Opposition Politics

Over the years you get the usual mantra from oppostion politics we will pay for this and that ,(guess its easier saying than delivering ) it came to me as I listen to the news today , where student debt reduction appeared , woman pay parity, public sector pay, police numbers , NHS investment , along with miriads of other giveaways , does anyone really believe you could run a country that way , never mind run ones life or business in such a way.

And to top if off the Brexit decision and that impact its haging andvwill have , even the Golf Open is effected , with the prize money paid in dollars, not pounds, due to currency value, how embarrassing.

How is paragraph 2 linked to paragraph 1?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

How is paragraph 2 linked to paragraph 1?

---

Basically that there debt build in para 1 , and a poor debt outlook in para 2

So you don't think it is possible to have a country without gender pay bias, with a properly funded health service, with public sector employees earning what it costs to live in the area they are employed and with enough police to make sure that people are held to account for their actions? To me these all feel absolutely fundamental if we are to consider ourselves a civilised society.

It is nonsensical to see it as a giveaway unless you dont pay tax. It is a choice that we have to make, what do we expect/want as a society and what are we willing to pay for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Over the years you get the usual mantra from oppostion politics we will pay for this and that ,(guess its easier saying than delivering ) it came to me as I listen to the news today , where student debt reduction appeared , woman pay parity, public sector pay, police numbers , NHS investment , along with miriads of other giveaways , does anyone really believe you could run a country that way , never mind run ones life or business in such a way.

And to top if off the Brexit decision and that impact its haging andvwill have , even the Golf Open is effected , with the prize money paid in dollars, not pounds, due to currency value, how embarrassing.

---

Same with Trump.

Promise the world in opposition and it is a different story in power. Manifesto's are filled from beginning to end with lies they will most probably get away with.

The Tories in their recent manifesto even went so far as saying their manifesto pledges were "aims", not concrete pledges. At least a tiny bit of honesty.

I think if the UK wants a socialist government, to save complete carnage, it has to be after brexit is sorted. Luckily that may be the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

So you don't think it is possible to have a country without gender pay bias, with a properly funded health service, with public sector employees earning what it costs to live in the area they are employed and with enough police to make sure that people are held to account for their actions? To me these all feel absolutely fundamental if we are to consider ourselves a civilised society.

It is nonsensical to see it as a giveaway unless you dont pay tax. It is a choice that we have to make, what do we expect/want as a society and what are we willing to pay for it.

---

Of course you support equal pay, have a funded NHS , wages that allow people to live, good policing, yes fundamental backbone stuff .

It just strikes me the multiple giveaways promises thrown around are simply not fundable just clever sound bite electioneering .

Promising headline stuff which if deployed in all its glory would hurt the very people and serives we should care for is not good , debt and inflation would rise and jobs go is dangerous , and guess who that hurts , perhaps being smarter, with one's money as we were taught as youngsters , is a far better realistic and affordable approach . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Of course you support equal pay, have a funded NHS , wages that allow people to live, good policing, yes fundamental backbone stuff .

It just strikes me the multiple giveaways promises thrown around are simply not fundable just clever sound bite electioneering .

Promising headline stuff which if deployed in all its glory would hurt the very people and serives we should care for is not good , debt and inflation would rise and jobs go is dangerous , and guess who that hurts , perhaps being smarter, with one's money as we were taught as youngsters , is a far better realistic and affordable approach . .

---

What are you referring to?

A case of effective opposition?

https://www.theguardian.com/business...-has-found-one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

A case of effective opposition?

https://www.theguardian.com/business...-has-found-one

---

Good article and thinking out of the box ,however some protection to small medium enterprises business, much better than sound bite promises and relentless unfundable project politics that always never gets fully deployed as they are unattainable and end up hurting ordinary folk .

I would be braver though:
Legalise and tax weed.
Increase drink duty and isolate it and call it a drink health fund as its costing the NHS big time in care and abuse of staff.(something I've wittnessed first hand )

Charge for minor GP and A&E health visits and treatment ie ear syringing,run like BHS dentistries .

Raise fines by 50% for drunk and disordly behavour ,driving dangerously , allow fines to be taken directly from wages .

Fine pubs that don't control their customers behaviour, another NHS fund grab.

Increase tax duty on business car and private health add one contracts gimmies.

Congestion charge all cities with over 1/2 million occupants.

Apply visa tax to anyone with over a million pounds wishing to reside in UK, proof of which provided before allowing residency.

Tax agencies that don't allow British UK job seekers.

Allow armed forces to work alongside UK police forces to relieve public purse pressure .

Adopt a joint fire /ambulance service as the American model to relieve public purse.

Increase police retirement to 55, and reduce the public contribution which is in the billions , okay increasing numbers and pay through some of the same reduction benefit.

Even up public pension liabilities, to protect future jobs and wages.

Nurses,and Teachers should benefit from the above .

Borrowing to fund is not a sensible way forward and has been proven over the years as an inflation and job loss
animal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

What are you referring to?

---

Quote:

---

Good article and thinking out of the box ,however some protection to small medium enterprises business, much better than sound bite promises and relentless unfundable project politics that always never gets fully deployed as they are unattainable and end up hurting ordinary folk .

---

Not only 'unfundable' but unmentionable it seems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Good article and thinking out of the box ,however some protection to small medium enterprises business, much better than sound bite promises and relentless unfundable project politics that always never gets fully deployed as they are unattainable and end up hurting ordinary folk .

I would be braver though:
Legalise and tax weed.
Increase drink duty and isolate it and call it a drink health fund as its costing the NHS big time in care and abuse of staff.(something I've wittnessed first hand )

Charge for minor GP and A&E health visits and treatment ie ear syringing,run like BHS dentistries .

Raise fines by 50% for drunk and disordly behavour ,driving dangerously , allow fines to be taken directly from wages .

Fine pubs that don't control their customers behaviour, another NHS fund grab.

Increase tax duty on business car and private health add one contracts gimmies.

Congestion charge all cities with over 1/2 million occupants.

Apply visa tax to anyone with over a million pounds wishing to reside in UK, proof of which provided before allowing residency.

Tax agencies that don't allow British UK job seekers.

Allow armed forces to work alongside UK police forces to relieve public purse pressure .

Adopt a joint fire /ambulance service as the American model to relieve public purse.

Increase police retirement to 55, and reduce the public contribution which is in the billions , okay increasing numbers and pay through some of the same reduction benefit.

Even up public pension liabilities, to protect future jobs and wages.

Nurses,and Teachers should benefit from the above .

Borrowing to fund is not a sensible way forward and has been proven over the years as an inflation and job loss
animal.

---

The UK has its own printing press. It doesn't need to borrow a bean from anyone. The national debt (I can't be arsed to check the exact percentage) is way below 100% of GDP. In 1946 it was 237% of GDP... the point being it's no big deal. If you don't believe me, Japan's is currently 250% of GDP and the streets of Tokyo aren't lined with the starving and homeless, in fact they have a higher standard of living than we do. How? Well, there's many reasons, prime amongst them is most of their debt is internal; they owe it to themselves. All of this nonsense continues to work because of the F-word, faith. People continue to believe the fiat currency they measure their wealth in has value. And it does, until it doesn't. When it doesn't, after the curtain is pulled back, and everyone suddenly catches on that they themselves and collectively have lived way beyond their means by stealing from the future is when there'll be a mad rush to supermarkets and banks. That day should have occurred years ago but has been delayed by pumping ever increasing amounts of debt into the system.

Today the typical UK home costs a staggering £218,000 apiece. It's a gigantic bubble. So too the stock markets of the world which have also been pumped with cheap debt (credit) all to delay the day when it pops as it's unsustainable. None of us know what the needle will be that brings them all down but the longer it takes then the worse it will be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ninianclark

"The national debt (I can't be arsed to check the exact percentage) is way below 100% of GDP" - it is 89.3% as of 2016. Japan does so well - because it exports so much, the workforce and the work ethic of the Japanese is almost suicidal - and they do have lots of homeless and not much if any social care. The homelessness I witnessed when I was there a couple of years ago involved men in suits living in card board boxes playing card games.

They dont really have unemployment as such - if you dont have a job - you will be assigned a role with the local council to do something in return for your 'dole money'

---

Not as good as Venezuela then ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

What are you referring to?

---

Jesus Christ it has been nearly a week, what were the giveaways promised?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

Jesus Christ it has been nearly a week, what were the giveaways promised?

---

The two that stand out recently are the suggested clearance of billions of student debt , and the 350 million NHS Brexit Bus advert.

If a company or director applied
those types of plans , without delivering them or failed to produce evidence as a robust business plan , they would face criminal charges.

The point to the post is about suggestive polictics and sound bite policies, and how they use the media /social media to engage with the less informed and the vulnerable ,with off the wall quotes , perhaps it should become illegal and only allowed if your plans can actually be supported by real fact and finance .

Sound bite , aimed at gullable groups is simply wrong .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

The two that stand out recently are the suggested clearance of billions of student debt , and the 350 million NHS Brexit Bus advert.

If a company or director applied
those types of plans , without delivering them or failed to produce evidence as a robust business plan , they would face criminal charges.

The point to the post is about suggestive polictics and sound bite policies, and how they use the media /social media to engage with the less informed and the vulnerable ,with off the wall quotes , perhaps it should become illegal and only allowed if your plans can actually be supported by real fact and finance .

Sound bite , aimed at gullable groups is simply wrong .

---

I understand the sentiment, politicians should only be talking about achievable things. I don't really think the two things warrant comparison, one was a well worded statement intended to fool the public and the other is a manifesto pledge based upon changing our priorities as a country.

I am a recent graduate (<10 years) and I was under no illusion or in no confusion, Corbyn had not promised or even hinted that a Labour government would wipe my student loan. Labour had explicitly said that the changes would apply to students currently at University, effective immediately. The right wing media has since cooked up this story because they were looking for a way to justify May shredding her manifesto.

Whether or not you think it is worthwhile to the taxpayer to fund every single degree is debatable but there is no doubt that the current system is nonsense. A youngster is meant to decide whether a degree is worth doing without knowing how much it will cost them, on the flip side the taxpayer has no idea what it will cost them either (they pick up the tab when somebody doesn't meet the threshold.

The idea of tuition fees was that different universities and different degrees would cost different amounts creating a marketplace but as usual with attempts to force competition it hasn't worked at all, universities just see it as a way to fleece children.

We live in a country where nearly every highly sought after job is occupied by somebody who didn't pay tuition fees when they went to university. They are also the generation that has benefited the most from the higher education they obtained (there is barely a gap now in lifetime earnings). There is something deeply sinister about these people trying to convince ordinary people that as a country we can't afford to fund higher education.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I understand the sentiment, politicians should only be talking about achievable things. I don't really think the two things warrant comparison, one was a well worded statement intended to fool the public and the other is a manifesto pledge based upon changing our priorities as a country.

I am a recent graduate (<10 years) and I was under no illusion or in no confusion, Corbyn had not promised or even hinted that a Labour government would wipe my student loan. Labour had explicitly said that the changes would apply to students currently at University, effective immediately. The right wing media has since cooked up this story because they were looking for a way to justify May shredding her manifesto.

Whether or not you think it is worthwhile to the taxpayer to fund every single degree is debatable but there is no doubt that the current system is nonsense. A youngster is meant to decide whether a degree is worth doing without knowing how much it will cost them, on the flip side the taxpayer has no idea what it will cost them either (they pick up the tab when somebody doesn't meet the threshold.

The idea of tuition fees was that different universities and different degrees would cost different amounts creating a marketplace but as usual with attempts to force competition it hasn't worked at all, universities just see it as a way to fleece children.

We live in a country where nearly every highly sought after job is occupied by somebody who didn't pay tuition fees when they went to university. They are also the generation that has benefited the most from the higher education they obtained (there is barely a gap now in lifetime earnings). There is something deeply sinister about these people trying to convince ordinary people that as a country we can't afford to fund higher education.

---

I do agree the answer to student loans has to be fixed , however thuer were a clever use of words that others could gleam a different view from yours.

I was well into my 30s before I finally clocked that all the left, right and blue, red fisticuffs of UK politics was a charade, and I was angry at myself for being taken in for so long. Although I did take solace in the knowledge that I had never placed an X next to any of their candidates at any poll as I had always voted Plaid. Both sides play for the same side and the name of the game is to extract more and more wealth from the bottom and especially the Middle Class to filter it upwards to the already ultra wealthy. Allied to that of course is exercising ever increasing control of our lives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.

I was well into my 30s before I finally clocked that all the left, right and blue, red fisticuffs of UK politics was a charade, and I was angry at myself for being taken in for so long. Although I did take solace in the knowledge that I had never placed an X next to any of their candidates at any poll as I had always voted Plaid. Both sides play for the same side and the name of the game is to extract more and more wealth from the bottom and especially the Middle Class to filter it upwards to the already ultra wealthy. Allied to that of course is exercising ever increasing control of our lives.

---

Yes left and right are guilty of the creating the wrong illusions of giveaway ideas to attract power. Nothing really changes all the same badged politics even the latest batch.

Power at any cost or debt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I understand the sentiment, politicians should only be talking about achievable things. I don't really think the two things warrant comparison, one was a well worded statement intended to fool the public and the other is a manifesto pledge based upon changing our priorities as a country.

I am a recent graduate (<10 years) and I was under no illusion or in no confusion, Corbyn had not promised or even hinted that a Labour government would wipe my student loan. Labour had explicitly said that the changes would apply to students currently at University, effective immediately. The right wing media has since cooked up this story because they were looking for a way to justify May shredding her manifesto.

Whether or not you think it is worthwhile to the taxpayer to fund every single degree is debatable but there is no doubt that the current system is nonsense. A youngster is meant to decide whether a degree is worth doing without knowing how much it will cost them, on the flip side the taxpayer has no idea what it will cost them either (they pick up the tab when somebody doesn't meet the threshold.

The idea of tuition fees was that different universities and different degrees would cost different amounts creating a marketplace but as usual with attempts to force competition it hasn't worked at all, universities just see it as a way to fleece children.

We live in a country where nearly every highly sought after job is occupied by somebody who didn't pay tuition fees when they went to university. They are also the generation that has benefited the most from the higher education they obtained (there is barely a gap now in lifetime earnings). There is something deeply sinister about these people trying to convince ordinary people that as a country we can't afford to fund higher education.

---

Accepting that it was not a manifesto pledge what do you think "I will deal with it" meant then Eric?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elwood Blues

Accepting that it was not a manifesto pledge what do you think "I will deal with it meant then Eric?

---

I think he has clarified since, they would look at it in government. They couldn't make a firm commitment other than the ones in the manifesto. There is a real lack of confidence in the repayment % estimates, as that number creeps down and public debt burden from student loans creeps up, wiping it becomes less of an issue. I would like to see them cancel all fee-related loans and then we can finally draw a line under this saga. Successive governments have completely cocked up higher education and we need a new direction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I think he has clarified since, they would look at it in government. They couldn't make a firm commitment other than the ones in the manifesto. There is a real lack of confidence in the repayment % estimates, as that number creeps down and public debt burden from student loans creeps up, wiping it becomes less of an issue. I would like to see them cancel all fee-related loans and then we can finally draw a line under this saga. Successive governments have completely cocked up higher education and we need a new direction.

---

There we have it and the point to this post,suggestive sound bite ,as you say "he has now clarified " the point ,was that after Glasto ?

Would that be deemed as a type of U Turn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

There we have it and the point to this post,suggestive sound bite ,as you say "he has now clarified " the point ,was that after Glasto ?

Would that be deemed as a type of U Turn.

---

Is the issue not as important as the vendetta?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

Is the issue not as important as the vendetta?

---

Think your missing the point , or being coy , this us a general point across the political divide , please read back my posts on this matter . I stated very simply think it should be illegal as it is in business , doesn't it seem ironic to you ironic the parliament of this land has strict rules about false declarations for the business community , and not a law for themselves which in all aspects is an even bigher business model, dealing in millions of promises to trade for votes that is affecting people's life's, mainly the poor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Think your missing the point , or being coy , this us a general point across the political divide , please read back my posts on this matter . I stated very simply think it should be illegal as it is in business , doesn't it seem ironic to you ironic the parliament of this land has strict rules about false declarations for the business community , and not a law for themselves which in all aspects is an even bigher business model, dealing in millions of promises to trade for votes that is affecting people's life's, mainly the poor.

---

Yet the only two examples you can name are a bus which wasn't associated to any political party and Corbyn saying 'we will deal with it' when talking about student debt.

What are the other examples of giveaways promised? You implied in the OP that funding the NHS, gender pay parity, public sector pay and police numbers were examples but then you quickly backed away from that so what are they?

I get it completely. It is trendy to be in the middle and say 'they are all as bad as each other' but it isn't groundbreaking.

Fyi I have spoken about student fees on here before, labours policy is a stupid one when taken in isolation. Reduction or eradication in fees must come hand in hand with a revamp of higher education. University approach has almost become predatory, take the most amount of cash for the least amount of value, like a confidence scammer. Our young people flood in expecting a great future to be handed to them upon receipt of their degree but it isn't like that anymore.

Unless you're going into teaching, law,medicine or another practical based subject I'd advise teenagers not to bother and get themselves a job and work
Their way up.
The fees are extortionate and some of he degrees offered are ****ing ridiclulous.
I do feel sorry for our younger graduates these days, higher fees higher house prices and being told thats he way it is from some in the older generations who benefitted from free university and lower house prices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

Yet the only two examples you can name are a bus which wasn't associated to any political party and Corbyn saying 'we will deal with it' when talking about student debt.

What are the other examples of giveaways promised? You implied in the OP that funding the NHS, gender pay parity, public sector pay and police numbers were examples but then you quickly backed away from that so what are they?

I get it completely. It is trendy to be in the middle and say 'they are all as bad as each other' but it isn't groundbreaking.

---

Not looking for groundbreaking decisions ,just honest ,simple ,fundable decisions that can be delivered ,and don't involve sound bite .