Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Page 2 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Thu 31 Oct 2013, 5:50 pm

First topic message reminder :

The multitude of examples of disgraceful behaviour by Trade Unions over the past year have really started to show them up as the evil bully-boys they are.

Latest example being the vicious targeting of the wives and children of Ineos managers:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24758166

Question is, will this start to hurt Labour's chances of election in 2015?

Clearly formerly 'Red' Ed is concerned as he's taken steps to distance himself from both their antics and the Unions themselves, surely all this negativity will have to bite at some point? This could be the last thing Labour's already dwindling opinion poll leads need - could 2014 be the year of the turning point re public opinion or the main two parties??

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down


Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Duty281 on Fri 01 Nov 2013, 10:23 pm

Not quite sure how the selection for the TV debates work, but it's fairly obvious to presume that Miliband, Clegg, and Cameron wouldn't want Farage on there. So no, I don't think Farage will appear on the debates - but I awfully hope he does.

Duty281

Posts : 20880
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 24
Location : Not having Chance on here

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Champagne_Socialist on Sat 02 Nov 2013, 12:00 am

Farage won't appear on the tv debates because the bbc/sky etc will want to preserve the status quo.

Champagne_Socialist

Posts : 4961
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 32

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Sat 02 Nov 2013, 9:07 am

Another reason poll leads are irrelevant are that they only measure popular vote and we have a FPTP system. So unless you can find examples of Labour poll leads in Tory held seats it's meaningless.

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Champagne_Socialist on Sat 02 Nov 2013, 7:41 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:Another reason poll leads are irrelevant are that they only measure popular vote and we have a FPTP system.  So unless you can find examples of Labour poll leads in Tory held seats it's meaningless.
They have been pretty accurate in previous elections.

There is no chance the Tories will win the next election, they couldn't win it in 2010 and I very much doubt they will gain votes which will require them to win in 2015. The issue is whether Labour will secure enough votes to win the next election or if they will form a coalition.


Champagne_Socialist

Posts : 4961
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 32

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Sat 02 Nov 2013, 9:57 pm

Polls are irrelevant to this guy because the Tories are behind.......

Polls are very relevant especially when they are all pointing the same way......

But he is right that it's not the lead.......it's the share and that's a constant 36% +

Not just that but we have other Tory pitfalls to come.........

Coulson going down...........

IDS has made a mess of the Universal credit.......Going to cost millions..

Say it again that people who think Unions cost Elections are the same people who think Europe referndum promises costs elections.......

The people with more money than sense.........people who don't have to worry about the standard of living going up etc...

Standard of living has dropped and won't be going back to where it was in 2010 before 2015..........

Like I said keep dreaming..........

Don't take my word for it look at the odds.........

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Duty281 on Sat 02 Nov 2013, 10:10 pm

Cameron will have Miliband on toast during the TV debates - just watch any of the last few PMQs to see that.

That will certainly hurt Labour, if nothing else.

Then there's the growing economy, falling unemployment, and Britain gradually turning a corner. Keep dreaming of a Labour majority, that won't happen. But nor will the Tories. They'll likely get around 38-40 percent of the vote, with Labour on about 35-37, and the liberals on 13-15, with UKIP in the outside lane on 10-12 percent.

It will be a coalition, but what?

The most likely outcome will be Labour and the Liberals. Oh dear, that'll be the certain death of Britain. A left-wing paradise.

Which country shall I emigrate to? Canada or New Zealand? I've heard nice things about Australia. Hmmm.

Duty281

Posts : 20880
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 24
Location : Not having Chance on here

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Champagne_Socialist on Sun 03 Nov 2013, 5:28 am

Duty281 wrote:Cameron will have Miliband on toast during the TV debates - just watch any of the last few PMQs to see that.

That will certainly hurt Labour, if nothing else.

Then there's the growing economy, falling unemployment, and Britain gradually turning a corner. Keep dreaming of a Labour majority, that won't happen. But nor will the Tories. They'll likely get around 38-40 percent of the vote, with Labour on about 35-37, and the liberals on 13-15, with UKIP in the outside lane on 10-12 percent.

It will be a coalition, but what?

The most likely outcome will be Labour and the Liberals. Oh dear, that'll be the certain death of Britain. A left-wing paradise.

Which country shall I emigrate to? Canada or New Zealand? I've heard nice things about Australia. Hmmm.
Are you honestly happy with how the Conservatives have been running the country for the last 3 years? They have been using the idea of debt reduction as a disguise to allow them to impose ideologial punishments to the poor.

This government seem to think that the only way to reduce the deficit is by attacking the poor. How in the same year they justified an increase in VAT to 20% and a reduction in income tax for people earning over 150k to 45% is beyond me.

If you are super rich then vote Conservative because they like to look after their own. They have given the super rich tax cuts on their earnings over 150k and they have purposefully reduced the standard of living for the poor and middle classes so that people become pooer and more desperate so that they are forced to work longer hours for less pay in poorer working conditions in companies owned by David Cameron's rich Conservative voting friends.

If you think the cuts to welfare and standards of living are to cut the deficit then you believe in a lie, lots of the cuts are ideological cuts designed to cut the standard of living, make people poorer so that they are forced to do what the rich landowners want them to do.

Do you think cuts to EMA and an increase in tuition fees was to reduce the debt? It's real purpose was to reduce the number of poor and working class people from getting an education because too many poor or working class young people were getting an education and working in better paid jobs and the conservatves were worried that no one was left to work in the low paid jobs.  

The conservatives opposed the national minimum wage, the conservatives are in favour of scrapping certain employment protecctions such as unfair dismissal. The conservatives want the working class to earn less money and have less protections at work so that they are more desperate and more vulnerable and thus it is easier for david cameron's rich employer friends to manipulate their employees.

Every single Conservative cut is aimed at the poor.

David Cameron might sound good on tv in a debate but if you have had your housing benefit cut by 25% because you have a spare bedroom in a house you have lived in for 40 years and refuse to move to a smaller house in sometimes a different city then you will not fall for his lies.

If you are an unemployed person who has been told that he has to pay up to 30% of his Council Tax bill whch could be as much as £25 a week out of your £55 a week JSA you will not vote onservative.

If you are a disabled person whose disability benefit has been cut you will not vote for Mr Cameron.

If you are a bright young school leaver from a poor family who has been told he has no access to EMA to help fund his college studies you will not vote conservative.

All of the above and much more has been in the name of the country having no money yet somehow david cameron has managed to find £50 billion pounds under his sofa to fund a rail link from London to Manchester even though we already have a rail link from london to manchester but this new rail link is 30 minutes faster.

If you are middle class or working class do not be fooled into voting conservative because your standard of living will go down. You might be upset about immigration or crime etc but voting conservative will not stop those problems and it will just result in your wallet having less money in it.

Champagne_Socialist

Posts : 4961
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 32

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Duty281 on Sun 03 Nov 2013, 10:12 am

Champagne_Socialist wrote:
Duty281 wrote:Cameron will have Miliband on toast during the TV debates - just watch any of the last few PMQs to see that.

That will certainly hurt Labour, if nothing else.

Then there's the growing economy, falling unemployment, and Britain gradually turning a corner. Keep dreaming of a Labour majority, that won't happen. But nor will the Tories. They'll likely get around 38-40 percent of the vote, with Labour on about 35-37, and the liberals on 13-15, with UKIP in the outside lane on 10-12 percent.

It will be a coalition, but what?

The most likely outcome will be Labour and the Liberals. Oh dear, that'll be the certain death of Britain. A left-wing paradise.

Which country shall I emigrate to? Canada or New Zealand? I've heard nice things about Australia. Hmmm.
Are you honestly happy with how the Conservatives have been running the country for the last 3 years? They have been using the idea of debt reduction as a disguise to allow them to impose ideologial punishments to the poor.

This government seem to think that the only way to reduce the deficit is by attacking the poor. How in the same year they justified an increase in VAT to 20% and a reduction in income tax for people earning over 150k to 45% is beyond me.

If you are super rich then vote Conservative because they like to look after their own. They have given the super rich tax cuts on their earnings over 150k and they have purposefully reduced the standard of living for the poor and middle classes so that people become pooer and more desperate so that they are forced to work longer hours for less pay in poorer working conditions in companies owned by David Cameron's rich Conservative voting friends.

If you think the cuts to welfare and standards of living are to cut the deficit then you believe in a lie, lots of the cuts are ideological cuts designed to cut the standard of living, make people poorer so that they are forced to do what the rich landowners want them to do.

Do you think cuts to EMA and an increase in tuition fees was to reduce the debt? It's real purpose was to reduce the number of poor and working class people from getting an education because too many poor or working class young people were getting an education and working in better paid jobs and the conservatves were worried that no one was left to work in the low paid jobs.  

The conservatives opposed the national minimum wage, the conservatives are in favour of scrapping certain employment protecctions such as unfair dismissal. The conservatives want the working class to earn less money and have less protections at work so that they are more desperate and more vulnerable and thus it is easier for david cameron's rich employer friends to manipulate their employees.

Every single Conservative cut is aimed at the poor.

David Cameron might sound good on tv in a debate but if you have had your housing benefit cut by 25% because you have a spare bedroom in a house you have lived in for 40 years and refuse to move to a smaller house in sometimes a different city then you will not fall for his lies.

If you are an unemployed person who has been told that he has to pay up to 30% of his Council Tax bill whch could be as much as £25 a week out of your £55 a week JSA you will not vote onservative.

If you are a disabled person whose disability benefit has been cut you will not vote for Mr Cameron.

If you are a bright young school leaver from a poor family who has been told he has no access to EMA to help fund his college studies you will not vote conservative.

All of the above and much more has been in the name of the country having no money yet somehow david cameron has managed to find £50 billion pounds under his sofa to fund a rail link from London to Manchester even though we already have a rail link from london to manchester but this new rail link is 30 minutes faster.

If you are middle class or working class do not be fooled into voting conservative because your standard of living will go down. You might be upset about immigration or crime etc but voting conservative will not stop those problems and it will just result in your wallet having less money in it.
Well I'm far happier with the Conservatives running the land, than the pathetic Labour party.

Duty281

Posts : 20880
Join date : 2011-06-06
Age : 24
Location : Not having Chance on here

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Sun 03 Nov 2013, 11:24 am

In fairness Duty is entitled to want the Conservatives to run the Country and I must admit to me they are far more suited to run the Economy..........As Romney was over Obama.....

Makes little difference to me who wins........Lucky enough to be comfortably off.......

I vote Labour mainly because I was brought up with strong liberal values by a house full of Kennedy Democrats.......Though it has to be said the Democrats back home are more right wing than the current Tory party.......

I believe in Universal healthcare, I believe in high standards of education for all....."Fair day's work for a fair day's pay" (Harry Truman).......I believe in full employment and a dignified welfare net for those who fall off the saddle and want to get back on the horse.......

I believe in Tax cuts for the working and middle class too...........

Just think my beliefs are closer to the Labour party........than the alternative offerings..

Must be said that my Brit family being a bunch of rightwingers has strengthened my resolve in my now stubborn middle years.......

Whatever ideology you believe however certain facts are self evident.......

1. Brown with the Labour party at an alltime low got 29%..........
2. Left wing Liberals will add to that CORE vote...........Making 33% minimum.......
3. Cameron with everything going for him got 36 %......2010
4. Labour only need to be 5 points behind under the current system to be the largest party...

Now we can forget the energy crisis.......Brooks and Coulson.......IDS crazy universal credit.....UKIP  and the slapping the Tories will get in the Euros...........

and say that the economy will be much improved in 2015..........which it will be.........

However Blair was a huge iconic figure swept to power in 1997 and he only got 43 % over dead duck Major........with a hugely split Tory party.

He had no baggage..................Cameron has plenty...........

You decide whether Cammy can get 40% to win outright !!!! which he will need..

I know what I think.........

Anyway the Tories are up 4 points in the latest Ipsos poll but here is the problem.............

Labour are still on 37%.............unchanged.................The Tories close the gap pertaining to how UKIP are doing..........The left wing Liberals are seeing to it that Labour has a 36-40% block vote...........


Last edited by TRUSSMAN66 on Sun 03 Nov 2013, 11:56 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : ...)

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 9:21 am

Champagne_Socialist wrote:
Duty281 wrote:Cameron will have Miliband on toast during the TV debates - just watch any of the last few PMQs to see that.

That will certainly hurt Labour, if nothing else.

Then there's the growing economy, falling unemployment, and Britain gradually turning a corner. Keep dreaming of a Labour majority, that won't happen. But nor will the Tories. They'll likely get around 38-40 percent of the vote, with Labour on about 35-37, and the liberals on 13-15, with UKIP in the outside lane on 10-12 percent.

It will be a coalition, but what?

The most likely outcome will be Labour and the Liberals. Oh dear, that'll be the certain death of Britain. A left-wing paradise.

Which country shall I emigrate to? Canada or New Zealand? I've heard nice things about Australia. Hmmm.
Are you honestly happy with how the Conservatives have been running the country for the last 3 years? They have been using the idea of debt reduction as a disguise to allow them to impose ideologial punishments to the poor.

This government seem to think that the only way to reduce the deficit is by attacking the poor. How in the same year they justified an increase in VAT to 20% and a reduction in income tax for people earning over 150k to 45% is beyond me.

If you are super rich then vote Conservative because they like to look after their own. They have given the super rich tax cuts on their earnings over 150k and they have purposefully reduced the standard of living for the poor and middle classes so that people become pooer and more desperate so that they are forced to work longer hours for less pay in poorer working conditions in companies owned by David Cameron's rich Conservative voting friends.

If you think the cuts to welfare and standards of living are to cut the deficit then you believe in a lie, lots of the cuts are ideological cuts designed to cut the standard of living, make people poorer so that they are forced to do what the rich landowners want them to do.

Do you think cuts to EMA and an increase in tuition fees was to reduce the debt? It's real purpose was to reduce the number of poor and working class people from getting an education because too many poor or working class young people were getting an education and working in better paid jobs and the conservatves were worried that no one was left to work in the low paid jobs.  

The conservatives opposed the national minimum wage, the conservatives are in favour of scrapping certain employment protecctions such as unfair dismissal. The conservatives want the working class to earn less money and have less protections at work so that they are more desperate and more vulnerable and thus it is easier for david cameron's rich employer friends to manipulate their employees.

Every single Conservative cut is aimed at the poor.

David Cameron might sound good on tv in a debate but if you have had your housing benefit cut by 25% because you have a spare bedroom in a house you have lived in for 40 years and refuse to move to a smaller house in sometimes a different city then you will not fall for his lies.

If you are an unemployed person who has been told that he has to pay up to 30% of his Council Tax bill whch could be as much as £25 a week out of your £55 a week JSA you will not vote onservative.

If you are a disabled person whose disability benefit has been cut you will not vote for Mr Cameron.

If you are a bright young school leaver from a poor family who has been told he has no access to EMA to help fund his college studies you will not vote conservative.

All of the above and much more has been in the name of the country having no money yet somehow david cameron has managed to find £50 billion pounds under his sofa to fund a rail link from London to Manchester even though we already have a rail link from london to manchester but this new rail link is 30 minutes faster.

If you are middle class or working class do not be fooled into voting conservative because your standard of living will go down. You might be upset about immigration or crime etc but voting conservative will not stop those problems and it will just result in your wallet having less money in it.
Who don't vote.

If they'd exercise their democratic rights a little more they wouldn't be in such a quagmire.

And, to answer your original question, yes I'm very happy with how the Tories are running show (though a million miles from perfect) and think Labour will basically come in a ruin everything if they get power.

My wallet has a lot more money in it thanks to the conversatives.

Not sure why you always preach and lecture about government spending either since you've actively chosen to avoid paying anything into the pot anyway.

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 9:28 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Polls are irrelevant to this guy because the Tories are behind.......

Polls are very relevant especially when they are all pointing the same way......

But he is right that it's not the lead.......it's the share and that's a constant 36% +

LD's polled fantastically right up until a few days before the last GE, how'd they actually fair again Truss??

Memory serves me correctly that actually LOST seats. That's right, LOST, despite consistently polling a third of the popular vote in the lead-up.

Everything is going Tories way at the moment, all the economic indicators are pointing positive. As much as you might lecture about 'cost of living', fact is more people are in work now than they ever were under Labour. Same as you/C_S can lecture about inequality but the top 1% are paying MORE now (both overall and proportionately) than they ever were under Labour. Currently everything is moving in Tories' favour, with over a year to go, and Labour are floundering. Milliband still looks utterly hopeless and incapable of coming out with any policy initiatives (unless you count the gas price folly) and the polls are all moving against them.

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 9:35 am

Think it's a bit of a generalisation that Labour ruin everything when they come into power....

I knew cleaners who got paid £2.50 an hour before the minimum wage......

People were dying on waiting lists pre-1997..........

Educational standards improved immeasurably post 1997......

Unemployment was down........

and the bankers did have something to do with the crash.......A fact biased Conservatives forget ad nauseum........So Brown should have let Northern rock go under ???

World wide recession..........

Miliband just needs to take a leaf out of Cameron's pre 2010 book.........Go populist on everything.......Point out that Clegg will sell out to the highest bidder so Liberals are a wasted vote.........Point at the standard of living, food banks etc..........

Just basically shore up the left wing lib dem vote..........

35% is more than enough Smile Smile Smile Cool Cool Cool Smile Smile Smile 

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 9:38 am

Didn't say Labour ruin everything.

I said this Labour will ruin the current position.  The economy has just picked up momentum from the greatest recession of anyone's lifetime and they want to bowl in, kill productivity, and resort to exactly what got us into the mess - borrow borrow borrow, just so they can throw bones at a lazy disinterested section of the electorate.

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 9:45 am

Vote blue go green remember that........Now he's U turning on that.......Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes 

There is a site where you can see all the U-turns he's made in 3 years......Over 40..

Universal credit is next by the way...........

and Milband is WEAK..........geez.

Thatcher bless her had more rocks..........Ten times the leader this guy is.

Say it again Blair was hugely popular and only got 43 % in 1997.........

Cammy-boy should have gone for electoral reform before HOL reform.......Osbourne missed a trick there....

Got to be 7 points ahead and I can't see it.......With the left wing Libbies added on to the core 29%........


TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 9:53 am

Labour u-turning as well. Going back on policies. Look at the HS2 debacle.

Point is, only you (and similar others) are placing massive emphasis on u-turns. Personally I'd rather we just did the right thing in the end. I WISH HOPE DREAM Tony Blair has u-turned on Iraq for example.

That decision is STILL costing this country substantially more in lives and plain cash than all the recent Tory 'u-turns' put together.

But hey, get your knickers in a twist over 'pasty tax' if you want and think that'll make a difference come election time. The Tories have come through their implosion, Labour failed to build on it and now are suffering their own one. We'll see where we are in a year...

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by seanmichaels on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 9:59 am

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:
Just posting his career and then ripping off a cheap Phil Collins/Sun headline doesn’t really add anything.
I think it was quite relevant given he was heavliy invovled in the fiscal policy of the last labour government, highlights which include record levels of borrowing and selling our stockpile of gold at rock bottom prices.

I am not political at all, I only voted once and that was because the missus was giving me earache about never having voted. I did spoil the paper as per Rowley's suggestion but didn't tell her. That said I do put aside 45 mins every wednesday for PMQ's and watch the news everyday. It is quite clear the country can't afford Milliband's latest round of vote winning policies but I fear your average joe will be swayed by them regardless.

My biggest gripe about him is however the treatment of his brother. Showed a really nasty side and says a lot about the man.

seanmichaels
seanmichaels
seanmichaels

Posts : 13321
Join date : 2012-05-25
Location : Virgin

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 10:01 am

I was against Iraq.........

Not getting my knickers into a twist........No need to.......

Thatcher got 42% against Foot who was the worst Labour leader in Labour history according to Labourlist.....He had a Suicide note manifesto .....and he got 28% and that was hampered by the SDP taking votes.........

For sure 2010 Tory-UKIpers will go back to the Tories in huge numbers but some won't.......

Enough to stop 42%........Factor in they haven't de-toxified..........Factor in Labour have a core of 29% before the Lib switchers.......

and you'll see 7 points becomes the lofty height of all ambition...........

Who knows maybe they'll do it..........But as I have pointed out it's a tall order kid.

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 10:06 am

Like I said, my money, i.e. the smart non-ideological money, is on another hung parliament. So who will the LD's get in bed with? Reckon Clegg would jump in with DC again as they're essentially cut from the same length, but if he were deposed then I could see them king-making Labour. Confident UKIP won't get enough seats to swing anything, even if they fare ok on the popular vote.

Just keeping my fingers crossed still that the Tories edge it somehow, as, as michaels says, I don't think this country can afford Labour right now. Maybe in 2020 when everyone's feeling rich and peachy again.

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 10:13 am

My money is too Mate..........

Clegg won't be part of it though........

Miliband/Farron.............Can't see right wing Tories wanting Cameron to go in again....Or leftie liberals..........and Labour won't agree on Clegg so he'll resign.

Expect Liberals to be under 50 next time........

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Mind the windows Tino. on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 11:51 am

seanmichaels wrote:selling our stockpile of gold at rock bottom prices.
Well, this just highlights my point exactly. It all depends on your agenda.

Brown's gold sales are always used as a stick to beat him/Labour with. If that’s your agenda then fine, beat away. Fact is, it was a plan fully ratified and agreed upon by the previous Conservative government. Why do you think it never comes up in cross party debate? Neither of them want to talk about it. Brown made a mess of the PR so Labour avoid it, the Conservatives ratified the plan before they lost power so they avoid it as well. Do you really think Brown woke up one morning and arbitrarily decided to sell the UK’s gold reserves on a punt? Brown’s decision, and the previously ratified Tory plan, came about with the input of some of the UK’s leading economic advisors. No doubt some of which were Conservative voters. They got it wrong. With hindsight, it was a poor decision but I don’t recall many people at the time predicting near enough a decade long bull run in gold. If there were dissenters, they said it pretty quietly and only found the courage to really speak up $1500 an ounce later. Very brave.

Hindsight traders are always the best traders. Some of the UK gold reserves were valued at an average price of around $65 an ounce. I think the average price Brown achieved for his sales was something like $275 an ounce. Let’s not get confused here, the sales added money to the UK economy, they didn’t take away from it. Looking at the price over the next decade, he clearly left money on the table but I repeat, hindsight is a wonderful thing. A few influential journalists promoting whatever agenda they want can turn a story of PR mismanagement into the greatest financial balls up in history. Labours big gaffe was announcing the central bank sales before-hand which allowed the gold traders to short the market and allowed the producers to inflate their figures knowing full well the price was about to drop and they could buy back their hedge books at a profit. The losers are the UK population and the winners are ‘big business’ gold producers and the banks who have very clever gold traders. Not even that clever, it was an easy decision.

I have no problems with Brown carrying the can, he was the Chancellor and that comes with the job, but let’s not pretend it was his decision alone. Do we go back and ask the previous Tory Chancellor what he thought when he ratified the plan?

This is the whole point about personality politics. Your agenda is coming from the right whereas others don’t. Like you, I wouldn’t consider myself a ‘political’ person but I would certainly try and get a fuller picture of the facts if I had a clear agenda to push.

Mind the windows Tino.
Beano
Beano

Posts : 17786
Join date : 2011-05-13
Location : There are fewer more distressing sights than that of an Englishman in a baseball cap. And we'll die in the class we were born, well that's a class of our own my love. A class of our own my love. Did you see the stylish kids in the riot, cos mine beat me up then set the night on fire. Wombles bleed, truncheons and shields, you know I cherish you my love. Oh how I cherish Julius my love.

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 12:02 pm

Problem was he announced the sale well in advance...Giving the market notice it was to be flooded....

Shouldn't have sold it by auction either.......

Selling the reserves wasn't a bad idea...How it was implemented was the bad idea.

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Mind the windows Tino. on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 12:03 pm

I just said that.

Mind the windows Tino.
Beano
Beano

Posts : 17786
Join date : 2011-05-13
Location : There are fewer more distressing sights than that of an Englishman in a baseball cap. And we'll die in the class we were born, well that's a class of our own my love. A class of our own my love. Did you see the stylish kids in the riot, cos mine beat me up then set the night on fire. Wombles bleed, truncheons and shields, you know I cherish you my love. Oh how I cherish Julius my love.

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 12:04 pm

Sorry..........I didn't read it......

Just thought i'd comment on the reserves..


TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Mind the windows Tino. on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 12:05 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Sorry..........I didn't read it......

Yes you did.

Mind the windows Tino.
Beano
Beano

Posts : 17786
Join date : 2011-05-13
Location : There are fewer more distressing sights than that of an Englishman in a baseball cap. And we'll die in the class we were born, well that's a class of our own my love. A class of our own my love. Did you see the stylish kids in the riot, cos mine beat me up then set the night on fire. Wombles bleed, truncheons and shields, you know I cherish you my love. Oh how I cherish Julius my love.

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 12:07 pm

What do you think of Labour's chances.......??

you agree with my points....

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Mind the windows Tino. on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 12:21 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:What do you think of Labour's chances.......??

you agree with my points....
I don't really know much about it, to be honest. Too much apathy. I know about gold sales but not enough about current polling figures. My point is really routed in the personality of politics and voters. There are some people I work with who would vote Conservative if they put Ian Brady up as their representative. Likewise there are Labour voters here who would vote for Katie Price if she was a candidate. So long as the 'party' fits their world view, then its all fine. They cling on to facts that support their argument/discredit the opposing view when the reality is probably somewhere in the middle.

For the record, and I speak as someone who is purely a long distance viewer of politics rather than a genuine supporter, I think it will be hard to the Conservatives to win. They had an open goal last time and only managed to hit the bar and I'm not sure they have the backing yet to win a clear majority. Probably another hung parliament is my guess. And I stress, that is a semi-educated guess.

Mind the windows Tino.
Beano
Beano

Posts : 17786
Join date : 2011-05-13
Location : There are fewer more distressing sights than that of an Englishman in a baseball cap. And we'll die in the class we were born, well that's a class of our own my love. A class of our own my love. Did you see the stylish kids in the riot, cos mine beat me up then set the night on fire. Wombles bleed, truncheons and shields, you know I cherish you my love. Oh how I cherish Julius my love.

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 12:27 pm

You make good points............

As I alluded to earlier my Brit family is all right wing and I'm lucky enough not to be affected by whoever wins......

I'd like Labour to win and will vote...........But I wouldn't vote for Gordon or Tony in 2005....

Just think Labour despite being flawed is interested in a bigger group of the population than the present lot..

Appreciate you answering my question..

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Rowley on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 12:33 pm

Mind the windows Tino. wrote: There are some people I work with who would vote Conservative if they put Ian Brady up as their representative.  Likewise there are Labour voters here who would vote for Katie Price if she was a candidate.  
Ain't that the truth. My constituency is Rotherham and our MP for some time had been Dennis McShane who was kicked out of parliment for basically being a crook, even by the standards of the expenses scandal he behaved shamefully. We had a by election some time ago when he was kicked out and yet again Labour romped home.

Rowley
Admin
Admin

Posts : 22053
Join date : 2011-02-17
Age : 46
Location : I'm just a symptom of the modern decay that's gnawing at the heart of this country.

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 12:49 pm

Your system is like America in a way........In that states like Massachusetts always vote one way as States like Texas do the other........

So in essence only Ten states count in America...........Over here only about a eighty out of 600 or so count.........

PR system and every vote would count.......Probably be fairer.

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 1:00 pm

Would also mean nutters like the BNP and UKIP getting seat in parliament. Would require a massive step change in Brit psyche as it would be coalition governments permanently into the future.

The Germans seem to make it work, but they always seem a more sensible bunch....

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 1:04 pm

I think the BNP are finished.............Polling is non existant less than 1%........

UKIP are full of right wing Tory defectors.......

Thought you'd welcome UKIP..........

There is a case for saying If you get 6% of the votes you should have 6% of the representation..

I said it would be fairer but I wouldn't want it..

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 1:20 pm

if 6% of the country are mental I don't want that 6% represented

either that or you get all nietzche about it and say not everyone deserves/should have the vote.

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by seanmichaels on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 1:42 pm

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:selling our stockpile of gold at rock bottom prices.
I have no problems with Brown carrying the can, he was the Chancellor and that comes with the job, but let’s not pretend it was his decision alone.  Do we go back and ask the previous Tory Chancellor what he thought when he ratified the plan?  

This is the whole point about personality politics.  Your agenda is coming from the right whereas others don’t.  Like you, I wouldn’t consider myself a ‘political’ person but I would certainly try and get a fuller picture of the facts if I had a clear agenda to push.


 
I am not pretending it was his decision alone. He probably received a fair bit of advice from his sidekicks Balls and Milliband which is the worry given both have risen to the top of the tree in the labour party.
 
With respect to the conservatives ratifying the plan, the h-bomb was built the last century but if some nutter presses the button now it will be him and not those scientists carrying the can. Labour had their finger on the trigger and it was Brown who pulled it.
 
A great deal of Gordon Brown’s economic strategy would strike a sane man as troubling. Not a great deal was mysterious. The orgy of consumption spending, frequent extensions of the cycle over which he would “borrow to invest”, proclamations of the “end of boom and bust”: these are part of the armoury of modern politicians, of all political hues.
 
One decision stands out as downright bizarre, however: the sale of the majority of Britain’s gold reserves for prices between $256 and $296 an ounce, only to watch it soar so far as $1,615 per ounce today.
 
When Brown decided to dispose of almost 400 tonnes of gold between 1999 and 2002, he did two distinctly odd things.
 
First, he broke with convention and announced the sale well in advance, giving the market notice that it was shortly to be flooded and forcing down the spot price. This was apparently done in the interests of “open government”, but had the effect of sending the spot price of gold to a 20-year low, as implied by basic supply and demand theory.
 
Second, the Treasury elected to sell its gold via auction. Again, this broke with the standard model. The price of gold was usually determined at a morning and afternoon "fix" between representatives of big banks whose network of smaller bank clients and private orders allowed them to determine the exact price at which demand met with supply.
 
The auction system again frequently achieved a lower price than the equivalent fix price. The first auction saw an auction price of $10c less per ounce than was achieved at the morning fix. It also acted to depress the price of the afternoon fix which fell by nearly $4.
 
It seemed almost as if the Treasury was trying to achieve the lowest price possible for the public’s gold. It was.
 
One of the most popular trading plays of the late 1990s was the carry trade, particularly the gold carry trade.
 
In this a bank would borrow gold from another financial institution for a set period, and pay a token sum relative to the overall value of that gold for the privilege.
 
Once control of the gold had been passed over, the bank would then immediately sell it for its full market value. The proceeds would be invested in an alternative product which was predicted to generate a better return over the period than gold which was enduring a spell of relative price stability, even decline.
 
At the end of the allotted period, the bank would sell its investment and use the proceeds to buy back the amount of gold it had originally borrowed. This gold would be returned to the lender. The borrowing bank would trouser the difference between the two prices.
 
This plan worked brilliantly when gold fell and the other asset – for the bank at the heart of this case, yen-backed securities – rose. When the prices moved the other way, the banks were in trouble.
 
This is what had happened on an enormous scale by early 1999. One globally significant US bank in particular is understood to have been heavily short on two tonnes of gold, enough to call into question its solvency if redemption occurred at the prevailing price.
 
Goldman Sachs, which is not understood to have been significantly short on gold itself, is rumoured to have approached the Treasury to explain the situation through its then head of commodities Gavyn Davies, later chairman of the BBC and married to Sue Nye who ran Brown’s private office.
 
Faced with the prospect of a global collapse in the banking system, the Chancellor took the decision to bail out the banks by dumping Britain’s gold, forcing the price down and allowing the banks to buy back gold at a profit, thus meeting their borrowing obligations.
 
I spoke with Peter Hambro, chairman of Petroplavosk and a leading figure in the London gold market, late last year and asked him about the rumours above.
 
“I think that Mr Brown found himself in a terrible position,” he said.
 
“He was facing a problem that was a world scale problem where a number of financial institutions had become voluntarily short of gold to the extent that it was threatening the stability of the financial system and it was obvious that something had to be done.”
 
While the market manipulation which occurred when the gold reserves were sold was not illegal as the abuse at Barclays may have been, the moral atmosphere in which it took place was identical.
 
The crash which began in 2007 and endures still was the result of an abdication of responsibility across the financial sector. This abdication ranged from the consumer whose thirst for goods pushed him beyond into grave debt to a government whose lust for popularity encouraged it to do the same.
 
Responsibility is evaded by all bar those on whose shoulders it ought to rest. The gold panic of 1999 was expensively paid for by the British public. The one thing politicians ought to have bought with that money was a lesson in the structural restraints which needed to be placed on banks now that the principle that they were ultimately public liabilities had been established.
 
It was a lesson which could have acted to restrain all players in the credit market boom of the 2000s. It was a lesson which nobody learnt.

seanmichaels
seanmichaels
seanmichaels

Posts : 13321
Join date : 2012-05-25
Location : Virgin

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Champagne_Socialist on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 4:08 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:
Champagne_Socialist wrote:
Duty281 wrote:Cameron will have Miliband on toast during the TV debates - just watch any of the last few PMQs to see that.

That will certainly hurt Labour, if nothing else.

Then there's the growing economy, falling unemployment, and Britain gradually turning a corner. Keep dreaming of a Labour majority, that won't happen. But nor will the Tories. They'll likely get around 38-40 percent of the vote, with Labour on about 35-37, and the liberals on 13-15, with UKIP in the outside lane on 10-12 percent.

It will be a coalition, but what?

The most likely outcome will be Labour and the Liberals. Oh dear, that'll be the certain death of Britain. A left-wing paradise.

Which country shall I emigrate to? Canada or New Zealand? I've heard nice things about Australia. Hmmm.
Are you honestly happy with how the Conservatives have been running the country for the last 3 years? They have been using the idea of debt reduction as a disguise to allow them to impose ideologial punishments to the poor.

This government seem to think that the only way to reduce the deficit is by attacking the poor. How in the same year they justified an increase in VAT to 20% and a reduction in income tax for people earning over 150k to 45% is beyond me.

If you are super rich then vote Conservative because they like to look after their own. They have given the super rich tax cuts on their earnings over 150k and they have purposefully reduced the standard of living for the poor and middle classes so that people become pooer and more desperate so that they are forced to work longer hours for less pay in poorer working conditions in companies owned by David Cameron's rich Conservative voting friends.

If you think the cuts to welfare and standards of living are to cut the deficit then you believe in a lie, lots of the cuts are ideological cuts designed to cut the standard of living, make people poorer so that they are forced to do what the rich landowners want them to do.

Do you think cuts to EMA and an increase in tuition fees was to reduce the debt? It's real purpose was to reduce the number of poor and working class people from getting an education because too many poor or working class young people were getting an education and working in better paid jobs and the conservatves were worried that no one was left to work in the low paid jobs.  

The conservatives opposed the national minimum wage, the conservatives are in favour of scrapping certain employment protecctions such as unfair dismissal. The conservatives want the working class to earn less money and have less protections at work so that they are more desperate and more vulnerable and thus it is easier for david cameron's rich employer friends to manipulate their employees.

Every single Conservative cut is aimed at the poor.

David Cameron might sound good on tv in a debate but if you have had your housing benefit cut by 25% because you have a spare bedroom in a house you have lived in for 40 years and refuse to move to a smaller house in sometimes a different city then you will not fall for his lies.

If you are an unemployed person who has been told that he has to pay up to 30% of his Council Tax bill whch could be as much as £25 a week out of your £55 a week JSA you will not vote onservative.

If you are a disabled person whose disability benefit has been cut you will not vote for Mr Cameron.

If you are a bright young school leaver from a poor family who has been told he has no access to EMA to help fund his college studies you will not vote conservative.

All of the above and much more has been in the name of the country having no money yet somehow david cameron has managed to find £50 billion pounds under his sofa to fund a rail link from London to Manchester even though we already have a rail link from london to manchester but this new rail link is 30 minutes faster.

If you are middle class or working class do not be fooled into voting conservative because your standard of living will go down. You might be upset about immigration or crime etc but voting conservative will not stop those problems and it will just result in your wallet having less money in it.
Who don't vote.

If they'd exercise their democratic rights a little more they wouldn't be in such a quagmire.

And, to answer your original question, yes I'm very happy with how the Tories are running show (though a million miles from perfect) and think Labour will basically come in a ruin everything if they get power.  

My wallet has a lot more money in it thanks to the conversatives.

Not sure why you always preach and lecture about government spending either since you've actively chosen to avoid paying anything into the pot anyway.
Can you name all the different ways people pay tax? if not use google to help you out. Even people on benefits pay tax.

Champagne_Socialist

Posts : 4961
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 32

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Mind the windows Tino. on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 4:30 pm

seanmichaels wrote:
I am not pretending it was his decision alone. He probably received a fair bit of advice from his sidekicks Balls and Milliband which is the worry given both have risen to the top of the tree in the labour party.
 
With respect to the conservatives ratifying the plan, the h-bomb was built the last century but if some nutter presses the button now it will be him and not those scientists carrying the can. Labour had their finger on the trigger and it was Brown who pulled it.
  
You just can't help yourself you can you?  Lets forget the impartial economic advise and blame it on a coven of Labour witches.  What was it someone said about agendas!

Not really sure what point you're making about the H-bomb.  So it is all about timing then?  I've already conceded that I have no problem with Brown carrying the can, but that doesn't make the Conservative economic policy makers any less culpable, just lucky.  Lucky that the Tories got voted out so their flawed gold sale strategy was booked on someone elses watch.  That's the whole basis of the point I am making.  You see what you want to see, I am just trying to give it a bit of perspective.

Isn't the internet wonderful, you've found an article that supports your point of view.  I'm not going to bother trawling the web myself as I've been in and around commodity trading for over 16 years so I know a little bit about it.  You haven't referenced the article so I don't know what angle they are coming from, but a few observations;

First, he broke with convention and announced the sale well in advance, giving the market notice that it was shortly to be flooded and forcing down the spot price. This was apparently done in the interests of “open government”, but had the effect of sending the spot price of gold to a 20-year low, as implied by basic supply and demand theory.  Agreed.  Silly thing to do.

The price of gold was usually determined at a morning and afternoon "fix" between representatives of big banks whose network of smaller bank clients and private orders allowed them to determine the exact price at which demand met with supply.  Pretty much horsesh*t.  The 'fix', although its changed its purpose over the last decade was purely a tool to stop the banks stiffing the producers who had no access to live pricing.  Arguably you could say it was a mechanism to determine a price twice a day (10:30 and 15:00) but that is all it is.  A snapshot of a market that runs pretty much 24 hours a day.  The "price of gold" is determined by a fluid motion of buyers and sellers throughout the day, not by some pricing photograph that takes about 3 minutes in total.

The auction system again frequently achieved a lower price than the equivalent fix price. The first auction saw an auction price of $10c less per ounce than was achieved at the morning fix. It also acted to depress the price of the afternoon fix which fell by nearly $4.  Big deal.  I've seen the 'real' market move as much as $30 an ounce, up or down, with 5 minutes of the 'fix' settling.  $4 is nothing.

One globally significant US bank in particular is understood to have been heavily short on two tonnes of gold, enough to call into question its solvency if redemption occurred at the prevailing price.  Globally significant?  What a delightfully wishy washy description.  Heavily short?  This sounds like scaremongering to me.  Two tonnes?  65,000 ounces?  Assuming they weren't idiots and took a 65k position when they came in the morning, then that isn't a big play for a "globally significant" US bank.  If they are a "globally significant US bank" then they are one of the big boys and as such, a strategic 65k gold position isn't going to bring them down, especially as it would almost certainly have been arbitraged against another asset to reduce exposure.  Scaremongering.

Goldman Sachs, which is not understood to have been significantly short on gold itself, is rumoured to have approached the Treasury Is rumoured?  So that's worth it then.

I could go on but I have bored myself now.  The point is, and the point I have been making all along is that different agendas suit different political philosophies.  The truth is almost always somewhere in the middle.  

The article you have quoted might be completely accurate or a complete work of fiction, but depending on what angle the author is coming from can make the perspective change dramatically.

Mind the windows Tino.
Beano
Beano

Posts : 17786
Join date : 2011-05-13
Location : There are fewer more distressing sights than that of an Englishman in a baseball cap. And we'll die in the class we were born, well that's a class of our own my love. A class of our own my love. Did you see the stylish kids in the riot, cos mine beat me up then set the night on fire. Wombles bleed, truncheons and shields, you know I cherish you my love. Oh how I cherish Julius my love.

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 4:36 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Vote blue go green remember that........Now he's U turning on that.......Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes 

There is a site where you can see all the U-turns he's made in 3 years......Over 40..

Universal credit is next by the way...........

and Milband is WEAK..........geez.

Thatcher bless her had more rocks..........Ten times the leader this guy is.

Say it again Blair was hugely popular and only got 43 % in 1997.........

Cammy-boy should have gone for electoral reform before HOL reform-deemck-reform.......Osbourne missed a trick there....

Got to be 7 points ahead and I can't see it.......With the left wing Libbies added on to the core 29%........

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn
Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn
V2 Journal
V2 Journal

Posts : 4322
Join date : 2011-02-01
Location : Costa Del Belfast

http://theboxingfreak.wordpress.com/

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 4:44 pm

Champagne_Socialist wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Champagne_Socialist wrote:
Duty281 wrote:Cameron will have Miliband on toast during the TV debates - just watch any of the last few PMQs to see that.

That will certainly hurt Labour, if nothing else.

Then there's the growing economy, falling unemployment, and Britain gradually turning a corner. Keep dreaming of a Labour majority, that won't happen. But nor will the Tories. They'll likely get around 38-40 percent of the vote, with Labour on about 35-37, and the liberals on 13-15, with UKIP in the outside lane on 10-12 percent.

It will be a coalition, but what?

The most likely outcome will be Labour and the Liberals. Oh dear, that'll be the certain death of Britain. A left-wing paradise.

Which country shall I emigrate to? Canada or New Zealand? I've heard nice things about Australia. Hmmm.
Are you honestly happy with how the Conservatives have been running the country for the last 3 years? They have been using the idea of debt reduction as a disguise to allow them to impose ideologial punishments to the poor.

This government seem to think that the only way to reduce the deficit is by attacking the poor. How in the same year they justified an increase in VAT to 20% and a reduction in income tax for people earning over 150k to 45% is beyond me.

If you are super rich then vote Conservative because they like to look after their own. They have given the super rich tax cuts on their earnings over 150k and they have purposefully reduced the standard of living for the poor and middle classes so that people become pooer and more desperate so that they are forced to work longer hours for less pay in poorer working conditions in companies owned by David Cameron's rich Conservative voting friends.

If you think the cuts to welfare and standards of living are to cut the deficit then you believe in a lie, lots of the cuts are ideological cuts designed to cut the standard of living, make people poorer so that they are forced to do what the rich landowners want them to do.

Do you think cuts to EMA and an increase in tuition fees was to reduce the debt? It's real purpose was to reduce the number of poor and working class people from getting an education because too many poor or working class young people were getting an education and working in better paid jobs and the conservatves were worried that no one was left to work in the low paid jobs.  

The conservatives opposed the national minimum wage, the conservatives are in favour of scrapping certain employment protecctions such as unfair dismissal. The conservatives want the working class to earn less money and have less protections at work so that they are more desperate and more vulnerable and thus it is easier for david cameron's rich employer friends to manipulate their employees.

Every single Conservative cut is aimed at the poor.

David Cameron might sound good on tv in a debate but if you have had your housing benefit cut by 25% because you have a spare bedroom in a house you have lived in for 40 years and refuse to move to a smaller house in sometimes a different city then you will not fall for his lies.

If you are an unemployed person who has been told that he has to pay up to 30% of his Council Tax bill whch could be as much as £25 a week out of your £55 a week JSA you will not vote onservative.

If you are a disabled person whose disability benefit has been cut you will not vote for Mr Cameron.

If you are a bright young school leaver from a poor family who has been told he has no access to EMA to help fund his college studies you will not vote conservative.

All of the above and much more has been in the name of the country having no money yet somehow david cameron has managed to find £50 billion pounds under his sofa to fund a rail link from London to Manchester even though we already have a rail link from london to manchester but this new rail link is 30 minutes faster.

If you are middle class or working class do not be fooled into voting conservative because your standard of living will go down. You might be upset about immigration or crime etc but voting conservative will not stop those problems and it will just result in your wallet having less money in it.
Who don't vote.

If they'd exercise their democratic rights a little more they wouldn't be in such a quagmire.

And, to answer your original question, yes I'm very happy with how the Tories are running show (though a million miles from perfect) and think Labour will basically come in a ruin everything if they get power.  

My wallet has a lot more money in it thanks to the conversatives.

Not sure why you always preach and lecture about government spending either since you've actively chosen to avoid paying anything into the pot anyway.
Can you name all the different ways people pay tax? if not use google to help you out. Even people on benefits pay tax.
Income tax is the biggest single source of tax income and you deliberately avoid. You pay a little amount of VAT and that's it. No NI, no SDLT. Maybe some council tax.

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Champagne_Socialist on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 4:49 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:
Champagne_Socialist wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Champagne_Socialist wrote:
Duty281 wrote:Cameron will have Miliband on toast during the TV debates - just watch any of the last few PMQs to see that.

That will certainly hurt Labour, if nothing else.

Then there's the growing economy, falling unemployment, and Britain gradually turning a corner. Keep dreaming of a Labour majority, that won't happen. But nor will the Tories. They'll likely get around 38-40 percent of the vote, with Labour on about 35-37, and the liberals on 13-15, with UKIP in the outside lane on 10-12 percent.

It will be a coalition, but what?

The most likely outcome will be Labour and the Liberals. Oh dear, that'll be the certain death of Britain. A left-wing paradise.

Which country shall I emigrate to? Canada or New Zealand? I've heard nice things about Australia. Hmmm.
Are you honestly happy with how the Conservatives have been running the country for the last 3 years? They have been using the idea of debt reduction as a disguise to allow them to impose ideologial punishments to the poor.

This government seem to think that the only way to reduce the deficit is by attacking the poor. How in the same year they justified an increase in VAT to 20% and a reduction in income tax for people earning over 150k to 45% is beyond me.

If you are super rich then vote Conservative because they like to look after their own. They have given the super rich tax cuts on their earnings over 150k and they have purposefully reduced the standard of living for the poor and middle classes so that people become pooer and more desperate so that they are forced to work longer hours for less pay in poorer working conditions in companies owned by David Cameron's rich Conservative voting friends.

If you think the cuts to welfare and standards of living are to cut the deficit then you believe in a lie, lots of the cuts are ideological cuts designed to cut the standard of living, make people poorer so that they are forced to do what the rich landowners want them to do.

Do you think cuts to EMA and an increase in tuition fees was to reduce the debt? It's real purpose was to reduce the number of poor and working class people from getting an education because too many poor or working class young people were getting an education and working in better paid jobs and the conservatves were worried that no one was left to work in the low paid jobs.  

The conservatives opposed the national minimum wage, the conservatives are in favour of scrapping certain employment protecctions such as unfair dismissal. The conservatives want the working class to earn less money and have less protections at work so that they are more desperate and more vulnerable and thus it is easier for david cameron's rich employer friends to manipulate their employees.

Every single Conservative cut is aimed at the poor.

David Cameron might sound good on tv in a debate but if you have had your housing benefit cut by 25% because you have a spare bedroom in a house you have lived in for 40 years and refuse to move to a smaller house in sometimes a different city then you will not fall for his lies.

If you are an unemployed person who has been told that he has to pay up to 30% of his Council Tax bill whch could be as much as £25 a week out of your £55 a week JSA you will not vote onservative.

If you are a disabled person whose disability benefit has been cut you will not vote for Mr Cameron.

If you are a bright young school leaver from a poor family who has been told he has no access to EMA to help fund his college studies you will not vote conservative.

All of the above and much more has been in the name of the country having no money yet somehow david cameron has managed to find £50 billion pounds under his sofa to fund a rail link from London to Manchester even though we already have a rail link from london to manchester but this new rail link is 30 minutes faster.

If you are middle class or working class do not be fooled into voting conservative because your standard of living will go down. You might be upset about immigration or crime etc but voting conservative will not stop those problems and it will just result in your wallet having less money in it.
Who don't vote.

If they'd exercise their democratic rights a little more they wouldn't be in such a quagmire.

And, to answer your original question, yes I'm very happy with how the Tories are running show (though a million miles from perfect) and think Labour will basically come in a ruin everything if they get power.  

My wallet has a lot more money in it thanks to the conversatives.

Not sure why you always preach and lecture about government spending either since you've actively chosen to avoid paying anything into the pot anyway.
Can you name all the different ways people pay tax? if not use google to help you out. Even people on benefits pay tax.
Income tax is the biggest single source of tax income and you deliberately avoid.  You pay a little amount of VAT and that's it.  No NI, no SDLT. Maybe some council tax.  
Do you want to expand on that? I didn't know unemployed people were deliberately avoiding paying income tax, I suppose we should lock up all the unemployed for tax invasion.


Champagne_Socialist

Posts : 4961
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 32

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 5:18 pm

I think we've won the argument kiddo....Cool 

How is the bodybuilding going ?

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 5:21 pm

You chose a way of deriving income (gambling) that deliberately allowed you to avoid paying any tax.

With an education half as impressive as you make out you have, getting a job is far from impossible, so don't make out like you're some hard-up serf continually screwed by 'the man' and condemned to a life of welfare dependency and turnip eating.

IF, you are to be believed, then your weekly income was more than I was getting as a grad when I first started work in 2007 and I paid tax and NI on that.

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 5:22 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I think we've won the argument kiddo....Cool 

How is the bodybuilding going ?
Fail to see how.



http://www.606v2.com/f191-weightlifting

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 5:27 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I think we've won the argument kiddo....Cool 

How is the bodybuilding going ?
Fail to see how.



http://www.606v2.com/f191-weightlifting
I've proved that unions don't cost elections.........and yes you are welcome to come on 606 weightlifting anytime you like.......

It's not even a factor on voting intention..........

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 5:42 pm

What isn't a factor?

Because if you don't think Unions are then you're either mad, clueless or on the wind-up. Why else has Ed tried to distance himself?

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Champagne_Socialist on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 9:08 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:You chose a way of deriving income (gambling) that deliberately allowed you to avoid paying any tax.

With an education half as impressive as you make out you have, getting a job is far from impossible, so don't make out like you're some hard-up serf continually screwed by 'the man' and condemned to a life of welfare dependency and turnip eating.

IF, you are to be believed, then your weekly income was more than I was getting as a grad when I first started work in 2007 and I paid tax and NI on that.
Uunder UK taxation laws gambling profits are not subject to tax. It is physically impossible for me to pay tax on my gambling profits even if I wanted to as it is illegal for the tax man to collect any tax on gambling profits. I do make donations to charity however (nspcc).

You keep talking about me not paying income tax on my gambling profits and that is just highlighting your limited knowledge of taxation laws. Income tax is a tax on income derived from employment, going to the casino and putting £100 on number 18 on roulette and winning is not a form of employment and thus is not subject to income tax. You attacking me constantly for not paying income tax on my gambling profits is as silly as you saying I should pay capital gains tax on gambling profits or corporation tax because all of those taxes have no relevance to gambling profits.

Perhaps you are in favour of taxing gambling profits but that would mean everyone who wins £10 on a scratch card has to pay tax on it or an old granny winning £40 at bingo has to pay tax on it or a few lads heading to the casino to play blackjack on a saturday night and get lucky and win £100 have to pay tax on it.

If you are going to tax gambling profits because the gambler has managed to increase their capital then you need to also offer tax breaks for gambling losses because the gambler has reduced their capital.

But like I said it is physically impossible in the Uk to pay tax on any gambling profits and once again the fact you keep talking about me avoiding tax on gambling just shows your lack of knowledge of taxation laws. You can't avoid a tax that does not exist.


Champagne_Socialist

Posts : 4961
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 32

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Champagne_Socialist on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 9:10 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I think we've won the argument kiddo....Cool 

How is the bodybuilding going ?
Yeh whenever Tophat goes for the personal attacks it is a sign he has lost, it is his last resort.

Gym is going well. Injured my heel playing football about 3 weeks ago so have been avoiding cardio and just doing weight lifting. Went on the scales and saw that I weighed 94 kilos (210 lbs).


Champagne_Socialist

Posts : 4961
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 32

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 9:59 pm

Very quick to insult isn't he......Which makes it hard to debate with him......

Ipsos Mori.........Yougov and other pollsters have.........

Economy, Health, crime, education as the most important factors on whether people vote.......Unions aren't even a consideration......

Miliband is distancing himself because  Unite are an embarrassment...............

Foot got 28% with lot's of loonies.........Brown got 29% without a problem with unions.....

Foot had the SDP...

Unions aren't a factor.....Only for Tories  as Europe is.......


Last edited by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 04 Nov 2013, 10:01 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : ..)

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Tue 05 Nov 2013, 8:51 am

Champagne_Socialist wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:You chose a way of deriving income (gambling) that deliberately allowed you to avoid paying any tax.

With an education half as impressive as you make out you have, getting a job is far from impossible, so don't make out like you're some hard-up serf continually screwed by 'the man' and condemned to a life of welfare dependency and turnip eating.

IF, you are to be believed, then your weekly income was more than I was getting as a grad when I first started work in 2007 and I paid tax and NI on that.
Uunder UK taxation laws gambling profits are not subject to tax. It is physically impossible for me to pay tax on my gambling profits even if I wanted to as it is illegal for the tax man to collect any tax on gambling profits. I do make donations to charity however (nspcc).

You keep talking about me not paying income tax on my gambling profits and that is just highlighting your limited knowledge of taxation laws. Income tax is a tax on income derived from employment, going to the casino and putting £100 on number 18 on roulette and winning is not a form of employment and thus is not subject to income tax. You attacking me constantly for not paying income tax on my gambling profits is as silly as you saying I should pay capital gains tax on gambling profits or corporation tax because all of those taxes have no relevance to gambling profits.

Perhaps you are in favour of taxing gambling profits but that would mean everyone who wins £10 on a scratch card has to pay tax on it or an old granny winning £40 at bingo has to pay tax on it or a few lads heading to the casino to play blackjack on a saturday night and get lucky and win £100 have to pay tax on it.

If you are going to tax gambling profits because the gambler has managed to increase their capital then you need to also offer tax breaks for gambling losses because the gambler has reduced their capital.

But like I said it is physically impossible in the Uk to pay tax on any gambling profits and once again the fact you keep talking about me avoiding tax on gambling just shows your lack of knowledge of taxation laws. You can't avoid a tax that does not exist.

My tax law knowledge is fine thank-you. None of the pretentious diatribe above disputes what I'm saying - which is that you consciously chose a means of income that allowed you to avoid paying income tax and NI which are the single greatest tax contributions any one else makes.

So, as always, you're either ignorantly missing the point or simply choosing to skirt around it because you know you're in the wrong. But please, continue to lecture us all on how you think the government should spend the taxes we've all bust a gut to earn by working hard all day whilst you're sat on your backside in your dressing gown with a cup of tea clicking on internet gambling websites.

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Tue 05 Nov 2013, 8:56 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Very quick to insult isn't he......Which makes it hard to debate with him......

Ipsos Mori.........Yougov and other pollsters have.........

Economy, Health, crime, education as the most important factors on whether people vote.......Unions aren't even a consideration......

Miliband is distancing himself because  Unite are an embarrassment...............

Foot got 28% with lot's of loonies.........Brown got 29% without a problem with unions.....

Foot had the SDP...

Unions aren't a factor.....Only for Tories  as Europe is.......
Tying yourself in knots again Trussy. Why does it matter than Unite are an embarrassment if the Unions aren't a factor in voting??

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Tue 05 Nov 2013, 9:16 am

Thay aren't a factor in voting in general elections......However they sponsor Labour and are an embarrassment.........

I've pointed out to you what drives voting intention..

Peoople like yourself who are rich see Europe and Unions as a big deal.........Because unlike the struggling/striving classes that decide Elections you don't have to worry about energy rises and standard of living problems........

Unions won't be a factor as europe won't be.................

Because the people who decide elections don't give a f**k.........




TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 38778
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by TopHat24/7 on Tue 05 Nov 2013, 9:26 am

My energy bills went up 25% in the last year or so, trust me I have plenty to worry about.

Economy up, health netural (esp as a lot of the blame for what isn't going well can be laid at Labour's door), crime down and education negative (purely based on everyone's [largely justified] hatred of Gove).

So, using your metrics, things aren't looking to shabby for the Tories.

TopHat24/7

Posts : 17008
Join date : 2011-07-01
Age : 35
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015? - Page 2 Empty Re: Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum