Do you want to discuss boring politics? (153 Viewers)

[skybluetony176]

she got eliminated at stage two last time

Yet Truss didn’t. Not sure what your point is.

 

---

[Grendel]

You also said you would vote for him to be the next PM, hence my confusion as to why you’re so sure that extremists could never win support in this country.

Did you miss my question about Wilders’ policies re: Islam btw? What are your thoughts?

It may not have occurred to you but Mr McDonnell never won support amongst his own MPs let alone the support of the country

Also as upsetting as this may be I have no idea about Mr Wilders policies - all I notice is he has rather strange hair

 

[Grendel]

Yet Truss didn’t. Not sure what your point is.

Badanoch didn’t - that’s my point

 

[Sick Boy]

It may not have occurred to you but Mr McDonnell never won support amongst his own MPs let alone the support of the country

Also as upsetting as this may be I have no idea about Mr Wilders policies - all I motive is he has rather strange hair

He definitely looks like quite a strange person.

 

[Grendel]

He definitely looks like quite a strange person.

He looks like a Liberache tribute act

 

[skybluetony176]

Badanoch didn’t - that’s my point

If the previous leadership contest was a measure of the next Hunt wouldn’t have gone out in the first round last time.

It’s pretty clear that the right wing press wants her as leader, they’re recycling all their old Truss headlines for her and that might be enough to get her to the final 2 amongst MP’s, but it depends on who she’s up against. She’s another Truss in reality and MP’s won’t need to have long memories to remember how that folly went.

 

[skybluetony176]

He definitely looks like quite a strange person.

He has the air of a man who’s never satisfied a woman. Or ever had any interest in even trying to.

 

[Grendel]

If the previous leadership contest was a measure of the next Hunt wouldn’t have gone out in the first round last time.

It’s pretty clear that the right wing press wants her as leader, they’re recycling all their old Truss headlines for her and that might be enough to get her to the final 2 amongst MP’s, but it depends on who she’s up against. She’s another Truss in reality and MP’s won’t need to have long memories to remember how that folly went.

Well yes Hunt would and again she has very little support even amongst the right of the party - she’s a fringe character with an overblown sense of her worth. Despite clearly having a strong educational background she’s mind knowingly stupid and her rather brief dalliance with leadership ambitions will be about as successful as a certain Northamptonshire MP

 

[Grendel]

He has the air of a man who’s never satisfied a woman. Or ever had any interest in even trying to.

Are you speaking from experience Tony?

 

[SBT]

It may not have occurred to you but Mr McDonnell never won support amongst his own MPs let alone the support of the country

Also as upsetting as this may be I have no idea about Mr Wilders policies - all I notice is he has rather strange hair

Well someone with even more extreme views did win the support of their own MPs (and party membership) of course. The idea that neither could ever win an election under the right circumstances seems naive to me - I would give either a fighting chance against the current lot.

Wilders wants to ban the Quran, ban mosques, and ban Islamic schools from the Netherlands. You’ve been quite outspoken about Islam in the past, any thoughts on these policies?

 

[skybluetony176]

Well yes Hunt would and again she has very little support even amongst the right of the party - she’s a fringe character with an overblown sense of her worth. Despite clearly having a strong educational background she’s mind knowingly stupid and her rather brief dalliance with leadership ambitions will be about as successful as a certain Northamptonshire MP

The thing is you could just as easily be describing Truss or Johnson. It never stopped them from being leader, if anything it helped them.

 

[Grendel]

Well someone with even more extreme views did win the support of their own MPs (and party membership) of course. The idea that neither could ever win an election under the right circumstances seems naive to me - I would give either a fighting chance against the current lot.

Wilders wants to ban the Quran, ban mosques, and ban Islamic schools from the Netherlands. You’ve been quite outspoken about Islam in the past, any thoughts on these policies?

Are you talking about Corbyn?

I agree then with Mr Wilders on Islamic schools - on that he has my vote - but I’m hardly outspoken in reality stop being dramatic

 

[Grendel]

The thing is you could just as easily be describing Truss or Johnson. It never stopped them from being leader, if anything it helped them.

Boris Johnson isnt right wing - he’s an election winning machine which is why he won - he’s not even a real Tory. Sorry Braverman is a non entity who will fade away

 

[skybluetony176]

Are you speaking from experience Tony?

I always had an interest in the second part which meant that the first part came easily (no pun intended) with experience.

 

[CCFCSteve]

Public services are only at breaking point because your favoured party slashed their budgets. Young immigrants are no great burden on public services in any case, they are more likely to even worth within them.

The study numbers will include lots of people that are net contributors to the UK economy.

What do you think the right level of immigration is?

I’m not sure how you think 500k-600k net migration per annum wouldn’t impact public services, infrastructure and housing. That’s almost a couple of coventrys every year or the size of Birmingham in the last two years.

It’s impossible to say what the correct amount of net migration is as it depends on specific labour/skills shortages etc and more importantly how much of the infrastructure etc you can build per year to support the additional numbers. Has either party ever had a plan for this ?! 150-200k might be manageable but that’s a total guess.

In terms of workers I’ve said before I’d rather have focussed employee support plans in known skills shortage areas to train, financially support (bursaries/no tuition/course fees for certain learning), flexible working solutions, better pay etc. That’s what I never understand about many on the ‘left’, don’t they see that business, especially big business, loves free movement and high immigration….cos it means they can get away with paying workers fuck all in certain sectors and rather than train and invest in people they just import them - like Australia are supposedly doing with our docs and nurses, like we’ve been doing to the Philippines and other developing nations by all accounts - that just feels wrong to me

No issue with the student numbers if they’re available spaces (where have 200-250k spaces magically appeared from ?) but 100k dependents ?

None of this really affects me personally so I don’t know why I get bothered by it all but I just try to look at stuff logically and the numbers and ‘strategy’ just dont make sense to me.

Ps I’ve said numerous times I’ve voted for the two main parties equal times

 

[SBT]

Are you talking about Corbyn?

I agree then with Mr Wilders on Islamic schools - on that he has my vote - but I’m hardly outspoken in reality stop being dramatic

Yes I meant him.

You agree because you want all religious schools banned, or just the Islamic ones?

 

[Grendel]

Yes I meant him.

You agree because you want all religious schools banned, or just the Islamic ones?

Faith schools are breeding grounds for misogyny, homophobia and a warped ideology which by its essence is a medieval viewpoint

Do you believe in the existence of Allah and Mohammed?

 

[skybluetony176]

Boris Johnson isnt right wing - he’s an election winning machine which is why he won - he’s not even a real Tory. Sorry Braverman is a non entity who will fade away

Again, Truss. Braverman is making the right noises for the membership. All she has to do is get to the final 2.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

What’s your take on him?

I think he's a much of a clown as Trump, but my opinion on him isn't really relevant.

It doesn't surprise me that he's won, though. The left in the Netherlands have been a total disaster, alienating the electorate bit by bit for a while now. There are a lot of issues, and they haven't addressed some of the key concerns that many have too. If you talk to people in the bars that's generally on the hardcore lockdowns, state of the economy, the farmers situation, and the negative effects that's come with a lot of immigration from various countries with a high Islamic demographic. If you know anything about the Dutch, they like to have a hissy as much as the French do, so for me at least this result is pretty inevitable.

Is the idea to ban Islam correct? No. Is the idea that Wilders will save the country correct? Also probably no. If people don't feel they are listened to however, they will often vote in an extreme way at the end. Patronising the voters is not really going to work either, we've seen that across the world in recent years in many different ways too. Rather than blaming them, the losing parties need to take a good look at themselves, they've enabled this in all seriousness.

 

[Grendel]

Again, Truss. Braverman is making the right noises for the membership. All she has to do is get to the final 2.

Ok Tony Badanoch will miss out even though she easily beat Braverman last time and then her votes transferred to Truss.

 

[SBT]

Faith schools are breeding grounds for misogyny, homophobia and a warped ideology which by its essence is a medieval viewpoint

Do you believe in the existence of Allah and Mohammed?

That’s fine if that’s your view on faith schools in general, but this is about legislating against one faith in particular - do you see that as discriminatory?

I don’t believe in any god. I assume that Mohammed was a real person and not invented.

 

[David O'Day]

I think he's a much of a clown as Trump, but my opinion on him isn't really relevant.

It doesn't surprise me that he's won, though. The left in the Netherlands have been a total disaster, alienating the electorate bit by bit for a while now. There are a lot of issues, and they haven't addressed some of the key concerns that many have too. If you talk to people in the bars that's generally on the hardcore lockdowns, state of the economy, the farmers situation, and the negative effects that's come with a lot of immigration from various countries with a high Islamic demographic. If you know anything about the Dutch, they like to have a hissy as much as the French do, so for me at least this result is pretty inevitable.

Is the idea to ban Islam correct? No. Is the idea that Wilders will save the country correct? Also probably no. If people don't feel they are listened to however, they will often vote in an extreme way at the end. Patronising the voters is not really going to work either, we've seen that across the world in recent years in many different ways too. Rather than blaming them, the losing parties need to take a good look at themselves, they've enabled this in all seriousness.

The left has done not to bad actually in this election, gained a fair few seats and finished 2nd which will please them.

 

[shmmeee]

Faith schools are breeding grounds for misogyny, homophobia and a warped ideology which by its essence is a medieval viewpoint

Do you believe in the existence of Allah and Mohammed?

And yet also among the highest performing schools in the country.

I generally agree, faith schools done badly are a real issue. Problem is faith schools done well seem to work really well too.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

She is a fantasist with a minority of support in the parliamentary party - she’s a fringe character with an overblown sense of her own importance and support

You could argue so was Boris, within the parliamentary party at least.

Whether Braverman could convince the hardcore anti-immigrant faction given her racial heritage would be interesting to see play out. I think she'd gather more support from the general public than I'd be comfortable with, and with FPTP it's more about achieving it in a relatively small number of seats.

 

[shmmeee]

I think he's a much of a clown as Trump, but my opinion on him isn't really relevant.

It doesn't surprise me that he's won, though. The left in the Netherlands have been a total disaster, alienating the electorate bit by bit for a while now. There are a lot of issues, and they haven't addressed some of the key concerns that many have too. If you talk to people in the bars that's generally on the hardcore lockdowns, state of the economy, the farmers situation, and the negative effects that's come with a lot of immigration from various countries with a high Islamic demographic. If you know anything about the Dutch, they like to have a hissy as much as the French do, so for me at least this result is pretty inevitable.

Is the idea to ban Islam correct? No. Is the idea that Wilders will save the country correct? Also probably no. If people don't feel they are listened to however, they will often vote in an extreme way at the end. Patronising the voters is not really going to work either, we've seen that across the world in recent years in many different ways too. Rather than blaming them, the losing parties need to take a good look at themselves, they've enabled this in all seriousness.

I think

I’m not sure how you think 500k-600k net migration per annum wouldn’t impact public services, infrastructure and housing. That’s almost a couple of coventrys every year or the size of Birmingham in the last two years.

It’s impossible to say what the correct amount of net migration is as it depends on specific labour/skills shortages etc and more importantly how much of the infrastructure etc you can build per year to support the additional numbers. Has either party ever had a plan for this ?! 150-200k might be manageable but that’s a total guess.

In terms of workers I’ve said before I’d rather have focussed employee support plans in known skills shortage areas to train, financially support (bursaries/no tuition/course fees for certain learning), flexible working solutions, better pay etc. That’s what I never understand about many on the ‘left’, don’t they see that business, especially big business, loves free movement and high immigration….cos it means they can get away with paying workers fuck all in certain sectors and rather than train and invest in people they just import them - like Australia are supposedly doing with our docs and nurses, like we’ve been doing to the Philippines and other developing nations by all accounts - that just feels wrong to me

No issue with the student numbers if they’re available spaces (where have 200-250k spaces magically appeared from ?) but 100k dependents ?

None of this really affects me personally so I don’t know why I get bothered by it all but I just try to look at stuff logically and the numbers and ‘strategy’ just dont make sense to me.

Ps I’ve said numerous times I’ve voted for the two main parties equal times

We don’t have the birth rate to support low immigration without huge cuts to pensions or social care really. We can fit loads more people in, and we can expand services and fund them properly if we want to. But we need to do something. Like so much of the economy successive governments have chosen to do nothing. If we want low immigration we need massive investment in productivity, and loads of child friendly policies like free childcare and improved child benefit.

If we want cheaper housing then built it. If we want better public services, pay for them. And if you want lower immigration be honest that it will cost a lot to implement.

 

[shmmeee]

You could argue so was Boris, within the parliamentary party at least.

Whether Braverman could convince the hardcore anti-immigrant faction given her racial heritage would be interesting to see play out. I think she'd gather more support from the general public than I'd be comfortable with, and with FPTP it's more about achieving it in a relatively small number of seats.

Johnson was a winner which got people on board.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

This is the gross figure:

Number of houses built in the UK 1949-2023, by tenure | Statista

Most of the houses completed in the UK in the past years were built by the private sector, making up the great majority of homes completed in 2020.

www.statista.com

Not sure what the net figure is.

I guess you could do a 'new houses per head of population' type calculation to show the rate, recent years look very poor given the rate of population growth.

This is partly down to the cartel behaviours of the big housebuilders, who control supply to keep prices up. It certainly shows though that local authority capacity was not replaced post right to buy.

Given that the housebuilders have huge conflicts of interests with the needs of the country, deliberately drip feed housing in to keep the prices high and also concentrate as much as possible on more expensive houses with higher margins, we really need to start seriously looking at govt actually getting involved in housebuilding again.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Hunt has paid for tax cuts with unrealistic spending cuts which create huge problems for next chancellor, IFS says

The Institute for Fiscal Studies has released its full assessment of the autumn statement. In his summary, Paul Johnson, the IFS director, says Jeremy Hunt’s tax cuts are “paid for by planned real cuts in public service spending” which are not credible. He says this means Hunt has left a huge problem for whoever is chancellor after the next election. He explains:

The net result is that Mr Hunt is, by the narrowest of tiny margins, still on course to meet his (poorly designed) fiscal rule that debt as a fraction of national income should be falling in the last year of the forecast period. In reality debt is set to be just about flat at around 93 per cent of national income over the whole period. And that is on the basis of a series of questionable, if not plain implausible, assumptions. It assumes that many aspects of day to day public service spending will be cut. It assumes a substantial real cut in public investment spending. It assumes that rates of fuel duties will rise year on year with inflation – which they have not done in more than a decade and they surely will not do next April. It assumes that the constant roll over of “temporary” business rates cuts will stop. It assumes, of course, that the economy doesn’t suffer any negative shocks.

Like his predecessors Mr Hunt has taken a modest improvement in the public finance forecasts and spent most of it. He has spent up front and told us he will meet his targets largely by unspecified fiscal restraint at some point in the future. What he will do in March if the OBR downgrades its forecasts we do not know. Any such downgrading would leave him with a big headache. More importantly he or his successor is going to have the mother and father of a headache when it comes to making the tough decisions implied by this statement in a year or two’s time.

And here is Johnson’s conclusion.

The fiscal forecasts have not in any real sense got better. Debt is not declining over time. Taxes are still heading to record levels. Spending is also due to stay high by historic standards, not least because of high debt interest payments. But those payments plus pressures on health and pension spending mean current plans are for some pretty serious cuts across other areas of public spending. How did Mr Hunt afford tax cuts when real economic forecasts got no better? He banked additional revenue from higher inflation, and pencilled in harsher cuts to public spending.

I’m not sure I’d want to be the chancellor inheriting this fiscal situation in a year’s time.


Labour are fooked if they get in to power.



Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

Of course it's deliberate. They know they're losing so start putting everything in place now to blow up during the next parliament and claim Labour are economically incompetent,

 

[shmmeee]

Given that the housebuilders have huge conflicts of interests with the needs of the country, deliberately drip feed housing in to keep the prices high and also concentrate as much as possible on more expensive houses with higher margins, we really need to start seriously looking at govt actually getting involved in housebuilding again.

This just isn’t true.

Lack of house building is pretty much entirely down to planning law and lack of workers. There no evidence of land banking on any scale.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

This just isn’t true.

Lack of house building is pretty much entirely down to planning law and lack of workers. There no evidence of land banking on any scale.

Tell them to stop building four bed detached around me then, and start on the two bed terraces instead

 

[shmmeee]

Tell them to stop building four bed detached around me then, and start on the two bed terraces instead

They’ll build what sells at the highest margin.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

They’ll build what sells at the highest margin.

Exactly

 

[shmmeee]

Exactly

make more land available and what it profitable to build changes. We need more houses full stop. Four bed detached houses are still houses and bring down costs overall.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

make more land available and what it profitable to build changes. We need more houses full stop. Four bed detached houses are still houses and bring down costs overall.

That's a nonsense. Take centralised control and build what's needed instead of chase profits at the expense of everything else.

 

[PVA]

The big house builders make obscene profit on each house, there's no way they're drip feeding new builds to keep prices high.