Labour party conference

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 28 of 30 < 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 >

davenotamonkey 01 Oct 17 5.11pm
Originally posted by serial thriller I'm not pro-EU Stirling by any means. I'm just pointing out that arguing for sovereignty against the EU and refusing to see how un-democratic our political system is ridiculous. You say that the second chamber shouldn't be elected as it would make it more political. Well how can passing laws not be a political act? How could you have a non-political legislator, when the whole point of politics in a liberal democracy is to propose and enact laws? As for our national debt. Before 2008, it stood at around half a trillion. Already an eyewatering figure, but since then it's up to over £1.8 trillion. So what has our government been spending these loans on? Well it evidently isn't the public, as welfare, schools, hospitals and local authority has seen crippling, devastating cuts to their budgets. So where did the money go? Well, £500 billion went on our initial bailout of the banks, which now continue to receive government subsidies whilst paying little or no tax. Other private companies are also reaping in huge government subsidies, from rail to energy, despite their services often being shoddy at best. Whilst 99% of the country are experiencing the effects of austerity, of a shrinking of the public economy, the elites are being bankrolled despite causing one of the biggest economic crashes in modern times. The EU are one of the biggest culprits of this kind of cronyist reverse-Robin Hood policy, but our own government is more than happy to follow along. I'm sorry, but you have to start somewhere. And that start is bringing the entire legal and judicial framework and competence back to where we can chuck it out if we don't like it. Next stop, indeed: the House of Lords and electoral reform. But what's the point in reforming the Lords when more and more of our law-making is done outside of the UK? Do you think the Lords have EVER, in the past 40 years, debated an EU regulation in their house? No. It goes straight into law. No oversight. Do you think they EVER returned an EU directive bill back to the Commons? Then, what's the point in changing the way we elect our politicians when they can just point to Brussels and say "sorry, our hands are tied: your argument is the them". No. It is an onion. Work on the outer layer, and then tackle the issues deeper within our country when our political system is actually accountable to us voters. Well, that's pretty much what most waycists, zennofobig, low-edukation Brexit bigguts thought, anyway.
Alert a moderator to this post

davenotamonkey

01 Oct 17 5.11pm

Send a Private Message to davenotamonkey

Originally posted by serial thriller

I'm not pro-EU Stirling by any means. I'm just pointing out that arguing for sovereignty against the EU and refusing to see how un-democratic our political system is ridiculous.

You say that the second chamber shouldn't be elected as it would make it more political. Well how can passing laws not be a political act? How could you have a non-political legislator, when the whole point of politics in a liberal democracy is to propose and enact laws?

As for our national debt. Before 2008, it stood at around half a trillion. Already an eyewatering figure, but since then it's up to over £1.8 trillion.

So what has our government been spending these loans on? Well it evidently isn't the public, as welfare, schools, hospitals and local authority has seen crippling, devastating cuts to their budgets. So where did the money go? Well, £500 billion went on our initial bailout of the banks, which now continue to receive government subsidies whilst paying little or no tax. Other private companies are also reaping in huge government subsidies, from rail to energy, despite their services often being shoddy at best.

Whilst 99% of the country are experiencing the effects of austerity, of a shrinking of the public economy, the elites are being bankrolled despite causing one of the biggest economic crashes in modern times. The EU are one of the biggest culprits of this kind of cronyist reverse-Robin Hood policy, but our own government is more than happy to follow along.

I'm sorry, but you have to start somewhere. And that start is bringing the entire legal and judicial framework and competence back to where we can chuck it out if we don't like it.

Next stop, indeed: the House of Lords and electoral reform.

But what's the point in reforming the Lords when more and more of our law-making is done outside of the UK? Do you think the Lords have EVER, in the past 40 years, debated an EU regulation in their house? No. It goes straight into law. No oversight. Do you think they EVER returned an EU directive bill back to the Commons?

Then, what's the point in changing the way we elect our politicians when they can just point to Brussels and say "sorry, our hands are tied: your argument is the them".

No. It is an onion. Work on the outer layer, and then tackle the issues deeper within our country when our political system is actually accountable to us voters.

Well, that's pretty much what most waycists, zennofobig, low-edukation Brexit bigguts thought, anyway.

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 01 Oct 17 5.16pm
Originally posted by davenotamonkey I'm sorry, but you have to start somewhere. And that start is bringing the entire legal and judicial framework and competence back to where we can chuck it out if we don't like it. Next stop, indeed: the House of Lords and electoral reform. But what's the point in reforming the Lords when more and more of our law-making is done outside of the UK? Do you think the Lords have EVER, in the past 40 years, debated an EU regulation in their house? No. It goes straight into law. No oversight. Do you think they EVER returned an EU directive bill back to the Commons? Then, what's the point in changing the way we elect our politicians when they can just point to Brussels and say "sorry, our hands are tied: your argument is the them". No. It is an onion. Work on the outer layer, and then tackle the issues deeper within our country when our political system is actually accountable to us voters. Well, that's pretty much what most waycists, zennofobig, low-edukation Brexit bigguts thought, anyway. Shame that legislation is being carried out by Tory heavy commities rather than being put before the democratically elected sovereign parliament. Who knew that taking back control would be so rigged?
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 01 Oct 17 5.16pm

Originally posted by davenotamonkey

I'm sorry, but you have to start somewhere. And that start is bringing the entire legal and judicial framework and competence back to where we can chuck it out if we don't like it.

Next stop, indeed: the House of Lords and electoral reform.

Then, what's the point in changing the way we elect our politicians when they can just point to Brussels and say "sorry, our hands are tied: your argument is the them".

No. It is an onion. Work on the outer layer, and then tackle the issues deeper within our country when our political system is actually accountable to us voters.

Well, that's pretty much what most waycists, zennofobig, low-edukation Brexit bigguts thought, anyway.

Shame that legislation is being carried out by Tory heavy commities rather than being put before the democratically elected sovereign parliament.

Who knew that taking back control would be so rigged?

Alert a moderator to this post

davenotamonkey 01 Oct 17 5.27pm
Originally posted by nickgusset Shame that legislation is being carried out by Tory heavy commities rather than being put before the democratically elected sovereign parliament. Who knew that taking back control would be so rigged? Better that than wrecked by Labour. And as the repeal bill white paper was published on the 30th March of this year, the voting population evidently agree. Given that this bill encompasses solely legislation enacted by the EU, I find it very interesting you decide take an interest NOW in all the laws that have been enacted outside the Commons. Where have you been all these years? Any idea what Labour's Brexit policy is today? No, me neither. Clowns.
Alert a moderator to this post

davenotamonkey

01 Oct 17 5.27pm

Originally posted by nickgusset

Shame that legislation is being carried out by Tory heavy commities rather than being put before the democratically elected sovereign parliament.

Who knew that taking back control would be so rigged?

Better that than wrecked by Labour. And as the repeal bill white paper was published on the 30th March of this year, the voting population evidently agree.

Given that this bill encompasses solely legislation enacted by the EU, I find it very interesting you decide take an interest NOW in all the laws that have been enacted outside the Commons. Where have you been all these years?

Any idea what Labour's Brexit policy is today? No, me neither.

Clowns.

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 01 Oct 17 5.29pm
Originally posted by davenotamonkey Better that than wrecked by Labour. And as the repeal bill white paper was published on the 30th March of this year, the voting population evidently agree. Given that this bill encompasses solely legislation enacted by the EU, I find it very interesting you decide take an interest NOW in all the laws that have been enacted outside the Commons. Where have you been all these years? Any idea what Labour's Brexit policy is today? No, me neither. Clowns. What s the Tories Brexit policy, not just today but ever? No, me neither.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 01 Oct 17 5.29pm

Originally posted by davenotamonkey

Better that than wrecked by Labour. And as the repeal bill white paper was published on the 30th March of this year, the voting population evidently agree.

Any idea what Labour's Brexit policy is today? No, me neither.

Clowns.

What s the Tories Brexit policy, not just today but ever? No, me neither.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 01 Oct 17 5.29pm
Originally posted by serial thriller I'm not pro-EU Stirling by any means. I'm just pointing out that arguing for sovereignty against the EU and refusing to see how un-democratic our political system is ridiculous. You say that the second chamber shouldn't be elected as it would make it more political. Well how can passing laws not be a political act? How could you have a non-political legislator, when the whole point of politics in a liberal democracy is to propose and enact laws? As for our national debt. Before 2008, it stood at around half a trillion. Already an eyewatering figure, but since then it's up to over £1.8 trillion. So what has our government been spending these loans on? Well it evidently isn't the public, as welfare, schools, hospitals and local authority has seen crippling, devastating cuts to their budgets. So where did the money go? Well, £500 billion went on our initial bailout of the banks, which now continue to receive government subsidies whilst paying little or no tax. Other private companies are also reaping in huge government subsidies, from rail to energy, despite their services often being shoddy at best. Whilst 99% of the country are experiencing the effects of austerity, of a shrinking of the public economy, the elites are being bankrolled despite causing one of the biggest economic crashes in modern times. The EU are one of the biggest culprits of this kind of cronyist reverse-Robin Hood policy, but our own government is more than happy to follow along. I agree that our system could be fairer and more democratic. I've always viewed the second chamber as a good idea precisely because the concept is that its inhabited by experts in legislation and various fields. The idea being, as we all know, that the overt political tribalism of the first chamber with its occasional habit of producing the odd rushed bad bill can be bounced back and improved....in theory by that second chamber oversight. But your point about political identities in that second chamber is a good one..... but this is a point that could be countered by balancing out party representation. We want an apolitical chamber as much as possible. I think that's possible....but it requires the will to do it....parties and their political games make that end result a pipe dream at the moment. You of course are right to speak of the wrongs of a system that caused the banking crises and taxpayer bail out. It's a cycle that capitalism treads out every few decades. However, I'm not sure a criticism on the ills of regulated capitalism....still the best, if flawed, system we know....is going to get us anywhere.....We could have let the whole system collapse....It's not like that's a better answer either. But yes...there was zero fairness in the whole thing Regulated capitalism has many ills but keeping wealth in the country is vital to paying for the socialistic elements of the state such as schools and hospitals. It's a symbiotic relationship.....darkness and light so to speak. Rather than electing marxists into the mix I regard a far better and more realistic change in this dynamic as coming from the coming advancement of technology and its automation. Automation will inevitably result in gradual universal basic incomes and will change capitalism and society far far more than the old era political cats amongst the birds that Corbyn and co represent. That automation will happen everywhere in the first world at the same time...so it won't have the same affect as scaring away capital. Edited by Stirlingsays (01 Oct 2017 5.35pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

01 Oct 17 5.29pm

Originally posted by serial thriller

I'm not pro-EU Stirling by any means. I'm just pointing out that arguing for sovereignty against the EU and refusing to see how un-democratic our political system is ridiculous.

As for our national debt. Before 2008, it stood at around half a trillion. Already an eyewatering figure, but since then it's up to over £1.8 trillion.

I agree that our system could be fairer and more democratic.

I've always viewed the second chamber as a good idea precisely because the concept is that its inhabited by experts in legislation and various fields.

The idea being, as we all know, that the overt political tribalism of the first chamber with its occasional habit of producing the odd rushed bad bill can be bounced back and improved....in theory by that second chamber oversight.

But your point about political identities in that second chamber is a good one..... but this is a point that could be countered by balancing out party representation. We want an apolitical chamber as much as possible.

I think that's possible....but it requires the will to do it....parties and their political games make that end result a pipe dream at the moment.

You of course are right to speak of the wrongs of a system that caused the banking crises and taxpayer bail out. It's a cycle that capitalism treads out every few decades. However, I'm not sure a criticism on the ills of regulated capitalism....still the best, if flawed, system we know....is going to get us anywhere.....We could have let the whole system collapse....It's not like that's a better answer either. But yes...there was zero fairness in the whole thing

Regulated capitalism has many ills but keeping wealth in the country is vital to paying for the socialistic elements of the state such as schools and hospitals. It's a symbiotic relationship.....darkness and light so to speak.

Rather than electing marxists into the mix I regard a far better and more realistic change in this dynamic as coming from the coming advancement of technology and its automation.

Automation will inevitably result in gradual universal basic incomes and will change capitalism and society far far more than the old era political cats amongst the birds that Corbyn and co represent.

That automation will happen everywhere in the first world at the same time...so it won't have the same affect as scaring away capital.

Edited by Stirlingsays (01 Oct 2017 5.35pm)

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

Alert a moderator to this post

davenotamonkey 01 Oct 17 5.49pm
Originally posted by nickgusset What s the Tories Brexit policy, not just today but ever? No, me neither. Leave the single market. Leave the customs union. Regain legal sovereignty and supremacy from the ECJ. More details in the Lancaster House speech, the Conservative election manifesto, the f***-tonne of position papers they have published, and most recently the Florence speech. There, not so difficult, was it? Perhaps Labour could give it a try. Or at the very least hold the same position for more than a week or two. Maybe you should be a little more informed and stop reading the left-wing trash you keep posting on here. It rots your brain, you kno.... oh, never mind. I don't doubt you'll want to argue the minuate, or indeed the ISSUES ARISING from the policy (as opposed to the policy itself), but to tell you the truth gusset - I'm utterly bored with you.
Alert a moderator to this post

davenotamonkey

01 Oct 17 5.49pm

Originally posted by nickgusset

What s the Tories Brexit policy, not just today but ever? No, me neither.

Leave the single market. Leave the customs union. Regain legal sovereignty and supremacy from the ECJ.

More details in the Lancaster House speech, the Conservative election manifesto, the f***-tonne of position papers they have published, and most recently the Florence speech.

There, not so difficult, was it? Perhaps Labour could give it a try. Or at the very least hold the same position for more than a week or two.

Maybe you should be a little more informed and stop reading the left-wing trash you keep posting on here. It rots your brain, you kno.... oh, never mind.

I don't doubt you'll want to argue the minuate, or indeed the ISSUES ARISING from the policy (as opposed to the policy itself), but to tell you the truth gusset - I'm utterly bored with you.

Alert a moderator to this post

dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 03 Oct 17 10.56am
I've read with interest the last 10 pages or so, and far from the left being the next government elect, I think it's followers are slowly realising that actually their party (much like the Tory's they despise) is full of amoral b******s, with nothing but self interest at heart. Politics eh Anyhow see this mouth piece is gobbing off again. But its OK she called someone a liar "but was only poking fun" Horrible horrible woman soon to be moaning no doubt about nasty people being horrible to her, much like the maligned Diane Abbott, who recently appeared on the Rusell Howard hour on SKY 1 blubbing about the nasty abuse she got for being a total waste of skin. You honestly couldn't make it up. [Link] "It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"
Alert a moderator to this post

dannyh

wherever I lay my hat....... 03 Oct 17 10.56am

I've read with interest the last 10 pages or so, and far from the left being the next government elect, I think it's followers are slowly realising that actually their party (much like the Tory's they despise) is full of amoral b******s, with nothing but self interest at heart.

Politics eh

Anyhow see this mouth piece is gobbing off again. But its OK she called someone a liar "but was only poking fun"

Horrible horrible woman soon to be moaning no doubt about nasty people being horrible to her, much like the maligned Diane Abbott, who recently appeared on the Rusell Howard hour on SKY 1 blubbing about the nasty abuse she got for being a total waste of skin.

You honestly couldn't make it up.

[Link]

"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 03 Oct 17 11.06am
She's proper scum isn't she? I'm normally pretty ambivalent about the royals, but this gave me the screaming hump - I almost went on Twitter to vent my spleen at her, but decided to deny her the attention. Labour say she's entitled to her opinion. Of course she is, but she's not entitled to slander - this isn't an opinion, it's spouting cr@p as fact. And apparently "everyone knows" Prince Philip has affairs - well I must have missed that newsflash, too, but I'm sure they'd be informing a no-mark like her as a priority. Besides, does she really think that the co-pilot of an attack helicopter "sits there going vroom vroom"? Ignorant piece of sh*t!
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 03 Oct 17 11.06am

She's proper scum isn't she? I'm normally pretty ambivalent about the royals, but this gave me the screaming hump - I almost went on Twitter to vent my spleen at her, but decided to deny her the attention.

Labour say she's entitled to her opinion. Of course she is, but she's not entitled to slander - this isn't an opinion, it's spouting cr@p as fact. And apparently "everyone knows" Prince Philip has affairs - well I must have missed that newsflash, too, but I'm sure they'd be informing a no-mark like her as a priority.

Besides, does she really think that the co-pilot of an attack helicopter "sits there going vroom vroom"? Ignorant piece of sh*t!

Alert a moderator to this post

dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 03 Oct 17 11.23am
Originally posted by npn She's proper scum isn't she? I'm normally pretty ambivalent about the royals, but this gave me the screaming hump - I almost went on Twitter to vent my spleen at her, but decided to deny her the attention. Labour say she's entitled to her opinion. Of course she is, but she's not entitled to slander - this isn't an opinion, it's spouting cr@p as fact. And apparently "everyone knows" Prince Philip has affairs - well I must have missed that newsflash, too, but I'm sure they'd be informing a no-mark like her as a priority. Besides, does she really think that the co-pilot of an attack helicopter "sits there going vroom vroom"? *Ignorant piece of sht!** Is the correct answer "It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"
Alert a moderator to this post

dannyh

wherever I lay my hat....... 03 Oct 17 11.23am

Originally posted by npn

Besides, does she really think that the co-pilot of an attack helicopter "sits there going vroom vroom"? Ignorant piece of sh*t!

Is the correct answer

"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Alert a moderator to this post

Lyons550 Shirley 03 Oct 17 2.04pm
Originally posted by nickgusset The feeling of anger against Tory party policies and their blatant disregard for ordinary people trying to scrape a living and afford a decent place to live is high. Perhaps these people are relatives of those that have died at the hands of Tory cuts. Perhaps some are doctors or nurses fed up with what is happening with the NHS. Hahahahahah...that attempt to deflect made me burst out laughing Nick...that was excellent have you thought of entering politics? The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World
Alert a moderator to this post

Lyons550

Shirley 03 Oct 17 2.04pm

Originally posted by nickgusset

The feeling of anger against Tory party policies and their blatant disregard for ordinary people trying to scrape a living and afford a decent place to live is high.

Perhaps these people are relatives of those that have died at the hands of Tory cuts. Perhaps some are doctors or nurses fed up with what is happening with the NHS.

Hahahahahah...that attempt to deflect made me burst out laughing Nick...that was excellent have you thought of entering politics?

The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert a moderator to this post

Lyons550 Shirley 03 Oct 17 2.09pm
Originally posted by serial thriller I'm not pro-EU Stirling by any means. I'm just pointing out that arguing for sovereignty against the EU and refusing to see how un-democratic our political system is ridiculous. You say that the second chamber shouldn't be elected as it would make it more political. Well how can passing laws not be a political act? How could you have a non-political legislator, when the whole point of politics in a liberal democracy is to propose and enact laws? As for our national debt. Before 2008, it stood at around half a trillion. Already an eyewatering figure, but since then it's up to over £1.8 trillion. So what has our government been spending these loans on? Well it evidently isn't the public, as welfare, schools, hospitals and local authority has seen crippling, devastating cuts to their budgets. So where did the money go? Well, £500 billion went on our initial bailout of the banks, which now continue to receive government subsidies whilst paying little or no tax. Other private companies are also reaping in huge government subsidies, from rail to energy, despite their services often being shoddy at best. Whilst 99% of the country are experiencing the effects of austerity, of a shrinking of the public economy, the elites are being bankrolled despite causing one of the biggest economic crashes in modern times. The EU are one of the biggest culprits of this kind of cronyist reverse-Robin Hood policy, but our own government is more than happy to follow along. Lloyds has now been released back into the wild with the tax payer getting more than was used to support it back...that aside, you, Stirling and davenotamonkey should be applauded for the debating on this thread...well done lads...all very interesting and some good / valid points from both sides. Edited by Lyons550 (03 Oct 2017 2.15pm) The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World
Alert a moderator to this post

Lyons550

Shirley 03 Oct 17 2.09pm

Originally posted by serial thriller

I'm not pro-EU Stirling by any means. I'm just pointing out that arguing for sovereignty against the EU and refusing to see how un-democratic our political system is ridiculous.

As for our national debt. Before 2008, it stood at around half a trillion. Already an eyewatering figure, but since then it's up to over £1.8 trillion.

So what has our government been spending these loans on? Well it evidently isn't the public, as welfare, schools, hospitals and local authority has seen crippling, devastating cuts to their budgets. So where did the money go? Well, £500 billion went on our initial bailout of the banks, which now continue to receive government subsidies whilst paying little or no tax. Other private companies are also reaping in huge government subsidies, from rail to energy, despite their services often being shoddy at best.

Lloyds has now been released back into the wild with the tax payer getting more than was used to support it back...that aside, you, Stirling and davenotamonkey should be applauded for the debating on this thread...well done lads...all very interesting and some good / valid points from both sides.

Edited by Lyons550 (03 Oct 2017 2.15pm)

The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 03 Oct 17 6.22pm
An interesting piece on the conference. [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 03 Oct 17 6.22pm

An interesting piece on the conference.

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 28 of 30 < 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Labour party conference

Site Map

Sponsors