Letterman and Cameron

[Wolfshade]

It is noteworthy that we have previously had posts about the reaction to Ronmey, and questions regarding how Obama is percieved in the Uk as a contrast to in the US. So the question is what is the reaction to seeing David Cameron on Letterman.
The BBC interviewed a number of people who mentioned that they found him very intelligent but likeable and that he spoke very well.

As an aside I do find it interesting that he was described as intelligent but likeable as if the two are usually mutally exclusive.

[Deadlift]

As an aside I do find it interesting that he was described as intelligent but likeable as if the two are usually mutally exclusive.

Could be why I have quite a few friends, due to being thick as a brick.

But Dave is actually quite a charming man and don't forget the yanks love a British accent. At the end of the day he is in politics and so should be a good orator and able to win people over quite easily. Being interviewed on a show like Letterman, where quite frankly most hosts are kissing arse should be Dave's cup of tea. Lettermans not exactly Paxman is he ?

[DrLove42]

That and we as Brits tend to take a liking to Obama as a person.

But according to our Us bretheren hes not so popular if he has power over you. Sound familiar.

Camerons just a smarmy, slimy ****.

[Wolfshade]

No, as an observer has said there are no tough american interviews.

Though there is a little backlash as it is percieved that British actors are taking jobs from american ones, in reference to the british invasion of the emmys,

[Wildeybeast]

TBF, Cameron is actually quite a good a PM. His main weakness is that he seems utterly incapable of posting anyone even halfway competent to his cabinet. He seems to have recruited them all from the bungling oaf academy. Every time the furore over one of them doing something catastrophically stupid at the worst possible time (see Andrew Mitchell for the present example) dies down, another one bungles in spectacular fashion.

[Mr Mystery]

He's a horrible bit of work.

Still, seems his days in No 10 appear numbered. Deep, hurtful cuts and PRESTO! Double Dip recession, with Tax cuts for his rich chums. Butthole.

[Deadlift]

He's a horrible bit of work.

Still, seems his days in No 10 appear numbered. Deep, hurtful cuts and PRESTO! Double Dip recession, with Tax cuts for his rich chums. Butthole.

Dont worry once Boris is done with being mayor of London, I am sure he will set his sights on PM.

In all his splender "The excitement is growing so much I think the Geiger counter of Olympo-mania is going to go zoink off the scale".
On the forthcoming London Olympic Games. Daily Telegraph, 27 July 2012.

[wittdooley]

Dammit. I came looking for discussion about a new James Cameron movie.

[Wolfshade]

I watched the interview last night and it does seem that Letterman has his wn agenda and uses such interviews to highlight such things. Quite sutbly done, but still.

I think the one thing to remember is that had not DC inherited such a huge debt then there wouldn't need to be such massive spending cuts. Things could be worse, Spain needs to make savings and has 25% unemployment, Greece is going to be repossed by Germany any day now, Italy is teetering on the edge, Ireland stared into the abyss not too long ago.

It is a simple concept, you cannot spend more than you recieve. There are two basic principles (WARNING: generalistation)
The Labour Way - Provide more services but tax people more
The Conservative Way - Provide less services but tax people less

I look and I am angry at a number of things.
1 - Humanitarian aid to India - don't get me wrong I am all in favour of helping people out but why oh why are we providing aid to a country whose economy is doing a damn sight better than our own has a higher number of millionaires/per 1000 and is embarking on a solo space race.
2 - Welfare housing - again I see that it is essential, but I fear that too often people recieve it when perhaps they shouldn't. We are now seeing multi-generational-occupancy at levels akin to Victorian England, it seems strange to me that a married couple with kids will have to live in their parent's house because they can't afford an house and yet a 16 year-old single girl will be given a council house for free. Welfare should help people survive not florish. The difficulty with such things is trying to sort out the deserving and non-desrerving.
3 - When welfare pays better than minimum wage - now this just encourages people not to work.
4 - Civil Service inefficiencies - this is a great bug bear of mine, I work for a private company that is employeed in the public sector so alot of what I do is liaising with civil servants or other public bodies and the duplication, slow and inefficient way that things are carried out irks me. I recall ebing asked to review the findings of a couple of million pound project, I responded, that they were sound results, but that my company was already being paid to (and already delievering) an identical service throughout England for a fraction of that cost. The overspending on NHS IT systems and other such projects, why can this occur.

All of these are broken systems that have been inherited and unfortunately, a short term popluarist government cannot resolve them. The simple answer to the deficit is slash spending up taxes and boom problems solved, only, it isn't because, well it's not that simple (increased taxes slows growth etc...) and also that party would never be elected. If I wanted to be elected you promise more services, less taxes and you get the vote, it is unfortunate that such a view cannot continue. Successive governments have tried it and while you can prop yourself up on the economy that is fine, but when it crashes you have irresponsible spending.

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

Loathe the guy. Hate how he has treated us Disabled folks - using the news and media to drum up hate towards us as all as "workshy benefit scroungers". Only 0.5% of us are faking it, the rest are genuine. I know people fisrthand who have disabilities that genuinely prohibit them from working such as heart-conditions, cancer and physical problems - many of which including my friend with cancer has been made to search for work, and seeing how it's messed him up is really upsetting, you can se the guy is genuinely trying despite the fact he has little time left to live anyway. Not all of us have families and friends that are able to help us either.

[Wolfshade]

The trouble is that we do not know the true extent of anything, you say 0.5% media implies 95% cite your sources ancedotal evidence and personal experiance. It is very easy to drum up angry at a group because of "people who ruin it for everyone else", my wife suffers from mental disorders and cannot work, but because she was in full time education before she was diagnosed and unable to continue she has not made any NI contributions and so is unable to claim any benefits because of her being unwell, however, if she had just left school at 16 and never wqorked she could get full job seekers. It is such injustices that are a problem. Think how much better the system could be if all those who were not deserving of benefits were disallowed them, it would enable the government to reduce the welfare bill and still increase payments to those who need it. Unfortunately, such a process is too long/difficult and could potentially cost more than it could save knowing the governmental inefficiencies.

[Chris*ta]

As an aside I do find it interesting that he was described as intelligent but likeable as if the two are usually mutally exclusive.


Could be why I have quite a few friends, due to being thick as a brick.

Maybe it's just that you're an a**ehole? :p

[Chris*ta]

1 - Humanitarian aid to India - don't get me wrong I am all in favour of helping people out but why oh why are we providing aid to a country whose economy is doing a damn sight better than our own has a higher number of millionaires/per 1000 and is embarking on a solo space race.

The % of millionaires really has nothing to do with the number of poor people, or how poor they are. If anything, I'd say there's a reverse correlation.


Loathe the guy. Hate how he has treated us Disabled folks - using the news and media to drum up hate towards us as all as "workshy benefit scroungers". Only 0.5% of us are faking it, the rest are genuine. I know people fisrthand who have disabilities that genuinely prohibit them from working such as heart-conditions, cancer and physical problems - many of which including my friend with cancer has been made to search for work, and seeing how it's messed him up is really upsetting, you can se the guy is genuinely trying despite the fact he has little time left to live anyway. Not all of us have families and friends that are able to help us either.

I'm in Australia, but I've heard of someone who had to have an appointment once a year where the doctor would ask "So, have your legs grown back yet?" so he could remain on benefits. And I have a friend in a similar situation, where he sees a doctor who determines that his hemi-paralyzation hasn't miraculously reversed itself.

In my experience, the attitude of Centrelink that everyone's basically faking it to try to get benefits means that any effort you could spend on getting better/suffering less from terminal cancer (as your friend's case) is instead spent on just jumping through the appropriate hoops to convince the Government that you should get your pittance :(

[Wolfshade]

The % of millionaires really has nothing to do with the number of poor people, or how poor they are. If anything, I'd say there's a reverse correlation.
It is a statement about how they choose to redistribute the wealth. The comment about the size of the economy, certainly suggests that if they had the will they could redistribute the rich/poor divide. Certainly if they can afford a multi billion pound space program they can feed/clothe/house their own poor/homeless/starving.


I'm in Australia, but I've heard of someone who had to have an appointment once a year where the doctor would ask "So, have your legs grown back yet?" so he could remain on benefits. And I have a friend in a similar situation, where he sees a doctor who determines that his hemi-paralyzation hasn't miraculously reversed itself.
It is silly, but if you had I don't know a longer term injury such things could be cured, or if you had mental health problems they could be managed. I know a chap who was bed ridden with ME for 3 years, now, you would have no idea to look at him, he has an all consuming job, but he manages it to function. Now certainly it seems silly having to check to see if your legs aren't their but big government has one rule and cannot function on a case by case basis


In my experience, the attitude of Centrelink that everyone's basically faking it to try to get benefits means that any effort you could spend on getting better/suffering less from terminal cancer (as your friend's case) is instead spent on just jumping through the appropriate hoops to convince the Government that you should get your pittance :(
This goes back to my big government point, you have two stand points, assume people do not qualify for aide and have them prove it otherwise or assume people do qualify for aide and prove it otherwise. Certainly, it is easier on the system to have the individual prove that they qualify rather than have the governement prove that they don't. I do not agree with this but unfortunatley this is what we are stuck with :( You also then need to factor in perception bias so the person who makes the judgement sees 100 people, 99 are genuine and 1 is a faker and they remember the 1 more than the 99 and that logdes in their mind and they see it happening more and mroe, not necessarily that it is but the mind loves patterns and repetitions so in the end of the week they think they've seen loads of fakers when proportioanlly they might not have (those figures are made up btw).
Similiarly, it is like how you buy a car that you very rarely see on the road then after you have brought it you see them popping up everywhere.

[Chris*ta]

It is a statement about how they choose to redistribute the wealth. The comment about the size of the economy, certainly suggests that if they had the will they could redistribute the rich/poor divide. Certainly if they can afford a multi billion pound space program they can feed/clothe/house their own poor/homeless/starving.

I'll agree with you on the space programme, but the distribution of wealth is not something that the government can control. Well, without becoming a totalitarian regime, anyway.

[Chris*ta]

It is silly, but if you had I don't know a longer term injury such things could be cured, or if you had mental health problems they could be managed. I know a chap who was bed ridden with ME for 3 years, now, you would have no idea to look at him, he has an all consuming job, but he manages it to function. Now certainly it seems silly having to check to see if your legs aren't their but big government has one rule and cannot function on a case by case basis


This goes back to my big government point, you have two stand points, assume people do not qualify for aide and have them prove it otherwise or assume people do qualify for aide and prove it otherwise. Certainly, it is easier on the system to have the individual prove that they qualify rather than have the governement prove that they don't. I do not agree with this but unfortunatley this is what we are stuck with :( You also then need to factor in perception bias so the person who makes the judgement sees 100 people, 99 are genuine and 1 is a faker and they remember the 1 more than the 99 and that logdes in their mind and they see it happening more and mroe, not necessarily that it is but the mind loves patterns and repetitions so in the end of the week they think they've seen loads of fakers when proportioanlly they might not have (those figures are made up btw).
Similiarly, it is like how you buy a car that you very rarely see on the road then after you have brought it you see them popping up everywhere.

My complaint is not against the individuals who work for Centrelink -- most seem nice and try to be helpful -- but the way the system is set up/the policies that govern the system. Which are set up to make it as difficult as possible to get/keep payments. And not in a sensible, stopping fraud way, in an excluding the needy who don't fit into the nice definitions the system has/can't make the effort to play ball.

[Wolfshade]

90% tax rate on those earning about X.

That is how to remove the dissparity.

But seriously, most nations have a staggard tax rate based on income, so of your earnings A - B are tax free, B - C are taxed at X%, C - D taxed at Y% and D+ at Z%

[Wolfshade]

My complaint is not against the individuals who work for Centrelink -- most seem nice and try to be helpful -- but the way the system is set up/the policies that govern the system. Which are set up to make it as difficult as possible to get/keep payments. And not in a sensible, stopping fraud way, in an excluding the needy who don't fit into the nice definitions the system has/can't make the effort to play ball.
Oh no I didn't take it that that was your issue.

[Deadlift]

Maybe it's just that you're an a**ehole? :p

I do my best, but as you well know, it takes one to know one :p :p

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

I'm in Australia, but I've heard of someone who had to have an appointment once a year where the doctor would ask "So, have your legs grown back yet?" so he could remain on benefits. And I have a friend in a similar situation, where he sees a doctor who determines that his hemi-paralyzation hasn't miraculously reversed itself.

In my experience, the attitude of Centrelink that everyone's basically faking it to try to get benefits means that any effort you could spend on getting better/suffering less from terminal cancer (as your friend's case) is instead spent on just jumping through the appropriate hoops to convince the Government that you should get your pittance :(

Yeah, those sort of things don't seem that uncommon - I find it really heartbreaking. I guess I'm lucky I was able to come off benefits and start doing voluntary work, which I'm actually quite enjoying plus I am lucky to have supportive parents that know it will take me time before I am able to look for (paying) work, of course I'm hoping my minis business will help somewhat too. Sadly, not all folks have support like I do and get screwed over.:(

[Chris*ta]

I do my best, but as you well know, it takes one to know one :p :p

I know you are, but what am I? :rolleyes:

[Deadlift]

I know you are, but what am I? :rolleyes:

No returns :D

[Mr Mystery]

He's just trotting out the same old Tory nastiness.

Economy in trouble (overstated as it is)??

KICK THE POOR!

Housing in crisis??

KICK THE POOR!

Take Police Pensions. Fair enough, there is an argument that it's overly generous. But why apply a cut retrospectively? That is patently not fair on those who have planned their career based on it. Cut it for new starters by all means.

They have done nothing but forward their own political agenda yet again.

And remember folks, the banks shafted the global economy, governments less so.

[Psychosplodge]

I look and I am angry at a number of things.
1 - Humanitarian aid to India - don't get me wrong I am all in favour of helping people out but why oh why are we providing aid to a country whose economy is doing a damn sight better than our own has a higher number of millionaires/per 1000 and is embarking on a solo space race.
2 - Welfare housing - again I see that it is essential, but I fear that too often people recieve it when perhaps they shouldn't. We are now seeing multi-generational-occupancy at levels akin to Victorian England, it seems strange to me that a married couple with kids will have to live in their parent's house because they can't afford an house and yet a 16 year-old single girl will be given a council house for free. Welfare should help people survive not florish. The difficulty with such things is trying to sort out the deserving and non-desrerving.
3 - When welfare pays better than minimum wage - now this just encourages people not to work.
4 - Civil Service inefficiencies - this is a great bug bear of mine, I work for a private company that is employeed in the public sector so alot of what I do is liaising with civil servants or other public bodies and the duplication, slow and inefficient way that things are carried out irks me. I recall ebing asked to review the findings of a couple of million pound project, I responded, that they were sound results, but that my company was already being paid to (and already delievering) an identical service throughout England for a fraction of that cost. The overspending on NHS IT systems and other such projects, why can this occur.

All of these are broken systems that have been inherited and unfortunately, a short term popluarist government cannot resolve them. The simple answer to the deficit is slash spending up taxes and boom problems solved, only, it isn't because, well it's not that simple (increased taxes slows growth etc...) and also that party would never be elected. If I wanted to be elected you promise more services, less taxes and you get the vote, it is unfortunate that such a view cannot continue. Successive governments have tried it and while you can prop yourself up on the economy that is fine, but when it crashes you have irresponsible spending.
pretty much agree, I'd reclassify it as Tories look after the rich and Labour buys peoples votes with us poor suckers who work for a living stuck in the middle.
However the woman they've put in to look at the aid budget seems to have her head screwed on, no more £3.5million lightbulbs for african despots...


Loathe the guy. Hate how he has treated us Disabled folks - using the news and media to drum up hate towards us as all as "workshy benefit scroungers". Only 0.5% of us are faking it, the rest are genuine. I know people fisrthand who have disabilities that genuinely prohibit them from working such as heart-conditions, cancer and physical problems - many of which including my friend with cancer has been made to search for work, and seeing how it's messed him up is really upsetting, you can se the guy is genuinely trying despite the fact he has little time left to live anyway. Not all of us have families and friends that are able to help us either.

I watch the better half jump through these hoops every 3-6 months, and did you know Labour implemented the atos scheme? the tories have failed in not scrapping it and putting something fairer in place.


The trouble is that we do not know the true extent of anything, you say 0.5% media implies 95% cite your sources ancedotal evidence and personal experiance. It is very easy to drum up angry at a group because of "people who ruin it for everyone else", my wife suffers from mental disorders and cannot work, but because she was in full time education before she was diagnosed and unable to continue she has not made any NI contributions and so is unable to claim any benefits because of her being unwell, however, if she had just left school at 16 and never wqorked she could get full job seekers. It is such injustices that are a problem. Think how much better the system could be if all those who were not deserving of benefits were disallowed them, it would enable the government to reduce the welfare bill and still increase payments to those who need it. Unfortunately, such a process is too long/difficult and could potentially cost more than it could save knowing the governmental inefficiencies.
Yeah the moneys there, but it's more important to know how to play the system rather than be in need...


He's just trotting out the same old Tory nastiness.

Economy in trouble (overstated as it is)??

KICK THE POOR!

Housing in crisis??

KICK THE POOR!

Take Police Pensions. Fair enough, there is an argument that it's overly generous. But why apply a cut retrospectively? That is patently not fair on those who have planned their career based on it. Cut it for new starters by all means.

They have done nothing but forward their own political agenda yet again.

And remember folks, the banks shafted the global economy, governments less so.

They Economy is suffering both from the banking mass, and the massive debts run up with no way to pay them by the government