ukip (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 matt_himself  Matataland 14 Nov 14 8.06pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote Kermit8 at 14 Nov 2014 8.16am
Quote matt_himself at 13 Nov 2014 1.25pm
Quote Kermit8 at 13 Nov 2014 12.37pm
Quote matt_himself at 13 Nov 2014 12.14pm
Quote Kermit8 at 13 Nov 2014 11.06am
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 9.45pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 5.42pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 5.26pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 5.17pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 5.16pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 5.10pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 5.04pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 4.53pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 4.42pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 4.24pm
ukip supporters don't read articles to understand they read merely in order to reply. LOUDLY. The thing I find amazing is that if this was such a scoop, why the mainstream press is not all over it at the moment? It appears that only the Guardian is reporting it. Why could that be?
He is not to be trusted, it appears. Not by a long chalk.
Thanks Kermit.
No sale. You are just being your usual smug self.
You may decide to continue to do so but how will you know that his latter thoughts truly usurp the video-based ones? The flip-flopping chatterbox is snookering his own supporters. Or, he would be if they weren't so damned well in love with him.
Draw from it what you will Kermit. However, you are a smart guy and must have doubts that you have witnessed the full extent of what was discussed in those events videoed. If you are unable to put Nige under the scrutiny spotlight for that video then I am coming to the conclusion that you don't actually really and truly support UKIP but are more interested in just being contrary against a few certain posters.
Do you know what questions were put to Nigel before he spoke? If so, what were they? Let me know then we can break down his response further.
Here we go Full public meeting vid: Watch from about 45mins in to get the NHS stuff at 48mins and in context. Look forward to your thoughts on Nigel's words and his subsequent backtracking. Edited by Kermit8 (13 Nov 2014 12.49pm)
I have watched it. I have more admiration for Nigel than I did before. He said his thoughts in the video. However, he being the leader of a broad church of views, is supporting the party opinion in respect of the NHS. He has stated his views up front, has agreed to support the party, I fail to see how he can't 'be trusted'. Surely it would be worse of he stayed quiet on matters and then swivelled his views AFTER being elected? How many other party leaders have the honesty and the confidence to support grassroots opinion why it is contrary to their own beliefs in recognition of the democratic voice of the members of their party? I am sure there are hundreds of reasons why this is wrong Kermit but I assure you that nothing in that video has made me think twice about voting UKIP at next years general election. Edited by matt_himself (14 Nov 2014 8.08pm)
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
Kermit8  Hevon 14 Nov 14 8.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote matt_himself at 14 Nov 2014 8.06pm
Quote Kermit8 at 14 Nov 2014 8.16am
Quote matt_himself at 13 Nov 2014 1.25pm
Quote Kermit8 at 13 Nov 2014 12.37pm
Quote matt_himself at 13 Nov 2014 12.14pm
Quote Kermit8 at 13 Nov 2014 11.06am
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 9.45pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 5.42pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 5.26pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 5.17pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 5.16pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 5.10pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 5.04pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 4.53pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 4.42pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 4.24pm
ukip supporters don't read articles to understand they read merely in order to reply. LOUDLY. The thing I find amazing is that if this was such a scoop, why the mainstream press is not all over it at the moment? It appears that only the Guardian is reporting it. Why could that be?
He is not to be trusted, it appears. Not by a long chalk.
Thanks Kermit.
No sale. You are just being your usual smug self.
You may decide to continue to do so but how will you know that his latter thoughts truly usurp the video-based ones? The flip-flopping chatterbox is snookering his own supporters. Or, he would be if they weren't so damned well in love with him.
Draw from it what you will Kermit. However, you are a smart guy and must have doubts that you have witnessed the full extent of what was discussed in those events videoed. If you are unable to put Nige under the scrutiny spotlight for that video then I am coming to the conclusion that you don't actually really and truly support UKIP but are more interested in just being contrary against a few certain posters.
Do you know what questions were put to Nigel before he spoke? If so, what were they? Let me know then we can break down his response further.
Here we go Full public meeting vid: Watch from about 45mins in to get the NHS stuff at 48mins and in context. Look forward to your thoughts on Nigel's words and his subsequent backtracking. Edited by Kermit8 (13 Nov 2014 12.49pm)
I have watched it. I have more admiration for Nigel than I did before. He said his thoughts in the video. However, he being the leader of a broad church of views, is supporting the party opinion in respect of the NHS. He has stated his views up front, has agreed to support the party, I fail to see how he can't 'be trusted'. Surely it would be worse of he stayed quiet on matters and then swivelled his views AFTER being elected? How many other party leaders have the honesty and the confidence to support grassroots opinion why it is contrary to their own beliefs in recognition of the democratic voice of the members of their party? I am sure there are hundreds of reasons why this is wrong Kermit but I assure you that nothing in that video has made me think twice about voting UKIP at next years general election. Edited by matt_himself (14 Nov 2014 8.08pm)
But, as a leader, if he is prepared to backtrack on his own beliefs with such an emotive subject in order to please 'the party' - he made no mention of them when saying what must happen to the NHS btw - then how do you know that he won't flip on other important issues if his political power base is at stake in a coalition further down the line? Like a referendum on membership of the EU, for example. He is, as now has been revealed, not a conviction politician but a malleable one. What kind of leader is that? A weak one for the future - that is what. You may wish to believe otherwise and ignore the evidence but, seriously, are you that desperate for a politician to believe in that you will always find in favour of him when put under the Matt scrutiny microscope? He was suspended from class at Dulwich College for loud racism just 30 years ago, when racism was not just a word to be banded around at the drop of a hat. There's another clue there as to the kind of person you are admiring and helping. He is, basically, just another politician who likes the sound of his own voice and will do what he has to do to protect and prolong his political career. The sooner you realise that the less the disappointment will be when he let's you and your ilk down. And he will.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| matt_himself Matataland 14 Nov 14 9.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Kermit8 at 14 Nov 2014 8.39pm
Quote matt_himself at 14 Nov 2014 8.06pm
Quote Kermit8 at 14 Nov 2014 8.16am
Quote matt_himself at 13 Nov 2014 1.25pm
Quote Kermit8 at 13 Nov 2014 12.37pm
Quote matt_himself at 13 Nov 2014 12.14pm
Quote Kermit8 at 13 Nov 2014 11.06am
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 9.45pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 5.42pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 5.26pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 5.17pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 5.16pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 5.10pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 5.04pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 4.53pm
Quote matt_himself at 12 Nov 2014 4.42pm
Quote Kermit8 at 12 Nov 2014 4.24pm
ukip supporters don't read articles to understand they read merely in order to reply. LOUDLY. The thing I find amazing is that if this was such a scoop, why the mainstream press is not all over it at the moment? It appears that only the Guardian is reporting it. Why could that be?
He is not to be trusted, it appears. Not by a long chalk.
Thanks Kermit.
No sale. You are just being your usual smug self.
You may decide to continue to do so but how will you know that his latter thoughts truly usurp the video-based ones? The flip-flopping chatterbox is snookering his own supporters. Or, he would be if they weren't so damned well in love with him.
Draw from it what you will Kermit. However, you are a smart guy and must have doubts that you have witnessed the full extent of what was discussed in those events videoed. If you are unable to put Nige under the scrutiny spotlight for that video then I am coming to the conclusion that you don't actually really and truly support UKIP but are more interested in just being contrary against a few certain posters.
Do you know what questions were put to Nigel before he spoke? If so, what were they? Let me know then we can break down his response further.
Here we go Full public meeting vid: Watch from about 45mins in to get the NHS stuff at 48mins and in context. Look forward to your thoughts on Nigel's words and his subsequent backtracking. Edited by Kermit8 (13 Nov 2014 12.49pm)
I have watched it. I have more admiration for Nigel than I did before. He said his thoughts in the video. However, he being the leader of a broad church of views, is supporting the party opinion in respect of the NHS. He has stated his views up front, has agreed to support the party, I fail to see how he can't 'be trusted'. Surely it would be worse of he stayed quiet on matters and then swivelled his views AFTER being elected? How many other party leaders have the honesty and the confidence to support grassroots opinion why it is contrary to their own beliefs in recognition of the democratic voice of the members of their party? I am sure there are hundreds of reasons why this is wrong Kermit but I assure you that nothing in that video has made me think twice about voting UKIP at next years general election. Edited by matt_himself (14 Nov 2014 8.08pm)
But, as a leader, if he is prepared to backtrack on his own beliefs with such an emotive subject in order to please 'the party' - he made no mention of them when saying what must happen to the NHS btw - then how do you know that he won't flip on other important issues if his political power base is at stake in a coalition further down the line? Like a referendum on membership of the EU, for example. He is, as now has been revealed, not a conviction politician but a malleable one. What kind of leader is that? A weak one for the future - that is what. You may wish to believe otherwise and ignore the evidence but, seriously, are you that desperate for a politician to believe in that you will always find in favour of him when put under the Matt scrutiny microscope? He was suspended from class at Dulwich College for loud racism just 30 years ago, when racism was not just a word to be banded around at the drop of a hat. There's another clue there as to the kind of person you are admiring and helping. He is, basically, just another politician who likes the sound of his own voice and will do what he has to do to protect and prolong his political career. The sooner you realise that the less the disappointment will be when he let's you and your ilk down. And he will.
Who are you likely to vote for next election Kermit? Let me guess, 'it is personal' and you don't wish to share. However, as I imagine it will be Miliband I laugh at you as that man has no leadership qualities and is as effective as a marzipan dildo. Your other comments are either factually wrong, wind ups or patronising posturing he type I have come to expect from you. Check your facts on Farage and Dulwich college. Believe you have got your story wrong. I am supporting UKIP because they resonate with me and annoy people like you. That for me is two bloody good reasons to vote for them. Thanks once again old chap for the warnings and patronising. Lest we not forget that the slightly liberal left views you espouse got us into a trillion pounds of debt, an unmanageable large government and being dictated by Brussels. All because you and the left 'know best'. Thanks for that and I am sure your grandchildren will be thanking you for that legacy. Edited by matt_himself (14 Nov 2014 10.20pm)
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Kermit8 Hevon 15 Nov 14 12.08am |
|
|---|---|
|
Luther King, Bevan, Ataturk, Nasser, Gandhi...and that other great conviction politician Farage.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 15 Nov 14 12.24am |
|
|---|---|
|
And there was me thinking we were in so much debt because of a global financial crisis caused by deregulation in the financial sector started in the Thatcher era and continued through successive governments voted in by both major parties. Wasn't it the financial sector that over leveraged itself to the max (using mortgage payments, savings and pension schemes as their reserves) in order to make all kinds of insane bets on crap like Spanish and Irish property assets, Greek government bonds and complex derivatives (like Collateralised Debt Obligations) that they clearly didn't even understand? It's a bit dull hearing the "always cleaning up Labour's mess" line over and over again; as if increasing the national debt by 11% of GDP in 13 years (as New Labour did) is somehow significantly worse than George Osborne's record of increasing the national debt by 26% in just 5 years. On the two occasions that a Labour government oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt.
Now before you say you don't support the Tories and what has thisgot to do with UKIP... ...UKIP is bankrolled by ex bankers and Tories - like our Nige himself is, can we expect more stupendous gambling with our finances if they get anything like a sniff of power? Also, what's been going on with the selection process for Boston and Skegness? Seems they held the selection meeting in a brewery. That old Tory fave, Neil Hamilton reckons he's a dead cert for candidacy in that manor. However no-one will say who was chosen. Could the delay in announcing the victor have anything to do with the leading candidate being, errr, Neil Hamilton? There’s certainly no love lost between Farage and the brown-envelope-loving former Tory MP. And having finally ditched Godfrey Bloom, UKIP might be loathe to fill the vacant position of Gaffe-Generator-In-Chief with a candidate who is not only less personable but also became a byword for 1990s corruption and sleaze. Buying themselves a few day’s breathing space, is it possible that the party plan to get their National Executive Committee to overrule a Hamilton victory?
Edited by nickgusset (15 Nov 2014 12.30am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| matt_himself Matataland 15 Nov 14 6.25am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 15 Nov 2014 12.24am
And there was me thinking we were in so much debt because of a global financial crisis caused by deregulation in the financial sector started in the Thatcher era and continued through successive governments voted in by both major parties. Wasn't it the financial sector that over leveraged itself to the max (using mortgage payments, savings and pension schemes as their reserves) in order to make all kinds of insane bets on crap like Spanish and Irish property assets, Greek government bonds and complex derivatives (like Collateralised Debt Obligations) that they clearly didn't even understand? It's a bit dull hearing the "always cleaning up Labour's mess" line over and over again; as if increasing the national debt by 11% of GDP in 13 years (as New Labour did) is somehow significantly worse than George Osborne's record of increasing the national debt by 26% in just 5 years. On the two occasions that a Labour government oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt.
Now before you say you don't support the Tories and what has thisgot to do with UKIP... ...UKIP is bankrolled by ex bankers and Tories - like our Nige himself is, can we expect more stupendous gambling with our finances if they get anything like a sniff of power? Also, what's been going on with the selection process for Boston and Skegness? Seems they held the selection meeting in a brewery. That old Tory fave, Neil Hamilton reckons he's a dead cert for candidacy in that manor. However no-one will say who was chosen. Could the delay in announcing the victor have anything to do with the leading candidate being, errr, Neil Hamilton? There’s certainly no love lost between Farage and the brown-envelope-loving former Tory MP. And having finally ditched Godfrey Bloom, UKIP might be loathe to fill the vacant position of Gaffe-Generator-In-Chief with a candidate who is not only less personable but also became a byword for 1990s corruption and sleaze. Buying themselves a few day’s breathing space, is it possible that the party plan to get their National Executive Committee to overrule a Hamilton victory?
Edited by nickgusset (15 Nov 2014 12.30am) Erm...
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| matt_himself Matataland 15 Nov 14 8.39am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 15 Nov 2014 12.24am
And there was me thinking we were in so much debt because of a global financial crisis caused by deregulation in the financial sector started in the Thatcher era and continued through successive governments voted in by both major parties. Wasn't it the financial sector that over leveraged itself to the max (using mortgage payments, savings and pension schemes as their reserves) in order to make all kinds of insane bets on crap like Spanish and Irish property assets, Greek government bonds and complex derivatives (like Collateralised Debt Obligations) that they clearly didn't even understand? It's a bit dull hearing the "always cleaning up Labour's mess" line over and over again; as if increasing the national debt by 11% of GDP in 13 years (as New Labour did) is somehow significantly worse than George Osborne's record of increasing the national debt by 26% in just 5 years. On the two occasions that a Labour government oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt.
Now before you say you don't support the Tories and what has thisgot to do with UKIP... ...UKIP is bankrolled by ex bankers and Tories - like our Nige himself is, can we expect more stupendous gambling with our finances if they get anything like a sniff of power? Also, what's been going on with the selection process for Boston and Skegness? Seems they held the selection meeting in a brewery. That old Tory fave, Neil Hamilton reckons he's a dead cert for candidacy in that manor. However no-one will say who was chosen. Could the delay in announcing the victor have anything to do with the leading candidate being, errr, Neil Hamilton? There’s certainly no love lost between Farage and the brown-envelope-loving former Tory MP. And having finally ditched Godfrey Bloom, UKIP might be loathe to fill the vacant position of Gaffe-Generator-In-Chief with a candidate who is not only less personable but also became a byword for 1990s corruption and sleaze. Buying themselves a few day’s breathing space, is it possible that the party plan to get their National Executive Committee to overrule a Hamilton victory?
Edited by nickgusset (15 Nov 2014 12.30am)
Lutfur Rahman. It doesn't look good, does it? Who are amongst his key supporters? Ken Livingstone, George Galloway and Len McCluskey. That's Len McCluskey of Unite. One of the Trade Unions you unquestioningly support. I am sure this is conspiracy dreamt up by 'right wing press barons' and the bourgeoise courts to suppress the working man, or some similar tosh.
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 15 Nov 14 9.49am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote matt_himself at 15 Nov 2014 8.39am
Quote nickgusset at 15 Nov 2014 12.24am
And there was me thinking we were in so much debt because of a global financial crisis caused by deregulation in the financial sector started in the Thatcher era and continued through successive governments voted in by both major parties. Wasn't it the financial sector that over leveraged itself to the max (using mortgage payments, savings and pension schemes as their reserves) in order to make all kinds of insane bets on crap like Spanish and Irish property assets, Greek government bonds and complex derivatives (like Collateralised Debt Obligations) that they clearly didn't even understand? It's a bit dull hearing the "always cleaning up Labour's mess" line over and over again; as if increasing the national debt by 11% of GDP in 13 years (as New Labour did) is somehow significantly worse than George Osborne's record of increasing the national debt by 26% in just 5 years. On the two occasions that a Labour government oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt.
Now before you say you don't support the Tories and what has thisgot to do with UKIP... ...UKIP is bankrolled by ex bankers and Tories - like our Nige himself is, can we expect more stupendous gambling with our finances if they get anything like a sniff of power? Also, what's been going on with the selection process for Boston and Skegness? Seems they held the selection meeting in a brewery. That old Tory fave, Neil Hamilton reckons he's a dead cert for candidacy in that manor. However no-one will say who was chosen. Could the delay in announcing the victor have anything to do with the leading candidate being, errr, Neil Hamilton? There’s certainly no love lost between Farage and the brown-envelope-loving former Tory MP. And having finally ditched Godfrey Bloom, UKIP might be loathe to fill the vacant position of Gaffe-Generator-In-Chief with a candidate who is not only less personable but also became a byword for 1990s corruption and sleaze. Buying themselves a few day’s breathing space, is it possible that the party plan to get their National Executive Committee to overrule a Hamilton victory?
Edited by nickgusset (15 Nov 2014 12.30am)
Lutfur Rahman. It doesn't look good, does it? Who are amongst his key supporters? Ken Livingstone, George Galloway and Len McCluskey. That's Len McCluskey of Unite. One of the Trade Unions you unquestioningly support. I am sure this is conspiracy dreamt up by 'right wing press barons' and the bourgeoise courts to suppress the working man, or some similar tosh. Deflect Deflect Deflect
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| matt_himself Matataland 15 Nov 14 9.53am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 15 Nov 2014 9.49am
Quote matt_himself at 15 Nov 2014 8.39am
Quote nickgusset at 15 Nov 2014 12.24am
And there was me thinking we were in so much debt because of a global financial crisis caused by deregulation in the financial sector started in the Thatcher era and continued through successive governments voted in by both major parties. Wasn't it the financial sector that over leveraged itself to the max (using mortgage payments, savings and pension schemes as their reserves) in order to make all kinds of insane bets on crap like Spanish and Irish property assets, Greek government bonds and complex derivatives (like Collateralised Debt Obligations) that they clearly didn't even understand? It's a bit dull hearing the "always cleaning up Labour's mess" line over and over again; as if increasing the national debt by 11% of GDP in 13 years (as New Labour did) is somehow significantly worse than George Osborne's record of increasing the national debt by 26% in just 5 years. On the two occasions that a Labour government oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt.
Now before you say you don't support the Tories and what has thisgot to do with UKIP... ...UKIP is bankrolled by ex bankers and Tories - like our Nige himself is, can we expect more stupendous gambling with our finances if they get anything like a sniff of power? Also, what's been going on with the selection process for Boston and Skegness? Seems they held the selection meeting in a brewery. That old Tory fave, Neil Hamilton reckons he's a dead cert for candidacy in that manor. However no-one will say who was chosen. Could the delay in announcing the victor have anything to do with the leading candidate being, errr, Neil Hamilton? There’s certainly no love lost between Farage and the brown-envelope-loving former Tory MP. And having finally ditched Godfrey Bloom, UKIP might be loathe to fill the vacant position of Gaffe-Generator-In-Chief with a candidate who is not only less personable but also became a byword for 1990s corruption and sleaze. Buying themselves a few day’s breathing space, is it possible that the party plan to get their National Executive Committee to overrule a Hamilton victory?
Edited by nickgusset (15 Nov 2014 12.30am)
Lutfur Rahman. It doesn't look good, does it? Who are amongst his key supporters? Ken Livingstone, George Galloway and Len McCluskey. That's Len McCluskey of Unite. One of the Trade Unions you unquestioningly support. I am sure this is conspiracy dreamt up by 'right wing press barons' and the bourgeoise courts to suppress the working man, or some similar tosh. Deflect Deflect Deflect
I take it you won't respond on the above then?
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 15 Nov 14 10.00am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote matt_himself at 15 Nov 2014 9.53am
Quote nickgusset at 15 Nov 2014 9.49am
Quote matt_himself at 15 Nov 2014 8.39am
Quote nickgusset at 15 Nov 2014 12.24am
And there was me thinking we were in so much debt because of a global financial crisis caused by deregulation in the financial sector started in the Thatcher era and continued through successive governments voted in by both major parties. Wasn't it the financial sector that over leveraged itself to the max (using mortgage payments, savings and pension schemes as their reserves) in order to make all kinds of insane bets on crap like Spanish and Irish property assets, Greek government bonds and complex derivatives (like Collateralised Debt Obligations) that they clearly didn't even understand? It's a bit dull hearing the "always cleaning up Labour's mess" line over and over again; as if increasing the national debt by 11% of GDP in 13 years (as New Labour did) is somehow significantly worse than George Osborne's record of increasing the national debt by 26% in just 5 years. On the two occasions that a Labour government oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt.
Now before you say you don't support the Tories and what has thisgot to do with UKIP... ...UKIP is bankrolled by ex bankers and Tories - like our Nige himself is, can we expect more stupendous gambling with our finances if they get anything like a sniff of power? Also, what's been going on with the selection process for Boston and Skegness? Seems they held the selection meeting in a brewery. That old Tory fave, Neil Hamilton reckons he's a dead cert for candidacy in that manor. However no-one will say who was chosen. Could the delay in announcing the victor have anything to do with the leading candidate being, errr, Neil Hamilton? There’s certainly no love lost between Farage and the brown-envelope-loving former Tory MP. And having finally ditched Godfrey Bloom, UKIP might be loathe to fill the vacant position of Gaffe-Generator-In-Chief with a candidate who is not only less personable but also became a byword for 1990s corruption and sleaze. Buying themselves a few day’s breathing space, is it possible that the party plan to get their National Executive Committee to overrule a Hamilton victory?
Edited by nickgusset (15 Nov 2014 12.30am)
Lutfur Rahman. It doesn't look good, does it? Who are amongst his key supporters? Ken Livingstone, George Galloway and Len McCluskey. That's Len McCluskey of Unite. One of the Trade Unions you unquestioningly support. I am sure this is conspiracy dreamt up by 'right wing press barons' and the bourgeoise courts to suppress the working man, or some similar tosh. Deflect Deflect Deflect
I take it you won't respond on the above then? Scotland Yard have cleared Tower Hamlets of any wrongdoings in an investigation. Edited by nickgusset (15 Nov 2014 10.02am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| matt_himself Matataland 15 Nov 14 10.38am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 15 Nov 2014 10.00am
Quote matt_himself at 15 Nov 2014 9.53am
Quote nickgusset at 15 Nov 2014 9.49am
Quote matt_himself at 15 Nov 2014 8.39am
Quote nickgusset at 15 Nov 2014 12.24am
And there was me thinking we were in so much debt because of a global financial crisis caused by deregulation in the financial sector started in the Thatcher era and continued through successive governments voted in by both major parties. Wasn't it the financial sector that over leveraged itself to the max (using mortgage payments, savings and pension schemes as their reserves) in order to make all kinds of insane bets on crap like Spanish and Irish property assets, Greek government bonds and complex derivatives (like Collateralised Debt Obligations) that they clearly didn't even understand? It's a bit dull hearing the "always cleaning up Labour's mess" line over and over again; as if increasing the national debt by 11% of GDP in 13 years (as New Labour did) is somehow significantly worse than George Osborne's record of increasing the national debt by 26% in just 5 years. On the two occasions that a Labour government oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt.
Now before you say you don't support the Tories and what has thisgot to do with UKIP... ...UKIP is bankrolled by ex bankers and Tories - like our Nige himself is, can we expect more stupendous gambling with our finances if they get anything like a sniff of power? Also, what's been going on with the selection process for Boston and Skegness? Seems they held the selection meeting in a brewery. That old Tory fave, Neil Hamilton reckons he's a dead cert for candidacy in that manor. However no-one will say who was chosen. Could the delay in announcing the victor have anything to do with the leading candidate being, errr, Neil Hamilton? There’s certainly no love lost between Farage and the brown-envelope-loving former Tory MP. And having finally ditched Godfrey Bloom, UKIP might be loathe to fill the vacant position of Gaffe-Generator-In-Chief with a candidate who is not only less personable but also became a byword for 1990s corruption and sleaze. Buying themselves a few day’s breathing space, is it possible that the party plan to get their National Executive Committee to overrule a Hamilton victory?
Edited by nickgusset (15 Nov 2014 12.30am)
Lutfur Rahman. It doesn't look good, does it? Who are amongst his key supporters? Ken Livingstone, George Galloway and Len McCluskey. That's Len McCluskey of Unite. One of the Trade Unions you unquestioningly support. I am sure this is conspiracy dreamt up by 'right wing press barons' and the bourgeoise courts to suppress the working man, or some similar tosh. Deflect Deflect Deflect
I take it you won't respond on the above then? Scotland Yard have cleared Tower Hamlets of any wrongdoings in an investigation. Edited by nickgusset (15 Nov 2014 10.02am) You didn't appear to have any question other than Hamilton was a dead cert for the candidacy and the NEC will overrule him being selected. As Hamilton has ruled himself out, that would appear academic, wouldn't it? So if there is no evidence against Rahman, why is there going to be a full judicial review into Tower Hamlets?
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| legaleagle 15 Nov 14 11.15am |
|
|---|---|
|
Below is a post by Paul Nuttall, MEP and UKIP Deputy Leader about the NHS, favouring privatisation. Once it got wider attention, he deleted it. What some might see in recent days as Nigel Farage admirably listening to voices within his party and then proclaiming his support for the NHS (thus showing what a virtuous politician he is), might be seen by others as another example of a classic old school politician chopping and changing what he says to suit the audience and trying to deflect attention away from what he and other influential people in his party really believe the future for the NHS should be; privatisation. Its funny how some of those those proclaiming support for Farage's supposed virtues in "clarifying" that he supports the NHS whole heartedly might be the first to jump on politicians in other parties should they be caught out saying what they really thought about an issue as opposed to what they wanted the wider public to believe they thought. "I would like to congratulate the coalition government for bringing a whiff of privatisation into the beleaguered National Health Service. The fact that successive governments have undertaken what they call ‘substantial’ changes to the NHS should tell us all we need to know: there is something fundamentally wrong with how we treat the ill in our country. The NHS is the second biggest employer in the world, beaten only by Walmart, but as with all state monopolies, it is costly, inefficient and stuffed with bureaucrats. In New Labour’s NHS, for every nurse there is a manager and vital workers, such as midwives, are falling in numbers. The problem, however, goes far deeper. I would argue that the very existence of the NHS stifles competition, and as competition drives quality and choice, innovation and improvements are restricted. Therefore, I believe, as long as the NHS is the ‘sacred cow’ of British politics, the longer the British people will suffer with a second rate health service. Paul Nuttall MEP"
Edited by legaleagle (15 Nov 2014 11.17am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.