Stop voting for fucking Tories

[C69]

After he's exonerated from this woke witch hunt, more pictures.

Yip it's gonna happen and then the Police will be be accused of a cover up and collusion...

Possibly.

[Hal Jordan]

Either that or during the next PMQs when they get back from their latest richly deserved holidays.

[I like neeps]

What a pleasant bunch.

[fishfoodie]

If you want to know what the ERG plans are for the UK; steamy pile of shite Frost lays it out

1) Completely reverse Devolution
2) Bonfire of regulations, & protections for the individual.
3) Ignore Climate change & Privatize the NHS

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... y-country/

[petej]

If you want to know what the ERG plans are for the UK; steamy pile of shite Frost lays it out

1) Completely reverse Devolution
2) Bonfire of regulations, & protections for the individual.
3) Ignore Climate change & Privatize the NHS

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... y-country/

That isn't a surprising from the countries shittest negotiator. I've assumed he was the most senior civil servant they could find willing to humiliate himself on Johnson's behalf.

[Tichtheid]

If you want to know what the ERG plans are for the UK; steamy pile of shite Frost lays it out

1) Completely reverse Devolution
2) Bonfire of regulations, & protections for the individual.
3) Ignore Climate change & Privatize the NHS

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... y-country/

Scottish independence has never been closer, then


I'm not hardline Indy, I'm genuinely torn, but if they start to implement that then I am fully committed to getting away from it.

I can only assume Wales will follow suit, and Norn Irn will get there anyway when the demographic changes reach critical mass.

[Slick]

If you want to know what the ERG plans are for the UK; steamy pile of shite Frost lays it out

1) Completely reverse Devolution
2) Bonfire of regulations, & protections for the individual.
3) Ignore Climate change & Privatize the NHS

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... y-country/

Scottish independence has never been closer, then


I'm not hardline Indy, I'm genuinely torn, but if they start to implement that then I am fully committed to getting away from it.

I can only assume Wales will follow suit, and Norn Irn will get there anyway when the demographic changes reach critical mass.

I can’t read it, but if the headlines match the article then I’m the same.

I’m no fan of the Scottish Government but if they take one bit of power back, I’m gone.

[Tichtheid]

If you want to know what the ERG plans are for the UK; steamy pile of shite Frost lays it out

1) Completely reverse Devolution
2) Bonfire of regulations, & protections for the individual.
3) Ignore Climate change & Privatize the NHS

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... y-country/

Scottish independence has never been closer, then


I'm not hardline Indy, I'm genuinely torn, but if they start to implement that then I am fully committed to getting away from it.

I can only assume Wales will follow suit, and Norn Irn will get there anyway when the demographic changes reach critical mass.

I can’t read it, but if the headlines match the article then I’m the same.

I’m no fan of the Scottish Government but if they take one bit of power back, I’m gone.

The thing is, these hardline Brexit bastards are destroying England and stamping on English people. That ultra wing of the Tory party, now formalised as the ERG and its offshoots, has never been about long term investment and goals, it has always been about expediency and what they can get out of it for themselves now.

Modern-day Robber Barons

[fishfoodie]

The trick is to hit the escape key as the page loads.... !

All successful governments are alike, but all unsuccessful ones fail in their own particular way. Successful governments explain their objectives, adopt policies that can achieve them, bring on board skilled people to deliver them – and connect with the instincts and wishes of their voters. Unsuccessful governments fail to do some or all of these things. As a result, they lose the confidence of the electorate long before they actually lose office.

Boris Johnson’s administration risks going down this road.

Admittedly, it has two huge achievements to its credit: getting us out of the EU, and delivering an exit from the pandemic without the coercive measures we have seen elsewhere. Merry England is one of the freest countries in the world.

But voters don’t give credit for past glories. They want to know “what now?” And here the prospectus looks thinner. The Government doesn’t seem to be able to decide whether it is a traditional, low-tax Tory administration, or whether its ambition is to turn Britain into a European-style social democracy. Consequently, it isn’t pleasing anyone – and the sense of drift is palpable.

Whatever happens with partygate, things need to get back on track. If we don’t stop vacillating between inconsistent objectives, and failing to make the case for any of them, we won’t take people with us – and we will deserve to lose.

This is all the more frustrating because our voters wanted us to set a clear course, to develop a new popular and modern Conservatism for a newly free Britain. They wanted Brexit and they wanted change. Boris Johnson still has great instincts for sensing what people want. The cause is not lost. But barely more than two years remain until a general election – so we must get on with it.

There are two false trails we could go down.

The first I call the “Red Wall fallacy”. It is the idea that the Tories’ 2019 voters, especially the new ones, aren’t interested in Conservatism. Instead, it is said, they want to rebuild the country with a post-Brexit culture war on identity politics coupled with high spending and lots of government programmes. I even hear Conservative politicians arguing that free markets are inherently corrosive of solidarity and community, and that “levelling up” requires an expanded role for the state. In short, it is said, if you believe in the nation state of Britain, you must also believe in high public spending and socialist economics.

We can’t go down this road, for one simple reason: we know free markets are the only way of building prosperity. In my experience, our voters in the Red Wall are perfectly aware of this – indeed, they are keener than most on attracting new investment and supporting business.

To adopt the Red Wall fallacy is to choose defeat and decline. It is the way of the traditional post-war Labour Party – of steadily declining British industrial power, rooted in a world without global competition, where the Empire gave us illusory strength by hiding domestic economic weakness.

The second false trail I call the “Davos fallacy”. This rests on the opposite assumption: that if you believe in free markets, you must also be a globalist with no regard for place and history, and that you don’t care what is happening in your country as long as you are doing alright yourself.

The Davos fallacy can’t be accepted, either. People do care about their country and their communities. They don’t think that the outcomes of free markets are the only things that matter. They know that, in a dangerous world, we can’t be indifferent to where economic activity is and who owns it.

Adopting the Davos fallacy is to disempower and ultimately dismantle ourselves as a country. It is the way of the globalisers – those who were quite happy to offshore business to China, who favour unlimited migration, who don’t think that national identity and history much matter, and who think economic and political judgments are better made by international institutions than by national democracies. In a classic case of Orwell’s “transferred nationalism”, some make up for the psychological void left by their lack of belief in national identity by a fixation with identity politics – an obsession which, if taken to extremes, risks destroying the cohesion and sense of fairness that democracies need to survive.

Both false trails contain elements of truth. That is why they are dangerously attractive. But neither on its own can be a modern Conservative approach.

The centre of gravity of Conservatism is to be found in blending the best of both. That has been the historic genius of the Conservative Party: to bring together the maximum amount of political and economic freedom with a belief in our country, what it stands for, its cohesion, and our collective solidarity. Free markets, low taxes, freedom of speech and ideas, within a strong national democracy with which we all identify – that is the right way forward for our party and our country.

Some say these ideas are contradictory. They aren’t. They go together. If free markets, with all their churn and turbulence and messiness, are to be supported by everyone, they have to work within a framework – a common national endeavour, with an understanding that “we are all in this together”, where the price of being supported when things go wrong is that you have to work hard when things go right.

Historically, this concept would have seemed unexceptionable, obvious even. But it has been damaged by our 50 years of EU membership. The EU’s deeply embedded belief in regulation, corporatism and, too often, protectionism meant that we were stuck in a fundamentally social democratic organisation that frustrated our efforts to preserve free markets and which actually weakened our decision-makers’ belief in them.

Moreover, the EU systematically undermined Britain as a country. We lost far too many powers to the EU. British elections decided fewer and fewer things in practice. As a result, some began to focus their loyalty on the EU, rather than their own country – as we have seen from the furious reaction from extreme Remainers to the events of recent years. We have to live with that unhappy legacy. But we can now change it. After Brexit, we have re-established our democracy. Now we can begin to deliver.

The situation is urgent. Many things need doing. But it is crucial to have a plan and a direction of travel. So here is my three-point plan to help the Government begin that work – to rebuild our country, to boost economic growth and to create an effective state not a big one.

Step 1: Unite the kingdom

First, we must rebuild the UK nation state as a collective endeavour for everyone within it.

The democratic nation state is the best way human beings have found to create political community and loyalty, to facilitate solidarity, and to make people feel part of something bigger. We should be proud of what we have achieved in this country. We should be respectful of our history, though be ready to debate it. We should be supportive of the institutions that underpin our democracy.

A country with self-respect cannot have its laws set by others. We must therefore finish the business of re-establishing our sovereignty in Northern Ireland – step by step, if necessary, but with no doubt about the final goal.

We should put an end to “devolve and forget” in Scotland and Wales. Local decision-making is fine, but it should come within a sensible national framework. The pandemic made clear the nonsense of having four different travel and public health policies.

We need to control our borders effectively and reduce the inward migration that is still adding a city the size of Manchester to the country every decade. We must also be ready to insist that people who come here to live permanently should be committed to this country and determined to make it a success – to build a more cohesive Britain. This may require some difficult choices.

Bringing people together means helping them when they face disadvantage – as individuals. It does not mean conceding special privileges to people purely because they are members of a favoured group or have some supposedly “protected characteristic”. Nor does it mean genuflecting to the Marxism of groups like BLM, or the craziness of Stonewall. We believe in people as individuals, with rights, aspirations and duties. Any other path means fragmenting and ultimately undermining our collective life in this country. People are often scared to comment honestly on this. Far too many people feel their lives might be destroyed if some enforcer comes for them because they express themselves in a way that is not in line with the latest fads.

So we must return to our long-established tradition of protecting free speech. When I was young, I often heard people say, of some doubtful opinion: “Well, it’s a free country.” I don’t hear that so much now. Indeed, during the pandemic, social media companies have prevented far too much perfectly legitimate debate; unfortunately, our Government has not always pushed back on this; and the Scottish Government seems to positively revel in it. Let’s recast the Online Safety Bill; let’s put more protection for free speech into law, and let’s make this a free country again.


Step 2: Make free markets attractive again

Second, we need to turbo-charge our country’s productive capacity through a return to free markets and competition.

We need a whole-hearted focus on competitiveness, productivity and growth. One per cent growth is not good enough for Britain. Other priorities are important, but unless we are creating wealth we will not be able to do any of them.

Our aim must be to get everyone around the world looking at Britain and saying: “Yes, they are on the right path.” Then investment and growth will follow. So we have to make freedom and free markets attractive again. This is not a simple return to Thatcherism, as so many of our critics assert. Thatcherism in the Eighties had to deal with some very specific problems, notably the power of trade unions. Today’s problems are different, but free markets are still the best way of tackling them. We can make a modern case for economic and political freedom that reflects the conditions of today, and make it attractive to people across the spectrum.

Specifically, that means abandoning the planned tax rises – National Insurance and Corporation Tax. On present plans, taxes will be the highest they have been for 50 years. That is fundamentally un-Conservative.

Instead, we should make our domestic economy super-competitive. We need to get on with reforming our regulatory frameworks. We should instruct the Competition and Markets Authority to break up inefficient big businesses, and break down cartels like the house-builders. We should not automatically be the friend of big business, but of good customer service, of new business ideas, of innovation.

Our vision is not that everyone should be an employee of some mega corporation, but that everyone should have the chance to be the master of their own destiny. So we want to help people build businesses and make them successful – which means the intrusive new IR35 rules need to be scrapped, too.

Let us also open our economy to the world – getting the best products and high-quality food at the best prices – by reducing all our tariffs to zero as fast as we can. That would be a real Brexit dividend, help tackle the cost of living crisis and send a very powerful signal to the rest of the world.

Step 3: Stop useless state intervention

Third, we don’t need a big state – but we do need an effective one.

Modern governments try to do too much, and do much of it badly. Our government spends £4 of every £10 the country produces. We have reached a limit.

We have seen far too much government failure, from the shocking case of poor Arthur Labinjo-Hughes to extraordinary levels of waste and mismanagement at the centre. For too many people, the state does not help solve problems, but creates them. Yet while the Government constantly expands its remit to solve every social problem the Today programme deems to be the state’s responsibility, basic functions that people care about like policing the streets or running the court system are neglected.

Yet there is no sign of any reduction of ambition. The Government thinks it knows best how to achieve the immensely complex task of net zero by picking unproven and unready technologies that push up energy costs for everyone. . It proposes to create an entirely new social care service bolted on to the NHS And, at the micro level, time and effort are wasted on laws to recognise animal sentience or to ban the advertising of muesli.

The Government takes on these ambitious tasks with machinery that is fundamentally ramshackle, Victorian and Edwardian in its underlying concepts. The problems this generates have been made worse by an increasingly assertive Civil Service sense of right and wrong, which reflects the views of an establishment elite not necessarily those of the people who elected the Government. That is why, every time a new problem is faced, whether it is vaccines or Brexit negotiations, we have had to bypass the existing bureaucracy and create new teams, with outsiders, to do the job.

Labour will never understand this. Their solution to everything is more government. The Conservative Party can do something different. We can call a halt. That doesn’t mean a libertarian nightwatchman state. It means stopping taking on new tasks, with the constant growth in spending that entails, and instead do the current ones better. It means putting much more reliance on individuals, families and communities to deal with problems. And it means reforming the Civil Service in a serious way, so that this and future governments can put their trust in a state machine that will help them secure their objectives, rather than get in the way.

In setting out this three-point plan, I know I am advocating an ambitious programme. We can’t deliver it all in the remaining two years of this Parliament. But what we can do is begin the work and explain it.

We can set out what we are trying to do and why, and how it will make our country better, stronger and more prosperous – and, eventually, invite the voters to come with us. It would be a truly Conservative prospectus and a truly Conservative approach: to trust the people, to bring everyone together to create a new, free Britain.

[Rinkals]

The trick is to hit the escape key as the page loads.... !

All successful governments are alike, but all unsuccessful ones fail in their own particular way. Successful governments explain their objectives, adopt policies that can achieve them, bring on board skilled people to deliver them – and connect with the instincts and wishes of their voters. Unsuccessful governments fail to do some or all of these things. As a result, they lose the confidence of the electorate long before they actually lose office.

Boris Johnson’s administration risks going down this road.

Admittedly, it has two huge achievements to its credit: getting us out of the EU, and delivering an exit from the pandemic without the coercive measures we have seen elsewhere. Merry England is one of the freest countries in the world.

But voters don’t give credit for past glories. They want to know “what now?” And here the prospectus looks thinner. The Government doesn’t seem to be able to decide whether it is a traditional, low-tax Tory administration, or whether its ambition is to turn Britain into a European-style social democracy. Consequently, it isn’t pleasing anyone – and the sense of drift is palpable.

Whatever happens with partygate, things need to get back on track. If we don’t stop vacillating between inconsistent objectives, and failing to make the case for any of them, we won’t take people with us – and we will deserve to lose.

This is all the more frustrating because our voters wanted us to set a clear course, to develop a new popular and modern Conservatism for a newly free Britain. They wanted Brexit and they wanted change. Boris Johnson still has great instincts for sensing what people want. The cause is not lost. But barely more than two years remain until a general election – so we must get on with it.

There are two false trails we could go down.

The first I call the “Red Wall fallacy”. It is the idea that the Tories’ 2019 voters, especially the new ones, aren’t interested in Conservatism. Instead, it is said, they want to rebuild the country with a post-Brexit culture war on identity politics coupled with high spending and lots of government programmes. I even hear Conservative politicians arguing that free markets are inherently corrosive of solidarity and community, and that “levelling up” requires an expanded role for the state. In short, it is said, if you believe in the nation state of Britain, you must also believe in high public spending and socialist economics.

We can’t go down this road, for one simple reason: we know free markets are the only way of building prosperity. In my experience, our voters in the Red Wall are perfectly aware of this – indeed, they are keener than most on attracting new investment and supporting business.

To adopt the Red Wall fallacy is to choose defeat and decline. It is the way of the traditional post-war Labour Party – of steadily declining British industrial power, rooted in a world without global competition, where the Empire gave us illusory strength by hiding domestic economic weakness.

The second false trail I call the “Davos fallacy”. This rests on the opposite assumption: that if you believe in free markets, you must also be a globalist with no regard for place and history, and that you don’t care what is happening in your country as long as you are doing alright yourself.

The Davos fallacy can’t be accepted, either. People do care about their country and their communities. They don’t think that the outcomes of free markets are the only things that matter. They know that, in a dangerous world, we can’t be indifferent to where economic activity is and who owns it.

Adopting the Davos fallacy is to disempower and ultimately dismantle ourselves as a country. It is the way of the globalisers – those who were quite happy to offshore business to China, who favour unlimited migration, who don’t think that national identity and history much matter, and who think economic and political judgments are better made by international institutions than by national democracies. In a classic case of Orwell’s “transferred nationalism”, some make up for the psychological void left by their lack of belief in national identity by a fixation with identity politics – an obsession which, if taken to extremes, risks destroying the cohesion and sense of fairness that democracies need to survive.

Both false trails contain elements of truth. That is why they are dangerously attractive. But neither on its own can be a modern Conservative approach.

The centre of gravity of Conservatism is to be found in blending the best of both. That has been the historic genius of the Conservative Party: to bring together the maximum amount of political and economic freedom with a belief in our country, what it stands for, its cohesion, and our collective solidarity. Free markets, low taxes, freedom of speech and ideas, within a strong national democracy with which we all identify – that is the right way forward for our party and our country.

Some say these ideas are contradictory. They aren’t. They go together. If free markets, with all their churn and turbulence and messiness, are to be supported by everyone, they have to work within a framework – a common national endeavour, with an understanding that “we are all in this together”, where the price of being supported when things go wrong is that you have to work hard when things go right.

Historically, this concept would have seemed unexceptionable, obvious even. But it has been damaged by our 50 years of EU membership. The EU’s deeply embedded belief in regulation, corporatism and, too often, protectionism meant that we were stuck in a fundamentally social democratic organisation that frustrated our efforts to preserve free markets and which actually weakened our decision-makers’ belief in them.

Moreover, the EU systematically undermined Britain as a country. We lost far too many powers to the EU. British elections decided fewer and fewer things in practice. As a result, some began to focus their loyalty on the EU, rather than their own country – as we have seen from the furious reaction from extreme Remainers to the events of recent years. We have to live with that unhappy legacy. But we can now change it. After Brexit, we have re-established our democracy. Now we can begin to deliver.

The situation is urgent. Many things need doing. But it is crucial to have a plan and a direction of travel. So here is my three-point plan to help the Government begin that work – to rebuild our country, to boost economic growth and to create an effective state not a big one.

Step 1: Unite the kingdom

First, we must rebuild the UK nation state as a collective endeavour for everyone within it.

The democratic nation state is the best way human beings have found to create political community and loyalty, to facilitate solidarity, and to make people feel part of something bigger. We should be proud of what we have achieved in this country. We should be respectful of our history, though be ready to debate it. We should be supportive of the institutions that underpin our democracy.

A country with self-respect cannot have its laws set by others. We must therefore finish the business of re-establishing our sovereignty in Northern Ireland – step by step, if necessary, but with no doubt about the final goal.

We should put an end to “devolve and forget” in Scotland and Wales. Local decision-making is fine, but it should come within a sensible national framework. The pandemic made clear the nonsense of having four different travel and public health policies.

We need to control our borders effectively and reduce the inward migration that is still adding a city the size of Manchester to the country every decade. We must also be ready to insist that people who come here to live permanently should be committed to this country and determined to make it a success – to build a more cohesive Britain. This may require some difficult choices.

Bringing people together means helping them when they face disadvantage – as individuals. It does not mean conceding special privileges to people purely because they are members of a favoured group or have some supposedly “protected characteristic”. Nor does it mean genuflecting to the Marxism of groups like BLM, or the craziness of Stonewall. We believe in people as individuals, with rights, aspirations and duties. Any other path means fragmenting and ultimately undermining our collective life in this country. People are often scared to comment honestly on this. Far too many people feel their lives might be destroyed if some enforcer comes for them because they express themselves in a way that is not in line with the latest fads.

So we must return to our long-established tradition of protecting free speech. When I was young, I often heard people say, of some doubtful opinion: “Well, it’s a free country.” I don’t hear that so much now. Indeed, during the pandemic, social media companies have prevented far too much perfectly legitimate debate; unfortunately, our Government has not always pushed back on this; and the Scottish Government seems to positively revel in it. Let’s recast the Online Safety Bill; let’s put more protection for free speech into law, and let’s make this a free country again.


Step 2: Make free markets attractive again

Second, we need to turbo-charge our country’s productive capacity through a return to free markets and competition.

We need a whole-hearted focus on competitiveness, productivity and growth. One per cent growth is not good enough for Britain. Other priorities are important, but unless we are creating wealth we will not be able to do any of them.

Our aim must be to get everyone around the world looking at Britain and saying: “Yes, they are on the right path.” Then investment and growth will follow. So we have to make freedom and free markets attractive again. This is not a simple return to Thatcherism, as so many of our critics assert. Thatcherism in the Eighties had to deal with some very specific problems, notably the power of trade unions. Today’s problems are different, but free markets are still the best way of tackling them. We can make a modern case for economic and political freedom that reflects the conditions of today, and make it attractive to people across the spectrum.

Specifically, that means abandoning the planned tax rises – National Insurance and Corporation Tax. On present plans, taxes will be the highest they have been for 50 years. That is fundamentally un-Conservative.

Instead, we should make our domestic economy super-competitive. We need to get on with reforming our regulatory frameworks. We should instruct the Competition and Markets Authority to break up inefficient big businesses, and break down cartels like the house-builders. We should not automatically be the friend of big business, but of good customer service, of new business ideas, of innovation.

Our vision is not that everyone should be an employee of some mega corporation, but that everyone should have the chance to be the master of their own destiny. So we want to help people build businesses and make them successful – which means the intrusive new IR35 rules need to be scrapped, too.

Let us also open our economy to the world – getting the best products and high-quality food at the best prices – by reducing all our tariffs to zero as fast as we can. That would be a real Brexit dividend, help tackle the cost of living crisis and send a very powerful signal to the rest of the world.

Step 3: Stop useless state intervention

Third, we don’t need a big state – but we do need an effective one.

Modern governments try to do too much, and do much of it badly. Our government spends £4 of every £10 the country produces. We have reached a limit.

We have seen far too much government failure, from the shocking case of poor Arthur Labinjo-Hughes to extraordinary levels of waste and mismanagement at the centre. For too many people, the state does not help solve problems, but creates them. Yet while the Government constantly expands its remit to solve every social problem the Today programme deems to be the state’s responsibility, basic functions that people care about like policing the streets or running the court system are neglected.

Yet there is no sign of any reduction of ambition. The Government thinks it knows best how to achieve the immensely complex task of net zero by picking unproven and unready technologies that push up energy costs for everyone. . It proposes to create an entirely new social care service bolted on to the NHS And, at the micro level, time and effort are wasted on laws to recognise animal sentience or to ban the advertising of muesli.

The Government takes on these ambitious tasks with machinery that is fundamentally ramshackle, Victorian and Edwardian in its underlying concepts. The problems this generates have been made worse by an increasingly assertive Civil Service sense of right and wrong, which reflects the views of an establishment elite not necessarily those of the people who elected the Government. That is why, every time a new problem is faced, whether it is vaccines or Brexit negotiations, we have had to bypass the existing bureaucracy and create new teams, with outsiders, to do the job.

Labour will never understand this. Their solution to everything is more government. The Conservative Party can do something different. We can call a halt. That doesn’t mean a libertarian nightwatchman state. It means stopping taking on new tasks, with the constant growth in spending that entails, and instead do the current ones better. It means putting much more reliance on individuals, families and communities to deal with problems. And it means reforming the Civil Service in a serious way, so that this and future governments can put their trust in a state machine that will help them secure their objectives, rather than get in the way.

In setting out this three-point plan, I know I am advocating an ambitious programme. We can’t deliver it all in the remaining two years of this Parliament. But what we can do is begin the work and explain it.

We can set out what we are trying to do and why, and how it will make our country better, stronger and more prosperous – and, eventually, invite the voters to come with us. It would be a truly Conservative prospectus and a truly Conservative approach: to trust the people, to bring everyone together to create a new, free Britain.

It doesn't say anything about privatising the NHS and selling it to the Americans, but I suppose that is a step too far just yet.

[Biffer]

So basically he’s taking the economic model that we’ve had for forty years, that has ended up with increased social division and economic fragility, and saying we just need to do more of that, then saying fuck Welsh or Scottish, you’re all British or English, which is basically the same thing to him, oh, and the bloody foreigners will do as we say because British.

Sounds like a plan.

[Line6 HXFX]

You have to seriously wonder how much cash "hatred" is costing is.

Can we even afford to be hateful?
Will it just fuck us?


Hatred of foriegners in terms of brexit. Hundreds of Billions, down the drain...whole industries shafted...the e UK splitting up etc..

Hatred of the poor,sick and unemployed...Punishing poor people, in terms of growth and just the human and societal cost of their persecution., in terms of mental and physical health etc.

It isn't f'cking cheap.
And what is the end goal?
The upside?
A bunch of billionaires and millionaires, pouring poison in our ears, whilst going untaxed as we squabble amongst ourselves and tear ourselves apart?
The abundance of public school walnkers, thinking they are superior because they made everyone elses lives so f'king grim, just to justify the term fees at eton?

Your point might be stronger if you didn't display such 'hatred' of anyone you consider a bit posh.

Your point may be stronger if the posh people I have met weren't all (to a man) massive cunts, with self serving contempt for the poor, sick and unemployed.
I mean who is my posh "mentor"?
You?

[Line6 HXFX]

You have to seriously wonder how much cash "hatred" is costing is.

Can we even afford to be hateful?
Will it just fuck us?


Hatred of foriegners in terms of brexit. Hundreds of Billions, down the drain...whole industries shafted...the e UK splitting up etc..

Hatred of the poor,sick and unemployed...Punishing poor people, in terms of growth and just the human and societal cost of their persecution., in terms of mental and physical health etc.

It isn't f'cking cheap.
And what is the end goal?
The upside?
A bunch of billionaires and millionaires, pouring poison in our ears, whilst going untaxed as we squabble amongst ourselves and tear ourselves apart?
The abundance of public school walnkers, thinking they are superior because they made everyone elses lives so f'king grim, just to justify the term fees at eton?

Your point might be stronger if you didn't display such 'hatred' of anyone you consider a bit posh.

Your point may be stronger if the posh people I have met weren't all (to a man) massive cunts, with self serving contempt for the poor, sick and unemployed.
I mean who is my posh "mentor"?
You?

[C69]

You have to seriously wonder how much cash "hatred" is costing is.

Can we even afford to be hateful?
Will it just fuck us?


Hatred of foriegners in terms of brexit. Hundreds of Billions, down the drain...whole industries shafted...the e UK splitting up etc..

Hatred of the poor,sick and unemployed...Punishing poor people, in terms of growth and just the human and societal cost of their persecution., in terms of mental and physical health etc.

It isn't f'cking cheap.
And what is the end goal?
The upside?
A bunch of billionaires and millionaires, pouring poison in our ears, whilst going untaxed as we squabble amongst ourselves and tear ourselves apart?
The abundance of public school walnkers, thinking they are superior because they made everyone elses lives so f'king grim, just to justify the term fees at eton?

Your point might be stronger if you didn't display such 'hatred' of anyone you consider a bit posh.

Your point may be stronger if the posh people I have met weren't all (to a man) massive cunts, with self serving contempt for the poor, sick and unemployed.
I mean who is my posh "mentor"?
You?

I met Tony Benn a few times, very Posh but a decent bloke. A few guys I work with are very posh but are also decent.

That said I also know w few posh horsey types who are utterly self serving and look down their nose at everone.
They have a view of the World like JRM and make me shudder.

[Line6 HXFX]

Openside?
Theo?
Farming?

And why would I need a posh, patriarchal mentor?

I look after 3 people with some of the most debilitating conditions on earth.


How the fuck is posh going to help me?

[Line6 HXFX]

Your point might be stronger if you didn't display such 'hatred' of anyone you consider a bit posh.

Your point may be stronger if the posh people I have met weren't all (to a man) massive cunts, with self serving contempt for the poor, sick and unemployed.
I mean who is my posh "mentor"?
You?

I met Tony Benn a few times, very Posh but a decent bloke. A few guys I work with are very posh but are also decent.

That said I also know w few posh horsey types who are utterly self serving and look down their nose at everone.
They have a view of the World like JRM and make me shudder.

I don't know why you were talking to me.
I don't trust you. Never did. Fuck off.

[Line6 HXFX]

Just so we are 100% clear, posh people will label me a scrounger, benefits cheat, try to imprison me, and make me pay the bedroom tax.

And you wonder why I fucking hate them?

[ASMO]

Who the hell are these posh people you speak of? Titled landowners? People who have relatively decent jobs and incomes and own their own home? Business owners? Lottery winners? People who might not have had the best educations but have worked hard all their life, saved like hell and own their home? Who?

[sefton]

Poor old Refry, if you can afford to shop at Farmfoods then he probably thinks you are posh.

[Line6 HXFX]

Poor old Refry, if you can afford to shop at Farmfoods then he probably thinks you are posh.

Hah..nope I think you are posh if you are tryjng to insult a "carers" intelligence.

He probably thinks Sefton is basically some Austin Healey type cunt.

[Line6 HXFX]

Who the hell are these posh people you speak of? Titled landowners? People who have relatively decent jobs and incomes and own their own home? Business owners? Lottery winners? People who might not have had the best educations but have worked hard all their life, saved like hell and own their home? Who?

I mean I didn't talk of posh people, that was an accusation leveled gainst me that you allowed.. but yeah..
They are massive cunts.
Their policies and whimsies affect poor people.

Think of a class of people at war with the poor sick and unemployed, who like the smell of their own farts, who want to completely destroy British society..for a tax cut.

[SaintK]

Who the hell are these posh people you speak of? Titled landowners? People who have relatively decent jobs and incomes and own their own home? Business owners? Lottery winners? People who might not have had the best educations but have worked hard all their life, saved like hell and own their home? Who?

I mean I didn't talk of posh people, that was an accusation leveled gainst me that you allowed.. but yeah..
They are massive cunts.
Their policies and whimsies affect poor people.

Think of a class of people at war with the poor sick and unemployed, who like the smell of their own farts, who want to completely destroy British society..for a tax cut.

Fuck off and post elsewhere please

[ASMO]

Who the hell are these posh people you speak of? Titled landowners? People who have relatively decent jobs and incomes and own their own home? Business owners? Lottery winners? People who might not have had the best educations but have worked hard all their life, saved like hell and own their home? Who?

I mean I didn't talk of posh people, that was an accusation leveled gainst me that you allowed.. but yeah..
They are massive cunts.
Their policies and whimsies affect poor people.

Think of a class of people at war with the poor sick and unemployed, who like the smell of their own farts, who want to completely destroy British society..for a tax cut.

With the greatesr respect, you are the one who went full bore on i quote "A bunch of billionaires and millionaires, pouring poison in our ears, whilst going untaxed as we squabble amongst ourselves and tear ourselves apart?
The abundance of public school walnkers, thinking they are superior because they made everyone elses lives so f'king grim, just to justify the term fees at eton?"

So it wasnt an accusation being levelled at you, it was someone using your very own words.

[Line6 HXFX]

I mean thestuffI posted is incontrovertible.. there is no need for the jury to retire.
If we take away the personnal abuse and accusations of chippiness. can we honestly actually afford to be hateful?
Of course we can hate the posh though.

I mean tax them until they fuck off.

What's that going to cost us?
No Rupert Murdoch? Yeah...OK.

They started the classwar btw.

"You have to seriously wonder how much cash "hatred" is costing is.

Can we even afford to be hateful?
Will it just fuck us?


Hatred of foriegners in terms of brexit. Hundreds of Billions, down the drain...whole industries shafted...the e UK splitting up etc..

Hatred of the poor,sick and unemployed...Punishing poor people, in terms of growth and just the human and societal cost of their persecution., in terms of mental and physical health etc.

It isn't f'cking cheap.
And what is the end goal?
The upside?
A bunch of billionaires and millionaires, pouring poison in our ears, whilst going untaxed as we squabble amongst ourselves and tear ourselves apart?
The abundance of public school walnkers, thinking they are superior because they made everyone elses lives so f'king grim, just to justify the term fees at eton?"

[C69]

Ok back to adult business again

I'd mentioned the Lib/Lab non agression pact previously, now it seems to be gaining some momentum.
Here's the Observers take on it;

A first-past-the-post voting system is a phenomenally crude and democratically weak way of electing MPs. All the prizes go to the party that wins a minority of the votes, with other parties excluded – a route to unchecked, unbalanced, even corrupt, government.

Elsewhere in Europe, only Belarus adopts it, backed by Vladimir Putin, as a way of ensuring that Russia’s puppet president, Alexander Lukashenko, has remained in power since 1994 to ensure Belarus’s fealty.

The Conservative party’s dominance – it has been in power twice as often as Labour since 1918, notwithstanding it never winning a majority of votes – is because the opposition parties fight each other and divide their vote. The only rational response, if not an electoral pact to allow only one candidate against the Tories in each constituency, is some form of informal non-aggression pact. At the very least, Liberal Democrats and Labour should not campaign actively in those seats where neither has a chance of winning and give the other as free a run as possible.



It was thus very welcome news last week that the two parties are discussing precisely that. Labour will not campaign actively in the Lib Dems’ top 30 target seats where they lie a good second, nor will the Lib Dems campaign actively in Labour’s top target seats. Only in Sheffield Hallam and Cambridge is the arrangement threatened, but not enough to imperil the wider enterprise. Given Labour’s challenge – it needs to win 128 seats to form a government – if the Lib Dems can win 15 seats in the Tories’ blue wall it makes a non-Tory government more likely. This is no more than scaling up what was done in the Batley and Spen byelection last summer, where the Lib Dems fought a limited campaign, so allowing Labour to hold a tough seat, and Chesham and Amersham and North Shropshire, where only the Lib Dems had the prospect of winning the seats. They duly won.

Most party activists understand and support the argument, although for Labour the memory of Nick Clegg supporting austerity remains a blot on the Lib Dem record, while Lib Dems cannot easily forget or forgive Jeremy Corbyn. Both should relax. Most Lib Dem and Labour members share the same views of both. In the Lib Dems’ case, the prospect of another coalition is toxic: any arrangement will be confined to agreeing to support a minority Labour government on a “supply and motion” basis – voting through the budget and treating each legislative motion on its merits.

Most voters understand the shortcomings of first past the post and want to use their vote wisely
Purists will say voters require a choice, that parties should not take their preferences for granted and that the policies are distinct. Wrong. Most voters understand the shortcomings of first past the-post and want to vote wisely, hence the recent byelection results and the growth of tactical voting websites. As for policy, the priorities are shared: clean up politics, repair our broken relationship with the EU, mobilise levelling up, bind our fractured society and reset capitalism. There will even be agreement on reforming the voting system, now trade union opposition that blocked it at Labour’s 2021 party conference has been dropped.

But the parties cannot be too quiet in their non-aggression pact. Voters – and newspapers such as the Observer that have long championed tactical voting – need to know what the parties expect in different seats. The sample sizes to get accurate opinion poll predictions in hundreds of constituencies are too large and expensive and it is easy to make mistakes. Both parties urge open and transparent government. They are right. They should start with open and transparent communication with the electorate about which seats they intend fiercely to contest and those they don’t. Let’s do it properly this time.

[Rinkals]

Who the hell are these posh people you speak of? Titled landowners? People who have relatively decent jobs and incomes and own their own home? Business owners? Lottery winners? People who might not have had the best educations but have worked hard all their life, saved like hell and own their home? Who?

I mean I didn't talk of posh people, that was an accusation leveled gainst me that you allowed.. but yeah..
They are massive cunts.
Their policies and whimsies affect poor people.

Think of a class of people at war with the poor sick and unemployed, who like the smell of their own farts, who want to completely destroy British society..for a tax cut.

Fuck off and post elsewhere please

It's the victim mentality.

You can't play the victim if you have nobody to complain to.

[tabascoboy]

If you want to know what the ERG plans are for the UK; steamy pile of shite Frost lays it out

1) Completely reverse Devolution
2) Bonfire of regulations, & protections for the individual.
3) Ignore Climate change & Privatize the NHS

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... y-country/

Jesus H Christ, while there may be some fair observations in that article, they are submerged in Nationalistic Neoliberalist shite alright...all it needs is to add "For the glory of the Empire!" at the end

[SaintK]

If you want to know what the ERG plans are for the UK; steamy pile of shite Frost lays it out

1) Completely reverse Devolution
2) Bonfire of regulations, & protections for the individual.
3) Ignore Climate change & Privatize the NHS

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... y-country/

Jesus H Christ, while there may be some fair observations in that article, they are submerged in Nationalistic Neoliberalist shite alright...all it needs is to add "For the glory of the Empire!" at the end

Just another unelected cunt with a highly developed sense of entitlement nwho thinks he knows best.

[Hal Jordan]

If you want to know what the ERG plans are for the UK; steamy pile of shite Frost lays it out

1) Completely reverse Devolution
2) Bonfire of regulations, & protections for the individual.
3) Ignore Climate change & Privatize the NHS

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... y-country/

Jesus H Christ, while there may be some fair observations in that article, they are submerged in Nationalistic Neoliberalist shite alright...all it needs is to add "For the glory of the Empire!" at the end

He probably wrote whilst wanking over a picture of Kate Middleton, with the Union flag wrapped around his cock.

[Biffer]

If you want to know what the ERG plans are for the UK; steamy pile of shite Frost lays it out

1) Completely reverse Devolution
2) Bonfire of regulations, & protections for the individual.
3) Ignore Climate change & Privatize the NHS

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... y-country/

Jesus H Christ, while there may be some fair observations in that article, they are submerged in Nationalistic Neoliberalist shite alright...all it needs is to add "For the glory of the Empire!" at the end

He probably wrote whilst wanking over a picture of Kate Middleton, with the Union flag wrapped around his cock.

Nah, his rent boy was choking him from behind with the union flag. While wearing a boris wig.

[fishfoodie]

Guess who ?

"I don't think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of Government when we are dealing with our recovery from Covid, the accumulation of Russian troops on the Ukrainian border, making sure that the the health service is able to deal with the sad, the unfortunate but nevertheless obvious, backlog that's been created by Covid," he told Sky News.

"That's what the country needs. That's what I believe the Prime Minister should be doing."

[ASMO]

Guess who ?

"I don't think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of Government when we are dealing with our recovery from Covid, the accumulation of Russian troops on the Ukrainian border, making sure that the the health service is able to deal with the sad, the unfortunate but nevertheless obvious, backlog that's been created by Covid," he told Sky News.

"That's what the country needs. That's what I believe the Prime Minister should be doing."

There already is a moral, intellectual and ethical vacuum there.

[Ovals]

Guess who ?

"I don't think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of Government when we are dealing with our recovery from Covid, the accumulation of Russian troops on the Ukrainian border, making sure that the the health service is able to deal with the sad, the unfortunate but nevertheless obvious, backlog that's been created by Covid," he told Sky News.

"That's what the country needs. That's what I believe the Prime Minister should be doing."

He forgot; the mess, of our own making, that is Brexit and inflation at its highest in 40 years.

[Biffer]

Guess who ?

"I don't think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of Government when we are dealing with our recovery from Covid, the accumulation of Russian troops on the Ukrainian border, making sure that the the health service is able to deal with the sad, the unfortunate but nevertheless obvious, backlog that's been created by Covid," he told Sky News.

"That's what the country needs. That's what I believe the Prime Minister should be doing."

He forgot; the mess, of our own making, that is Brexit and inflation at its highest in 40 years.

Oh, but that’s all someone else’s fault.

[Paddington Bear]

Struggling to understand how inflation is Boris' fault - unless he's managed to screw it up for multiple countries.

[Happyhooker]

Struggling to understand how inflation is Boris' fault - unless he's managed to screw it up for multiple countries.

I don't think you parsed that sentence correctly

[I like neeps]

Struggling to understand how inflation is Boris' fault - unless he's managed to screw it up for multiple countries.

I don't think Brexit helps matters but it isn't his fault.

I do wonder the state of play in other countries re house prices. I know Germany and Netherlands aren't leveraged to the eyeballs on cheap credit as they have more professional renting industries and housing associations. So I think inflation could be quite a bit more painful to Boris Johnson than some of his neighbours.

[petej]

Struggling to understand how inflation is Boris' fault - unless he's managed to screw it up for multiple countries.

I don't think Brexit helps matters but it isn't his fault.

I do wonder the state of play in other countries re house prices. I know Germany and Netherlands aren't leveraged to the eyeballs on cheap credit as they have more professional renting industries and housing associations. So I think inflation could be quite a bit more painful to Boris Johnson than some of his neighbours.

You have to hope house prices will start to fall.

[Paddington Bear]

Struggling to understand how inflation is Boris' fault - unless he's managed to screw it up for multiple countries.

I don't think Brexit helps matters but it isn't his fault.

I do wonder the state of play in other countries re house prices. I know Germany and Netherlands aren't leveraged to the eyeballs on cheap credit as they have more professional renting industries and housing associations. So I think inflation could be quite a bit more painful to Boris Johnson than some of his neighbours.

Germany also has a crippling fear of inflation that we don't and will pay huge prices that we wouldn't to avoid it. Balls deep in credit does seem to be more of an Anglo-Irish thing in Western Europe at least.

I think in the end inflation is the real potential killer for Boris - with cheap credit life has been pretty good for a lot of people for quite a while. That could all come crashing down quickly. Of course it all kicking off in Ukraine almost certainly sends all European economies into a catastrophic spiral.

[I like neeps]

Struggling to understand how inflation is Boris' fault - unless he's managed to screw it up for multiple countries.

I don't think Brexit helps matters but it isn't his fault.

I do wonder the state of play in other countries re house prices. I know Germany and Netherlands aren't leveraged to the eyeballs on cheap credit as they have more professional renting industries and housing associations. So I think inflation could be quite a bit more painful to Boris Johnson than some of his neighbours.

Germany also has a crippling fear of inflation that we don't and will pay huge prices that we wouldn't to avoid it. Balls deep in credit does seem to be more of an Anglo-Irish thing in Western Europe at least.

I think in the end inflation is the real potential killer for Boris - with cheap credit life has been pretty good for a lot of people for quite a while. That could all come crashing down quickly. Of course it all kicking off in Ukraine almost certainly sends all European economies into a catastrophic spiral.

I guess their fear of inflation is based on club med not being able to keep up the pretention the debt will be paid back and Germans savings going kaput. Not sure of the electoral coalitions over there and how it might affect Scholz. But the Tory electoral coalition is homeowners and landlords - anything painful for homeowners and landlords is going to be very bad for her majesty's government.