|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 11, 2024 7:28:40 GMT
you dont outnumber the opposition. 80 % of the electorate oppose labour , two thirds of the vote , and Farage won the election for starmer on the dodgy fptp system. He took four million tory votes , and 42 % of the voters voted right wing parties , while labour got what........33.7 %? In scotland , the independence voters stayed at home and allowed labour to fall into place. Practically the whole of scotland now , bar a few seats , are marginals on flimsy vote shares for labour. lowest mandate of any government in modern history on the second lowest turnout can only be described as a pyrrhic victory for no mandate starmer. Im thoroughly looking forward to him and his pathetic team being under the spotlight , and forced to make decisions for the first time , instead of carping nonsense from the sidelines. What happened with the council houses? first test........starmers falls flat on his face. How we laughed. I just pity the poor buggers who went out daft enough to believe starmers tripe on housing. Empty slogans , ill thought out policy , and weak governance. Time to batten down the hatches for another terrifying bout of new labour dramatics. They outnumber all the other parties parties individually, that's why they are forming the government and those that you support are not. we know that. Then point is the public didnt elect labour............the dodgy discredited FPTP system did. Starmer couldnt even reach the long term benchmark of 40% for a majority government under the discredited FPTP such was his absolute failure to win over voters . What a stupid fucking comment only an imbecile would make. Everyone in scotland could vote for the parties I have supported , and they still couldnt make up the uk government . |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 11, 2024 9:33:01 GMT
If you have a hen house it means you are trying to keep your hens safe. Putting a fox in there does the opposite. Ergo it IS a bad thing. I know it is hard for most Reform UK supporters, but a simple bit of logical, joined-up thinking goes a long, long way. All The Best Okay, let's clarify. A fox in the henhouse is bad for chickens. Farage in Parliament is good for Britain.On what grounds is it good for Britain? Farage has only really ever had one Political Schtick - leaving the EU, He told us it would be great. We believed him. I believed him. He was monumentally WRONG. What hope that he is right about any of his new bullet point policies? All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jul 11, 2024 9:39:18 GMT
Okay, let's clarify. A fox in the henhouse is bad for chickens. Farage in Parliament is good for Britain.On what grounds is it good for Britain? Farage has only really ever had one Political Schtick - leaving the EU, He told us it would be great. We believed him. I believed him. He was monumentally WRONG. What hope that he is right about any of his new bullet point policies? All The Best Sorry, I couldn't work out what you thought was sane. A fox in the henhouse or Farage in Parliament. What was monumentally WRONG was project fear. And it is great not being in the EU! The very essence of Brexit is that what we do, right or wrong is now down to us and not Brussels. And it's good that Parliament has in there a person who gets a sizeable proportion of the electorate, and is able to represent them while ruffling the feathers of those that nest there. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 11, 2024 9:41:49 GMT
I'd agree. But we were in the Single Market LONG before 2007. So what happened in 2007 or just prior that made it become an issue where previously it wasn't? All The Best It was the expansion of the EU into poorer countries that changed everything, until then FOM had been restricted to countries of roughly equal economies. Once economic disparity between countries grew greater then the richer countries received an influx of those seeking better pay and conditions for the same level of work. That is why areas became changed almost overnight. Many people accepted slow change but rapid change raises the hackles and this was easy to see as to what was happening. Change over 20 years is a progression, the same change in two years is an imposition. OK, now we are getting somewhere. I agree it was the pace of change that was the huge problem. I broadly agree with your comments that EU Membership was not a significant problem in relation to FoM when all the Member Economies were roughly equal; but I am minded to point out that EU Economic Policy has really ONLY EVER served two nations - Germany and France, everyone else has always got the shitty end of the stick. Too many EU Members were allowed in without properly meeting the EU Economic and Fiscal requirements - not just Eastern European nations, but also Greece for example. The EEC / SM / EU started to fail IMO when it became more about Ideology than it did Practicality. When it was about the Practicality of reducing trade barriers among Members it was fine. When it became about the Ideology of expansion regardless of Practicality is when it started to fail. And all of this comes down, IMO, to two things: 1) a massive Democratic Deficit and 2) no direct Democratic Accountability. The issue I have now is that we still have both of those things in the UK even now were are out of the EU. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 11, 2024 9:43:58 GMT
They outnumber all the other parties parties individually, that's why they are forming the government and those that you support are not. we know that. Then point is the public didnt elect labour............the dodgy discredited FPTP system did. Starmer couldnt even reach the long term benchmark of 40% for a majority government under the discredited FPTP such was his absolute failure to win over voters . What a stupid fucking comment only an imbecile would make. Everyone in scotland could vote for the parties I have supported , and they still couldnt make up the uk government . Despite your discontent and your need to throw mud at Labour, only the public could elect Labour, and they did. Your comment is irrelevant, you had the option to vote Labour, and didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 11, 2024 9:49:19 GMT
On what grounds is it good for Britain? Farage has only really ever had one Political Schtick - leaving the EU, He told us it would be great. We believed him. I believed him. He was monumentally WRONG. What hope that he is right about any of his new bullet point policies? All The Best Sorry, I couldn't work out what you thought wasn't sane. A fox in the henhouse or Farage in Parliament. What was monumentally WRONG was project fear. And it is great not being in the EU! The very essence of Brexit is that what we do, right or wrong is now down to us and not Brussels. And it's good that Parliament has in there a person who gets a sizeable proportion of the electorate, and is able to represent them while ruffling the feathers of those that nest there. Is it? What we do now, and have always done in my lifetime, has been down to The Markets, and not Brussels, and not Westminster. Truss's mini budget was a disaster, not only of policy (and it was the wrong policies at the wrong time), but also of Market Acceptance. The impacts of Truss's mini budget were always going to be bad, but they were made worse by the Market Reaction to them. We bailed out the Banks to "stabilise the Markets" and then ushered in two decades of Austerity. We pander to the Markets allowing all of our Utilities to overcharge and under-deliver and do absolutely NOTHING about it. Our Housing system is the worst on the planet, because we permit it to be regulated by the Markets in the interests of shareholders, rather than regulated by the Government in the interests of British Citizens. What is Farage going to do to reign in the power of the Markets and thus reduce the Democratic Deficit caused by non-UK shareholders having more political clout than the UK electorate? I'll tell you - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. That is why he is as much a part of the problem as Sunak and Starmer and is NOT a part of the solution. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jul 11, 2024 9:55:35 GMT
If you have a hen house it means you are trying to keep your hens safe. Putting a fox in there does the opposite. Ergo it IS a bad thing. I know it is hard for most Reform UK supporters, but a simple bit of logical, joined-up thinking goes a long, long way. All The Best Okay, let's clarify. A fox in the henhouse is bad for chickens. Farage in Parliament is good for Britain. Right wingers are a bunch of extremists varying from the potential to be hard right to far right. Given the history of Rightist extremists, and the potential of Farage (and Trump) to follow suit, then IMO no reasonable person would encourage them or their ilk, into any sort of power or authority. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jul 11, 2024 10:02:22 GMT
Sorry, I couldn't work out what you thought wasn't sane. A fox in the henhouse or Farage in Parliament. What was monumentally WRONG was project fear. And it is great not being in the EU! The very essence of Brexit is that what we do, right or wrong is now down to us and not Brussels. And it's good that Parliament has in there a person who gets a sizeable proportion of the electorate, and is able to represent them while ruffling the feathers of those that nest there. Is it? What we do now, and have always done in my lifetime, has been down to The Markets, and not Brussels, and not Westminster. Truss's mini budget was a disaster, not only of policy (and it was the wrong policies at the wrong time), but also of Market Acceptance. The impacts of Truss's mini budget were always going to be bad, but they were made worse by the Market Reaction to them. We bailed out the Banks to "stabilise the Markets" and then ushered in two decades of Austerity. We pander to the Markets allowing all of our Utilities to overcharge and under-deliver and do absolutely NOTHING about it. Our Housing system is the worst on the planet, because we permit it to be regulated by the Markets in the interests of shareholders, rather than regulated by the Government in the interests of British Citizens. What is Farage going to do to reign in the power of the Markets and thus reduce the Democratic Deficit caused by non-UK shareholders having more political clout than the UK electorate? I'll tell you - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. That is why he is as much a part of the problem as Sunak and Starmer and is NOT a part of the solution. All The Best Yes, it is. The fact nation states have become embedded in the markets does not mean national sovereignty should be seen to carry on as a hurdle to economic freedom. Doing more of the same just feeds the globalist ideology, and yes while the UK is still deeply embedded in that, it still has its economic freedoms. One of which means we are no longer tied to the "hyper-active regulator" swallowing swathes of EU laws to the detriment of our industries. As for Farage, Parliament now has someone in there who can remarkably relay key messages to the Westminster parties, something they have been void of arguably since Tony Benn. Like it or lump it, Farage resonates with millions and seeing him in there gives them a voice. Again that is democracy. And oddly, you bemoan democracy on all sorts of levels, yet it seems you only want people in there who relay your political message - whatever that is. |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 11, 2024 10:39:20 GMT
Is it? What we do now, and have always done in my lifetime, has been down to The Markets, and not Brussels, and not Westminster. Truss's mini budget was a disaster, not only of policy (and it was the wrong policies at the wrong time), but also of Market Acceptance. The impacts of Truss's mini budget were always going to be bad, but they were made worse by the Market Reaction to them. We bailed out the Banks to "stabilise the Markets" and then ushered in two decades of Austerity. We pander to the Markets allowing all of our Utilities to overcharge and under-deliver and do absolutely NOTHING about it. Our Housing system is the worst on the planet, because we permit it to be regulated by the Markets in the interests of shareholders, rather than regulated by the Government in the interests of British Citizens. What is Farage going to do to reign in the power of the Markets and thus reduce the Democratic Deficit caused by non-UK shareholders having more political clout than the UK electorate? I'll tell you - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. That is why he is as much a part of the problem as Sunak and Starmer and is NOT a part of the solution. All The Best Yes, it is. The fact nation states have become embedded in the markets does not mean national sovereignty should be seen to carry on as a hurdle to economic freedom. Doing more of the same just feeds the globalist ideology, and yes while the UK is still deeply embedded in that, it still has its economic freedoms. One of which means we are no longer tied to the "hyper-active regulator" swallowing swathes of EU laws to the detriment of our industries. As for Farage, Parliament now has someone in there who can remarkably relay key messages to the Westminster parties, something they have been void of arguably since Tony Benn. Like it or lump it, Farage resonates with millions and seeing him in there gives them a voice. Again that is democracy. And oddly, you bemoan democracy on all sorts of levels, yet it seems you only want people in there who relay your political message - whatever that is. So if you are going to surrender National Sovereignty to Big Business in the name of Profit what was the point in wresting National Sovereignty back from the EU? The UK has no real Economic Freedoms when those freedoms are shackled by the whims of the Markets, and the unelected Bankers who control the Markets. At least with our Sovereignty in the hands of the EU there was a minimal degree of democratic accountability; with it in the hands of the Markets there is none at all. You reasoning is internally inconsistent; as is often the case with those who follow demagogues. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jul 11, 2024 10:58:04 GMT
Depends on who considered it an issue . In my experience it started to become an issue in factories and building sites about 2007. That was about the times I was seeing agency were starting to affect wages and conditions in factories and stories of Polish ( it was mostly Polish then ) cowboys undercutting our workers and stealing tools. I started seeing this echoed in politic rhetoric by UKIP . IMO this was never properly discussed by remainers. It was dismissed as racist and far right propaganda. I'd agree. But we were in the Single Market LONG before 2007. So what happened in 2007 or just prior that made it become an issue where previously it wasn't? All The Best Possibly the East European states joining the EU. |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jul 11, 2024 11:05:31 GMT
we know that. Then point is the public didnt elect labour............the dodgy discredited FPTP system did. Starmer couldnt even reach the long term benchmark of 40% for a majority government under the discredited FPTP such was his absolute failure to win over voters . What a stupid fucking comment only an imbecile would make. Everyone in scotland could vote for the parties I have supported , and they still couldnt make up the uk government . Despite your discontent and your need to throw mud at Labour, only the public could elect Labour, and they did. Your comment is irrelevant, you had the option to vote Labour, and didn't. Some of the electorate who live in areas with a labour MP voted labour , the ''public '' did not ( I live in a redefined boundary constituency that remains blue- labour came third , libs 4th- as does the other part merged elsewhere- the electorate here did not elect labour) |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 11, 2024 11:12:51 GMT
Then point is the public didnt elect labour............the dodgy discredited FPTP system did. But when granted an opportunity to reject the broken FPTP system the Public CHOSE to retain FPTP. Therefore the Public not only chose the system of election, they ELECTED Labour using that system. Ergo, you are demonstrably wrong. NOTE: I say that as someone who has long advocated PR rather than FPTP, in fact I was saying that back in the 90's, long before the 2011 referendum. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Jul 11, 2024 11:14:31 GMT
Despite your discontent and your need to throw mud at Labour, only the public could elect Labour, and they did. Your comment is irrelevant, you had the option to vote Labour, and didn't. Some of the electorate who live in areas with a labour MP voted labour , the ''public '' did not ( I live in a redefined boundary constituency that remains blue- labour came third , libs 4th- as does the other part merged elsewhere- the electorate here did not elect labour) Surely "the public" encompasses all UK citizens, including the sub-set eligible to vote? All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by ratcliff on Jul 11, 2024 11:37:13 GMT
Some of the electorate who live in areas with a labour MP voted labour , the ''public '' did not ( I live in a redefined boundary constituency that remains blue- labour came third , libs 4th- as does the other part merged elsewhere- the electorate here did not elect labour) Surely "the public" encompasses all UK citizens, including the sub-set eligible to vote? All The Best The ''public'' and the ''electorate'' are different concepts , the former includes those who are not eligible to vote in a general election eg most prisoners , Peers, most foreign born residents, children , the insane etc . Thus only some of the public are eligible to be entered onto the electoral roll and of that fraction , some voted for labour and elected a labour mp in their area , most of the electorate did not |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jul 11, 2024 11:41:38 GMT
Yes, it is. The fact nation states have become embedded in the markets does not mean national sovereignty should be seen to carry on as a hurdle to economic freedom. Doing more of the same just feeds the globalist ideology, and yes while the UK is still deeply embedded in that, it still has its economic freedoms. One of which means we are no longer tied to the "hyper-active regulator" swallowing swathes of EU laws to the detriment of our industries. As for Farage, Parliament now has someone in there who can remarkably relay key messages to the Westminster parties, something they have been void of arguably since Tony Benn. Like it or lump it, Farage resonates with millions and seeing him in there gives them a voice. Again that is democracy. And oddly, you bemoan democracy on all sorts of levels, yet it seems you only want people in there who relay your political message - whatever that is. So if you are going to surrender National Sovereignty to Big Business in the name of Profit what was the point in wresting National Sovereignty back from the EU? The UK has no real Economic Freedoms when those freedoms are shackled by the whims of the Markets, and the unelected Bankers who control the Markets. At least with our Sovereignty in the hands of the EU there was a minimal degree of democratic accountability; with it in the hands of the Markets there is none at all. You reasoning is internally inconsistent; as is often the case with those who follow demagogues. All The Best Look, I get it. You don't like Farage in Parliament. And you don't like the UK out of the EU. I'm still undecided whether you like democracy or not. However, you've not long made a post about how there was no democratic accountability in the EU. Now you're making excuses of why we should place our sovereignty in the hands of the EU because there is a "minimal degree of democratic accountability". You're all over the place. |
|
