Bulletguy Posted April 24, 2019 Author Share Posted April 24, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-24 3:37 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 3:10 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 8:40 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 5:05 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:59 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:49 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:38 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:28 PM tonyishuk - 2019-04-23 1:51 PM Back toThe OP. I wonder what percent of the 1% is indiginious to this country ? Rgds Good question. It said in the linked article, “A few thousand dukes, baronets and country squires own far more land than all of middle England put together.” “Land ownership in England is astonishingly unequal, heavily concentrated in the hands of a tiny elite.” So it would seem most of the landed gentry are indigenous.....unless going way back through historic generations of Germanic bloodline of Royalty as one example? It's common knowledge the Duke of Westminster owns at least half of London, inherited from his father at just 25. So what? *-) .......... Just because you Socialists are wracked with envy, is that any reason to change a system that works? >:-) ......... Have you anything sensible to add to the logical question Tony asked? If not, then continue drowning yourself in your usual alcohol fueled haze. *-) Why don't you address your obvious Socialist/Communist jealousy? ;-) .......... As history has proved on numerous occasions, just as it is in Venezuela >:-) .......... You lot should never be put in charge of anything.......Because you only F*ck it up 8-) ....... Instead of gobbing off nonsensical drivel all the time, try addressing the question Tony asked. If you can't, then don't bother unless you want to continue making yourself look totally stupid. How are those PFI's that Labour instigated working out? ;-) .......... Just askin (lol) .......... Hate to burst yer bubble but Pfi's were 'instigated' under a Tory government, 1992 to be exact with John Major. Just sayin' *-) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8779598/Private-Finance-Initiative-where-did-all-go-wrong.html Still no answer to Tony's question then? Which is why I said "Instigated under Labour" ;-) ......... Major started them, but they proliferated under Labour......Or is that another of those unfortunate facts you Socialists like to forget? (lol) ........ Instigated under a Tory government and continued under both........and both Cameron and May have had ample time to overturn it but haven't. They've actually encouraged it further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 4:33 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 3:37 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 3:10 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 8:40 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 5:05 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:59 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:49 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:38 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:28 PM tonyishuk - 2019-04-23 1:51 PM Back toThe OP. I wonder what percent of the 1% is indiginious to this country ? Rgds Good question. It said in the linked article, “A few thousand dukes, baronets and country squires own far more land than all of middle England put together.” “Land ownership in England is astonishingly unequal, heavily concentrated in the hands of a tiny elite.” So it would seem most of the landed gentry are indigenous.....unless going way back through historic generations of Germanic bloodline of Royalty as one example? It's common knowledge the Duke of Westminster owns at least half of London, inherited from his father at just 25. So what? *-) .......... Just because you Socialists are wracked with envy, is that any reason to change a system that works? >:-) ......... Have you anything sensible to add to the logical question Tony asked? If not, then continue drowning yourself in your usual alcohol fueled haze. *-) Why don't you address your obvious Socialist/Communist jealousy? ;-) .......... As history has proved on numerous occasions, just as it is in Venezuela >:-) .......... You lot should never be put in charge of anything.......Because you only F*ck it up 8-) ....... Instead of gobbing off nonsensical drivel all the time, try addressing the question Tony asked. If you can't, then don't bother unless you want to continue making yourself look totally stupid. How are those PFI's that Labour instigated working out? ;-) .......... Just askin (lol) .......... Hate to burst yer bubble but Pfi's were 'instigated' under a Tory government, 1992 to be exact with John Major. Just sayin' *-) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8779598/Private-Finance-Initiative-where-did-all-go-wrong.html Still no answer to Tony's question then? Which is why I said "Instigated under Labour" ;-) ......... Major started them, but they proliferated under Labour......Or is that another of those unfortunate facts you Socialists like to forget? (lol) ........ Instigated under a Tory government and continued under both........and both Cameron and May have had ample time to overturn it but haven't. They've actually encouraged it further. You mean proliferated under Labour >:-) ......... "Announcing his plan to nationalise PFIs John McDonnell noted that they started under John Major, yet for some reason neglected to mention that the vast majority began under Labour governments. Sky’s Ed Conway has this helpful graph showing 604 PFI projects started under Labour, compared to 112 under the Tories." https://order-order.com/2017/09/25/84-of-pfi-projects-started-under-labour/ (lol) (lol) (lol) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 24, 2019 Author Share Posted April 24, 2019 malc d - 2019-04-24 3:52 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 8:48 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 8:10 PM malc d - 2019-04-23 6:08 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:38 PM ……………….., is that any reason to change a system that works? >:-) ......... The Highland Clearances weren't very popular. :-| He's a supporter of ethnic cleansing......as long as it doesn't affect him or his family. I'm supporter of Socialist cleansing...........as they've done enough damage 8-) ......... Quite clearly Dave prefers England to be owned by a very few people rather than a lot of people. So - if you have enough money - or ancestral links - you can own Cornwall and keep everybody else out. Why he prefers that situation, to England being owned by a lot more people, - goodness knows - maybe he aspires to becoming a landowning squire himself. He's known for his delusions of grandeur but the closest he'd get is a patch of grass to park that old tub on. ( Not sure why he links ' lots of people owning land ' to Socialism - presumably because that's one of his obsessions and he sees everything in terms of left and right ). :-| He's always confusing 'left/right'.....in fact i think he should be kept off all roads in Europe as he probably believes being British entitles him to drive on the left. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 24, 2019 Author Share Posted April 24, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-24 4:38 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 4:33 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 3:37 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 3:10 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 8:40 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 5:05 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:59 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:49 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:38 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:28 PM tonyishuk - 2019-04-23 1:51 PM Back toThe OP. I wonder what percent of the 1% is indiginious to this country ? Rgds Good question. It said in the linked article, “A few thousand dukes, baronets and country squires own far more land than all of middle England put together.” “Land ownership in England is astonishingly unequal, heavily concentrated in the hands of a tiny elite.” So it would seem most of the landed gentry are indigenous.....unless going way back through historic generations of Germanic bloodline of Royalty as one example? It's common knowledge the Duke of Westminster owns at least half of London, inherited from his father at just 25. So what? *-) .......... Just because you Socialists are wracked with envy, is that any reason to change a system that works? >:-) ......... Have you anything sensible to add to the logical question Tony asked? If not, then continue drowning yourself in your usual alcohol fueled haze. *-) Why don't you address your obvious Socialist/Communist jealousy? ;-) .......... As history has proved on numerous occasions, just as it is in Venezuela >:-) .......... You lot should never be put in charge of anything.......Because you only F*ck it up 8-) ....... Instead of gobbing off nonsensical drivel all the time, try addressing the question Tony asked. If you can't, then don't bother unless you want to continue making yourself look totally stupid. How are those PFI's that Labour instigated working out? ;-) .......... Just askin (lol) .......... Hate to burst yer bubble but Pfi's were 'instigated' under a Tory government, 1992 to be exact with John Major. Just sayin' *-) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8779598/Private-Finance-Initiative-where-did-all-go-wrong.html Still no answer to Tony's question then? Which is why I said "Instigated under Labour" ;-) ......... Major started them, but they proliferated under Labour......Or is that another of those unfortunate facts you Socialists like to forget? (lol) ........ Instigated under a Tory government and continued under both........and both Cameron and May have had ample time to overturn it but haven't. They've actually encouraged it further. You mean proliferated under Labour >:-) ......... Remind me again.......how long have your Tories been in government now? Have they done anything to put an end to Pfi's? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-24 3:55 PM ..Corbyn wants stuff owned ...…........Not by lots of people *-) ....... I have no idea what Corbyn wants - but if what you say is true - you and Corbyn clearly have something in common. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 malc d - 2019-04-24 4:48 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 3:55 PM ..Corbyn wants stuff owned ...…........Not by lots of people *-) ....... I have no idea what Corbyn wants - but if what you say is true - you and Corbyn clearly have something in common. :-| I've nothing in common at all with Corbyn 8-) ......... I don't have a problem with rich people owning stuff ;-) ....... Envy is a Socialists trait :-| ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 4:45 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 4:38 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 4:33 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 3:37 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 3:10 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 8:40 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 5:05 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:59 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:49 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:38 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:28 PM tonyishuk - 2019-04-23 1:51 PM Back toThe OP. I wonder what percent of the 1% is indiginious to this country ? Rgds Good question. It said in the linked article, “A few thousand dukes, baronets and country squires own far more land than all of middle England put together.” “Land ownership in England is astonishingly unequal, heavily concentrated in the hands of a tiny elite.” So it would seem most of the landed gentry are indigenous.....unless going way back through historic generations of Germanic bloodline of Royalty as one example? It's common knowledge the Duke of Westminster owns at least half of London, inherited from his father at just 25. So what? *-) .......... Just because you Socialists are wracked with envy, is that any reason to change a system that works? >:-) ......... Have you anything sensible to add to the logical question Tony asked? If not, then continue drowning yourself in your usual alcohol fueled haze. *-) Why don't you address your obvious Socialist/Communist jealousy? ;-) .......... As history has proved on numerous occasions, just as it is in Venezuela >:-) .......... You lot should never be put in charge of anything.......Because you only F*ck it up 8-) ....... Instead of gobbing off nonsensical drivel all the time, try addressing the question Tony asked. If you can't, then don't bother unless you want to continue making yourself look totally stupid. How are those PFI's that Labour instigated working out? ;-) .......... Just askin (lol) .......... Hate to burst yer bubble but Pfi's were 'instigated' under a Tory government, 1992 to be exact with John Major. Just sayin' *-) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8779598/Private-Finance-Initiative-where-did-all-go-wrong.html Still no answer to Tony's question then? Which is why I said "Instigated under Labour" ;-) ......... Major started them, but they proliferated under Labour......Or is that another of those unfortunate facts you Socialists like to forget? (lol) ........ Instigated under a Tory government and continued under both........and both Cameron and May have had ample time to overturn it but haven't. They've actually encouraged it further. You mean proliferated under Labour >:-) ......... Remind me again.......how long have your Tories been in government now? Have they done anything to put an end to Pfi's? No. They've having to sort out the train crash economy you left first *-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-24 5:42 PM malc d - 2019-04-24 4:48 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 3:55 PM ..Corbyn wants stuff owned ...…........Not by lots of people *-) ....... I have no idea what Corbyn wants - but if what you say is true - you and Corbyn clearly have something in common. :-| I've nothing in common at all with Corbyn 8-) ......... That's debatable. He rarely gives a straight answer to a question - much like yourself. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teflon2 Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 8:12 PM teflon2 - 2019-04-23 6:29 PM tonyishuk - 2019-04-23 1:51 PM Back toThe OP. I wonder what percent of the 1% is indiginious to this country ? Rgds That's a really awkward one. The water companies own about 1/60th and they have shareholders then you get the railways the roads throw in a few lakes the broads and a few canals. How do find out the nationality of all the shareholders (?) Both of which were state owned until the Tories privatised it and flogged it off. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatisation_of_British_Rail https://whoownsengland.org/2016/08/29/liquid-assets-land-owned-by-the-water-utilities/ So how does that comment help identify the nationality of the shareholders (?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 24, 2019 Author Share Posted April 24, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-24 5:45 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 4:45 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 4:38 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 4:33 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 3:37 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 3:10 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 8:40 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 5:05 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:59 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:49 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:38 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:28 PM tonyishuk - 2019-04-23 1:51 PM Back toThe OP. I wonder what percent of the 1% is indiginious to this country ? Rgds Good question. It said in the linked article, “A few thousand dukes, baronets and country squires own far more land than all of middle England put together.” “Land ownership in England is astonishingly unequal, heavily concentrated in the hands of a tiny elite.” So it would seem most of the landed gentry are indigenous.....unless going way back through historic generations of Germanic bloodline of Royalty as one example? It's common knowledge the Duke of Westminster owns at least half of London, inherited from his father at just 25. So what? *-) .......... Just because you Socialists are wracked with envy, is that any reason to change a system that works? >:-) ......... Have you anything sensible to add to the logical question Tony asked? If not, then continue drowning yourself in your usual alcohol fueled haze. *-) Why don't you address your obvious Socialist/Communist jealousy? ;-) .......... As history has proved on numerous occasions, just as it is in Venezuela >:-) .......... You lot should never be put in charge of anything.......Because you only F*ck it up 8-) ....... Instead of gobbing off nonsensical drivel all the time, try addressing the question Tony asked. If you can't, then don't bother unless you want to continue making yourself look totally stupid. How are those PFI's that Labour instigated working out? ;-) .......... Just askin (lol) .......... Hate to burst yer bubble but Pfi's were 'instigated' under a Tory government, 1992 to be exact with John Major. Just sayin' *-) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8779598/Private-Finance-Initiative-where-did-all-go-wrong.html Still no answer to Tony's question then? Which is why I said "Instigated under Labour" ;-) ......... Major started them, but they proliferated under Labour......Or is that another of those unfortunate facts you Socialists like to forget? (lol) ........ Instigated under a Tory government and continued under both........and both Cameron and May have had ample time to overturn it but haven't. They've actually encouraged it further. You mean proliferated under Labour >:-) ......... Remind me again.......how long have your Tories been in government now? Have they done anything to put an end to Pfi's? No. They've having to sort out the train crash economy you left first *-) ......... Oh anyone can play those silly games of whataboutism and blame shifting....so like Blair had to sort out the Thatcher/Major train crash they left behind. Wash, rinse, repeat cycle. All a bit silly indulging childish games like that isn't it? *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 24, 2019 Author Share Posted April 24, 2019 teflon2 - 2019-04-24 6:27 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 8:12 PM teflon2 - 2019-04-23 6:29 PM tonyishuk - 2019-04-23 1:51 PM Back toThe OP. I wonder what percent of the 1% is indiginious to this country ? Rgds That's a really awkward one. The water companies own about 1/60th and they have shareholders then you get the railways the roads throw in a few lakes the broads and a few canals. How do find out the nationality of all the shareholders (?) Both of which were state owned until the Tories privatised it and flogged it off. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatisation_of_British_Rail https://whoownsengland.org/2016/08/29/liquid-assets-land-owned-by-the-water-utilities/ So how does that comment help identify the nationality of the shareholders (?) It doesn't. Not sure how it would be possible to even determine without hazarding a guess. There's some very wealthy Asians and Saudis of course. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 6:40 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 5:45 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 4:45 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 4:38 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 4:33 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 3:37 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 3:10 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-24 8:40 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 5:05 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:59 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:49 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-23 3:38 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-23 3:28 PM tonyishuk - 2019-04-23 1:51 PM Back toThe OP. I wonder what percent of the 1% is indiginious to this country ? Rgds Good question. It said in the linked article, “A few thousand dukes, baronets and country squires own far more land than all of middle England put together.” “Land ownership in England is astonishingly unequal, heavily concentrated in the hands of a tiny elite.” So it would seem most of the landed gentry are indigenous.....unless going way back through historic generations of Germanic bloodline of Royalty as one example? It's common knowledge the Duke of Westminster owns at least half of London, inherited from his father at just 25. So what? *-) .......... Just because you Socialists are wracked with envy, is that any reason to change a system that works? >:-) ......... Have you anything sensible to add to the logical question Tony asked? If not, then continue drowning yourself in your usual alcohol fueled haze. *-) Why don't you address your obvious Socialist/Communist jealousy? ;-) .......... As history has proved on numerous occasions, just as it is in Venezuela >:-) .......... You lot should never be put in charge of anything.......Because you only F*ck it up 8-) ....... Instead of gobbing off nonsensical drivel all the time, try addressing the question Tony asked. If you can't, then don't bother unless you want to continue making yourself look totally stupid. How are those PFI's that Labour instigated working out? ;-) .......... Just askin (lol) .......... Hate to burst yer bubble but Pfi's were 'instigated' under a Tory government, 1992 to be exact with John Major. Just sayin' *-) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8779598/Private-Finance-Initiative-where-did-all-go-wrong.html Still no answer to Tony's question then? Which is why I said "Instigated under Labour" ;-) ......... Major started them, but they proliferated under Labour......Or is that another of those unfortunate facts you Socialists like to forget? (lol) ........ Instigated under a Tory government and continued under both........and both Cameron and May have had ample time to overturn it but haven't. They've actually encouraged it further. You mean proliferated under Labour >:-) ......... Remind me again.......how long have your Tories been in government now? Have they done anything to put an end to Pfi's? No. They've having to sort out the train crash economy you left first *-) ......... Oh anyone can play those silly games of whataboutism and blame shifting....so like Blair had to sort out the Thatcher/Major train crash they left behind. Wash, rinse, repeat cycle. All a bit silly indulging childish games like that isn't it? *-) Give over Bullet *-) ...........When did Labour ever hand over a flourishing economy? (lol) ........ I'll accept our economies become a repetitive cycle of........Tories Fixes it......Labour F*cks it >:-) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-25 8:39 AM I'll accept our economies become a repetitive cycle of........Tories Fixes it......Labour F*cks it >:-) ........ That's always been the way our kind of two party " democracy " works. We swing too far left for a few years - then too far right for a few years - and ' moderate ' voting is almost completely ignored. That way - in theory - no-one is too badly affected for too long. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 malc d - 2019-04-25 9:33 AM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 8:39 AM I'll accept our economies become a repetitive cycle of........Tories Fixes it......Labour F*cks it >:-) ........ That's always been the way our kind of two party " democracy " works. We swing too far left for a few years - then too far right for a few years - and ' moderate ' voting is almost completely ignored. That way - in theory - no-one is too badly affected for too long. :-( Rumour has it that the 2 party system is dead ;-) ........... I guess if Farage follows through with his threat that the Brexit party will contest the next General Election B-) ......... It's demise will be a certainty :D ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-25 9:57 AM malc d - 2019-04-25 9:33 AM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 8:39 AM I'll accept our economies become a repetitive cycle of........Tories Fixes it......Labour F*cks it >:-) ........ That's always been the way our kind of two party " democracy " works. We swing too far left for a few years - then too far right for a few years - and ' moderate ' voting is almost completely ignored. That way - in theory - no-one is too badly affected for too long. :-( Rumour has it that the 2 party system is dead ;-) ........... I guess if Farage follows through with his threat that the Brexit party will contest the next General Election B-) ......... It's demise will be a certainty :D ......... Absolutely. Or he could end up with as many MPs as his old party ( UKIP ) did at the last election. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 malc d - 2019-04-25 10:13 AM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 9:57 AM malc d - 2019-04-25 9:33 AM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 8:39 AM I'll accept our economies become a repetitive cycle of........Tories Fixes it......Labour F*cks it >:-) ........ That's always been the way our kind of two party " democracy " works. We swing too far left for a few years - then too far right for a few years - and ' moderate ' voting is almost completely ignored. That way - in theory - no-one is too badly affected for too long. :-( Rumour has it that the 2 party system is dead ;-) ........... I guess if Farage follows through with his threat that the Brexit party will contest the next General Election B-) ......... It's demise will be a certainty :D ......... Absolutely. Or he could end up with as many MPs as his old party ( UKIP ) did at the last election. ;-) It's a valid point that our first past the post system favours two party politics ;-) ......... But that was before Brexit fractured their cosy "From me to you" Chuckle Brothers club :D ....... Lemmings are now their only hope >:-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-25 10:18 AM It's a valid point that our first past the post system favours two party politics ;-) ......... But that was before Brexit fractured their cosy "From me to you" Chuckle Brothers club :D ....... It seems quite likely to me that our political system will get a bit splintered in the short term, at least until the Brexit farce is over, but I'm sure that eventually we will revert to the two party system. Both sides have too much to lose by changing our electoral system permanently. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 malc d - 2019-04-25 11:46 AM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 10:18 AM It's a valid point that our first past the post system favours two party politics ;-) ......... But that was before Brexit fractured their cosy "From me to you" Chuckle Brothers club :D ....... It seems quite likely to me that our political system will get a bit splintered in the short term, at least until the Brexit farce is over, but I'm sure that eventually we will revert to the two party system. Both sides have too much to lose by changing our electoral system permanently. :-( Possibly......but this time both parties have splintered ......unlike when the SDP formed.... which was the result of a purely Labour bunfight ;-) ......... Plus add into the mix the electorate is taking sides.......The centre ground is purely for the fence sitters nowadays :D ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-25 12:43 PM malc d - 2019-04-25 11:46 AM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 10:18 AM It's a valid point that our first past the post system favours two party politics ;-) ......... But that was before Brexit fractured their cosy "From me to you" Chuckle Brothers club :D ....... It seems quite likely to me that our political system will get a bit splintered in the short term, at least until the Brexit farce is over, but I'm sure that eventually we will revert to the two party system. Both sides have too much to lose by changing our electoral system permanently. :-( Possibly......but this time both parties have splintered ......unlike when the SDP formed.... which was the result of a purely Labour bunfight ;-) ......... Plus add into the mix the electorate is taking sides.......The centre ground is purely for the fence sitters nowadays :D ........... But they have ONLY splintered over Brexit. So once the dust has settled on that ( could take a year or two ) they will each get back to their own self interest 'right and left' issues. In the centre ground will be the frustrated majority, pointlessly voting for minor alternative parties, as always. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 25, 2019 Author Share Posted April 25, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-25 8:39 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 6:40 PM Oh anyone can play those silly games of whataboutism and blame shifting....so like Blair had to sort out the Thatcher/Major train crash they left behind. Wash, rinse, repeat cycle. All a bit silly indulging childish games like that isn't it? *-) Give over Bullet *-) ...........When did Labour ever hand over a flourishing economy? (lol) ........ I'll accept our economies become a repetitive cycle of........Tories Fixes it......Labour F*cks it >:-) ........ Typically you don't back any of your wild claims up because you know it's just hyperbole and conjecture based on nothing other than your pro-Tory views. I'm not into economics and undoubtedly Brian or Pat will be far better versed on this than me but a simple fact check blows your myth apart and shows it's not the picture you like to paint at all. It’s fair to say that GDP was generally better under Labour, but only up until the financial crisis. Of course, the crisis was a global phenomenon that would have hit Britain no matter which party was in government. Since then, growth has slowed significantly under the Conservatives. Statistically, the Conservatives have presided over a far slower growth in earnings than Labour, on average. Median gross annual earnings grew by an average of £638 in the six Labour years from 2005-2010 (inclusive). Then, under the Conservatives, they grew by an average of just £389 per year between 2011-2016. On face value, Labour have a better track record on keeping unemployment levels low. While in office, the party oversaw an average unemployment rate of 5.8 per cent. This is two percentage points lower than the Conservative’s average. Labour also had the single lowest annual unemployment rates during this whole period. Interestingly though, although the Conservative’s average is higher, the rate of unemployment fell faster while they were in office than under Labour. But these were during post-recession recovery periods, following big bumps in unemployment – rather than driving down the figures below what we would otherwise have expected. The financial crisis makes it difficult to judge each party’s record fairly. What’s more, low unemployment rates does not necessarily mean more people are in good, stable and well-paid work. For instance, in recent years the rise in low paid zero-hours contracts is likely to have driven down the unemployment statistics. So who has the better record? It’s a close call: both parties have a reasonable claim to be the strongest on this, it just depends which way you look at it. However, if we look at the figures over a longer time period – back to when Thatcher became prime minister in 1979 – then Labour would undoubtedly have the best record. Under these parameters, the average unemployment rate under the Conservatives rises to more than 8.5 per cent. They oversaw the longest sustained rise in unemployment, and witnessed the single biggest annual increase. https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-qa-which-party-has-a-better-track-record-on-the-economy http://www.primeeconomics.org/articles/conservative-budget-deficits-on-average-theyre-twice-the-size-of-labours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-04-25 2:47 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 8:39 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 6:40 PM Oh anyone can play those silly games of whataboutism and blame shifting....so like Blair had to sort out the Thatcher/Major train crash they left behind. Wash, rinse, repeat cycle. All a bit silly indulging childish games like that isn't it? *-) Give over Bullet *-) ...........When did Labour ever hand over a flourishing economy? (lol) ........ I'll accept our economies become a repetitive cycle of........Tories Fixes it......Labour F*cks it >:-) ........ Typically you don't back any of your wild claims up because you know it's just hyperbole and conjecture based on nothing other than your pro-Tory views. I'm not into economics and undoubtedly Brian or Pat will be far better versed on this than me but a simple fact check blows your myth apart and shows it's not the picture you like to paint at all. It’s fair to say that GDP was generally better under Labour, but only up until the financial crisis. Of course, the crisis was a global phenomenon that would have hit Britain no matter which party was in government. Since then, growth has slowed significantly under the Conservatives. Statistically, the Conservatives have presided over a far slower growth in earnings than Labour, on average. Median gross annual earnings grew by an average of £638 in the six Labour years from 2005-2010 (inclusive). Then, under the Conservatives, they grew by an average of just £389 per year between 2011-2016. On face value, Labour have a better track record on keeping unemployment levels low. While in office, the party oversaw an average unemployment rate of 5.8 per cent. This is two percentage points lower than the Conservative’s average. Labour also had the single lowest annual unemployment rates during this whole period. Interestingly though, although the Conservative’s average is higher, the rate of unemployment fell faster while they were in office than under Labour. But these were during post-recession recovery periods, following big bumps in unemployment – rather than driving down the figures below what we would otherwise have expected. The financial crisis makes it difficult to judge each party’s record fairly. What’s more, low unemployment rates does not necessarily mean more people are in good, stable and well-paid work. For instance, in recent years the rise in low paid zero-hours contracts is likely to have driven down the unemployment statistics. So who has the better record? It’s a close call: both parties have a reasonable claim to be the strongest on this, it just depends which way you look at it. However, if we look at the figures over a longer time period – back to when Thatcher became prime minister in 1979 – then Labour would undoubtedly have the best record. Under these parameters, the average unemployment rate under the Conservatives rises to more than 8.5 per cent. They oversaw the longest sustained rise in unemployment, and witnessed the single biggest annual increase. https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-qa-which-party-has-a-better-track-record-on-the-economy http://www.primeeconomics.org/articles/conservative-budget-deficits-on-average-theyre-twice-the-size-of-labours I see you seek to deceive ;-) ....... You forget I'm old enough to remember the 3 day week >:-) ........ Another Labour F*ck UP that proved to be to be ultimately a swing to the left that was atouche too far (lol) (lol) (lol) ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 25, 2019 Author Share Posted April 25, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-04-25 4:56 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-25 2:47 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 8:39 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 6:40 PM Oh anyone can play those silly games of whataboutism and blame shifting....so like Blair had to sort out the Thatcher/Major train crash they left behind. Wash, rinse, repeat cycle. All a bit silly indulging childish games like that isn't it? *-) Give over Bullet *-) ...........When did Labour ever hand over a flourishing economy? (lol) ........ I'll accept our economies become a repetitive cycle of........Tories Fixes it......Labour F*cks it >:-) ........ Typically you don't back any of your wild claims up because you know it's just hyperbole and conjecture based on nothing other than your pro-Tory views. I'm not into economics and undoubtedly Brian or Pat will be far better versed on this than me but a simple fact check blows your myth apart and shows it's not the picture you like to paint at all. It’s fair to say that GDP was generally better under Labour, but only up until the financial crisis. Of course, the crisis was a global phenomenon that would have hit Britain no matter which party was in government. Since then, growth has slowed significantly under the Conservatives. Statistically, the Conservatives have presided over a far slower growth in earnings than Labour, on average. Median gross annual earnings grew by an average of £638 in the six Labour years from 2005-2010 (inclusive). Then, under the Conservatives, they grew by an average of just £389 per year between 2011-2016. On face value, Labour have a better track record on keeping unemployment levels low. While in office, the party oversaw an average unemployment rate of 5.8 per cent. This is two percentage points lower than the Conservative’s average. Labour also had the single lowest annual unemployment rates during this whole period. Interestingly though, although the Conservative’s average is higher, the rate of unemployment fell faster while they were in office than under Labour. But these were during post-recession recovery periods, following big bumps in unemployment – rather than driving down the figures below what we would otherwise have expected. The financial crisis makes it difficult to judge each party’s record fairly. What’s more, low unemployment rates does not necessarily mean more people are in good, stable and well-paid work. For instance, in recent years the rise in low paid zero-hours contracts is likely to have driven down the unemployment statistics. So who has the better record? It’s a close call: both parties have a reasonable claim to be the strongest on this, it just depends which way you look at it. However, if we look at the figures over a longer time period – back to when Thatcher became prime minister in 1979 – then Labour would undoubtedly have the best record. Under these parameters, the average unemployment rate under the Conservatives rises to more than 8.5 per cent. They oversaw the longest sustained rise in unemployment, and witnessed the single biggest annual increase. https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-qa-which-party-has-a-better-track-record-on-the-economy http://www.primeeconomics.org/articles/conservative-budget-deficits-on-average-theyre-twice-the-size-of-labours I see you seek to deceive ;-) ....... You forget I'm old enough to remember the 3 day week >:-) ........ Another Labour F*ck UP that proved to be to be ultimately a swing to the left that was atouche too far (lol) (lol) (lol) ....... You're actually deceiving yourself by burying your head in the sand rather than addressing issues clearly made in both links. What Prof Alston appropriately termed "a state of denial" in reference to ministers who think extreme poverty caused by punitive government measures simply doesn't exist in UK. That denial is how you prefer to remain. Also any fool can play at blame shifting games.......it's just the same wash, rinse, repeat cycle which achieves nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-04-25 5:18 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 4:56 PM Bulletguy - 2019-04-25 2:47 PM pelmetman - 2019-04-25 8:39 AM Bulletguy - 2019-04-24 6:40 PM Oh anyone can play those silly games of whataboutism and blame shifting....so like Blair had to sort out the Thatcher/Major train crash they left behind. Wash, rinse, repeat cycle. All a bit silly indulging childish games like that isn't it? *-) Give over Bullet *-) ...........When did Labour ever hand over a flourishing economy? (lol) ........ I'll accept our economies become a repetitive cycle of........Tories Fixes it......Labour F*cks it >:-) ........ Typically you don't back any of your wild claims up because you know it's just hyperbole and conjecture based on nothing other than your pro-Tory views. I'm not into economics and undoubtedly Brian or Pat will be far better versed on this than me but a simple fact check blows your myth apart and shows it's not the picture you like to paint at all. It’s fair to say that GDP was generally better under Labour, but only up until the financial crisis. Of course, the crisis was a global phenomenon that would have hit Britain no matter which party was in government. Since then, growth has slowed significantly under the Conservatives. Statistically, the Conservatives have presided over a far slower growth in earnings than Labour, on average. Median gross annual earnings grew by an average of £638 in the six Labour years from 2005-2010 (inclusive). Then, under the Conservatives, they grew by an average of just £389 per year between 2011-2016. On face value, Labour have a better track record on keeping unemployment levels low. While in office, the party oversaw an average unemployment rate of 5.8 per cent. This is two percentage points lower than the Conservative’s average. Labour also had the single lowest annual unemployment rates during this whole period. Interestingly though, although the Conservative’s average is higher, the rate of unemployment fell faster while they were in office than under Labour. But these were during post-recession recovery periods, following big bumps in unemployment – rather than driving down the figures below what we would otherwise have expected. The financial crisis makes it difficult to judge each party’s record fairly. What’s more, low unemployment rates does not necessarily mean more people are in good, stable and well-paid work. For instance, in recent years the rise in low paid zero-hours contracts is likely to have driven down the unemployment statistics. So who has the better record? It’s a close call: both parties have a reasonable claim to be the strongest on this, it just depends which way you look at it. However, if we look at the figures over a longer time period – back to when Thatcher became prime minister in 1979 – then Labour would undoubtedly have the best record. Under these parameters, the average unemployment rate under the Conservatives rises to more than 8.5 per cent. They oversaw the longest sustained rise in unemployment, and witnessed the single biggest annual increase. https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-qa-which-party-has-a-better-track-record-on-the-economy http://www.primeeconomics.org/articles/conservative-budget-deficits-on-average-theyre-twice-the-size-of-labours I see you seek to deceive ;-) ....... You forget I'm old enough to remember the 3 day week >:-) ........ Another Labour F*ck UP that proved to be to be ultimately a swing to the left that was atouche too far (lol) (lol) (lol) ....... You're actually deceiving yourself by burying your head in the sand rather than addressing issues clearly made in both links. What Prof Alston appropriately termed "a state of denial" in reference to ministers who think extreme poverty caused by punitive government measures simply doesn't exist in UK. That denial is how you prefer to remain. Also any fool can play at blame shifting games.......it's just the same wash, rinse, repeat cycle which achieves nothing. I'm not deceiving my self at all *-) ...... You've just reverted to recycling bullsh*t (lol) ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Belch :D ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-04-25 5:18 PM You're actually deceiving yourself by burying your head in the sand rather than addressing issues clearly made in both links. What Prof Alston appropriately termed "a state of denial" in reference to ministers who think extreme poverty caused by punitive government measures simply doesn't exist in UK. That denial is how you prefer to remain. Also any fool can play at blame shifting games.......it's just the same wash, rinse, repeat cycle which achieves nothing. I challenge that loony lefty bullsh*t state of denial >:-) ........ I know personally how easy it is to claim benefits......I also know a family who have bred 13 kids as a "nice earner" because of the "System" *-) ........ So take a day off from defending bullsh*t for once Bullet *-) ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.