Don't vote Tory

[Spindles]

Whether investment or austerity works better to reduce debt is a matter of ideology.  Labour policy and ideology is that investment is the better solution, this is supported by the greatest period of state infrastructure spending being parallel with the greatest increase in wealth, standard of living and economic growth (the 50 years post war).  The conservative policy and ideology is that cuts are the better solution, supported by....well, supported by belief.

The debt was so high in 2010 because we bailed out the banks, this extraordinary spending wasn't due to party policy, mismanagement of spending on public services, because of the poor, the disabled, those in education, it was because speculators lost it and we bailed them out rather than face the consequences.

To quote King Blues "We've seen the rules that you call fair, when there's profit you keep it, but debt we share".

Painting the sudden increase in national debt at the end of the last decade as being down to irresponsible public spending is a falsehood.  It was due to extraordinary costs from bailing out the banks.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Spindles

[eFestivals]

30 minutes ago, Spindles said:

Whether investment or austerity works better to reduce debt is a matter of ideology.

Utterly utterly wrong. Both rely on the same thing, resources. 

There are only the same resources available no matter what ideology is applied. All ideology does is shift how a person thinks the available resources are best allocated.

(and don't make the mistake of believing that a pile of cash is resources. It's not. That pile of cash will only influence how the resources are be distributed when the cash is used).

You cannot eat a biscuit that doesn't exist. No ideology can alter that.

 

30 minutes ago, Spindles said:

Labour policy and ideology is that investment is the better solution

It is. Funnily enough, it's also the tory ideology.

Now, tell me how (say) increasing nurses wages is 'investment' and not 'consumption'.

Increasing a nurse's wage gets no extra work from that nurse, therefore no extra healthy people from which a gain for the country can be achieved.

The problem is that Labour don't only want to invest, they also want to spend extra on consumption.

 

Quote

, this is supported by the greatest period of state infrastructure spending being parallel with the greatest increase in wealth, standard of living and economic growth (the 50 years post war).  

Hmmmm. That's putting aside everything of modernity, which might be an alternative reason - and in fact you only have to look at other countries in the world to see that it is.

 

Quote

The conservative policy and ideology is that cuts are the better solution, supported by....well, supported by belief.

Except of course the tory policy has been one of both cuts and investment (tho not necessarily investment by the state).

 

Quote

The debt was so high in 2010 because we bailed out the banks

No it wasn't.

The debt was so high because overspending  - deficit - had taken it there.

The deficit was so high because more was being spent than the economy could sustain.

 

Quote

 this extraordinary spending wasn't due to party policy, mismanagement of spending on public services, because of the poor, the disabled, those in education, it was because speculators lost it and we bailed them out rather than face the consequences.

Speculators over-inflated the economy via a false economy - but that false economy also spilled out of the banking arena and into all of our lives to create the prosperity we had before the crash - a false and unaffordable prosperity for all of us.

Facing the consequences would be accepting that the high levels of all of our lifestyles are beyond what our economic production can sustain.

 

Quote

Painting the sudden increase in national debt at the end of the last decade as being down to irresponsible public spending is a falsehood.  It was due to extraordinary costs from bailing out the banks.

No it wasn't. Not a jot of the deficit is due to bailing out the banks, and only a tiny tiny part of the debt.

The deficit is because the country is spending more than it raises in taxes. The deficit rocketed because the bankers false economy evaporated.

Fucks sake. Will you be giving me a lesson in MMT in a minute, and saying we can print money endlessly because it has no relationship to value?

 

 

 

Edited June 7, 2017 by eFestivals

[DeanoL]

3 hours ago, babyblade41 said:

Minimum wage at the min is doable but 10.00 an hour ??? small businesses run on tight margins but collectively are a great asset to the country... you screw them then the whole freebie giveaway won't be anywhere near possible 

I don't believe that small business that can't pay a living way /are/ an asset to the country. It's a phrase stated over and over but it's never backed up. Yes, it leads to high employment figures but when those jobs are zero hour contracts or pay so little the people with them are still on benefits anyway they're not really of great benefit. Yes, Corbyn's proposals would, in the short term, mean fewer jobs. But the quality of those we had would be much higher and the ones lost would get the same income in benefits anyway...

2 hours ago, babyblade41 said:

it just doesn't add up whichever way some think JC is the Messiah , The maths are all wrong , now it isn't my strong point but even I can see by giving the amount he promises and borrowing in huge quantities will amount to lots of people better off and the country's deficit virtually balanced ? I'd love someone to explain how it will work because I for one must be either really thick or realise this won't be possible no way no how 

There's an interesting article here on the impact of austerity: https://benjaminstudebaker.com/2017/06/06/britain-for-the-love-of-god-please-stop-theresa-may/

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

but there's no indication that he's going to cause them to vote this time - tho even if they do vote this time, it's not necessarily his doing.

Mate, it's hard enough getting them out to vote on Thursday. Maybe if that's worked we can focus on getting them to talk to polling companies next time round.

[Spindles]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Speculators over-inflated the economy via a false economy - but that false economy also spilled out of the banking arena and into all of our lives to create the prosperity we had before the crash - a false and unaffordable prosperity for all of us.

For some of us, maybe, not for all of us.  Those who were least in receipt of this prosperity are the ones who have been hit the hardest.  I cannot fathom why anyone would support the policies we have been subjected to.

 

[eFestivals]

24 minutes ago, Spindles said:

For some of us, maybe, not for all of us.  Those who were least in receipt of this prosperity are the ones who have been hit the hardest.  

It's utterly impossible for you to accurately say you've had none of it, just as it would be for me to say you have. We can both only guess at it.

What we do know is that the economy *WAS* falsely inflated, and that everyone was interacting with that falsely inflated economy.

So, for example, a low paid job you might have had might have been there only because of that false economic activity, whereas without that false activity you might have had no job at all.

The bankers over-inflated in the economy and made us all feel poorer. McD's money printing plan could well do the same; whether it does or not is wholely dependent on how fast and much he prints, and what exactly that money is used for.

BUT ... the movement of resources from one area of economic activity to another (such as house building) *will* make us all feel poorer anyway - unless every single one of those house building jobs is not a job diverted from doing something else (which either means importing new people to do those building jobs, or getting everyone fully-employed [but many of those under-employed don't actually want to be fully employed, which is a problem that will be hit]).

 

Quote

I cannot fathom why anyone would support the policies we have been subjected to.

that's an entirely different thing (and nothing I'm suggesting should be supported anyway).

It would have been better if the false economic activity of the bankers had never existed - BUT: that means we'd all be poorer anyway. There wouldn't have been the growth in the early noughties that there was.

 

 

Edited June 7, 2017 by eFestivals

[Monkismo]

If anything is going to win Labour this election, it's those who have never voted before or who have never really had a purpose in their vote i.e. The "young" and the uninformed. Social media makes information a lot easier to digest than it did when i first cast a vote in 2001 and as a long time fence sitting lib dem (I was brought up in a reasonably well off Southern middle class family but married into a council house dwelling working class Northern family) I'm fully on board with Jezza this time round and casting my first ever Labour vote, in what is one of the safest Labour seats in the country. I'll admit that I wasn't overly disappointed when the Tories won the last one, because it didn't really affect me personally, but enough is enough - there's more at stake now thanks to the last seven years of shite, even though I run a very small company that can't afford to pay 33% extra wages when the min rises to £10. The fact that May is a hideous witch incapable of responding with any form of meaningful answer is just the icing on the cake for my decision. I just don't know how anyone who is not selfish or priveledged can vote for them!

 

edit: I can only hope there's more people like me but who are voting in marginal seats. My "bubble" suggests that may be the case but my bubble said Clinton would win and that we'd easily remain in the EU.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Monkismo

[5co77ie]

Less than 48 hours until reality bites.

[dimus]

[oneeye]

[Mr.Tease]

4 hours ago, 5co77ie said:

Less than 48 hours until reality bites.

I'm really going to struggle come friday- I do get very down and depressed over politics

[Spindles]

Don't get depressed.  There's always humour..

 

[Guest]

Latest YouGov poll now showing a 7 point Tory lead. ComRes a 10 point lead.

[EasyUserName]

14 hours ago, arcade fireman said:

I think the worst possible result would be an increased Tory majority but only by about 10 seats. That will probably mean Corbyn stays despite doing worse than Miliband last time and despite Labour needing to pull a lot of voters from the Tories to stand a chance next time. 

At least a larger Tory majority than that would mean Labour were a bit more unified going forward.

That said, would much much prefer the Tories losing their majority over either of these. 

 

I don't know, wouldn't that be bad for May internally? I'd expect the loonies in her party she expected to slap down would be happy with such a result. Cue chaos for us all though.

[EasyUserName]

13 hours ago, devonhammer said:

... If you invest a million pounds in more nurses, you get at least a third straight back in direct taxation. Of the remainder, most will be spent on taxable goods at 20%, so lets say you get another 10% back. Everything that is spent goes to companies with employees and you get corporate tax and more personal tax. Because this multiplier keeps going, you get most of the money back at worst and  typically more than you invest.

 

 

Average nurse salary is around £24,000 (sorry, no citation). As I see it, tax calculators say the direct tax payable is around £4,500. That's not one third. Your additional 10% is based on £600,000 of spending. That is, said nurses spent £600,000 on VAT qualifying items to give you that £100,000 (10%).  That's only 30 nurses based on average ...

 

In fact, my head hurts here.  Could you give me a more detailed breakdown because I feel like I'm watching that episode of the Simpsons where Lisa has invented the perpetual motion machine (no offense to your argument, I just don't "get it").

https://m.youtube.com/?gl=GB&hl=en-GB#/watch?v=gOMibx876A4

 

[Teddington]

The Social Care policy has still lost my vote.  Can't hand on heart vote for a party with this policy.

 

As a final parting point on this election the slogan "for the many not the few" makes me giggle.

 

If Tory policies were only for the "few" then why are they ahead in the opinion polls? 

 

Nevermind I guess the slogan  "for the few as opposed to the majority" wouldn't have the same ring.........

 

 

[DeanoL]

1 minute ago, Teddington said:

The Social Care policy has still lost my vote.  Can't hand on heart vote for a party with this policy.

 

As a final parting point on this election the slogan "for the many not the few" makes me giggle.

 

If Tory policies were only for the "few" then why are they ahead in the opinion polls? 

 

Nevermind I guess the slogan  "for the few as opposed to the majority" wouldn't have the same ring.........

 

 

Because people believe that one day, they will be one of the few.

[EasyUserName]

2 minutes ago, Teddington said:

The Social Care policy has still lost my vote.  Can't hand on heart vote for a party with this policy. ...

 

It's an interesting argument though - who really pays for those last year's of care? It's far from cheap.

[EasyUserName]

2 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Because people believe that one day, they will be one of the few.

Sadly so, I fear.

[stuartbert two hats]

It's been nice debating with you all in here. I have just one thing to say before signing off until polling day:

Don't vote Tory.

[august1]

 

[Mattty]

Can't sleep. Worried about the tories.

[EasyUserName]

9 minutes ago, Mattty said:

Can't sleep. Worried about the tories.

Count sheep (subsidised ones maybe ....) 

[Dyceloon]

Well im in Scotland so youd be lucky to hit a torry here with a fecking meteorite .

Whatever you think or decide ..just vote .You have a right that is still denied to many on this planet .

Even if you take you ballot paper and do  a lovely caracture of the grumpy woman in tweed with the plastic ruler who smells of talc ...

 

VOTE !

[EasyUserName]

9 minutes ago, Dyceloon said:

... Even if you take you ballot paper and do  a lovely caracture of the grumpy woman in tweed with the plastic ruler who smells of talc ...

 

VOTE !

Nicola isn't *that* grumpy ... (Well, she does seem to be... )

[blackred]

Vote, vote, vote people. Even if it's for the Torys, vote for whatever you believe in - it's the single most important right you have (at least it will be in 5 years time).

Look on the bright side everyone, with the rate Theresa May u-turns I expect we will be in the euro and schengen by this time next year! (Not sure that would be great either, but you know - better than the alternative)