You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > General Election 2017
November 2 2026 9.32am

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

General Election 2017


Page 5 of 270 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >
Y Ddraig Goch Flag In The Crowd 18 Apr 17 10.56pm

Originally posted by miss smith

nick your going to be exhausted by the 8 june with all these tory tos*ers on the hol

Edited by miss smith (18 Apr 2017 7.40pm)

A rather erudite contribution

 


the dignified don't even enter in the game

Mr_Gristle Flag In the land of Whelk Eaters 18 Apr 17 11.30pm

Originally posted by elgrande

Not missing any point,I realise all of that but I'm asking what's so wrong with overspending the party's money on campaigning..and I bet labour and all the others have done it.

Erm, because it's against the law? Governments are meant to define and implement law, not break it when it suits them. Apparently.

 


Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune)

Stirlingsays Flag 19 Apr 17 12.05am

Originally posted by nickgusset

Protect a majority that came with the help of a bit of electoral fraud do you mean?

People will still vote for em anyway, even if they have been cheating. British are funny like that.

Edited by nickgusset (18 Apr 2017 9.46pm)

People will vote Tory because the alternative is a wishy washy weak mess of a CND leadership.

I haven't met anyone who thinks that Labour could negotiate a good deal for Britain.

I have issues myself with May....but in this general election it's a foregone conclusion.

And I'm sorry to say it Nick but the fault of where Labour is right now is down to people like yourself.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 19 Apr 17 12.29am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

People will vote Tory because the alternative is a wishy washy weak mess of a CND leadership.

I haven't met anyone who thinks that Labour could negotiate a good deal for Britain.

I have issues myself with May....but in this general election it's a foregone conclusion.

And I'm sorry to say it Nick but the fault of where Labour is right now is down to people like yourself.

We shall see.

 

nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 19 Apr 17 12.49am

Originally posted by Y Ddraig Goch

I don't know. It could be but I would suggest that

a) too soon to tell

b) you could argue that having an ongoing prosecution into 25 MPs while there is an election campaign is not the best strategy.

It certainly isn't.

 

nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 19 Apr 17 12.50am

Originally posted by Y Ddraig Goch

Constituents happy or members happy ? Not the same thing. We both know that there is a campaign encouraged by Momentum among others, to deselect "Blairytes" "Tory Lite" "Traitors"..............

There will be some mainstream MP casualties along the way.

if there are quite a few deselections then the lack of time will certainly be a problem for any prospective candidate.

Re your point about prosecution, that could be quite a fly in the ointment but it seems to me, parties aren't making too much of an issue of it due to their own sensitive position.

As it is it ain't gonna happen.

 

Stirlingsays Flag 19 Apr 17 2.45am

Originally posted by CambridgeEagle

I now live in Lewisham. Used to live in Cambridge and did so when I joined HOL hence the name. If you're from Stirling I have no idea what it's like so can't comment. Lewisham however I like and feel has benefited from immigration and from inward immigration into London in general, like the majority of places where immigrants have settled in the UK in numbers. The places most tolerant of immigration are those most directly impacted by it. Public accounts also show that immigration has been a significant net benefit to the economy, not to mention public services. The issues of under-funding and overcrowding, and unemployment and national policy issues created and exacerbated by consecutive governments' failure to invest in education, services and infrastructure and made significantly worse by poorly handled monetary policy (QE) and fiscal policy (austerity).

My point about Nuttall was his use of casual lies in public about himself. My comment was only meant to reflect on him and his party.

They used fear and lies about immigration to win votes. See insert.

Well by living in the crap hole that is Lewisham you are at least living out your principles....I lived in Catford right next to it for a few years...I wonder if the cinema is still there.

My surname is Stirling, to answer the location name point.

Anyway you think that large scale inward immigration benefits the areas it impacts....Well, on a 'feeling' basis it will differ from individual to individual by I seriously differ.

'The places most tolerant of immigration are those most directly impacted by it.'

If you forgive me but this point is a little silly. In London over the last thirty years there has been significant flight from the capital of Londoners. My family was one of them. We left, like many, because we didn't like what London was turning into.

Now it stands to reason that if a lot of people who don't like what's happening leave and you have increasingly large numbers of new people...mostly foreign coming in then you are going to end up with a city that mostly contains foreigners and those who are happy living as a minority amongst foreigners.

So that point is....boringly simplistic and easy to explain.

What isn't easy to explain is the economic benefits or costs of immigration. This is because accessing a non biased report isn't easy. You think it results in a net benefit I don't. I have seen reports by lefty academics that say it's a benefit and I've seen reports suggesting it's a drain. MigrationWatch UK use the same data and state pretty much the opposite....obviously what is factored in results in different conclusions.

I can't be sure who the liars are with that one...I will just say I don't know on the economic front.

But what I will say is that increasing a population each year without being able to increase infrastructure spending in line with the increase in effect punishes the working classes. They also don't factor in the social cohesion point that many like me make....apparently my views don't matter.....Well, until there is a 'leave' or 'remain' tick box that is....Thank you Cameron it was the only decent fecking thing you ever did!

Those who blame governments for the disaster of not increasing funding in line with it create a false argument because the increases in tax takes are just not there in line with population increase....over the year it's a population increase the size of the city of Newcastle......someone is lying about something.

As a teacher I've seen the damage and extra difficulties the rate of population increase has had on teaching....I can only imagine what it's been like in other sectors....I've read the stories.

I think those who accuse others of 'casual racism' are apart of the divisive nature of this debate. It stigmatise debate and widen the divide not decrease it....It closed down debate for many years and in effect what you did was create Ukip by causing resentment.

What you call 'casual racism' is probably more preference. I know some call that racism but as they are rather easy with their labels I call them plonkers.

Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Apr 2017 2.49am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Stirlingsays Flag 19 Apr 17 2.52am

Originally posted by nickgusset

It certainly isn't.

Who are you going to vote for Nick?

Are you going to have a massive internal struggle with it all like last year and then....to all our massive surprise vote how we all said you would?

Just being a cheeky fecker.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 19 Apr 17 7.33am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Who are you going to vote for Nick?

Are you going to have a massive internal struggle with it all like last year and then....to all our massive surprise vote how we all said you would?

Just being a cheeky fecker.

To be honest. Living in a Tory stronghold it doesn't matter who I vote for.

 

Y Ddraig Goch Flag In The Crowd 19 Apr 17 8.08am

Originally posted by nickgusset

As it is it ain't gonna happen.

sensible.

 


the dignified don't even enter in the game

hedgehog50 Flag Croydon 19 Apr 17 8.09am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Well by living in the crap hole that is Lewisham you are at least living out your principles....I lived in Catford right next to it for a few years...I wonder if the cinema is still there.

My surname is Stirling, to answer the location name point.

Anyway you think that large scale inward immigration benefits the areas it impacts....Well, on a 'feeling' basis it will differ from individual to individual by I seriously differ.

'The places most tolerant of immigration are those most directly impacted by it.'

If you forgive me but this point is a little silly. In London over the last thirty years there has been significant flight from the capital of Londoners. My family was one of them. We left, like many, because we didn't like what London was turning into.

Now it stands to reason that if a lot of people who don't like what's happening leave and you have increasingly large numbers of new people...mostly foreign coming in then you are going to end up with a city that mostly contains foreigners and those who are happy living as a minority amongst foreigners.

So that point is....boringly simplistic and easy to explain.

What isn't easy to explain is the economic benefits or costs of immigration. This is because accessing a non biased report isn't easy. You think it results in a net benefit I don't. I have seen reports by lefty academics that say it's a benefit and I've seen reports suggesting it's a drain. MigrationWatch UK use the same data and state pretty much the opposite....obviously what is factored in results in different conclusions.

I can't be sure who the liars are with that one...I will just say I don't know on the economic front.

But what I will say is that increasing a population each year without being able to increase infrastructure spending in line with the increase in effect punishes the working classes. They also don't factor in the social cohesion point that many like me make....apparently my views don't matter.....Well, until there is a 'leave' or 'remain' tick box that is....Thank you Cameron it was the only decent fecking thing you ever did!

Those who blame governments for the disaster of not increasing funding in line with it create a false argument because the increases in tax takes are just not there in line with population increase....over the year it's a population increase the size of the city of Newcastle......someone is lying about something.

As a teacher I've seen the damage and extra difficulties the rate of population increase has had on teaching....I can only imagine what it's been like in other sectors....I've read the stories.

I think those who accuse others of 'casual racism' are apart of the divisive nature of this debate. It stigmatise debate and widen the divide not decrease it....It closed down debate for many years and in effect what you did was create Ukip by causing resentment.

What you call 'casual racism' is probably more preference. I know some call that racism but as they are rather easy with their labels I call them plonkers.

Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Apr 2017 2.49am)

Terrific analysis, couldn't agree more, bravo.

 


We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]

CambridgeEagle Flag Sydenham 19 Apr 17 9.04am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Do you remember the last Labour government and what a total mess they made of everything?
Always got an excuse haven't they. It was never their fault.

Imagine Britain in a retro 1970's union controlled, CND marching, benefits system out of control, 5 more layers of administration in every service nightmare, because that is what Corbyn would bring.

Yes I want five more years of the Tories.

The last labour government made massive strides in improving social rights following decades of society being dismantled by Thatcher and Major.

They also made the BoE independent and stopped monetary policy being used for political ends - something the Tories brought back with QE.

The GFC was not the Labour party's fault (the clue is in the letter G). It's biggest failing in terms of the banking crisis was following America in a race to the bottom in terms of deregulation and allowing anti-competitive and anti-consumer practices.

You could also argue the spending plans of the last labour government were too much of a continuation of the previous Tory government and they didn't do enough to reverse the huge increases in inequality brought about by Thatcher or enough to invest in a sustainable economy.

Describing those 12 years as a total mess is wrong.

 

CambridgeEagle Flag Sydenham 19 Apr 17 9.05am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

But a sh-t load less debt than Labour would have had.


Total conjecture. Plus a complete misunderstanding of how an economy works.

 

CambridgeEagle Flag Sydenham 19 Apr 17 9.12am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

As I said. The Tories would almost certainly win those seats again in a by election with Labour this unpopular, so it makes little difference.
You are just deflecting from the imminent wipe out of your useless party.

You may well be right, but with a slim majority, if 20+ Tory seats are all re-contested they can only at best come out even and any losses would reduce their majority to something close to unworkable. Lib Dems are probably the biggest threat in a lot of those seats, many of which will be marginal. Lib Dems will attract votes from people who would like to Remain in the EU or avoid a hard brexit.

Seems to be pretty obvious politics for May to have a GE now while she's got such a big lead in the polls and gives her the chance to marginalise her back bench.

 

CambridgeEagle Flag Sydenham 19 Apr 17 9.18am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

People will vote Tory because the alternative is a wishy washy weak mess of a CND leadership.

I haven't met anyone who thinks that Labour could negotiate a good deal for Britain.

I have issues myself with May....but in this general election it's a foregone conclusion.

And I'm sorry to say it Nick but the fault of where Labour is right now is down to people like yourself.


I know France has a very different system, but the three most likely candidates to win in their election are not from the two main parties.

I think Corbyn is a wast of space and would make a useless PM and has no chance of winning. But there is nothing to say he's the only alternative. While it's extremely likely Labour and Tories will be the two biggest parties there are lots of permutations where other parties could hold the balance of power.

7 weeks is a long time for gains to be made by smaller parties and for Tories and Labour to lose out to LD/UKIP etc in closely contested seats.

For the record I would put my money on an increased Tory majority but if 2016 taught us anything it is that we shouldn't take anything for granted!

 

Kermit8 Flag Hevon 19 Apr 17 9.18am

"My surname is Stirling, to answer the location name point"

A true British name that. Heralds from Germanic or perhaps Scottish ancestry of a combo of both maybe

Immigrants were welcome

 


Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]


Willo Flag South coast - west of Brighton. 19 Apr 17 9.19am

A very busy time for me out campaigning both in the local elections and now the General Election.Accordingly my time on HOL will be somewhat restricted - I hear yelps of delights from the multitudes on here !

In any event I generally refrain from participating in any political debates on here for as sure as night follows day they would disintegrate into tedious WILLO threads where risible and ridiculous allegations are made against me and of course the debate would focus on me rather than the subject under discussion.

Rest assured I shall be campaigning with great vim and vigour for my beloved Tories !

 

Kermit8 Flag Hevon 19 Apr 17 9.25am

Originally posted by Willo

A very busy time for me out campaigning both in the local elections and now the General Election.Accordingly my time on HOL will be somewhat restricted - I hear yelps of delights from the multitudes on here !

In any event I generally refrain from participating in any political debates on here for as sure as night follows day they would disintegrate into tedious WILLO threads where risible and ridiculous allegations are made against me and of course the debate would focus on me rather than the subject under discussion.

Rest assured I shall be campaigning with great vim and vigour for my beloved Tories !

'et tu, Willo?

Regards

D.Cameron esq

 


Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]


CambridgeEagle Flag Sydenham 19 Apr 17 9.48am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Well by living in the crap hole that is Lewisham you are at least living out your principles....I lived in Catford right next to it for a few years...I wonder if the cinema is still there.

My surname is Stirling, to answer the location name point.

Anyway you think that large scale inward immigration benefits the areas it impacts....Well, on a 'feeling' basis it will differ from individual to individual by I seriously differ.

'The places most tolerant of immigration are those most directly impacted by it.'

If you forgive me but this point is a little silly. In London over the last thirty years there has been significant flight from the capital of Londoners. My family was one of them. We left, like many, because we didn't like what London was turning into.

Now it stands to reason that if a lot of people who don't like what's happening leave and you have increasingly large numbers of new people...mostly foreign coming in then you are going to end up with a city that mostly contains foreigners and those who are happy living as a minority amongst foreigners.

So that point is....boringly simplistic and easy to explain.

What isn't easy to explain is the economic benefits or costs of immigration. This is because accessing a non biased report isn't easy. You think it results in a net benefit I don't. I have seen reports by lefty academics that say it's a benefit and I've seen reports suggesting it's a drain. MigrationWatch UK use the same data and state pretty much the opposite....obviously what is factored in results in different conclusions.

I can't be sure who the liars are with that one...I will just say I don't know on the economic front.

But what I will say is that increasing a population each year without being able to increase infrastructure spending in line with the increase in effect punishes the working classes. They also don't factor in the social cohesion point that many like me make....apparently my views don't matter.....Well, until there is a 'leave' or 'remain' tick box that is....Thank you Cameron it was the only decent fecking thing you ever did!

Those who blame governments for the disaster of not increasing funding in line with it create a false argument because the increases in tax takes are just not there in line with population increase....over the year it's a population increase the size of the city of Newcastle......someone is lying about something.

As a teacher I've seen the damage and extra difficulties the rate of population increase has had on teaching....I can only imagine what it's been like in other sectors....I've read the stories.

I think those who accuse others of 'casual racism' are apart of the divisive nature of this debate. It stigmatise debate and widen the divide not decrease it....It closed down debate for many years and in effect what you did was create Ukip by causing resentment.

What you call 'casual racism' is probably more preference. I know some call that racism but as they are rather easy with their labels I call them plonkers.

Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Apr 2017 2.49am)

What makes you think there was an "inability" to increase investment on infrastructure? Or for that matter investment in education and healthcare?

Tax take per capita will be impacted by earnings per capita and the tax rate. If tax take per capita falls, as you suggest that would imply lower earnings per capita or reduction in tax rates. Earnings per capita has broadly increased since 1979, however average taxes on personal income have fallen from 10% of GDP to 9% in that time. That's over 1% lower than in the US, having been slightly higher in 1979. It's also lower than Canada, NZ, the Nordics and a number of other OECD countries. Tax on corporate profits has also shrunk as a share of GDP from 3.6% of GDP to 2.5% since the Tories came back to power. Social security contributions are also way below the OECD average and have reduced under the Tories.

This is ideological. The Tories have decided to slash spending on infrastructure, policing, healthcare, education, while simultaneously reducing the tax burden. Reducing tax on companies doesn't promote inward investment in the way that politicians would have you believe. There are huge amounts of corporate profits which sit on balance sheets doing nothing. It actually takes money out of the economy far from creating some sort of multiplier effect.

But more even than just talking about tax take - the government has been using QE for years now to prop up asset prices. This is completely irresponsible, and also ignores what they should be doing with monetary policy - increase money supply to invest in the economy and improve productivity. Creating asset bubbles with public finances just helps line the pockets of those who own the assets - the already wealthy. Using the argument that printing money for government spending just creates inflation is only true when an economy is at full employment - something ours is nowhere near. You can increase money supply and increase GDP in real terms up to that point. But this is against Tory ideology.

 

Y Ddraig Goch Flag In The Crowd 19 Apr 17 9.50am

I do think it will be interesting to see what May's Conservatives are about.


 


the dignified don't even enter in the game

Page 5 of 270 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > General Election 2017