British Politics Thread.

[Mr Mystery]

Actually this is a win win election.

If Conservatives get in, we can slay the UKIP dragon with the EU referendum and sort out EVEL.

If Labour get in, it will be on the back of the SNP. The SNP are a one trick pony, similar to the UKIP but far more insular. They ONLY want to manoeuvre to such a point they get another referendum. If they get it, they will leave the UK.

If the SNP don't get their referendum, they will make such a hash of things and will show Milliband to be so ineffectual that English voters are bound to push for electoral reform to prevent 1-trick parties holding the majority of the UK to ransom. Or actually push for meaningful English devolution.

If Scotland leaves the UK, the rest of us in the rump, will have a conservative government for a long time. Also, I suspect that the chance of a leave the EU referendum will be higher without the Scottish voters.

The amusing thing will be independent Scotland won't be an EU member because the EU have told them so. The rump UK won't be an EU member because the Jock voters won't get a say.

Seems win win to me, just depends how many years of economic woe and class warfare dressed up as fairness we get, I just hope they don't scare all enterprise away.

I'm kind of hoping that whatever happens, UKIP get *no* seats at all, and we still get an EU Referendum.

With 'In' currently polling 10% higher, a UKIP free Parliament will see them shattered as a party.

Also, SNP are hardly a one trick pony dude. Despite Scotland having had its say on Independence, they're still going great guns - kind of suggests they're doing something else very right.

[Wildeybeast]

Polling day is here and I still have no idea who I'm voting for. I agree with the Tory plan for the economy and I hold conservative values (emphasis on the small c) but as a teacher I'm not overly keen on the idea of them continuing to shaft the education system. Lib Dems seem to have the best policies on education, but how likely are they to be in a coalition? To further muddy the water, I'm in a Conservative safe seat (the current incumbent took 50% of the vote last time, twice as many votes as the runner up), so my vote is largely academic. Given the area, UKIP may put up a decent showing, though I doubt it will be anywhere near enough to trouble the Conservatives. Do I need to vote Conservative just to make sure Farrage chums don't get in?
I might just go and spoil my paper. Any last minute suggestions on who I should vote for?

[Denzark]

Also, SNP are hardly a one trick pony dude. Despite Scotland having had its say on Independence, they're still going great guns - kind of suggests they're doing something else very right.

I wouldn't deny they are massively clever in how they do business and how they have come from a loss of their primary aim (failed referendum) to being on the verge of representing every seat in Scotland. But FPTP means that they will have a disproportionate share of MPs, which in turn will have disproportionate influence propping up Miliband.

Their politicking has been par excellence.

However their policies are whack - they blame Westminster for problems with NHS Scotland - a devolved issue - and their economic estimates on oil revenue have already been proven to be woefully out.

In short, if they get another neverendum, it will be like this. Independence. No entry to Europe at least not immediately and possibly never because of Spain vetoing to prevent Catalan doing similar. Depending on what still trickles North from England - I anticipate a parachute payment like when a Premier league team is relegated - they will keep their chins up until the first squeeze on oil prices.

After that it starts. If the 'rump' UK government gives over too much money, that government will fall at next election as English voters will want to play hard ball. Then Scottish unionists will start trumpeting for another Neverendum to get back in the Union, as Scotland turns into an economic quagmire.

[Mr Mystery]

Polling day is here and I still have no idea who I'm voting for. I agree with the Tory plan for the economy and I hold conservative values (emphasis on the small c) but as a teacher I'm not overly keen on the idea of them continuing to shaft the education system. Lib Dems seem to have the best policies on education, but how likely are they to be in a coalition? To further muddy the water, I'm in a Conservative safe seat (the current incumbent took 50% of the vote last time, twice as many votes as the runner up), so my vote is largely academic. Given the area, UKIP may put up a decent showing, though I doubt it will be anywhere near enough to trouble the Conservatives. Do I need to vote Conservative just to make sure Farrage chums don't get in?
I might just go and spoil my paper. Any last minute suggestions on who I should vote for?

Whichever you think is the lesser of the varying evils, really.

I was all set to vote Tory to keep UKIP out, except UKIP aren't as popular as I feared in T Wells. So back to Labour for me.

- - - Updated - - -


I wouldn't deny they are massively clever in how they do business and how they have come from a loss of their primary aim (failed referendum) to being on the verge of representing every seat in Scotland. But FPTP means that they will have a disproportionate share of MPs, which in turn will have disproportionate influence propping up Miliband.

Their politicking has been par excellence.

However their policies are whack - they blame Westminster for problems with NHS Scotland - a devolved issue - and their economic estimates on oil revenue have already been proven to be woefully out.

In short, if they get another neverendum, it will be like this. Independence. No entry to Europe at least not immediately and possibly never because of Spain vetoing to prevent Catalan doing similar. Depending on what still trickles North from England - I anticipate a parachute payment like when a Premier league team is relegated - they will keep their chins up until the first squeeze on oil prices.

After that it starts. If the 'rump' UK government gives over too much money, that government will fall at next election as English voters will want to play hard ball. Then Scottish unionists will start trumpeting for another Neverendum to get back in the Union, as Scotland turns into an economic quagmire.

No referendum is ever failed.

When the SNP came to power, it was on the promise of a referendum. And they delivered.

My bet would be they're riding the success of the promises a panicked Westminster made in the aftermath. Be careful what you promise after all!

[Denzark]

Polling day is here and I still have no idea who I'm voting for. I agree with the Tory plan for the economy and I hold conservative values (emphasis on the small c) but as a teacher I'm not overly keen on the idea of them continuing to shaft the education system. Lib Dems seem to have the best policies on education, but how likely are they to be in a coalition? To further muddy the water, I'm in a Conservative safe seat (the current incumbent took 50% of the vote last time, twice as many votes as the runner up), so my vote is largely academic. Given the area, UKIP may put up a decent showing, though I doubt it will be anywhere near enough to trouble the Conservatives. Do I need to vote Conservative just to make sure Farrage chums don't get in?
I might just go and spoil my paper. Any last minute suggestions on who I should vote for?

I would suggest:

1. Don't vote to keep somebody out - vote because the candidate you want to represent you is the best one.

2. Vote with your head not your heart.


With regard to your being a teacher, so is Mrs Denzark. Whilst she was a virulent despiser of the Gove I don't think she is going to vote for anyone other than Conservative because irrespective of one issue matters (ie education) the overarching security (not just guns and stuff security - I mean general well being) of the country is underpinned by money and even with a million clever statistics or infographics about how the coalition has or hasn't done this, it is clear from un-skewable sources - ie letters from bona fide business leaders and gurus - that the business world as a whole fears the inability of Labour to manage our money in a manner commensurate with government.

- - - Updated - - -





No referendum is ever failed.

When the SNP came to power, it was on the promise of a referendum. And they delivered.

My bet would be they're riding the success of the promises a panicked Westminster made in the aftermath. Be careful what you promise after all!

Are you suggesting they actually wanted devo max and used the referendum to get it?

Mmm. Yes as a concept and exercise of democracy, no referendum is ever a failure. But the SNP campaigned for a result in that referendum, sort of the point really - not just an exercise in giving Scotland some extra democracy points - but to remove themselves from the Union. And that was a neggers cheggers for them.

[Mr Mystery]

No, I'm saying SNP have delivered what they promised to their electorate.

Today should be interesting. And once more for the record - I really hope UKIP are in for a shock series of defeats.

Side note - friend of mine is one of these bizarre 'if I don't vote = revolution' types.....

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

I have voted!

[Mr Mystery]

Me too.

Just had someone tell me on my Facebook that because he refuses to vote, everything bad that happens to him ever is the fault of those who do.

I tell you, if we could generate power from sense of entitlement, I may have finally found a use for him.

[Psychosplodge]

Excellent summary of the UK election for the benefit of those who don't know anything about anyone or anything involved. (http://gawker.com/meet-the-wankers-who-want-to-be-britain-s-prime-ministe-1702043423)

Plus it made me laugh.

I prefer a less clickbaity one I found on reddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/AskUK/comments/34h8gy/can_someone_explain_the_upcoming_elections_to/)



Firstly, we aren't directly electing the Prime Minister. The system is that we elect a Member of Parliament to represent our local area (called a constituency). This can be a large constituency in a rural area (Ross, Skye and Lochaber) or a small densely populated one (Islington North). Each candidate for a constituency can be a member of a political party, or they can be an independent candidate.

In our system of first past the post voting (which a lot of people think is broken but there you go) the candidate with the most votes gets the seat in the House of Commons. The FPTP system means that a candidate with a low number of overall votes can still win - for example in the 2005 election the Labour party took 57% of the seats, with only 36% of the vote.

Once the votes have been counted and we know which MPs have which seats (and which parties the MPs belong to) we can work out which party overall has the majority of seats in the house of Commons (I'll come onto the House of Lords later). The party with the majority of seats (I.E. one party with over 50%) is asked by Her Majesty the Queen to form a Government. These days the Queen has no choice in who she asks because we have a constitutional Monarchy, but it's officially Her Government.

The leader of the party with a majority takes the Prime Minister's job - they are essentially in charge of the country, but they don't have a separate branch of government that they control like the President and the Executive Branch in the USA.

In cases (such as the last parliament and most likely this one) where an absolute majority has not been reached, parties may form coalitions in order to gain the most seats overall - the coalition of two or more parties can be used to count towards the majority.

In cases where no coalition has been formed and no majority is present the largest minority party may still be asked to form a government however the system quickly becomes unworkable because there would be too much conflict and discussion on the legislation being tabled (in the UK tabling a motion means discussing it, unlike in the US where it means shelving it and not proceeding with it) and not enough aye votes would be passed to move legislation on in a timely manner.

When a majority government is not formed the procedure would likely be to have another general election as soon as possible, to hope that a majority government can be formed out of that one. Although she has never used this power before, the Queen could theoretically refuse to ask any minority party to form a government, triggering another general election without a government being formed, but if this happens it may cause a constitutional crisis which is a Bad Thing.

The other chamber in the Houses of Parliament is the House of Lords. The members of this chamber are men and women who have been given peerages by the Queen (on the orders of the government though) which entitle them to sit in the Lords. These people can be anything from prominent industrialists (Lord Sugar) to ex-senior politicians (Lord Prescott) etc. Because the Lords hold their seats for life (in theory, they may be removed if they are involved in a major scandal and have their peerages removed) they are supposed to be the "long term view" of the country. Because they are not elected they have no powers to block legislation permanently, all they can do is vote to pass a piece of legislation or return it to the House of Commons for another vote. A 2/3rds majority is then needed in the House of Commons to pass the returned legislation without the further involvement of the Lords - they therefore act as a checking system to make sure that controversial legislation has been thoroughly debated and is agreed upon by the vast majority of MPs.

The three currently largest parties in the government just gone (I'm saying this in this way because officially the last government has been dissolved by the Queen (on a schedule of every 5 years which was set by the last government rather than the government choosing when to call an election - the Queen has no say in when it gets dissolved) and we don't yet know which parties will be the largest in the next government as the election hasn't yet happened) were the Conservative Party, the Labour Party, and the Liberal Democrats.

The Conservative party and the Labour party have been the largest two parties since the 1920s when Labour overtook the Liberal (as it then was) party. The leader of the Conservative Party is David Cameron, and the leader of the Labour Party is currently Ed Milliband. Tony Blair was the leader of the Labour Party from 1994 to 2007, and was Prime Minister from 1997 until 2007. The Liberal Democrat's leader is Nick Clegg, who served as the Deputy Prime Minister in the last government as the government was formed of a coalition of the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats.

In the British system the second largest party (traditionally either the Conservatives or Labour) is referred to as the "opposition" and the leader of that party is the "leader of the opposition" - this essentially means that the opposition party forms a "shadow cabinet" which will draft policy and will watch as much as they can of what their counterparts in the actual cabinet are doing. The leader of the opposition also has a chance to have an "exchange of views" with the Prime Minister once a week at "Prime Minister's Questions" - a weekly even where MPs can ask the PM about various issues that affect their constituency or general policy questions. These events are televised and there are loads on youtube as they can be quite fun at times, especially when you get two good leaders going head to head.

Political outlook wise, the Conservative party can be described as slightly right of (our) centre, and the Labour party can be described as slightly left of centre. Bear in mind though that our centre is well to the left of the US centre.

Views wise, right now the main focus of the major parties is the economy and it's continued recovery. Labour wish to improve the economy by making slight cuts in expenditure and by borrowing some money to work on stimulating the economy, whereas the Conservatives wish to make much deeper cuts and borrow no money at all whilst spending money to work on stimulating the economy. And as usual both sides accuse the other of messing up the economy, the Conservatives keep going on about how Labour left them a complete mess to clear up and Labour keep saying the Conservatives are cutting everything back too far.

The other differences come in things like membership of the EU - the Conservatives have promised to have a referendum (national vote) on whether we stay in the EU or whether we leave it. Labour have said they will not have such a referendum, but both sides agree that our position in the EU needs to be renegotiated.

The other major difference is taxes - there are some differences in how the parties want to deal with the tax rate, with Labour accusing the Conservatives of giving tax breaks to their rich mates (the Conservative party is seen as more upper class whereas Labour was formed by and is still largely controlled by trade unions) whilst the Conservative view is that Labour is making the richest few pay more than their fair share.

The most major minor issue is immigration - both Labour and the Conservatives are committed to cutting the number of immigrants this country gets from outside the EU (we can't restrict intra-EU movement) but both sides are accusing the other of not meeting the targets they set when they were both in power.

- - - Updated - - -


Polling day is here and I still have no idea who I'm voting for. I agree with the Tory plan for the economy and I hold conservative values (emphasis on the small c) but as a teacher I'm not overly keen on the idea of them continuing to shaft the education system. Lib Dems seem to have the best policies on education, but how likely are they to be in a coalition? To further muddy the water, I'm in a Conservative safe seat (the current incumbent took 50% of the vote last time, twice as many votes as the runner up), so my vote is largely academic. Given the area, UKIP may put up a decent showing, though I doubt it will be anywhere near enough to trouble the Conservatives. Do I need to vote Conservative just to make sure Farrage chums don't get in?
I might just go and spoil my paper. Any last minute suggestions on who I should vote for?

I've spoilt my ballet for years because I live in a safe labour seat with a huge majority. This time I'm trying to decide who is most likely to unseat the sitting MP (yeah I know not likely but I do not want labour back in.)

[Mr Mystery]

You spoilt your ballet?

Seems a shame - why not just take up Tap instead? :p

[Psychosplodge]

Not this year. I haven't been yet. But I still don't know where my cross is going - only where it definitely isn't.

- - - Updated - - -

Seen a good one on reddit,

A "How did the greens make the 3 policies in their manifesto stretch to 40 pages?"

B "The rest is a list of everything they want to ban"

[Al Shut]

Just had someone tell me on my Facebook that because he refuses to vote, everything bad that happens to him ever is the fault of those who do.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

Since the effect of voting is practically guaranteed to be purely symbolic you all might well skip the whole tactical voting keep somebody out of parliament thing and vote for whatever policies you support the most and/or whomever you support most personally.

If someone wins your constituency by one vote I'll come over and bake you a cake.

[Mr Mystery]

It's been almost as near as one vote in some areas before....

I still remain in favour of electoral reform. I feel we need to move away from FPTP and onto proportional representation.

No form is ideal of course, but I consider FPTP to have the most flaws - YMMV!

[Psychosplodge]

I think its the least worst option when you put it against the alternatives. PR means we'd be stuck with permanent coalitions and nobody would ever get anything they voted for cause you'd never know who was actually going to form the government, and it gives disproportional power to small fringe groups that want their niche project backing in return for not collapsing the government.

[Mr Mystery]

I disagree on that one.

FPTP leads to weird, weird stuff.

I don't fear coalition governments - I grew up in a world of Tory and then Labour Majority, where following a quick 'three line whip' pretty much whatever they wanted, happened.

Overall, I'd love a radical overhaul and an end to party politics, which I see as inherently childish. Why can't we have say, a socialist education minister, but a more fiscally conservative chancellor? When your Government is all one thing and none of the other, all you get is ideology over leadership and sanity.

[Psychosplodge]

It generally leads to a reasonably stable government.
We could always do the Belgian thing and take a year off from having a government.

[Mr Mystery]

They did that? Sounds interesting!

I just feel FPTP leads to lazy campaigning, and things being too targeted.

I mean, I live in a Tory safe seat, so they don't really campaign that much - but to be fair, despite believing in holistic remedies and that, our MP is really quite effective. He actively helped my local pub achieve 'Community Asset' status, so I'll be forever grateful for that.

But....I truly baulk at the thought of a 'safe seat'. They just seem inherently undemocratic to my mind, as those who don't feel affinity to the 'safe' party could be said to have their vote eroded. At least PR helps to mitigate that somewhat.

So yeah - FPTP leads to lazy politicians. I'm lucky enough to have a competent MP - many don't!

[Psychosplodge]

I think it was them, they couldn't form a coalition so the country kind of just ran its self for a while.
I think it might be an idea to only allow an MP to serve one or two terms in a set constituancy so people don't get into voting for sitting MP

[Mr Mystery]

Possible, but then, if as in my case you have a competent MP, why ditch them?

Right person for the right job.

I think it really is party politics that irritate me. You want someone with teaching experience heading up the Dept for Education (and no Mr Gove, you going to school many decades ago doesn't really count). NHS and stuff? Someone with a bit of compassion. Economy? Someone with a proven track record and relevant qualifications.

Surely we can't go on with an 'all or nothing' approach? Fiscal prudence does not need to go hand in hand with the wholesale slaughter of public sector workers for instance.

[Psychosplodge]

idk of a win-win solution. I certainly don't believe PR is a viable answer.

I just know I feel personally let down by my MP. He wrote to everyone of my age and similar approaching university age, outlining his opposition to any tuition fees at all. He was vocally against them in the media. You know how he voted when the time came? Toed the party line.
Yeah maybe a fifteen year old grudge is excessive, but I certainly will never trust him again.

[Mr Mystery]

Hell no, carry said grudge.

That's one of the things I will always hold against Labour - the end of free University.

That was the day the post-war generation were blatant in their ambition to pull the ladder up after them. I nearly punched someone who said 'why should I pay for your Uni'.....BECAUSE SOMEBODY PAID FOR YOURS, YOU SELFISH SOD.

[Psychosplodge]

After that the fees were only going one way it was inevitable. Labour being the party to introduce fees is against everything I thought they stood for.

[Mr Mystery]

Indeed.

Sure, some of the more frivolous courses should be paid for out your own pocket. But stuff useful and essential to the country (Doctors, Nursing, Teaching etc) should always be free. Those career paths aren't for everyone - so there should be absolutely no barrier to those with the will to do them.

[Denzark]

I concur to some degree MM - the government should pay for people (such as those you called) who give service to the state - maybe 1 year return of service for each year of the course?

But anything without a benefit to the state is a luxury that the state shouldn't pay for - bear in mind that 18 (A-level) is quite a long time to be in education and is probably a reasonable point to finish free universal education.

On the subject of tuition fees - is it not the case that what the government did was lift a restriction on universities charging - and the up to £9k fee is a decision of each university?

[Mr Mystery]

Issue is, Univsrsity leads to better employment prospects, and in theory a citizen of greater tax worth going forward. So how we measure 'worth it' courses all gets a bit hazy.

But locking the less advantaged out entirely is just counter productive. Get social mobility going. I'm all for elitism in schools, but we need a meritocracy for the entry system, and not the old boys club.

[CoffeeGrunt]

I discovered today how awkward it is voting for the first time. You'd think that, being something we value as a country, we'd get taught how the government works, how voting works, etc, but I realised that no-one had ever told me how it works until today.

So I ended up registering for a postal vote, missing the deadline, got told I didn't actually need the card to vote, searched up my local polling booth, got there and was told it was the wrong one, got to the right one, and found out I was marked absent because I was a postal voter, and that I'd need the postal ballot in order to vote.

Said ballot was on my desk because I thought I'd not need it, and it was 6:40, I was a 30 minute cycle ride away, and the place closes at 7:00PM.

Given my apathy for the vote I just went home and felt grumpy and irritated for a bit. Seriously, I remember endless "Citizenship" lessons about not carrying knives or doing drugs, but hell if they taught you the one most important aspect of being a Citizen...

[Al Shut]

How odd, I thought I read that polls close at 10, at least that's how long I have to wait for proper election coverage that isn't about dogs or strange polling stations.

[Mr Mystery]

Polling Stations should still be open until 22:00......

[The_Gonk]

I discovered today how awkward it is voting for the first time. You'd think that, being something we value as a country, we'd get taught how the government works, how voting works, etc, but I realised that no-one had ever told me how it works until today.

So I ended up registering for a postal vote, missing the deadline, got told I didn't actually need the card to vote, searched up my local polling booth, got there and was told it was the wrong one, got to the right one, and found out I was marked absent because I was a postal voter, and that I'd need the postal ballot in order to vote.

Said ballot was on my desk because I thought I'd not need it, and it was 6:40, I was a 30 minute cycle ride away, and the place closes at 7:00PM.

Given my apathy for the vote I just went home and felt grumpy and irritated for a bit. Seriously, I remember endless "Citizenship" lessons about not carrying knives or doing drugs, but hell if they taught you the one most important aspect of being a Citizen...

They opened at 7AM, which may explain your confusion. They close at 10.

[Wildeybeast]

Decided I was voting Conservative for the locals as he's pretty decent and was going to spoil my ballot for the general. Then I got there and there was a UKIP guy outside the polling station which made me irrationally angry and I ended up voting conservative to make sure he didn't get anywhere near power. My local MP has done all right and I'm convinced Tories have the best economic plan, so I'm not too upset about having to do it.

[Mr Mystery]

One hour and eighteen minutes left at time of typing.....

[Wildeybeast]

And then at least another 8 before we have any sort of clarity as to who has won (if we get that at all). My little sister chumped up and voted for the wrong party. She got confused when she couldn't find David Cameron's name on the ballot paper and just picked one at random (Lib Dems it turns out). I'm beginning to wonder whether we really are related.

[Mr Mystery]

Could have gone worse in terms of 'pick at random'

[Wildeybeast]

That's what we said. She didn't even know which party Cameron was, so that was of no help. I could blame it on a poor education, but her BF explained it to her before they went in to vote and she still managed to mess it up.

[Kirsten]

well the exit polls look terrible

[Psychosplodge]

I think CG means he left it on his desk at work which closed before he could retrieve it?

@Wildey, and this is why voting doesn't work :D If they win by one vote remind her its her fault.

I'm happier with that than the prospect of a lab/snp outcome. The lib dems look like they'll potentially take the sting off the tories and we'll be possibly better off?
Still only really guesses though isn't it?

Spoilt my council ballet as literally none of them have been arsed to even send a leaflet, made it clear that was why on the paper...

[Kirsten]

Labour/SNP would be far and away better than the conservatives

[Psychosplodge]

I don't want a party in government that doesn't want to be in the country.

[Kirsten]

you'd rather a party that doesn't care about you and has lead a terrible economic policy?

[Psychosplodge]

Labours economic policy was no better, I was always worse off under brown, buy to let was encouraged by brown.
I don't trust them to be any better.

[Kirsten]

but we know for a fact that the last five years of tories have been a failure. austerity does not work, and the tories are significantly hampering recovery by pushing it.

[Psychosplodge]

We've had the biggest growing economy of the western world haven't we? I thought the ones that tried labours plan had dipped back into recession?

[Kirsten]

no, austerity has severely hampered recovery, the IMF warned strongly against it for exactly that reason. the UK would be far better off with some more spending. Austerity has only increased the deficit too.

[Psychosplodge]

The deficit has gone down. The debt has continued to increase because it wasn't decreased enough.

The IMF don't seem to be able to make up their mind, they were praising austerity on BBC last week, or week before.

- - - Updated - - -

What's more interesting is the Sunderland result. UKIP apparently got about 1000 last time, and were expected to get 5k this time and have come second with over 8k.
protest vote in safe labour seat? or genuine support?

- - - Updated - - -

Second sunderland result, Lab 20k+ Con 9k+ UKIP8k+ greens beat libdems.

[Kirsten]

utterly astonishing that anybody could be stupid enough to vote UKIP

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

Someone wake me when theres a revolution.

[Psychosplodge]

we'll probably all be dead by then, shall I just set you an alarm?

[YorkNecromancer]

We've had the biggest growing economy of the western world haven't we?

Only in the most general sense. If you look at the geography of it, it's concentrated in the South of the UK, and even there, primarily in London. The North, as it always does, suffers.

London is a parasite (http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/aug/07/london-gets-24-times-as-much-infrastructure-north-east-england) that diminishes (http://www.newstatesman.com/economics/2014/07/when-it-comes-arts-spending-it-s-london-vs-rest-uk) the rest of the nation. (http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/alex-massie/2013/12/london-is-different-the-government-will-spend-money-there/)

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/8/6/1407338410439/111c6c4d-8381-476b-9b2e-2fc765b95c85-bestSizeAvailable.png
http://i.guim.co.uk/static/w-620/h--/q-95/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/8/7/1407413558852/388a1d63-fbe3-42a6-b6e3-a6f43dd21f1d-460x403.png

All the parties are happy to spend tax payer money on themselves (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/9729139/George-Osborne-bought-paddock-with-taxpayers-money.html) and things which benefit themselves (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10824430/Tory-peer-set-to-receive-record-Lords-ban-for-abusing-expenses.html), but will cheerfully lecture us forever on those evil benefits claimants (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/killed-benefits-cuts-starving-soldier-3923771) and poor people (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-tragic-tale-of-the-pensioner-who-killed-himself-after-begging-for-help-over-benefit-cuts-10029754.html) who do no work. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/benefit-changes-are-killing-the-vulnerable-say-campaigners-9877872.html)

It's a club, you see. A great, rich club for men on The Great Adventure.

And we ain't in it.

We ain't in it, and we're never going to be, because it's a Great Adventure, but we don't all get to go. So we need to get back to our five jobs, zero hour contracts, rapidly evaporating NHS and just be thankful they've deigned to give us the little they have.

[Psychosplodge]

Third sunderland result, Labour majority has gone up, UKIP second, Conservatives third by couple of hundred.

Libdems only not last because of somesort of trade unionist party. think we're getting the pattern for the north east now.


I'm used to watching the labour council do the same Yorkie, and they're both wanting to waste money on HS2...

- - - Updated - - -

I've figured out the only way to win.
It's to be elected.

[Psychosplodge]

Does anyone else think the speculation seems far more all over the place this time round?

[Psychosplodge]

right calling it a night. **** knows what state country will be in tomorrow. Good Luck everybody :)

[Denzark]

but we know for a fact that the last five years of tories have been a failure. austerity does not work, and the tories are significantly hampering recovery by pushing it.

Do we?

[Paintingplasticcrack]

but we know for a fact that the last five years of tories have been a failure. austerity does not work, and the tories are significantly hampering recovery by pushing it.

Explain "fact".
I rather think the conservatives have done a hard but reasonable job of rebalancing the mess the Labour left.

[Mr Mystery]

Well I did not expect that.....

[Mr Mystery]

Also, my perambulations around Canary Wharf could be interesting today.

And I see one constituency was a Tory gain with a majority of just 27 seats....proof if any was needed that every vote counts.

[Mr Mystery]

Had a chance to catch up....

Highlights so far?

Wholesale slaughter of LibDem MPs - this is what happens when you go back on pretty much every election promise.

George Galloway loses his seat - good. The man is an embarrassment for the left leaning.

Nigel Farage - seems the general feel is that it's not good for the toad faced weasel. With any luck he'll follow through on his promise to quit when he loses.

[Denzark]

Bye Ed Balls - don't let the door catch you on the arse on the way out...

[Psychosplodge]

It was being reported that Galloway had been reported to police last night over early tweeting of exit polls.

I'm glad balls has gone. I wonder how long Milliband will last. Local radio is already assuming Clegg is going as leader.

I personally think the result is to keep the SNP out. But would have preferred the Libdems to have been coalition still.

[Psychosplodge]

I'm still waiting for Paddy Ashdown to eat his hat.

[Mr Mystery]

Tempted to make a Billy No-Mates meme of UKIP's one and only MP....

[Psychosplodge]

Someone will do it sooner or later.
Across the north though look how often they've come second.

[Mr Mystery]

Second doesn't get you anywhere....

[Psychosplodge]

Under the system you wanted it would though.
But I know so many people that were queuing to dance on Thatcher's grave that were saying I'm going to vote Tory for the first time.

- - - Updated - - -

Ed Milliband has just stood down.

[Kirsten]

Labour were never going to win with Miliband and Balls in charge. Miliband has become a different person in the last few weeks and if he had been like this for the last year he would have won comfortably. As it is I think he will have to go. Clegg will have to go after their appalling showing. Hopefully Farage loses and follows through on his promise to quite. Looks like another terrible five ears of conservatives. I wonder if there will be a UK still in another five years

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

Oh great. I love that the country is now balls.

[Mr Mystery]

Oh great. I love that the country is now balls.

No no no. Balls lost his seat.

[Psychosplodge]

How much does this effect you Kirsten living on a (is it?) crown dependency but outside the UK? Did you get a vote?

[Mr Mystery]

Hopefully Farage loses and follows through

I'd pay to see that on telly.

[Psychosplodge]

Its a shame he didn't make a hat statement as well.

We could have had them all sitting around eating hats together on live tv, though I think Alaistair campbell said he'd eat his kilt, which is probably a bit more filling.

[Mr Mystery]

If I'd said that, I'd have commissioned a special Shredded Wheat Kilt beforehand, just in case.

Tasty. And keeps your regular, like.

[Kirsten]

How much does this effect you Kirsten living on a (is it?) crown dependency but outside the UK? Did you get a vote?

Hard to say. we have our own government so I didn't get a vote. But the UK decides our foreign policy. How the EU referendum will work out I am not sure, the Isle of Man is not part of the EU anyway but we have agreements in place to get most of the benefits. so if the UK were to leave I don't know how it would affect us. We utilise the UK NHS a lot (and our NHS pays for it) so the Tory plans in that regard are worrying.

[Psychosplodge]

Yeah I can see why you'd be concerned. I can't see the NHS suffering as it would be the quickest way to make yourself unelectable.

[Mr Mystery]

NHS is a prickly problem.

People aren't especially well informed about the issues it faces - they seem to vary wildly from paper to paper. But, very, very few people want it gone.

It's an absolute corner stone of the UK, and something we should be rightly proud of.

Some call for Matrons to be in charge of wards, rather than managers. Is that practicable in the modern day? Who knows.

Classic issue here is that everyone wants it, but few seem willing to pay for it. I for one will always support the NHS. It's saved my life on numerous occasions - including before birth.

I do what I can, including a monthly donation to Great Ormond Street (because you can keep your politics out of the health of the most innocent, thank you very much).

BBC likewise - mess with it, and I'll come for you, big time.

[Psychosplodge]

Farage not elected.

[Mr Mystery]

Huzzah!

Now let's see if he actually quits....

[CoffeeGrunt]

They opened at 7AM, which may explain your confusion. They close at 10.

My work closed at 7PM. Sorry, should have been more clear. As my postal ballot paper was on my desk at said work, I couldn't get it.

Had an election party last night though. Surprising results! Wasn't expecting Conservatives to gain ground, and the bloody nose the Lib Dems came away with is pretty amazing. UKIP seem to be a relative non-entity now, which is nice, and the SNP have basically devoured Scotland whole.

Interesting political landscape, looks like Cameron'll be going it alone this time around.

[Psychosplodge]

My FB feed is already full of Greens supporters *****ing about the result. But they're forgetting that if they got the system they want UKIP got more than twice as many actual votes as the SNP so they'd be getting the exact opposite of what they actually want, what they'd end up with would be conservative (36.8%) propped up by UKIP (12.6%) and probably the DUP.

https://33.media.tumblr.com/b158accc0d4103a6ec749ff92f31d910/tumblr_ml5xwbgvxQ1r0ix14o1_500.gif

[Mr Mystery]

Odd isn't it.

My anti-voting friend has had a go at people already, those who are complaining and doomsaying.

Dude has a point, sort of.

Me, I'm disappointed. But with my understanding of our peculiar brand of democracy, the people got what the people wanted. Whether or not I'm happy with it is immaterial.

About the only thing I want parties to do that none really offered is to hamstring the political bull**** machine of the press. Perhaps ban character attacks on MPs? After all, we vote for a party - their policies are entirely fair game. But the individual? Well, that just shows you have either exceptionally piss poor journalists, or can't pick holes in their manifesto.

Oh. And I'd have Paul Dacre and Murdoch shot. Just on general principle. And the owner of the Daily Express. All three for attempting to pervert the course of democracy by printing lies and half truths.

[Psychosplodge]

I do question how the press can be printing exact opposites about each party and not being called on their bull****.

[Mr Mystery]

Yep.

[Psychosplodge]

Yours? or did someone beat you to it?

[Mr Mystery]

I made it.

Ideal pic I thought!

[Kirsten]

parties need to focus on their own policies and what they offer as well, the tory scaremongering over the last few weeks has been obscene. nothing offered just 'ooooh don't let the SNP have any power' as though they are some sort of monster under the bed. utterly wrong, and totally hypocritical.

[Psychosplodge]

I disagree, I think criticising another party is a fair election tactic. I'm sure there will be people that voted SNP thinking they'd end up with a hold on labour are going to be regretting it.

- - - Updated - - -

Clegg resigning as leader of Libdems live now.

[Denzark]

My FB feed is already full of Greens supporters *****ing about the result.

Can you see if they'll agree to have their tears distilled to make a sweet sweet wine for my soul? Can use organic grapes if that will help.

[Kirsten]

I disagree, I think criticising another party is a fair election tactic. I'm sure there will be people that voted SNP thinking they'd end up with a hold on labour are going to be regretting it.

- - - Updated - - -

Clegg resigning as leader of Libdems live now.

criticising is one thing, but going 'ooooh scary SNP' is not a valid tactic. it is childish and moronic.

[Psychosplodge]

I'm not touching it with a barge pole. Last night before any real results were announced there were three separate slanging matches going on.

[Al Shut]

About the only thing I want parties to do that none really offered is to hamstring the political bull**** machine of the press. Perhaps ban character attacks on MPs? After all, we vote for a party - their policies are entirely fair game. But the individual? Well, that just shows you have either exceptionally piss poor journalists, or can't pick holes in their manifesto.

But you DO vote for individuals instead of faceless party lists. About the only thing I find positive about the majority election system

[Mr Mystery]

I vote for policies, not personalities.

Ultimately, charisma should not be a deciding electoral trait.

[Psychosplodge]

So we're down three party leaders.

[Mr Mystery]

Not surprising.

But, this might be. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32601280?ocid=socialflow_facebook)

Higher proportion of female MPs this time around.

[Kirsten]

all inevitable really. Ed should have stepped down a year or more ago. he has polled badly from the start, he had no chance of winning. it is amazing the party was so supportive of him.

[Psychosplodge]

There was no real alternative was there?

[Kirsten]

not really, they were all useless, but they needed to find somebody. If only Ed had a more confident, capable brother...

[Psychosplodge]

I'm not sure he'd have done much either.

[Kirsten]

I think he would have been far more successful

[Mr Mystery]

On the bright side, the Tories have been left wide open to back bench rebellions.

Yes, they have a majority, but then they don't exactly have many allies in the chamber for 'close run' things.

Labour and SNP form quite a bloc, or could do if they so wished. It doesn't take much for any given Bill to be defeated in Parliament as things stand.

Just depends on who the Tory MPs are, and how close they are to ideology of their present leadership. But I don't expect the NHS to go anywhere. That's political suicide.

[Psychosplodge]

Yep. They've always had trouble with internal coherency. plus Boris is eyeing up Camerons job

http://i.imgur.com/GJuTeJM.jpg

[Kirsten]

I think they will keep selling off the NHS. With Scotland going SNP there is little chance now of Labour winning next time round, that is a long, long road to recovery. With the EU referendum coming up in theory in a couple of years, I think the SNP will start pushing for another referendum on independence. if they go, then Conservatives will win forever more, so they can do whatever they like with the NHS

[Mr Mystery]

Though to be fair, it's entirely possible UKIP have helped weed out the less stable Tory party members, one way or the other.

I think BoJo is more than astute enough to bide another five years. Camoron has achieved the seeming impossible, and still nobody really knows how, let alone the man himself.

Could be an interesting five years....

[Kirsten]

I think the conservatives will behave themselves. with Cameron going in three or four years, there is no need to spoil their own chances of leadership by squabbling now, they just have to be patient a few years then they can fight as much as they like over the vacant position.

[Psychosplodge]

Its a bit pathetic reholding referendums constantly until you get the answer you want. Once a generation seems fair.

[Mr Mystery]

I'm not sure a second indy ref is what the SNP are currently after - wasn't in their manifesto so far as I know.

Instead, I see this as Scotland trying to ensure Westminster makes good on it's promises made following the referendum.

I can see why the press are scared of the SNP - they're an effective political party. And we can't possibly have that now, can we?

[Psychosplodge]

Splitters! Splitters!

Neverendum wouldn't help the Scottish economy.

[Denzark]

I'm not sure 'scared' is the right way to describe how the press feel about SNP - after all the press in the last 2 decades have acted pretty much as they pleased - the only people that would scare them would be a party with an intent to tighten down on the press's more nefarious tendencies with legislation - and the SNP to my knowledge aren't trumpeting that.

As to their efficacy as a party, they have done massively well - but I think they would want to be rated as a party in and of government rather than someone politically clever in terms of harnessing the vote.

If they stick to their guns about the neverendum taking place once in a generation, then I'm not sure how much they can achieve in Westminster in terms of their being rated for the actual effect they deliver.

[Mr Mystery]

Well, with 56 seats and a cohesive party, they're a potential spanner in the works waiting to happen.

I truly hope they stick to their stance of not voting on English matters - I'm not exactly an SNP fan, but I am one to respect integrity.

As covered earlier, if there is any kind of fracture in the Tory party, their slim majority can be easily overwhelmed due to their lack of allies elsewhere.

I don't think this is the disaster many feel. For one, it's democracy in action - suck it up. And for two, the above somewhat-more-precarious-position the Tories are in.

SNP are a very, very tempting bloc of votes - enough to shore up either side in the event of a split. You can bet your bottom dollar they're going to politick that

[Kirsten]

depends whether or not the tories continue their privatisation of the NHS. they want to continue things like badger culls, fox culls, even bring back hunting in some cases. never mind trident, energy policy, green policy etc.

[Psychosplodge]

I hadn't considered Trident. This result could be partially the idea that the British public feel safer in possession of nuclear weapons rather than living in a world they exist in without having any?

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

Personally, I fully expect my life and my friends lives to get worse under continued Tory rule as it has gotten worse for my fellow MH/Disabled folk. Feels like the british public majority think people like me are worthless in society anyway.

[Mr Mystery]

Just more concerned with their sodding house price.

[Wolfshade]

Personally, I fully expect my life and my friends lives to get worse under continued Tory rule as it has gotten worse for my fellow MH/Disabled folk. Feels like the british public majority think people like me are worthless in society anyway.

If we didn't spend £5Bn on lifestyle related issues maybe we could have a decent MH provision...grumble grumble grumble

[Denzark]

I was made to mow the lawn today. As I scythed through innocent daisies and then raked their broken little stems into the compost bin I found them to be faintly reminiscent of the Labour Party on Thursday night.

[Psychosplodge]

I'm absolutely disgusted at the behaviour of the protesters/rioters in London at the weekend.
I mean seriously, damaging a war memorial (the women at war one iirc) because you disagree with the outcome of the election?
Also it would have been nicer to see more coverage, show people how ridiculous some of these noisy people are.

[Mr Mystery]

Sadly rent-a-mob will always exist.

All it does is detract from the message of the protest, that austerity is hurting people.

If I was to apply my cynical eye, I would suspect deliberately placed agitators to achieve just that.

[Psychosplodge]

You don't really need any with the average wannabe lefty anarchist

[Mr Mystery]

Still just rent-a-mob.

And the right wing press of course focus on those who did not behave, over those who did and their message.

[CoffeeGrunt]

It seems like yet another minority of ar*eholes messing up a perfectly peaceful protest, just like Baltimore, the 2011 riots and the student protests. Really detracts from the message people are putting out.

Tbh, I'm not sure what people are arguing for. There's massive demand for Proportionate Representation, but even then the Tories would still possess a convincing win, the only difference being Green would be slightly larger and UKIP would be a notable entity, with the SNP being diminished.

There's also a lot of people blaming Scotland for not voting Labour, showing their lack of math ability to see that adding the Labour and SNP seats together still doesn't touch the Tory total.

Personally I just followed the #ToriesGetOut stream to try and get a from-the-ground view, and it mostly seems to be edgy teenagers - some arrested aren't even of legal voting age - wearing Guy Fawkes masks, waving Anarchy flags, and talking about bringing down the system.

F**king grow up and go back to sitting in your room listening to Rage Against the Machine. Every tw*t smashing stuff up and punching police officers in an angsty move to, "bring down the system, man," is a distraction from the real issues at hand.

Plus the accusations of the government blacking out the protests in the media are stupid. It's been all over the internet news, top trending on Facebook and a popular series of hashtags for a few days now. I'm sick of hearing about it, to be honest, and it seems like something that the majority of people will get bored of and go home from.

What are they hoping to achieve other than kicking out a democratically-elected party because they personally didn't like them?

[Kirsten]

there have been a lot of reports flying around about the vandals being right wing instigators, journalist employees etc. no idea what is going on. regardless they do as has been said detract from the real issue.

[Psychosplodge]

I've seen one minor story on the BBC, which if its tiny is about what it deserves.
But of course the internet is full of claims its being covered up. It's not a cover up if its just tiny.

- - - Updated - - -

Also George Galloway is a ****ing joke. He was beaten with a huge majority and is going to challenge it in court.

[Mr Mystery]

Tell us something we don't know!

[Kirsten]

yup, Galloway being ousted is one of the few good things of this election

[Psychosplodge]

I don't know if that or seeing the smug smiles wiped off both Balls and Milliband's faces is my best bit.

[Denzark]

there have been a lot of reports flying around about the vandals being right wing instigators, journalist employees etc. no idea what is going on. regardless they do as has been said detract from the real issue.

I've not seen any reporting in any credible news sources - where are you seeing this 'lots of reports'?

- - - Updated - - -


I don't know if that or seeing the smug smiles wiped off both Balls and Milliband's faces is my best bit.

The latter - Galloway couldn't shaft a whole country with his ridiculous antics.

[Mr Mystery]

Cameron is the Comte of Smug. Big time.

But yeah, Galloway and Farage both having their delusional bubbles popped is highly amusing.

Fish faced incompetent tosspot Michael Gove being made Justice Secretary however, is not even remotely funny.

- - - Updated - - -

Eight members of the cabinet are non-White or female. This is good for our country.

Iain Duncan Smith still in charge of DWP less so - his witch hunt continues for a while yet.

BigboyBoJo has no cabinet post, he's set of focus on what might well be his final year as Mayor of London (I say might be, as I'm not sure if he's running again, not that he's liable to be voted out...but then with many London MPs now being Labour, who knows). At least that's the official line. Could be a calculated snub?

[CoffeeGrunt]

there have been a lot of reports flying around about the vandals being right wing instigators, journalist employees etc. no idea what is going on. regardless they do as has been said detract from the real issue.

Any sources? People on the ground are accusing people of a lot of things, especially the police for being "heavy handed." Given that they've taken a pretty standard approach with riot shields and apparently haven't even taken tasers or rubber bullets, they might even be a bit under-equipped if it gets any worse.

But yeah, the police are underfunded, undermanned and everyone blames the Tories...until they decide to start throwing bricks at the police and get arrested. Then we're living in a fascist state where the police have all the power...

[Kirsten]

nothing concrete, you can find reports blaming every possible group for the vandalism, including the police themselves.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Because the police really wanted to go out and get bricked that day dealing with some angsty kids, rather than, y'know, watching the peaceful protest, walking the beat, or anything else they do that doesn't involve getting bricked.

[Psychosplodge]

The pictures I've seen don't even have in full riot gear, just their normal gear and little shields, no helmets.

[Kirsten]

not a sensible theory of course, but I am surprised by just how many reports are flying around blaming various groups, don't usually see this many.

[Mr Mystery]

The pictures I've seen don't even have in full riot gear, just their normal gear and little shields, no helmets.

And the photos shown are shown for a reason - they're dramatic. Except of course they're often shown out of context. Of those I've seen, I'm seeing specific restraint techniques applied, as in 'this only hurts if you struggle, and shouldn't cause permanent damage'

The same kind used in Prisons and that, which are authorised for a reason.

[CoffeeGrunt]

And the photos shown are shown for a reason - they're dramatic. Except of course they're often shown out of context. Of those I've seen, I'm seeing specific restraint techniques applied, as in 'this only hurts if you struggle, and shouldn't cause permanent damage'

The same kind used in Prisons and that, which are authorised for a reason.

There is media bias, of course. Always difficult to find the truth of what's going on.

A colleague of mine shared a rather disgraceful image of a bored delivery man outside 10 Downing Street with a stack of boxes of Moet. Came from a page full of anti-Tory hate about the smug buggers sipping champagne over their victory, in the name of, "austerity."

Just a shame that a quick reverse-image search showed it as the headline photo for a delivery for Gordon Brown in 2004...

[Denzark]

not a sensible theory of course, but I am surprised by just how many reports are flying around blaming various groups, don't usually see this many.

I have looked on the BBC, Telegraph, Guardian, Mirror, and Daily Mail Websites.

I cannot see any reports blaming anyone other than anti-austerity lefties - if the Mirror or the Guardian had any grounds to suspect it was agent provocateurs of the Right - or the Police (FFS) it would be bigger than Ben Hur.

Links please.

[Al Shut]

Tbh, I'm not sure what people are arguing for. There's massive demand for Proportionate Representation, but even then the Tories would still possess a convincing win, the only difference being Green would be slightly larger and UKIP would be a notable entity, with the SNP being diminished.

Don't forget that a lot of people would vote differently in a proportional system. Just look at the last EU vote, I can't believe the difference is just policy related.

And I'm not sure if I'd call a vote share of 36,9% a convincing win

[Kirsten]

can't believe that ****ing **** farage is going to stay as UKIP leader after all.

what a *****.

[CoffeeGrunt]

People called it before the polling even started. Think about it, he promises to resign and thus he does, but he's left the party instructions to publicly beg for him to come back. Then he returns to do a service to his country, because he's what it needs, and gets a big, triumphant comeback to give UKIP's polls a shot in the arm in the future, allowing him to lay the groundwork for the 2020 elections.

Pretty clever, and I hate him for it.

[Kirsten]

his bigoted little bunch of ****wits would disappear without him. who else could make the apologies every week and somehow convince people they aren't racist scum despite the endless gaffs and evidence to the contrary? was just looking forward to another far right party disappearing.

[ShadowcatX]

We'd be happy to send y'all George W. Bush if you want someone to make him look better.

[Kirsten]

I'd swap Farage for Bush, Bush wouldn't enter politics over here.

[Denzark]

his bigoted little bunch of ****wits would disappear without him. who else could make the apologies every week and somehow convince people they aren't racist scum despite the endless gaffs and evidence to the contrary? was just looking forward to another far right party disappearing.

You are writing off 3.9 million people as racist scum? Really your prejudice does you very little credit.

This article is tailor-made for you Kirsten. Although probably not the correct terminology as that conjures up professional clothes making and not some organic fairtrade sourced hemp construction that most looney lefties would prefer.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11596659/The-juvenile-Left-needs-to-stop-wasting-its-time-talking-exclusively-to-itself.html

[Haighus]

Erm, Kirsten was saying the party was full of "racist scum", and the constant gaffs and expulsions of party members would suggest that. In fact, the comment is actually suggesting that Farage is the lynchpin in pulling the wool over the British public's eyes in covering up the fact that they are a racist party. So no, Kirsten is not writing off 3.9million people as scum.

[Denzark]

She's a big girl I'm sure she'll explain how by using 'people' she wasn't stereotyping all UKIP voters and actually by people she meant the dozen or so racists exposed in the media - 12/3900000 is a small fraction.

[40kGamer]

You are writing off 3.9 million people as racist scum? Really your prejudice does you very little credit.

This article is tailor-made for you Kirsten. Although probably not the correct terminology as that conjures up professional clothes making and not some organic fairtrade sourced hemp construction that most looney lefties would prefer.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11596659/The-juvenile-Left-needs-to-stop-wasting-its-time-talking-exclusively-to-itself.html

Eerily similar to US issues. Wealth has segregated the classes to an unhealthy extent. Too many of the 'poor' expect hand outs and are entirely unwilling to make sacrifices and too many of the wealthy want to keep the lion's share of things without creating opportunity for others. Best of luck finding the middle of the road. We're all going to need it.

[Houghten]

Is there an issue of terminology here? Why do you keep conflating "party" with "voters," Denz?

[Kirsten]

we are talking about a party that every single week has to apologise for one of its' candidates and what they have said. UKIP are a racist party, there is no getting around that. the more moderate policy suggestions they adopted came only toward the end of the political campaign as their support was utterly tanking. Britain First support UKIP. that's the far right fascist group that marched over the weekend opposing a mosque being built in Dudley, that threatened to bury a pig's head on the ground to halt construction (not that it would, they don't understand the concept). Britain First who take money away from charities by misleading people in their facebook posts and have broken the law repeatedly. they support UKIP. Nigel Farage, the man who hates the EU, but has taken millions of pounds from it as an MEP, whose party is under investigation for benefit fraud. the party who included such candidates as the woman who said she just doesn't like negroes...

- - - Updated - - -

and what is wrong with hemp clothing exactly? it is an amazing substance.

[Denzark]

Erm, Kirsten was saying the party was full of "racist scum", and the constant gaffs and expulsions of party members would suggest that. In fact, the comment is actually suggesting that Farage is the lynchpin in pulling the wool over the British public's eyes in covering up the fact that they are a racist party. So no, Kirsten is not writing off 3.9million people as scum.


Is there an issue of terminology here? Why do you keep conflating "party" with "voters," Denz?

I don't believe for one minute that Kirsten credits Farage with the political nous and charisma of character to 'pull the wool over the British Public's eyes'. Partially because that is absolutely barmy. I can't deconflict between the idea that UKIP are a single issue party - based on racism - but that they managed to conceal this from 3.9m voters - with some magic sorcery. It just doesn't wash. The fact is Farage says what he says and a large number of people like his message.

Kirsten says they added in Liberal policies towards the end of the campaign because their support was 'tanking'. This is codswallop. For a start the idea that support was tanking can only have been based on polling data - now widely acknowledged to have been hysterically wrong. Secondly, if correct, that would explicitly mean that people were stupid enough to disregard the more right wing of UKIP policies for these supposed more liberal ones as some sort of smoke screen. And that got them from 'tanking' to 3.9m votes? Tosh.

I am conflating 'party' with 'voters' because I genuinely believe that is what Kirsten does when it comes to UKIP. People are not stupid - they didn't vote tactically for UKIP. They voted for them because they believe in their policies. I don't think Kirsten can genuinely disassociate UKIP party with UKIP voters as a vote for UKIP is a vote in support of the party.

She hasn't popped up to deny it either. No one can take the easy out and say 'UKIP paid up party members bad racialists. UKIP non-paid up voters poor misguided people who fell for Farage' because that is cack - Farage ain't that good.

[Psychosplodge]

I heard two interesting suggestions in conversation this evening.
1) Green party support in Brighton collapsed at council level and the "green" MP actually minimised her association with the party on all her literature, to the extent that shes more like a green leaning independent.

2) A polling company produced a poll looking similar to the BBC's exit poll but didn't relese it because it was so far off the others.

Anyone seen anything written down about either of these? (I haven't really looked yet tbh)

[Kirsten]

point one, their MP is Caroline Lucas, who was the Green Party Leader for a while, so would seem a little unlikely, but who knows.

point two was mentioned on the BBC news.

[Psychosplodge]

with a bit of google-fu it may be an exaggeration, but hers (https://electionleaflets.org/person/571/) certainly look more about her personally compared to other (https://electionleaflets.org/parties/PP63/green-party-2) green ones. Though as they appear to lost about half their seats on the council it could be because of that.

[Wildeybeast]

we are talking about a party that every single week has to apologise for one of its' candidates and what they have said. UKIP are a racist party, there is no getting around that. the more moderate policy suggestions they adopted came only toward the end of the political campaign as their support was utterly tanking. Britain First support UKIP. that's the far right fascist group that marched over the weekend opposing a mosque being built in Dudley, that threatened to bury a pig's head on the ground to halt construction (not that it would, they don't understand the concept). Britain First who take money away from charities by misleading people in their facebook posts and have broken the law repeatedly. they support UKIP. Nigel Farage, the man who hates the EU, but has taken millions of pounds from it as an MEP, whose party is under investigation for benefit fraud. the party who included such candidates as the woman who said she just doesn't like negroes...

- - - Updated - - -

and what is wrong with hemp clothing exactly? it is an amazing substance.

Much as I despise them, I have to take issue with the allegation that UKIP are a racist party. Unlike the BNP, UKIP do not have racist policies nor racist membership criteria and so are therefore not a racist party. They have policies that could probably be comfortably termed 'xenophobic' but are careful to avoid overt racism. I agree that they have a significant number of racist (not to mention homophobic and sexist) gaffs and do seem to attract more bigots, but it isn't right to judge a whole party on that basis. A conservative local councillor was fired just before the election for referring to Milliband as 'the Jew' but no one is suggesting the whole Tory party is anti-Semitic.

We can build a case to suggest UKIP has an unhealthy level of nationalism (though so does the SNP and no one suggesting that makes them racist) and does appear to have a higher number of closet racists than other parties, but to tar everyone with the same brush without evidence to support is not justified and you are better than that Kirsten.

[Kirsten]

they are a racist party, they make no effort to distance themselves from a lot of the comments. occasionally somebody is sacked from the party, quite often they are defended or it gets swept under the rug with accusations against a supposedly biased media. they claim they can't possibly vet all the candidates who want to stand for them, and yet the other big parties do exactly that. so why not UKIP? they either don't want to know who is standing for them, or they do know, and tacitly accept it. you say they are not racist yet they are overtly anti immigration despite the mountains of evidence that supports the benefits of immigration to every country. Britain benefits massively from immigration, we know that the idea of benefit and healthcare tourism is a load of crap. Farage knows is as well, so why do we keep hearing the same anti immigration policies? Remember him blaming being late for a radio interview on immigrants using the motorway? why even bring them up? why make that suggestion, it is clearly nonsense.

as for the SNP, there is nothing wrong with being proud of your country. But where UKIP are saying Britain for the British, the SNP are saying we want Scottish people to be in charge of Scotland. that is perfectly reasonable, they are not trying to stop anyone else coming to Scotland, they are not trying to win votes by demonising other people.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Denzark, you seem to be making this a bit personal. Lots of people here have ripped into UKIP and labelled them racist, yet you're chasing down Kirsten specifically. Why?

UKIP have a constant stream of gaffes, fiascos and feet-in-the-mouth moments where their MPs have shown themselves to be incredibly racist - something that simply isn't acceptable. Not to mention the racism and sexism evident in aspects of their manifesto, as well as homophobia.

They're a party aiming to drag things back to the 1950s out of some misguided nostalgia to build a Britain that simply never existed. To claim immigrants are money-sucking parasites is as abhorrent as the accusation usually levelled at the Tories for doing the same and demonising the poor. Unsurprising that a lot of Tory MPs joined them, they realised that immigrants have even less ability to speak out against such persecution, are even poorer and more disadvantaged...

[Mr Mystery]

Apparently, DWP are going to replace cash benefit payments with a pre-paid card.

I think I support this, as it depends on how it's implemented.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/29/duncan-smith-prepaid-benefits-cards-cash-payments?CMP=share_btn_fb

[Haighus]

The card idea is a very interesting one. I can see the ethical issue about reducing peoples autonomy, but it actually has great potential public health benefits too, from more of a justice perspective, and this could be something that seriously reduces mortality if the infrastructure is there. What if you were not able to purchase cigarettes either? Or if so much had to be spent on certain healthier foods, such as fruit and vegetables (for that I imagine supermarkets and retailers would have to be brought on board)? It is going into the realms of authoritative public health policy, but the potential benefits could be significant. It really comes down to an autonomy verses beneficence, non-maleficence and justice argument, and personally, I don't think autonomy outweighs the others combined enough, at least for entirely destructive behaviours like smoking.

After all, the NHS is publicly funded, and autonomy within the NHS is not absolute, patients cannot have whatever procedure they choose, for reasons essentially coming down to it won't help them, it may make them worse, and it harms other patients (in particular by using money that could be used for others). So there is a precedent for restricting what access the public has to choices when using government money, and I don't see why this would be any different seeing as money is just as tight for welfare as it is in healthcare.

[Wolfshade]

Unfortunately a number of the ukip gaffes have been by ex-tory members....

But it does seem that ukip are in the public concious, after all we remember the days of news covering Geoffery Bloom and his infamous cleanliness comments, but do we remember Denis MacShane or any other MP sent to prison for fiddling expenses? (Other than you know the guy with the duck house) But that is the way things are.

[Psychosplodge]

there was a libdem that committed perjury wasn't there?

[Mr Mystery]

Random thought.....

How would people feel if a Government was to introduce a guaranteed 'once every 25 years' European Referendum?

Because from my perspective of not exactly pro-European but more 'better the devil you know' practicality, it would help quiet down the hooting and hollering from the political peanut gallery, allowing politicians to focus on things more important to the country.

Plus, Das Daily Heil, The Scum and The Daily Express would each comprise about three pages....

[Kirsten]

But it does seem that ukip are in the public concious, after all we remember the days of news covering Geoffery Bloom and his infamous cleanliness comments, but do we remember Denis MacShane or any other MP sent to prison for fiddling expenses? (Other than you know the guy with the duck house) But that is the way things are.

yes. every party makes **** ups, but no other party does them with the same regularity as UKIP, and not usually on the same topics every single time, i.e. immigrants and racism.

[Mr Mystery]

Yup.

Whether or not the party itself is racist.....it's got an awful lot of clearly racist members and candidates.

[Kirsten]

yup, and they keep coming out of the woodwork. as I said before, UKIP aren't vetting these people in advance, why not? every other party does.

[Mr Mystery]

More worrying is....

a) They are vetting, and actually endorsing these views in private

b) They are vetting, but are shockingly incompetent.

[Kirsten]

precisely

[Mr Mystery]

Either way, that's not a party I want anywhere near Westminster.

Oh, and it seems it's kicking off in the UKIP camp over money meant to help support smaller parties. £650,000 to help them function (good idea). Except UKIP claim their sole MP wants sole control over it. Billy No-Mates, sole UKIP MP says 'I didn't think tax payers money was what this party was about, so we should reject it'....

Mmmm....interesting. Especially when you consider UKIP MEPs seem only too happy to stick their snouts deep into that particular trough, including some only popping up the bare minimum of times to claim their 'expenses'.

UKIPpers....you have been sold a lie. And a whopper at that.

[Kirsten]

who would have thought it eh? :rolleyes:

[Mr Mystery]

Article is here, if anyone fancies a read/ (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32707357).

I think I actually back their MP on this one. If he says he doesn't need 15 staff, he doesn't need 15 staff. And he should know. He's the one who is an experienced MP.

[Psychosplodge]

That's because its clearly about repatriating money form the continent not gouging our taxpayer :D
Lets face it though they've all got their noses in the trough whether they're MEPs or MPs eg the kinnocks, or the expenses scandal...

Though I was in a pub in Birmingham about six months ago and there was a large UKIP party having a meal with their MEP and the amount of half drunk bottles of wine left on the table was a disgrace, I'm assuming that went on someones expenses.

[Mr Mystery]

And this is what really galls me about UKIP - how many people genuinely, honestly believe, despite substantial evidence to the contrary. that they're somehow completely different from the self-serving Westminster Elite.

Hence the 'you've been sold a lie' thing.

[Psychosplodge]

As an individual Farage interviews well. He told people in the audience on the last Q&A things they didn't want to hear. Both Milliband and Cameron tried to tell people what they wanted to hear, you could see them changing their answer as they talked to people. You don't see it often so it stands out when a politician just says what s/he thinks.

[Kirsten]

I am looking forward to seeing what Britain First is going to do now. When Farage announced his resignation they attacked him for being a traitor and letting right wing politics die, after telling everyone to vote UKIP for months. Only now he hasn't resigned, so will they take back what they said and go back to supporting him? or carry out their threat to enter politics themselves? I am hoping it is the latter, because it will dilute UKIP's support, and draw even more attention to how unbelievably stupid the Britain First fascists are.

[Mr Mystery]

Trouble is, what he thinks is based on lies.

Immigration - shown on many occasions and through independent studies to be of net benefit, with Migrants far less likely to 'ponce off us' to use a term a UKIP Candidate coined, than people 'native' to Britain.

Stuff about his policies - and nothing to explain how they'll pay for it.

He's like a Cult of Personality, but with that first l bent double...

[Psychosplodge]

It benefits some people, and it always makes sense to accept highly skilled people.
I doubt the people of Eastwood in Rotherham or Paige Hall in Sheffield and hundreds of similar run down areas across the country agree.

[Kirsten]

they may not agree but it does not mean they are right.

[Mr Mystery]

It benefits some people, and it always makes sense to accept highly skilled people.
I doubt the people of Eastwood in Rotherham or Paige Hall in Sheffield and hundreds of similar run down areas across the country agree.

Well, it's not migrants that have put them where they are. They need to look at what happened to their former industries, and point the finger accordingly.

Again, hint - It's not migrants.

[Psychosplodge]

Sorry I'm forgetting myself. Both those areas are populated by previous immigrant communities and are having trouble with the current "wave".
The latter one is the area David Blunkett was referencing in his comments earlier this year or late last year on how they got immigration wrong.

[Mr Mystery]

Define 'trouble'

- - - Updated - - -

Slightly sideways, as it relates to the US Senate, but it could have an impact on the UK shortly....

TTIP and TPP denied by US Senate (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32717241).

Been a bit of a stink over this, with various and sundry claims, including it would allow private companies to sue governments if legislation damaged profits.

Haven't really looked into it myself though - only reporting back what I've seen on FB and that.

[Psychosplodge]

Flytipping/anti social behaviour/borderline civil disturbance.

[Kirsten]

I've tried fly tipping, but no matter what I do, they just fly away. never gotten one to fall over.

[Mr Mystery]

And that's all laid at the feet of migrants?

[Psychosplodge]

The local pakistani community is blaming the incoming roma slovakians.

I'd assume similar is happening elsewhere as the weekend before the election all the UKIP supporters handing out leaflets in Stoke-on-trent city centre appeared to be of asian decent as a friend was losing her **** over it and couldn't understand why they'd support a supposedly racist party.

[Denzark]

The local pakistani community is blaming the incoming roma slovakians.

Don't tell the left that they'll get into a logic loop and have a head detonation.

[Mr Mystery]

Without police investigation etc, makes me wonder how much is just scape goating.

For instance, here in T Wells, the Circus is in town. Various warnings going up about thieving 'gyppos' and to keep your windows shut,

Sounds like the ideal time for anyone to try a spot of burglary, because it'll be blamed on the Circus first....

[Psychosplodge]

IDK about that its not my area of town. I do know they had police on local radio discussing the disturbances and had a month long dispersal order.

[Mr Mystery]

It's worth noting this has happened before.

Jamaicans and other people from the West Indies joined with White racists to go out 'paki bashing' back in the 70's.

Someone put your window through? Slovak did it.

Someone key your car? Clearly it was a Slovak.

Someone took ur jurb? Slovak did it.

[Psychosplodge]

IDK about that. I'm just surprised the ex-home secretaries comments about "something" (unspecified as always) needing to be done weren't more wildly reported. But then again it wasn't in London, Leeds or Manchester and we all know how lazy reporters are.

[Mr Mystery]

Fraud probe in South Thanet (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32725167)

I kind of hope this is UKIP being busted. That would make I laff and laff and laff. And then cry a bit. Then laff.

[Kirsten]

pretty much

[Kirsten]

http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd380/KirstenIGMB/11165289_10100821985857482_3895319903494813197_n_z ps2ke7jf7o.jpg (http://s1216.photobucket.com/user/KirstenIGMB/media/11165289_10100821985857482_3895319903494813197_n_z ps2ke7jf7o.jpg.html)

[Mr Mystery]

And why are they allowed to make such corrections so small?

Wrote twelfty pages about it? Apologise with twelfty pages.

[Mr Mystery]

UKIP seem to be having a spot of bother....could be the beginning of the end, perhaps?

[Psychosplodge]

Doubt it. If political parties folded everytime there was a leadership spat both labour and tories would be distant memories.

[Mr Mystery]

This is kind of different.

This is a part of a party worried they're about to become the domain of a single character, under the influence of advisors they don't trust.

[Psychosplodge]

I'm not sure. I think this might just be being reported more because ah scary UKIP.

[Mr Mystery]

When one of their major donors is calling for the leader to quit, I think it's newsworthy.

I kind of hope this ends Farage's inglorious career. Sick of the sight of his smug, lying mush.

[Psychosplodge]

*shrugs* Who knows? The unions wanted Blair gone for ages but still funded him.
He's still an MEP anyway isn't he?

[Psychosplodge]

Charles Kennedy had died (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-32970337)

Didn't agree with a lot of his policies, but he did come across as a lot more human than many of the current names in politics.

[Wolfshade]

Blimey

[Psychosplodge]

If Greece exits the euro what will the consequences be for us?

[Mr Mystery]

Dunno! There's concern it could trigger events which take Spain and Italy with it though.

[Haighus]

Hmmm, I guess at the very least the Euro would take a drop vs the pound. Cheap(er) European holidays?

[Mr Mystery]

Indeed. There's speculation it could be the beginning of the end of the Euro Currency 'experiment'.

Which makes this the absolute ideal time to renegotiate our membership, as it's looking like there'll be turmoil anyway.

[Haighus]

Yeah, agreed. Hopefully resulting in us not leaving the EU entirely, as I feel that would not be a good thing.

I wonder if Greece would go back to the Drachma?

[Psychosplodge]

Well considering how much they're trying to keep Greece in the eurozone, Think what we could get to keep a net contributor in the eu...
I think I'd still prefer our sovereignty though.

- - - Updated - - -

I wonder what exit features they built in the euro?

[grimmas]

If the dead wood drops out we could do it properly UK, Germany and France in a union or better yet lose France . Germany and the UK together in economic union id vote for that in a referendum 😉

[Mr Mystery]

Sovereignty is overrated to be honest.

At least in my opinion.

Just gives the illusion that I as the spod in the street have any say whatsoever in what goes on. When I don't. At all. I'm nowhere near rich enough for that.

[Psychosplodge]

Pushing back towards a trade agreement would be better for all of us. The cultures in the current block are too different to ever reach a meaningful consensus on anything, and thats ignoring the ridiculous levels of corruption.

[eldargal]

Sovereignty is overrated to be honest.

At least in my opinion.

Just gives the illusion that I as the spod in the street have any say whatsoever in what goes on. When I don't. At all. I'm nowhere near rich enough for that.

Yup. Like signing up to the Geneva conventions saying we won't murder prisoners of war, that's giving up sovereignty but we're fine with it for obvious reasons. 99% of the EU stuff we agreed to already matched our own regulations anyway, or regulations we were moving towards adopting, it being a EU thing just meant they were consistently worded and implemented across the EU.

Greece should never have been let in in the first place, and I think it is inevitable they drop the Euro at some point. The only thing that kept their economy going prior to them joining the EU was the fact they could devalue their currency to attract investment and tourism. The risk is Spain and Italy might follow suit so they can do the same, be more competitive by devaluing currency. Simplifying it a lot of course. Spain and Italy actually have good foundations to their economies, Italy specially whereas Greece doesn't.

- - - Updated - - -


Pushing back towards a trade agreement would be better for all of us. The cultures in the current block are too different to ever reach a meaningful consensus on anything, and thats ignoring the ridiculous levels of corruption.

I agree to an extent. A a trade bloc with some political ties it was very effective, the European parliament is a bit of a farce though.

[Mr Mystery]

It's all just a bit 'half rice, half chips' as things stand.

Either wind it back to a set trade bloc, or go full Federation.

[Kirsten]

if they go full federation, will they go exploring space, or will they have to blockade Naboo?

actually, sending the droid army in to Greece might be for the best.

[Psychosplodge]

Unfortunately you know they'd be more blockade Naboo

[Mr Mystery]

As long as we stick it to the offensive, somewhat racist, utterly needless, Gungans, I'm all for it.

[Psychosplodge]

Two thirds of those adjectives could be applied to the entire prequel trilogy...

[Mr Mystery]

And Greece is in arrears.....

[Psychosplodge]

surprising no one.

[Haighus]

Hmmm, I can't really see Greece staying in the Eurozone now.

[Wolfshade]

I can't believe that Greece owes the cricket board so much money


The UK exposure is minimal, £10Bn, and that is in their banks rather than government debt.

The best for the Euro would be a controlled exit of Greece. It might be a good thing for greece in the long run, but not in the near future. Look at Argentina, they were the last develop(ing/ed) country to go bankfrupt

[Mr Mystery]

Oh dear.

Greece voted 'no'.....

Very good chance they'll be out of the Euro, and quite possibly Europe.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Oh dear.

Greece voted 'no'.....

Very good chance they'll be out of the Euro, and quite possibly Europe.

I don't fully understand why. Going it alone is hardly a great option when you're destitute.

[Mr Mystery]

Frees them up to fix it their way.

Now we get to see if Germany blinks....

Apparently, pundits say there's a 40% chance they'll be out of the Euro.

[Kirsten]

I find it impossible to have sympathy for them. plenty of countries suffer from mis-management etc. and Greece certainly has, but their own citizens have seriously compounded the issue. every strata of society has collectively shot themselves in the foot over the years with their utter indifference to things like regulation, tax, and tackling corruption. now they are bleating on about unfair deals. they got themselves in to this mess, now they want bailing out, but don't want the consequences.

[CoffeeGrunt]

I had a good laugh at a caller on Radio 2 who called Merkel a, "fascist," for demanding the Greek government get their sh*t together and start putting in some effective austerity measures rather than just handing them another bailout. The German people are getting pretty sick of shoring up faltering countries, it seems, and honestly, they've already put in a lot to the EU pot, so who can blame them?

[Mr Mystery]

I find it impossible to have sympathy for them. plenty of countries suffer from mis-management etc. and Greece certainly has, but their own citizens have seriously compounded the issue. every strata of society has collectively shot themselves in the foot over the years with their utter indifference to things like regulation, tax, and tackling corruption. now they are bleating on about unfair deals. they got themselves in to this mess, now they want bailing out, but don't want the consequences.

Yup. If an individual decides not to pay their creditors, or spends so much that they can't, or doesn't earn enough to, there's pretty serious consequences. Same goes for countries.

Take the UK. As much as I feel the Tories are yet again using our financial position to advance their cause over sanity and fairness, the cuts will eventually help balance the books and leave us in a better position overall.

[Kirsten]

I have seen arguments for and against austerity, both can be put forward convincingly by various economists. but you can only spend your way out of a slump if you actually have money. Greece have none, so austerity is the only option they have.

[Mr Mystery]

Right now, I think it's fairly appropriate. I truly get the need to live within our means.

But as mentioned many times in my posts, it's all just so lopsidedly done.

[Morgrim]

They seem to be living within their means right now, but the interest payments are killing them. In which case I wonder why the bank they owe money to isn't willing to work with them on that; surely "we will get our original money back and inflation, but maybe not a profit" is better than "we will make a loss".

[daboarder]

They seem to be living within their means right now, but the interest payments are killing them. In which case I wonder why the bank they owe money to isn't willing to work with them on that; surely "we will get our original money back and inflation, but maybe not a profit" is better than "we will make a loss".

because Germany and France are playing sillybuggers with them. and basically pandering to local popularist politics rather than trying to fix the issue

[Mr Mystery]

They seem to be living within their means right now, but the interest payments are killing them. In which case I wonder why the bank they owe money to isn't willing to work with them on that; surely "we will get our original money back and inflation, but maybe not a profit" is better than "we will make a loss".

It's more than just Greece though. Spain, Italy and to a lesser extent Ireland all have large debts to the ECB.

And they're not living within their means at the moment. From what I've read, they still have issues collecting tax etc.

There's a bloke on BBC news at he moment going on about how the crash of the Euro has seen exports in Europe surge, and those additional profits outstrip the amount lent to Greece. However, he's the type to shout during an interview despite nobody actually arguing, just asking him to explain the viewers, so I'm inherently suspicious!

[Denzark]

The whole foundation of the EU is built on lies which are now being exposed. The Greek economy did not meet the requirements for membership but their government at the time lied about it and the EU swallowed it because it played to what the federalists wanted.

The EU can never work as designed until there is a united fiscal policy, and this can only be done with a federal single government. The guarantor of peace in Europe is NATO, which I do believe in. However, whilst we want our taxes to pay for stuff other countries don't have (a whole range of stuff from Nukes to NHS) we can't default to some external government.

Now we are at the stage when we are shown a central bank with the ability to control cash is what is needed. Luckily enough people ignored the Euro in this country that we are not biting that shizzle sandwich.

It is a sad indictment that EU members are considering humanitarian aid for the greeks, rather than wiping out their debt - as we did for West Germany in 1953...

[Mr Mystery]

Meh. They ran their own economy at a massive deficit, and now aren't keen on addressing that and repaying their creditors.

Meanwhile, in Blighty....

It's Budget day. Again. And the first 100% Conservative Budget for a long, long time.

Expected stuff.....

£12 billion worth of cuts, but spread over three rather than two years.

Inheritance Tax upped to an initial £1,000,000 threshold. Of this I fully approve. With house prices being stupid in the UK, Inheritance a Tax needs to be upped accordingly, which it hasn't in a long old time.

Rumours that income tax thresholds are also going to go up again. And yep, hard to disapprove of that one, as it puts money directly in my sky rocket,

Cuts thing? Depends where and how they're made.

[Mr Mystery]

Right let's have a quick recap of what we know, or what we think we know, is coming up in the Budget:

- The Student Maintenance Allowance looks set to be scrapped

- Tax credits face changes with limits for families with more than two children

- Social housing tenants earning more than £40,000 in London and £30,0000 in the rest of the country will be expected to pay market rents

- The benefits cap is to be lowered to £23,000 in London and £20,000 elsewhere

- The chancellor is expected to increase the threshold at which the 40% rate of tax kicks in

- There's a good chance Mr Osborne will also increase the personal allowance from £10,600 earlier than anticipated

- Some people are suggesting the chancellor could even merge National Insurance and income tax

- It's expected the chancellor will increase the inheritance tax threshold to £1m

- And it's likely that the Right to Buy scheme will be extended to tenants housing associations

- Finally, we already know that the government will amend Sunday trading laws

- And the BBC will have to pay for free TV licences for the over 75s starting in 2018


Some stuff I think is morally dubious, but most is alright with me.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

Seeing as I went off on him a bit in another thread, here's a thrown bone - Denzark is actually right on what Greece needs, which is a debt restructure deal (ie. some of it should be written off). At the moment it is not possible for Greece to repay its debt even at the most optimistic estimates (per the IMF). Greece's creditors have already effectively lost their money. The best thing to do is give the Greek economy a fighting chance to restart (and carry out necessary reforms, like tax collection) and alleviate the social crisis by writing off some or all of the debt. A functioning Greece is good for the rest of Europe (they buy and make things, and who doesn't like feta and olives? Even Germans!), and far better than one in total disarray, slaving to struggle to meet just the interest repayments on an amount of money so preposterous it's effectively not even real. Keeping the squeeze only empowers the most vicious parts of Greek society, too. Nobody wants Golden Dawn.

Oh, and you absolutely can - should - spend your way out of recession. Read Keynes! The time to restructure is when the crisis is over and there's money in people's hands, not before. This is why the likes of the USA and Germany recovered fine from the last crash, whereas Britain lurched into a double-dip.

National economies are not like households. You absolutely can spend money you don't have - that's the basis of successful economies the world over. You think the United States got rich by paying its debts? :p

Oh, and on the Budget: Gideon's "living wage" malarkey is amazingly cynical but undoubtedly good politics - I mean, it's testament to how cowardly and feckless Labour are that the Conservatives have outflanked them utterly on this one. Shame it's a ****ty deal for a lot of people!

[daboarder]

now now Cap'n

Cant be poking wholes in the imaginations of economic bigots.

and as much as I disagree with his concepts on social welfare, Ill also agree with denzark, greece needs some relief.

[Psychosplodge]

Unless the rest of us see a raise in the same sort of terms or greater than the minimum wage we're all going to be worse off when the prices go up with the minimum wage.

[Mr Mystery]

True that.

I'm also broadly pleased with tax breaks for buy-to-let being reduced for high earners. Might see the rental market stop being quite so insane.

[Psychosplodge]

It might stop the selfish *******s buying all the housing suitable for first time buyers you mean?

[Mr Mystery]

That's the ticket :)

Take away their tax breaks, and they might just not bother, because it costs them slightly more.

Then all we need is a sustained project of house building (and no developers, not your 'luxury' flats. Mainly because I'm not at all convinced making your interior, dividing walls out of rice paper actually constitutes any kind of luxury) and we might get the housing market back under control.

[Psychosplodge]

and there's nothing luxurious about a 40 square metre box.

[Kirsten]

interesting seeing the headlines today when went for lunch. right wing papers reporting lower taxes and higher minimum wage better for poorer families, left wing papers reporting benefits cuts and working class worse off.

[Psychosplodge]

Neither's probably 100% accurate, but of course they have their ideological point to push.

[Denzark]

That's the ticket :)

Take away their tax breaks, and they might just not bother, because it costs them slightly more.

Then all we need is a sustained project of house building (and no developers, not your 'luxury' flats. Mainly because I'm not at all convinced making your interior, dividing walls out of rice paper actually constitutes any kind of luxury) and we might get the housing market back under control.

Housing is such a difficult thing. I disagree wholly with the principle that an asset somebody owns, should suffer restrictions on how much they can sell or rent it for. This applies to houses. At the end of the day, a reasonable price is what someone will pay for something. We have similar arguments about 40K.

OK - the difference is that 40K is a luxury, true, but there are many parts of the world where bricks and mortar would be considered a luxury form of shelter from the environment.

Figures I can find (National House Building Council) show 138500 plots for building were registered for 2013-14. 172000 were built on average per year 2001-2006.

And net migration to the UK 13-14 was 243000.

Rather than legislate for telling people the prices they must sell/rent their property assets at - after all we wouldn't do that for any other asset - why not ease the market by having less people coming to the UK? then the house commodity is not so rare so prices should naturally fall.

[Mr Mystery]

Because it's those who already have money that are pricing everyone else out in a no-lose situation, as they just ramp up rents.

This is why I also support the new 'full priced' social housing thing. Got a council flat? Earn £30k outside Nodnol or £40k in Nodnol? Guess you're paying market value rent!

What's that! You can't afford it? Good. Do what everyone else has to do, and move somewhere more affordable. You're earning bloody good money, so stop schlepping around in housing intended for those less fortunate, particularly as the very same people who should be in your accommodation are currently in private rents, where the 'think of a number' monthly cost is met by the tax payer!

[Denzark]

true.

[Mr Mystery]

Whilst I don't condone the continued kicking of less well off students, and the impact that will have on social mobility, quite a decent budget overall.

And I'm not sure why Labour are objecting to their ideas being adopted. IT'S A GOOD THING, YOU GOONS!

[Cap'nSmurfs]

'cos the housing crisis has very little to do with immigration and almost everything to do with letting the "aspirational" middle classes (or in London, the international oligarchy) buy up all the housing stock, then not building any more for decades.

[Houghten]

and there's nothing luxurious about a 40 square metre box.

As a person living in a 25 square metre box (24 after deducting the area taken up by the dividing walls), I'd consider it a glorious upgrade.

[Psychosplodge]

As a person living in a 25 square metre box (24 after deducting the area taken up by the dividing walls), I'd consider it a glorious upgrade.

I may have confused my metric and imperial there.

[Denzark]

'cos the housing crisis has very little to do with immigration and almost everything to do with letting the "aspirational" middle classes (or in London, the international oligarchy) buy up all the housing stock, then not building any more for decades.

Start from the absolute end. Can all of Britain be built on until like Coruscant, every piece of land is covered in buildings? No I would suggest. Once you have accepted that as fact - you need some non-built on spaces - then the question is how to get to the acceptable limits. Immigration does not cause the housing crisis and I have not correlated those who would need/attract social housing - ie asylum seekers - against rich doctors who would come in and buy full price. But, when the population takes in every year, over 50% more people than it puts up houses for, it is entirely reasonable to say immigration exacerbates the problem. Housing, like all resources, is finite.

[grimmas]

Because it's those who already have money that are pricing everyone else out in a no-lose situation, as they just ramp up rents.

This is why I also support the new 'full priced' social housing thing. Got a council flat? Earn £30k outside Nodnol or £40k in Nodnol? Guess you're paying market value rent!

What's that! You can't afford it? Good. Do what everyone else has to do, and move somewhere more affordable. You're earning bloody good money, so stop schlepping around in housing intended for those less fortunate, particularly as the very same people who should be in your accommodation are currently in private rents, where the 'think of a number' monthly cost is met by the tax payer!

Well I certainly managed to live in T' big smoke in a private rent on a lot less than £40,000 a year, it was only me not a family though. I didn't receive any government help though.

[Mr Mystery]

Labour's leadership elections kick off today, and the other candidates continue to try to put the boot into Jeremy Corbyn, a note left winger.

Why?

Well, I'm not actually sure. Apparently, UK politics should only be a choice between The Tories, and The Diet Tories (formerly known as New Labour, formerly known as The Labour Party).

Apologies if I'm going a bit student radical here, but we need the like of Jeremy Corbyn. Someone who hasn't subscribed to the proven nonsense of trickle down economics. Someone who isn't obsessed with the exploitation of the workers (god I'm sounding student. Apologies again!).

I'm sick of 'big business knows best' when it's pretty clear all they know best is how to line their pockets, and get away with trashing the world economy.

I'd vote for Corbyn, and I'd vote for his vision of the Labour Party, especially given the aforementioned current choice of 'Tory or Diet Tory', not to mention the 'SUPER STRENGTH INSANITY TORY, NOW WITH QUADRUPLED NOT-SO-VEILD RACISM UKIP'.

Britain does have a left - and it's high time they were given their voice back.

[Kirsten]

yup, it is pretty infuriating the way he is being attacked on all sides. People are claiming that the British public doesn't want a left wing labour party because of the last election, but in reality they haven't had the chance to vote for one for quite a long time. as you say, last election was a choice between tory and diet tory, so hardly a good indicator of the will of the people. Corbyn being a long way ahead though, that is a much better indicator from Labour voters.

[Path Walker]

Given how all the news of UK politics has been about how much the voters like his policies, where are they getting the idea what people wouldn't vote for a Left Wing Labour Party? I mean, obviously the media interests are in the right/centre right holding power and will create the illusion that left wing ideas are bad which will make it difficult but its 2015, people aren't listening to the newspapers half as much as they were in the 80s, and by 2020 it'll be even harder for the press barons, or whats left of them, to control the message.

[Wildeybeast]

I think any sort of radical party in unelectable in England. The unexpected Conservative victory was driven by a fear of the SNP in middle ground English voters, so I doubt a clearly left wing Corbyn led Labour party would gain much traction. What it might do is gain back some of the ground they lost in Scotland. Tbh, I feel it's largely irrelevant whoever leads the Labour party. They have been decimated and it will be a generation before they get into power again.