Snap General Election Called

[newjez]

3 hours ago, BacktoDemocracy said:

You'll have to lay off the magic mushrooms the fantasies are getting dangerous.

Trump? Is that just a drug induced dream then? Please wake me up!

[Guest263228]

On ‎18‎/‎04‎/‎2017 at 8:14 PM, BritChickx said:

Well good for the tories I guess. I think it should have waited until after we leave the EU

Well likely as much to attempt a 'soft landing' Brexit than the present 'hard one'. She needs to overwhelm the Tory Right within her party in order to get that. She has the belief that another fifty or so seats would enable her to negotiate on her terms in way of departing, not pandering to the dissents from within her ranks as is the case at the moment.

She can also claim to have the country behind her,(well England and Wales, in all likelihood) to legitimise an exit. Not bad for someone whom was an unbeliever in the not too distant past.

[amibovered]

10 hours ago, newjez said:

... And of course, there is the elephant in the room. What happens if corbyn does a trump? What if social media gets behind him like it did Trump, and he rolls into power in a SNP, green, lib Dems alliance? Cancels brexit, starts a flower power revolution and kills trident?

What then?

Why would he cancel Brexit, he hates the EU, the only reason he is hanging on like grim death to the the leadership is so he can see Brexit through.

[newjez]

1 hour ago, amibovered said:

Why would he cancel Brexit, he hates the EU, the only reason he is hanging on like grim death to the the leadership is so he can see Brexit through.

I don't think he hates it. Indifferent maybe. After all, it is a Tory tussle. He is concerned that they will use brexit to erode workers rights, which they will do. He is also concerned that we will lose the single market. I doubt that now. The election will tame the Eurosceptics, and Brexit will be unpalatable to many, but she won't have to answer to them for three and a half years after brexit. By then, everyone will have forgotten she shafted them. Personally I think this is brilliant news. Just a shame that those who voted for brexit don't realise they are about to get shafted. Not only that, but they are about to vote for it. La da di.

[amibovered]

4 minutes ago, newjez said:

I don't think he hates it. Indifferent maybe. After all, it is a Tory tussle. He is concerned that they will use brexit to erode workers rights, which they will do. He is also concerned that we will lose the single market. I doubt that now. The election will tame the Eurosceptics, and Brexit will be unpalatable to many, but she won't have to answer to them for three and a half years after brexit. By then, everyone will have forgotten she shafted them. Personally I think this is brilliant news. Just a shame that those who voted for brexit don't realise they are about to get shafted. Not only that, but they are about to vote for it. La da di.

Look at his history when it comes to the EU, he hates it alright.

[amibovered]

Spot on Jezza

 

[newjez]

9 minutes ago, amibovered said:

Look at his history when it comes to the EU, he hates it alright.

I can't keep up. Is the EU a left wing Mecca or a right wing cesspool?

[amibovered]

2 minutes ago, newjez said:

I can't keep up. Is the EU a left wing Mecca or a right wing cesspool?

Just a cesspool I think.

[BacktoDemocracy]

7 minutes ago, newjez said:

I don't think he hates it. Indifferent maybe. After all, it is a Tory tussle. He is concerned that they will use brexit to erode workers rights, which they will do. He is also concerned that we will lose the single market. I doubt that now. The election will tame the Eurosceptics, and Brexit will be unpalatable to many, but she won't have to answer to them for three and a half years after brexit. By then, everyone will have forgotten she shafted them. Personally I think this is brilliant news. Just a shame that those who voted for brexit don't realise they are about to get shafted. Not only that, but they are about to vote for it. La da di.

I wish I was as confident, I hope it is to face down the right but she seems to lean towards them, look at the brexit team, she has not gone out of her way to put the europhobes down and their does seem to be a genuine belief about brexit.

On the other hand she may, he he, be genuinely Machievellian, she may,he he, be making all her own decisions whilst stroking everyone else's ego, a skill she may have learnt on the knee of her Vicar father, running a parish is often a task of keeping everyone sweet whilst getting your own way, in which case these are going to be unstable times.

I suppose the best indicator will be in the reshuffle after the election, will the brexit team remain, will Hunt stay, will Patel stay, will Leadsom.

[newjez]

24 minutes ago, BacktoDemocracy said:

I wish I was as confident, I hope it is to face down the right but she seems to lean towards them, look at the brexit team, she has not gone out of her way to put the europhobes down and their does seem to be a genuine belief about brexit.

On the other hand she may, he he, be genuinely Machievellian, she may,he he, be making all her own decisions whilst stroking everyone else's ego, a skill she may have learnt on the knee of her Vicar father, running a parish is often a task of keeping everyone sweet whilst getting your own way, in which case these are going to be unstable times.

I suppose the best indicator will be in the reshuffle after the election, will the brexit team remain, will Hunt stay, will Patel stay, will Leadsom.

She may keep Davis as the man is an idiot. But she may lose Johnson and fox.

[BacktoDemocracy]

6 minutes ago, newjez said:

She may keep Davis as the man is an idiot. But she may lose Johnson and fox.

I would have thought all 3, but that will slow things down a bit and will show her hand immediately, if she replaces any of them then it will be an immediate 'tell'.

[newjez]

5 hours ago, BacktoDemocracy said:

I wish I was as confident, I hope it is to face down the right but she seems to lean towards them, look at the brexit team, she has not gone out of her way to put the europhobes down and their does seem to be a genuine belief about brexit.

On the other hand she may, he he, be genuinely Machievellian, she may,he he, be making all her own decisions whilst stroking everyone else's ego, a skill she may have learnt on the knee of her Vicar father, running a parish is often a task of keeping everyone sweet whilst getting your own way, in which case these are going to be unstable times.

I suppose the best indicator will be in the reshuffle after the election, will the brexit team remain, will Hunt stay, will Patel stay, will Leadsom.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/theresa-may-brexit-soft-hard-general-election-progressive-alliance-jeremy-corbyn-a7692361.html

No guarantee. But then it's not like we have a choice.

I can imagine lots of people being a bit pissed.

But they won't be the majority.

[amibovered]

10 minutes ago, newjez said:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/theresa-may-brexit-soft-hard-general-election-progressive-alliance-jeremy-corbyn-a7692361.html

No guarantee. But then it's not like we have a choice.

I can imagine lots of people being a bit pissed.

But they won't be the majority.

A rare moment of common sense from the Indy!!

[ScottieGirl]

@newjez why might she lose Fox and Johnson? I haven't been back long enough to know

[newjez]

7 hours ago, ScottieGirl said:

@newjez why might she lose Fox and Johnson? I haven't been back long enough to know

Davis, fox and Johnson are the three brexiteers. Ultras, who want to leave at all costs. If she replaced them with more moderate people it would give an indication of a change in direction.

If she goes the other way and promotes ids and gove, then we could be in a spot of bother.

[ScottieGirl]

8 hours ago, newjez said:

Davis, fox and Johnson are the three brexiteers. Ultras, who want to leave at all costs. If she replaced them with more moderate people it would give an indication of a change in direction.

If she goes the other way and promotes ids and gove, then we could be in a spot of bother.

I thought Gove was pro Brexit as well? He certainly stood on the podium with Johnson the morning after,not long before stabhing him in the back as I recall.

[newjez]

4 hours ago, ScottieGirl said:

I thought Gove was pro Brexit as well? He certainly stood on the podium with Johnson the morning after,not long before stabhing him in the back as I recall.

Yes, if she promotes gove we will be in for a very hard brexit, and I doubt that will please many.

[ScottieGirl]

Apparently Juncker is already welcoming us back with open arms, they love us really

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/20/european-parliament-will-welcome-britain-back-if-voters-veto-brexit

[VERYSTORMY]

On 21 April 2017 at 0:32 PM, ScottieGirl said:

Apparently Juncker is already welcoming us back with open arms, they love us really

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/20/european-parliament-will-welcome-britain-back-if-voters-veto-brexit

Of course he would. All those billions are very welcome. 

[VERYSTORMY]

The more labour speak the more they put the foot in it. Now, you are rich if you earn £70k. Which is what a lot of plumbers in London earn or what a couple who are both nurses earn. 

[Sandgroper]

Well a vote for labour will get you an extra 4 days off work a year apparently 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-labour-bank-holidays-general-election-2017-a7697296.html

[amibovered]

5 hours ago, Sandgroper said:

Well a vote for labour will get you an extra 4 days off work a year apparently 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-labour-bank-holidays-general-election-2017-a7697296.html

Yes, we'd even get the day off to celebrate the national day of a foreign country!!!  

[BritChickx]

19 hours ago, VERYSTORMY said:

The more labour speak the more they put the foot in it. Now, you are rich if you earn £70k. Which is what a lot of plumbers in London earn or what a couple who are both nurses earn. 

I don't agree with punishing people who earn a decent wage with a higher tax rate. I know more money has to come from somewhere but taxing people more isn't really fair. I know I say that as someone who doesn't earn much but If i was earning 70k a year, which I'd say isn't rich but comfortable, is still low in the grand scheme of things. Maybe if people earned hundreds of thousands of millions a year I could understand.

[VERYSTORMY]

1 hour ago, BritChickx said:

I don't agree with punishing people who earn a decent wage with a higher tax rate. I know more money has to come from somewhere but taxing people more isn't really fair. I know I say that as someone who doesn't earn much but If i was earning 70k a year, which I'd say isn't rich but comfortable, is still low in the grand scheme of things. Maybe if people earned hundreds of thousands of millions a year I could understand.

Agree. Though the very rich already pay a large sum. At present, the richest 1% pay nearly 30% of all tax. 

[Johndoe]

54 minutes ago, BritChickx said:

I don't agree with punishing people who earn a decent wage with a higher tax rate. I know more money has to come from somewhere but taxing people more isn't really fair.

Yes it is if you have socialist ideals.

Their (higher)  earnings are achieved from the "economy of the state" Now it could be argued that irrespective of how much (financially) went into their ability to command those earnings, whether it be by privileged education via the class system, or via sheer hard work to "pull themselves up by the bootlace" the fact is, they have more disposable income than those less fortunate.

Do they owe their taxes to improve the life the less fortunate? Your opinion depends on whether you are "educated" enough to remember how the less fortunate were the ones who made that country great (once)...............long before the "financial service industry" Britain was built on the pure determination, labour, and will to survive of the average bloke/woman in an industrialised nation. Labour/Industry/times have changed, but should we abandon and fail to recognise those who's descendants, are now derided as chavs and dole bludgers, or should we recognise why they are as they are and attempt to "rehabilitate" through welfare programmes, increased employment opportunities,  and education?

Most of those folk (dependents of) in deprived areas have since been relegated to the label of "Chav".............but ask yourself, why? Why have the Chavs of Manchester or anywhere else, become so, and why have they become an item of ridicule as opposed to questioning why they are so?

Detractors of Tax breaks for the higher earners ignore the fact that they are only higher earners because the State has afforded that they so be............it isn't simply that they've worked hard, although likely the majority have, it's also because whatever it was in their "being" that enabled them to "thrive" was because of State (opportunities), above average intelligence /determination or privilege. Does that indicate that they are better/ more worthy, just lucky, or part of God's Great Plan?

Whether they got to where they are through pure hard work and adversity, or privilege, class, higher IQ, WTF does it matter? Does it make them "better" (WTF does "better" mean) than those less fortunate? Does it exempt them from the "human" principle of helping those less fortunate? Those "less fortunate" may not have the higher IQ, the parental motivation, the social environment suited to better study etc etc............but, they are still "brothers/sisters" and for me, it illustrates that they need a "leg up" and what better way (moral or socialistic way, call it as you may) could be better than those who have financially benefited from the State/Labour (status quo) making a higher contribution?...............a State who's wealth was defined by Labour, to contribute by way of higher taxes for those who benefit from that labour to the welfare of the descendants of (traditional) Labour.

Most may disagree, but terrorism/racial prejudice/N Korea and all other Capitalist diversions aside, I still believe that after all these years of my political awareness, that the biggest roadblock to the average (UK) punter's happiness, is the politics/lack of education that have divided Labour and ignored how the average "working class" bloke felt............divisions not strong enough within the party to cause an absolute split., but the very same divisions within society now alienating working man or the man who aspires to work, from his capitalist employers and will drive him towards Nationalism based on his perception (aided by the Far Right) that his country has been eroded by foreigners..................just as Germans thought (not so many) years ago.