Don't vote Tory

[rubenz]

Take a look at @AngrySalmond's Tweet: https://twitter.com/AngrySalmond/status/873652870809350144?s=09

[russycarps]

18 minutes ago, babyblade41 said:

I thought this was all about love to all not love to all as  long as you support a political party ... you'd be surprised how many tory people will be in the crowd ... 

I wouldn't be surprised at all because I witnessed their abhorrent heckling of Caroline Lucas first hand years so. 

Sadly only more of the scum have infiltrated the festival since then.

[babyblade41]

Just now, russycarps said:

I wouldn't be surprised at all because I witnessed their abhorrent heckling of Caroline Lucas first hand years so. 

Sadly only more of the scum have infiltrated the festival since then.

you're welcome 

[Teddington]

17 minutes ago, russycarps said:

I wouldn't be surprised at all because I witnessed their abhorrent heckling of Caroline Lucas first hand years so. 

Sadly only more of the scum have infiltrated the festival since then.

 

Peace and Love.  The Glasto ethos displayed by Russycrap.

 

I think he should be asking himself whether this is the right festival for him.

[russycarps]

6 minutes ago, Teddington said:

 

Peace and Love.  The Glasto ethos displayed by Russycrap.

 

I think he should be asking himself whether this is the right festival for him.

You've seen the light and are no longer tory scum. Congratulations on your decision.

[arcade fireman]

Sky AND BBC calling the health secretary Jeremy c**t today

There is no way this is accidental, at least not in most cases. It keeps happening and has happened a few times before. I'm sure journalists have some sort of a bet on as to who can get away with it. 

[waterfalls212434]

2 hours ago, arcade fireman said:

Sky AND BBC calling the health secretary Jeremy c**t today

There is no way this is accidental, at least not in most cases. It keeps happening and has happened a few times before. I'm sure journalists have some sort of a bet on as to who can get away with it. 

lets face it you cant really consider it inaccurate. of all the government ministers he must rank as one of the biggest c**ts of the lot. How hes still in the job is a wonder. 

[waterfalls212434]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/michael-gove-reshuffle-environment-secretary_uk_593d9b57e4b0c5a35ca08058?ncid=tweetlnkukhpmg00000001

Appoint a failed education minister who doesn't believe in climate change so much so that he tried to remove mentions of it from british schooling, and who backs bloodsports to look after the environment!...top job Theresa top job!....clearly just taking part in a `who can make the most utterly stupid moves` contest with her mate donald trump now.

[Mardy]

 

Thing is, @russycarps is right I reckon. I don't understand where this "Glastonbury =Peace and Love" got twisted into "It's alright to be a c**t" thing.

If anything I believe, if anything, the ethos of Glastonbury is more about fighting for a fairer world, rejecting injustice and inequality, not 'Oh, you're a racist/sexist/homophobe/climate change denier? ah well, that's your choice and I respect your decision. Peace and love, eh'.

[eFestivals]

18 hours ago, HalfAnIdiot said:

May wanted to be sat at the negotiating table with a large majority that would add maximum weight to here stance. We now have a situation where she is substantially weakened. The EU negotiators will make maximum use of the current situation calling on whichever aspects of UK public opinion supports there position and reminding May that she doesnt even have a parliamentary majority. This will now be a far more partisan negotiation, just watch for the leaks from the EU when they want to undermine May on  a negotiating point.

May wanted to add weight to her stance WITHIN THE TORY PARTY.

The likes of Boris was telling her she should just tell the EU to fuck off, that we're leaving, and that we shouldn't pay our obligations. May made clear we'd pay our obligation - but she didn't have the numbers in the tory party to carry that thru (or other more-sensible options).

Nothing of my point was anything to do with a negotiating position with the EU, only what she could get thru the HoC that she might agree with the EU. The EU care nothing of her electoral position, apart from her being able to deliver what she agrees with them.

 

18 hours ago, HalfAnIdiot said:

We are in trouble. May got us here through poor judgment and should not carry that baggage into the negotiations. We need a new leader.

we in trouble only that because it looks like nothing agreed by her - or anyone else - with the EU would get thru the HoC. A change of leader would not change that.

'We' - or more correctly the tories - might need a new leader, but there's not going to be one very soon. The politics don't allow it unless the tories want to be out of power, and they don't. 

And if May is weak, Corbyn is even weaker. I don't want them but it's the tories who won.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

Apart from Borris, who is obviously mad so would clearly take the job, who on earth would want the PM/Tory leader job right now? You've got an impossible task trying to get Brexit through which either way the public will hate you for. You also can't realistically make any meaningful changes due to a non existent majority. Talk about a poisoned chalice.

[HalfAnIdiot]

33 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

May wanted to add weight to her stance WITHIN THE TORY PARTY.

The likes of Boris was telling her she should just tell the EU to fuck off, that we're leaving, and that we shouldn't pay our obligations. May made clear we'd pay our obligation - but she didn't have the numbers in the tory party to carry that thru (or other more-sensible options).

Nothing of my point was anything to do with a negotiating position with the EU, only what she could get thru the HoC that she might agree with the EU. The EU care nothing of her electoral position, apart from her being able to deliver what she agrees with them.

 

we in trouble only that because it looks like nothing agreed by her - or anyone else - with the EU would get thru the HoC. A change of leader would not change that.

'We' - or more correctly the tories - might need a new leader, but there's not going to be one very soon. The politics don't allow it unless the tories want to be out of power, and they don't. 

And if May is weak, Corbyn is even weaker. I don't want them but it's the tories who won.

Neil, you clearly have little knowledge of negotiation. It is far from the technical process you imagine. Personalities and personal standing play a huge part. May is damaged goods.

We (the British people) need a new leader, that is a fact.

[eFestivals]

30 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Apart from Borris, who is obviously mad so would clearly take the job, who on earth would want the PM/Tory leader job right now? You've got an impossible task trying to get Brexit through which either way the public will hate you for. You also can't realistically make any meaningful changes due to a non existent majority. Talk about a poisoned chalice.

a poisoned chalice, but (from the tory party point of view) still the tories in power. As far as they're concerned that poisoned chalice is better than the alternatives. They still have the numbers in the HoC and they'll be going nowhere.

 

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, HalfAnIdiot said:

Neil, you clearly have little knowledge of negotiation. It is far from the technical process you imagine. Personalities and personal standing play a huge part. May is damaged goods.

May is damaged goods within the UK. It makes fuck all difference to the EU, who *only* want to negotiate with someone who is able to deliver what they agree.

Your version only works if the EU are a bunch of c**ts who want nothing that's reasonable, equitable or sustainable, and only want the greatest advantage.

Your version only works if Juncker was lying with the urging he did of May to hold an election so she had the parliamentary backing to get what she agreed with the EU thru the HoC, and was instead hoping to see the sort of collapse that's just happened.

Etc, etc, etc.

1 minute ago, HalfAnIdiot said:

We (the British people) need a new leader, that is a fact.

That might be your want, that might be the country's want, it might be the country's need.

But May has the numbers via a legitimate election and she ain't going anywhere, unless 5 years run out, or opinion swings back to the tories, or someone reckons that them as new leader can make opinion swing back to the tories (or May says fuck the lot of you).

 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

They did a pice in GMB this morning showing what all the European newspapers thought of May. A Dutch newspaper had a cartoon of her hitting herself over the head with a hammer. I think Europe know exactly what they think of her.

[HalfAnIdiot]

12 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

May is damaged goods within the UK. It makes fuck all difference to the EU, who *only* want to negotiate with someone who is able to deliver what they agree.

Your version only works if the EU are a bunch of c**ts who want nothing that's reasonable, equitable or sustainable, and only want the greatest advantage.

Your version only works if Juncker was lying with the urging he did of May to hold an election so she had the parliamentary backing to get what she agreed with the EU thru the HoC, and was instead hoping to see the sort of collapse that's just happened.

Etc, etc, etc.

That might be your want, that might be the country's want, it might be the country's need.

But May has the numbers via a legitimate election and she ain't going anywhere, unless 5 years run out, or opinion swings back to the tories, or someone reckons that them as new leader can make opinion swing back to the tories (or May says fuck the lot of you).

 

It will make ALL the difference in the EU negotiations. Of course they will want 'the greatest advantage', that's their job.

May has weakened our position and so the outcome of the negotiations risks being worse (for us) than could have been. This can be mitigated by inserting a new, stronger, negotiating lead that doesn't have the baggage May is carrying.

However the Westminster pantomime must play on for  a few weeks weeks before we get the change that is sorely needed.

 

Edited June 12, 2017 by HalfAnIdiot
Typo

[Keithy]

11 hours ago, DeanoL said:

 

I don't think the current system is hugely unfair, I think people who reap the benefits of university should pay back into when they're older, especially as they have a greater earning potential. But plenty of people are still alive who had the benefit of a free or cheaper university education. I don't think it's unfair to ask them to pay in too.

A graduate tax at a similar level to the current loan repayment (9% on everything over 20K) would raise a fuckload. Realistically it could be a lot smaller (1% on everything over 20k) and make the same or more money.

I think they need to look at a mixed funding model. University degrees such as the core sciences, medical and technology courses should be state funded as they are key to driving our science and tech econonies and healthcare. If someone wants to study classical art history or other courses that don't necessarily directly contribute to the state then perhaps they should have some fee's attached.

As much as I'd love free uni education for all, I'm not sure given the numbers going to uni that its a cost the state can bear.

[HalfAnIdiot]

10 minutes ago, Keithy said:

I think they need to look at a mixed funding model. University degrees such as the core sciences, medical and technology courses should be state funded as they are key to driving our science and tech econonies and healthcare. If someone wants to study classical art history or other courses that don't necessarily directly contribute to the state then perhaps they should have some fee's attached.

As much as I'd love free uni education for all, I'm not sure given the numbers going to uni that its a cost the state can bear.

The arts don't contribute to the state? Ouch, no no no. Our culture is embodied in the arts. Our culture is the state (or perhaps the other way round).

I say this as an engineer and scientist BTW.

Enjoy your festival of contemporary arts :-)

 

Edited June 12, 2017 by HalfAnIdiot
Typo

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, HalfAnIdiot said:

It will make ALL the difference in the EU negotiations. Of course they will want 'the greatest advantage', that's their job.

Ahhh, so they are the bunch of c**ts Farage said? Good job we're leaving then.

They want an advantageous deal, but that's merely what the other side does as well. That doesn't mean an unfair one.

What might be agreed face to face is still meaningless without the UK's negotiator able to get what's agreed thru the HoC - and as things look right now, it looks like nothing would be (even if Corbyn were the one negotiating).

They need a meaningful negotiation more than they need a weak one. For them, same as us, no deal at all is a dreadful outcome that will cause as much chaos across the EU as it will cause within the UK (tho the chaos would be more dispersed within the EU).

 

 

11 minutes ago, HalfAnIdiot said:

May has weakened our position and so the outcome of the negotiations risks being worse (for us) than could have been. This can be mitigated by inserting a new, stronger, negotiating lead that doesn't have the baggage May is carrying.

Nope, it makes fuck all difference. A new face would only have the same HoC numbers. Everything is dependent on what is agreed being able to be got thru the HoC.

 

11 minutes ago, HalfAnIdiot said:

However the Westminster pantomime must play on for  a few weeks weeks before we get the change that is sorely needed.

I reckon you're likely to be wrong about 'a few weeks'.

Care to tell me what you think will change in a few weeks, and how that would advantage the tory party who are very unlikely to put themselves out of power?

It's not impossible they might change the leader, but any new leader is unlikely to call a new election (cos they'd lose), and would be just as hamstrung by the limited HoC support they'd have for any and all options they might pursue.

 

 

 

[Keithy]

2 minutes ago, HalfAnIdiot said:

The arts don't contribute to the state? Ouch, no no no. Our culture is embodied in the arts. Our culture is the state (or perhaps the other way round).

I say this as an engineer and scientist BTW.

Enjoy your festival of contemporary arts :-)

 

I didn't mean all arts just perhaps some of the more obscure ones. Perhaps arts was a bad example but i was talking about degrees that are direct economic drivers rather than perhaps social. And thats not to say that arts don't contribute to the economy but thr future of our econony and future is being a leader on the world tech and science stage. 

[HalfAnIdiot]

7 minutes ago, Keithy said:

I didn't mean all arts just perhaps some of the more obscure ones. Perhaps arts was a bad example but i was talking about degrees that are direct economic drivers rather than perhaps social. And thats not to say that arts don't contribute to the economy but thr future of our econony and future is being a leader on the world tech and science stage. 

You did specify 'classical art history'. Agreed that there is a chunk of vanity higher education that is of dubious benefit.

[Mardy]

Other way for me, i think. If you want to study retail management or finance or whatever, engineering etc, i'm not really against that being sponsored by companies, but more esoteric, academic subjects should be state funded.

[Mardy]

9 minutes ago, HalfAnIdiot said:

You did specify 'classical art history'. Agreed that there is a chunk of vanity higher education that is of dubious benefit.

I think it all benefits society as a whole. The idea of people studying something just because it's practical or leads to a 'good' job fills me with dread. We might as well be ants or worker bees if all we do is think about productivity.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Mardy said:

I think it all benefits society as a whole. The idea of people studying something just because it's practical or leads to a 'good' job fills me with dread. We might as well be ants or worker bees if all we do is think about productivity.

and yet everything Corbyn is promising is dependent on productivity. Everything we have or might have is 100% dependent on that productivity.

Without that productivity there's no time for arts, because we'd be scrambling in the dirt trying to survive.

[Tuna]

Ah... I was enjoying not seeing Gove on my telly box.