have) I don't know if it has been arranged for compensation or a refund on their fee but we'll see.

People have the right to strike. However I think I would wait and see the outcome of the election and then make that decision having first given the new government a chance to sort out whatever problems there are. It is always looked upon as a last resort.

I don't agree with zero hours contracts but I wouldn't stand in the way of anybody who wanted such a contract. I can't see any circumstance where I would want one but it would depend on the whole package on offer. If it was an extremely lucrative rate for example I might be tempted but my first reaction would be no thanks.

On Pm's, we'll get who the people choose and we each have a shot at it but I don't think Corbyn, for instance, would relish entering number ten in such circumstances and it could be him, so this problem should be back burnered until the election dust has settled.

Those are my opinions but they're not going to ring me anytime soon to acquire them. :laugh:

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:48 pm

Dont think there is any doubt he will win the election but my hope is that he wins in a hung parliament so only has a minority government. It's not helping though having so many people in hartlepool apparently following the brexit party.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12368

I'm not so sure. Corbyn has just promised thousands to each of the waspies in compensation for their pension loss. There are 3.7 million of them,and that's a lot of votes. He's promised it and the rest of us will have to pay for it.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 2:51 pm

and quite right too. And I assume you mean the state will pay for it. Also quite right.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 3:06 pm

https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/25/truth-be ... -11213784/

Lies lies and more lies. But hey keep believing folks.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 3:08 pm

50,000 new nurses includes 19,000 from abroad, and a huge number already employed. And the 40 new hospitals has already been admitted as fake.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 3:38 pm

The full interview with Nicki Morgan is extraordinary and quite accurately sums up the tories. Absolutley staggering. And she isnt even standing at the next election.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12368

It really is annoying that we are witnessing so many lies and still the country won't accept the alternative.
labour should be out of sight, they really should.
And that is after nearly ten years in the wilderness.

All is not lost though cos we could have pact between the non electables and that would get rid of boris.
The lib dems would stop brexit, the snp would scrap trident ( don't panic we still have dad's army) and the union, whereas labour, after spending all the money, would go neutral.

At least the northern ireland problem would be solved as the dup and sinn fein would beg the south to take them away from the abyss.
Yes I know that is a bit far fetched but I like Guinness.

To avoid all this mayhem we should vote jeremy into number ten, paint it all in neutral colours and then sit back on our four day week enjoying all our freebies. That's the way to enjoy my retirement.

The high streets would be packed with all the waspy women spending thousands from their jeremy purses, well he has to put the money into something before he hands it over

Bring it on,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,VOTE LABOUR.

Everyone on here is complaining about the hideous one whereas me, yes me........I've sorted it.

Bye Bye Boris.

Splod · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 7:31 pm

I find myself in the quandary that I might have to vote Tory for the first time in my life. I just don't see how Corbyn is credible. So...

Can anyone explain the purpose of Labour's ambition to re-nationalise industries such as energy, water, trains when all that is required is effective regulation of the industries with a customer focus rather than an industry focus? I worked in the electricity industry pre and post-privatisation in the 1990s and at that time one of the key benefits was the removal of 'the dead hand of government' from decision making ie governments were spectacularly poor at making economic/timely or the right decisions. Since that time governments have given us HS2, Hinkley C, PFI contracts and are still undecided about Heathrow etc. How is he going to maintain good relationships with Europe when many of those industries are owned by German and French companies? Won't the EU seek to block such re-nationalisations as being counter to EU competition policy

Secondly, can anyone set out how many and the value of commercial contracts that Corbyn and his team have been responsible for? It seems an incredible leap of faith for someone who doesn't take decisions without a conference mandate to suddenly run all these industries as well as the economy and Brexit negotiations.

Thirdly, how can you go into negotiation with the EU over Brexit when your party (and chief negotiator) don't want to leave? How does that get you the best deal? I don't understand why copying EU laws into UK law doesn't offer the same level of environmental or employment protection, or is Corbyn scared that a future Labour government might water those laws down?

horden · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 7:41 pm

derwent wrote:

I'm not so sure. Corbyn has just promised thousands to each of the waspies in compensation for their pension loss. There are 3.7 million of them,and that's a lot of votes. He's promised it and the rest of us will have to pay for it.

So you don't believe in fairness and equality then? if you are married to a Waspi Woman you wouldn't be complaining. I don't know what your problem is with Labour spending money? the tories have spent plenty , only on tax breaks for themselves and pilfering of nationalised industries that we all used to have a stake in , but now don't.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 8:12 pm

I am afraid to say I agree with you entirely. Thats afraid of the same things as you. It was stupid error to fall into the trap of agreeing a GE. I fear a tory majority but I also believe that be the fault of the Northern working classes. And boy will they regret it in time. How an unemployed bricklayer from Rochdale or Stockton on tees believes his life revolves around getting brexit done will be a mystery that will be unsovled for decades.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 8:23 pm

Splod wrote:

I find myself in the quandary that I might have to vote Tory for the first time in my life. I just don't see how Corbyn is credible. So...

But Johnson is?????

Can anyone explain the purpose of Labour's ambition to re-nationalise industries such as energy, water, trains when all that is required is effective regulation of the industries with a customer focus rather than an industry focus?

How would that work? I see the regulator in cahoots with the industries to cretae a very cosy framework. Maybe it needs to be completely re-aligned meaning the regulators need removing. Some industries should be re-nationalised for the modern world. Rail for example.

I worked in the electricity industry pre and post-privatisation in the 1990s and at that time one of the key benefits was the removal of 'the dead hand of government' from decision making ie governments were spectacularly poor at making economic/timely or the right decisions. Since that time governments have given us HS2, Hinkley C, PFI contracts and are still undecided about Heathrow etc. How is he going to maintain good relationships with Europe when many of those industries are owned by German and French companies? Won't the EU seek to block such re-nationalisations as being counter to EU competition policy

Hopefully we wont leave at all. Once the overall sensible public realise the folly of the whole charade.

Secondly, can anyone set out how many and the value of commercial contracts that Corbyn and his team have been responsible for? It seems an incredible leap of faith for someone who doesn't take decisions without a conference mandate to suddenly run all these industries as well as the economy and Brexit negotiations.

Corbyn has never been in power has he? So how can anyone answer that. Corbyn isnt a dictator though which is good thing right?

Thirdly, how can you go into negotiation with the EU over Brexit when your party (and chief negotiator) don't want to leave? How does that get you the best deal? I don't understand why copying EU laws into UK law doesn't offer the same level of environmental or employment protection, or is Corbyn scared that a future Labour government might water those laws down?

Its absolute nonsense to claim that you get a better deal by threatening to not have one at all. This isnt the sale of TV from Currys. Another bit of stupid tory spin.

Splod · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 8:48 pm

Mr far afar,

The cost and complexity of renationalising these industries will be all consuming for a new government. Why not try a realignment of regulation first? I repeat, governments are notoriously bad at making commercial decisions.

The fact that a leader at the age of 70 who has yet to do a commercial deal is going to worry a lot of people and he has few former labour ministers who have had that experience in his team. The only one left is Diane Abbott!

I have been involved in multi£bn negotiations in my career and I can assure you that the threat to walk away from a bad deal offers significant negotiating leverage. You haven't addressed my point that EU policy would threaten to block many of Corbyn's re-nationalisation ambitions. Every decision in those industries would be subject to state aid scrutiny by the EC.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Mon Nov 25, 2019 9:55 pm

So have I Mr Splod that is being involved with multi-million pound deals. I dont get the theory though. Both sides know a deal needs to be done. Deals of that size, like Brexit, dont have a number of alternatives in place. So its futile to try and pretend you could walk away. Sometimes you just have to be realistic. And remember in this particular case the UK is walking away so the other side are under no obligation to give the UK a decent deal.We are walking away so we have very limited bargaining chips. Any other view on that is part of the tory ruse.

I agree not all industries can be re-nationalised but Rail could and should.

Most deals of that size are not negotiated by the likes of Johnson or Corbyn. They have so called experts that do that so whats the issue? I have no knowledge of any particular deal Johnson has done. I only know Johnson for lying on an industrial scale.

I cant comment on the last bit as I have no knowledge of it or what the EU would do. Of course part of a deal to remain could include the agreement to re-nationalise some industries.

The Fat Man · **Joined:** Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:03 pm **Posts:** 2107

Splod raises an important issue; state aid rules are such that it is difficult to nationalise industries within the EU. That's one of the reasons many on the left have a problem with EU membership. If I remember correctly, that's the reason one of the members of this board (I think it was Malcolm Dawes knew my father; not heard from him in a while. Is he still around) voted leave.

Watching from afar · **Posted:** Tue Nov 26, 2019 1:45 am

EDF will be running and own Hinkley Point C, and they negotiated a huge tariff to compensate them for the huge amount of many they paid the government. The british tax payer will be paying for that for decades. Hardly great negotiating from the the british government.

Now Hinkley was planned as far back as 2008 and warnings were issued bak then when Labour were in power. But the deal actually struck was done by the tories who then compounded the issue by allowing China to buy in and owning one third. Yet we are meant to trust the tories as better negotiators.

They have also given us the disgrace that is HS2. The case for the prosecution rests.

PJPoolie · **Joined:** Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:28 pm **Posts:** 15342

I have just seen this on Twitter as it was ‘liked’ by King of Brexit Chris Turner;

“Boris Johnson could urinate through my mam’s letterbox and I’d still vote for him. It’s so important that we get Brexit done, deliver on that solemn promise, avoid going the same way as Venezuela and selling our armed forces for tea in No 10 with some of our most fervent enemies”

The author is some little twerp called Darren Grimes from County Durham who looks about 12. Staggeringly he has nearly 70k followers on social media. He describes himself as Conservative Commentator and Brexit activist. The question for me is, is he brainwashed to the extent he believes that absurd nonsense he’s tweeting or is he on the payroll? At times like this social media can be an effective and very dangerous tool. In days gone by to hear language used like that surrounding politics you’d have to be like minded enough to go to a rally. These days it’s shared liked and believed in an instant by the gullible.

horden · **Posted:** Tue Nov 26, 2019 8:10 am

If you are worried about the money Labour are talking of spending think about the Tories spending £100 billion on HS2 just to save twenty minutes on a rail journey for businessmen and destroying a lot of countryside into the bargain, and to the detriment of the North East as well.

It was a Labour initiative initially in 2009 at a projected cost of 56 billion but under the tories since 2010 this has risen to 100 billion and counting

Splod · **Posted:** Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:31 am

Hinkley Point C was first planned in the early 1980s. It gained planning approval in the late 1980s and was then shelved before being resurrected by Blair when he concluded he did need more nuclear power. EdF is 86% owned by the French state so the problems with nationalising it are immense.

accrington fan · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm **Posts:** 19859

horden wrote:

If you are worried about the money Labour are talking of spending think about the Tories spending £100 billion on HS2 just to save twenty minutes on a rail journey for businessmen and destroying a lot of countryside into the bargain, and to the detriment of the North East as well.

It was a Labour initiative initially in 2009 at a projected cost of 56 billion but under the tories since 2010 this has risen to 100 billion and counting

HS2 might affect people in my area being a quicker way to london. thing is the majority i know do not want to go there anyway even if they could afford it. no one wants it if they are interested in the first place. then our local bus service has been cut to one a hour just to pee others off in our 21st. century transport system.

Election Predictions

Gadgies online