Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: scawsby steve on May 29, 2019, 05:47:34 pm
-
Who's buried in the deepest crock of sh*t at the moment, Labour or Tories?
-
Tough one.
Both parties have traditionally been big coalitions of very different opinions. Think about the gap between Blair and Corbyn or between Rees-Mogg and Soubry. They were held together by general political aims, and the need to stay united to be able to win in a FPTP system.
Brexit has driven a wedge through these two coalitions. It has exposed differences of opinion that are getting to be insurmountable. And that gets to the core of your question. Neither party, as far as I can see, can retain the support of both its Remain and Leave supporting members. The parties have to come down on one side or the other and in doing so, will inevitably alienate a chunk of people on the other side.
Labour has been trying to hold a line of "we're support BOTH Remain and Leave people". They are trying to push the line that a fairer society and opposition to Austerity is bigger than Brexit. And there's some nobility in that approach, but the problem is that it doesn't seem to be getting through to more than 20-25% of the electorate. In the meantime, since the majority of Labour supporters are Remainers, and Labour's policy is not unambiguously Remain, Labour is haemorraging support to the Greens and LDs (and lesser, to ChUK). There's an obvious solution to this, which is to pivot to an unambiguous Ref2/Remain stance, but the party won't, partly through the ideology of its leadership and partly through genuine concerns of losing supporting in Northern Labour strongholds.
The Tories are unquestionably going to choose a new leader who will claim to be prepared to threaten No Deal. They have to do that to fight off Farage on the Right. And so we're going to go into a replay of the last couple of years. Because, unless they are truly mad, that leader will know that No Deal is not a sane option, and will know that the EU knows that they know that, and so it's not a credible negotiating position. That's precisely the path we've traipsed round for the past two years. So, the leader is doomed to either let down the majority of the membership and Tory voters, or to be faced down again by Parliament. Meanwhile, if they DO seriously go No Deal, they will lose a fair chunk of centrist Tory voters.
So, in a nutshell, they are both in a crock of shit. It's a mess for the country and nothing to crow about.
-
Tories, because they're all criminals. The squeaky clean Labour party will win an election when all the opposition parties are locked up.
-
Who's buried in the deepest crock of sh*t at the moment, Labour or Tories?
The UK is undoubtedly in the s**t whichever way the EU issue is decided
Total total crock of s**t - presided over by MP's who have been well and truly exposed as self serving b******s. There are some genuine ones who want to do their best to represent their Constituents *** but unfortunately they are outnumbered by those that do not have that agenda and so the former are largely "impotent" and can never prevail
*** I dont specifically mean B****t - but any other reasonably important topic - which could advance peoples lives suffers the same fate. Ploughed through by the Governemnt of the day (of whichever Colour)
Unfortunately people have short memories and a generation later after Party x has royally f****d up they suddenly win the day and get to start all over again
-
Ask the young ones only, us oldies with zimmer frames know they are all bloody useless.
-
Ask the young ones only, us oldies with zimmer frames know we are all bloody useless.
FTFY
-
Ask the young ones only, us oldies with zimmer frames know they are all bloody useless.
Careful Brian, you'll be accused of "lazy thinking".
-
Kato, if you are going to quote me please quote what I posted useless.
-
Ask the young ones only, us oldies with zimmer frames know they are all bloody useless.
Careful Brian, you'll be accused of "lazy thinking".
Saying they're useless isn't exactly the same as claiming they're "in it for themselves" though is it.
-
Ask the young ones only, us oldies with zimmer frames know they are all bloody useless.
Careful Brian, you'll be accused of "lazy thinking".
Saying they're useless isn't exactly the same as claiming they're "in it for themselves" though is it.
Red, mate; do you honestly think politicians are in it for the sake of helping humanity? I know I'm a bit of a cynic, but I just don't see it. Even with full expenses, would they do it for the minimum wage?
Don't forget, there are people who work voluntarily in places like soup kitchens and foodbanks. They're the real heroes to me.
As for those 650 in Westminster, I wouldn't even stand and have a drink with them.
-
Ask the young ones only, us oldies with zimmer frames know they are all bloody useless.
Careful Brian, you'll be accused of "lazy thinking".
Saying they're useless isn't exactly the same as claiming they're "in it for themselves" though is it.
Red, mate; do you honestly think politicians are in it for the sake of helping humanity? I know I'm a bit of a cynic, but I just don't see it. Even with full expenses, would they do it for the minimum wage?
Don't forget, there are people who work voluntarily in places like soup kitchens and foodbanks. They're the real heroes to me.
As for those 650 in Westminster, I wouldn't even stand and have a drink with them.
I don't deny there will be some there just to line their own pocket. But every single one of them and every single person wanting to get into politics, just there for themselves? I don't buy that. It's just a lazy cliche.
-
I've known several MPs.
Some are not the sharpest knives in the box. Some are frighteningly bright.
Every one worked ferociously hard and every one (including the ones I don't agree with) genuinely believed that they were trying to make the country a better place.
Mind, I've never met Boris Johnson...
-
I've known several MPs.
Some are not the sharpest knives in the box. Some are frighteningly bright.
Every one worked ferociously hard and every one (including the ones I don't agree with) genuinely believed that they were trying to make the country a better place.
Mind, I've never met Boris Johnson...
Ferociously hard? Well that's strange, because every debate I watch in the HOC is attended by about 6 people on each side of the chamber; and yet every time I walk over Westminster Bridge the veranda at the side of the Thames is full of them, all p*ssing it up at our expense.
-
RJ,a Labour female MP for a Nottingham constituency claimed just Over £200,000 pounds in expenses last year, that takes some doing spending about £4000 a week every week, and she will not be the only one.
When asked to explain herself on a talk radio show she went ballistic, and refused to answer,some of them are disgusting. The average of all MP's expenses across the UK is £158, 264 which worked out from January 2018 to the article being published at £120 million just for expenses and did not include the MP's salaries.
Over the three years of Brexit it looks like we have paid them quite a few million pounds in expenses alone to do nothing.
Add on the salaries and the expense of the House of Lords and we arn't half wasting some money.
-
SS
The work in the chamber of the Commons is a tiny fraction of what MPs do.
They sit on Select Committees.
Scrutinise legislation.
Hold surgeries
Write articles.
Meet with and discuss issues with wide ranges of people from trade unionists and business heads to foreign politicians
They give interviews on TV, radio and to the press.
They represent the country on trips to overseas Govts and businesses.
They campaign.
They read and write hundreds of letters and e-mails to/from constituents every year.
They attend party conferences and local party meetings and fundraising events.
And that lot barely scrapes the surface.
Your post is as ignorant (correct sense of the word, not an insult) of what they do as someone saying that football managers are bone idle because you only see them for 2 hours a week in the dugout.
Selby.
MPs have to run offices. That requires staff and equipment. They have to travel between Westminster and their constituency. They have to have accommodation in London to allow them to work effectively in Westminster.
£22000 is peanuts (and it's also £400/week, not £4000...) (EDIT: Just seen your correction. Point still stands. £150-250k is not a huge amount of money for what they have to do). Members of Congress in the States on average receive $1.25m in expenses per year. And a salary which is nearly double that of MPs.
-
By the way lads, if you're REALLY interested in elected representatives who draw lavish salaries and claim lots of expenses while not doing the job they were elected to do, you might want to examine the record of the bloke whose party I'm guessing you voted for last week.
Farage ranks 748/751 MEPs for attendance at votes.
Doesn't stop him drawing a €9000/ month salary, or claiming expenses which he then illegally spent on funding his UK Parliament election bid.
See. What I don't get is this. You see conspiracies and corruption everywhere where it doesn't exist. But you turn a blind eye to the piles of evidence of how far Farage's snout is buried in the trough.
Odd...
-
RJ,a Labour female MP for a Nottingham constituency claimed just Over £200,000 pounds in expenses last year, that takes some doing spending about £4000 a week every week, and she will not be the only one.
When asked to explain herself on a talk radio show she went ballistic, and refused to answer,some of them are disgusting. The average of all MP's expenses across the UK is £158, 264 which worked out from January 2018 to the article being published at £120 million just for expenses and did not include the MP's salaries.
Over the three years of Brexit it looks like we have paid them quite a few million pounds in expenses alone to do nothing.
Add on the salaries and the expense of the House of Lords and we arn't half wasting some money.
Ah well there you go, proof that every single person in politics is out for themselves, eh.
-
It is a good job the MP,s are not on performance related pay, they would not make the minimum wage.
Billy, how many make up the members in congress? what is the population of the USA compared to the UK?
And I notice you don't include the House of Lords, there are some good revelations today about their snouts in the trough, especially Labour members claiming expenses and having no recorded votes ( he claimed it was for thinking).
-
It is a good job the MP,s are not on performance related pay, they would not make the minimum wage.
Billy, how many make up the members in congress? what is the population of the USA compared to the UK?
And I notice you don't include the House of Lords, there are some good revelations today about their snouts in the trough, especially Labour members claiming expenses and having no recorded votes ( he claimed it was for thinking).
I think it's long overdue Selby to clear out of the house of lords make it a proper house of revue and have them elected, they are paid by the people, they are supposed to be for the people and they should be voted in by the people, and we probably don't need 650 of them.
-
Kato, if you are going to quote me please quote what I posted useless.
You clearly missed the FTFY, (Fixed That For You). It was a deliberate attempt to post the opposite viewpoint to yours by altering your post, something that's often used on on-line fora. Perhaps the internet is not for you? :P
-
Selby.
So you ignore the list of MPs' duties and just repeat that tired line about the being slackers. Kind of difficult to have a discussion when one side just blanks facts.
Each American House of Reo member represents about six times as many people as one of our MPs. And they get about 6 times the expenses. But you ought to factor in also the fact that America has a far stronger stratum of Govt at State level than our equivalent County Councils. So each state has dozens of hundreds of State representatives and senators who also take full time salaries and claim.large expenses.
Whichever way you look at it, our MPs do a shed load of work and are not highly remunerated by international standards.
-
BST
It may surprise you that the ex-Labour MP Clare Short was a personal friend of mine in the 1960s, when she was a bright young thing just out of university.
Now, I've no doubt that you're familiar with the term "tired and emotional", which is a parliamentary term used to replace the unparliamentary term "drunk". I can't remember the exact year, but Clare was suspended from the Chamber for accusing the Tory minister Alan Clark of being "as tired and emotional as a newt". Clark later admitted that Clare was right.
My point in all this, along with the fact I previously mentioned about the veranda outside the Commons, is if the MPs are such hardworking trojans, why are so many of them p*ssed up half the time? Would your employees be allowed to be drunk at work? I doubt it.
-
SS
You've picked THE biggest lounge lizard MP of the past 50 years as an example.
It's like watching Andy Watson and saying all footballers are nesh.
-
Billy, you have not done one sided then for three years? bloody hell.
-
Selby
Have I not backed up every argument with facts?
You know what they say: the truth tends to have a centre-Left bias.
-
Selby
Have I not backed up every argument with facts?
You know what they say: the truth tends to have a centre-Left bias.
https://lifehacker.com/how-to-find-evidence-to-support-any-argument-1454627815
-
AL
Telling. You assume I decide what I think then trawl round looking for stuff to support that?
Jesus f**king wept, it truly is hopeless isn't it?