• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

scaramanga said:
It is a lot easier, yes.

The NLW is something that has been debated and defined in law. "Frontline staff" is not and has not. It's incredibly open to interpretation and disagreement.

The Queen's Speech needs to be simpler than that - especially when running a tiny majority. You can't afford for items or language that are open to interpretation or discussion because you have to guarantee it passes.
Click to expand...

Are you joking? Read the Queen's Speech, there is loads that is open to interpretation! It passes because you have the numbers, which is where Tory politicians who pretend to care could actually influence things if they weren't just pretending, because they only just have the numbers.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/queens-speech-2017?_sm_au_=iVVjkZbkvQt5ns6R

Almost all of it is open to interpretation, e.g.: My government’s priority is to secure the best possible deal as the country leaves the European Union.

Best deal according to who? I'm not sure you can find anybody that can agree on that. And that's just the second line of the speech.
 
the dza said:
Are you joking? Read the Queen's Speech, there is loads that is open to interpretation! It passes because you have the numbers, which is where Tory politicians who pretend to care could actually influence things if they weren't just pretending, because they only just have the numbers.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/queens-speech-2017?_sm_au_=iVVjkZbkvQt5ns6R

Almost all of it is open to interpretation, e.g.: My government’s priority is to secure the best possible deal as the country leaves the European Union.

Best deal according to who? I'm not sure you can find anybody that can agree on that. And that's just the second line of the speech.
Click to expand...
But nobody is going to argue against getting the beast from a deal with the EU.

Plenty can, would and should argue against something as vague as front line pay increases.

For example, it could easily be argued that consultants in the NHS are on the front line. They deal directly with patients, after all. Yet with the nation's finances as they currently are, giving people earning £100k more than a 1% payrises would be negligent.
 
scaramanga said:
But nobody is going to argue against getting the beast from a deal with the EU.

Plenty can, would and should argue against something as vague as front line pay increases.

For example, it could easily be argued that consultants in the NHS are on the front line. They deal directly with patients, after all. Yet with the nation's finances as they currently are, giving people earning £100k more than a 1% payrises would be negligent.
Click to expand...

That's not arguing against "frontline increases" that's arguing about who is on the "frontline." "Best deal" can be argued against in the exact same way and is just as vague, because if Ken Clarke defines best, it's different to what Peter Bone defines best, or Hammond, or May. Infact, there's much more potential difference of opinion there than there is about who is on the frontline of the NHS.

So to say you can't have something in the Queen's Speech that is open to interpretation is plainly nonsense.
 
Those 'bleeding heart' talking Tories/Nasty Party voting Tories had better watch it, because in a tight parliament there will be more attention than ever on what they say and how it conflicts with what they do.
 
There are actually good reasons for the wage cap. Ken Clarke was quite good on this on Newsnight last night

Basically to make your economy better, the first trick is to devalue your currency, so your exports become competitive. You do this by freezing wages, so relative costs go down. The big problem with the Eurozone is that it prevents Southern European countries from being able to do this. Greece would be long in the clear if they could have devalued their currency, like they used to do with the drachma

If you increase wages, prices go up, so people demand pay rises, so you get inflation, so your economy becomes less and less competitive. Essentially it's a vicious circle that will lead to ever worse places.

The whole economic policy of the last 7 years has been to shrink wages to improve international competitiveness. It's not a consequence, it's a design.
 
the dza said:
Better for who? There are many millions of people who don't feel like this economy is working in their favour, not just here but in other countries too. This is where the winds of change are coming from imo, people have had enough of the politics/economics that they don't feel the benefit from.
Click to expand...

To achieve balance of payments. I'm no capitalist, but a country needs to earn at least what it spends.
 
Gutter Boy said:
There are actually good reasons for the wage cap. Ken Clarke was quite good on this on Newsnight last night

Basically to make your economy better, the first trick is to devalue your currency, so your exports become competitive. You do this by freezing wages, so relative costs go down. The big problem with the Eurozone is that it prevents Southern European countries from being able to do this. Greece would be long in the clear if they could have devalued their currency, like they used to do with the drachma

If you increase wages, prices go up, so people demand pay rises, so you get inflation, so your economy becomes less and less competitive. Essentially it's a vicious circle that will lead to ever worse places.

The whole economic policy of the last 7 years has been to shrink wages to improve international competitiveness. It's not a consequence, it's a design.
Click to expand...

But inflation helps when you and everyone else are in the biggest debt of their life.

Otherwise it (and it is) goes on forever.
 
Gutter Boy said:
To achieve balance of payments. I'm no capitalist, but a country needs to earn at least what it spends.
Click to expand...

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nati...nitedkingdombalanceofpaymentsthepinkbook/2016

The deterioration in the current account balance in recent years, leading to a record deficit of 5.4% as a percentage of nominal GDP in 2015, was largely due to UK earnings on assets overseas falling relative to the earnings of foreign investors in the UK.

________________

Doesn't seem to be talking about below inflation pay rises for nurses being a factor.
 
the dza said:
I wouldn't like to say for sure, because who knows nowadays -- but my feeling is, if Hunt were to become Tory leader, it would be a gift to the Labour Party. IMO, he is hated by everyone but the most ardent Tories. Being an enemy of doctors and nurses is never a good look.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think that his reputation is toxic.

If I was a betting man I'd put money on Green and Fallon.
 
the dza said:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nati...nitedkingdombalanceofpaymentsthepinkbook/2016

The deterioration in the current account balance in recent years, leading to a record deficit of 5.4% as a percentage of nominal GDP in 2015, was largely due to UK earnings on assets overseas falling relative to the earnings of foreign investors in the UK.

________________

Doesn't seem to be talking about below inflation pay rises for nurses being a factor.
Click to expand...

But the remedy is still to devalue your currency, which you do by stagnating wages.
 
milo said:
I agree. I think that his reputation is toxic.

If I was a betting man I'd put money on Green and Fallon.
Click to expand...

They are both too grey and charisma free. May seems to have stabalised herself as the caretaker till March 2019 now, so the next leader needs to be a potential election winner for them (a Johnson, Davidson or relative unknown like Cameron was).
 
Gutter Boy said:
But the remedy is still to devalue your currency, which you do by stagnating wages.
Click to expand...

Do you? Before the Brexit vote, Sterling was at $1.50. After the vote, it dropped and currently sits at $1.29.

In May 2010, Sterling was at $1.52. Cue austerity politics and stagnating wages, Sterling was up to $1.70 in July 2014 and $1.55 by May 2015, after 1 parliament of austerity policies and stagnating wages. So no devaluation at work there.

The thing that devalued our currency in recent times is Brexit, not stagnating wages.
 
Gutter Boy said:
They are both too grey and charisma free. May seems to have stabalised herself as the caretaker till March 2019 now, so the next leader needs to be a potential election winner for them (a Johnson, Davidson or relative unknown like Cameron was).
Click to expand...

I was suggesting them on the basis that May falls before then. The Conservatives rarely pick the front runner and vote against candidates rather than for them. I suggest them because they are prominent, a safe pair of hands and are not Davis or Hammond.

May seems more secure than she did three weeks ago but the government has a lot of work to do before the autumn if her prospects are to improve.

I don't think Johnson is such a big vote winner anymore, his appeal is limited and his performances have been poor of late. I see that his approval ratings have plummeted in the latest Conservative Home survey.

Davidson is obviously a really strong candidate, not tainted by the current Conservative failures and popular. The questions are, can a move to Westminster be engineered and does she want that right now? She may well feel that she is better off in Holyrood for the moment and pushing back the SNP is unfinished business.
 
Last edited:
Gutter Boy said:
There are actually good reasons for the wage cap. Ken Clarke was quite good on this on Newsnight last night

Basically to make your economy better, the first trick is to devalue your currency, so your exports become competitive. You do this by freezing wages, so relative costs go down. The big problem with the Eurozone is that it prevents Southern European countries from being able to do this. Greece would be long in the clear if they could have devalued their currency, like they used to do with the drachma

If you increase wages, prices go up, so people demand pay rises, so you get inflation, so your economy becomes less and less competitive. Essentially it's a vicious circle that will lead to ever worse places.

The whole economic policy of the last 7 years has been to shrink wages to improve international competitiveness. It's not a consequence, it's a design.
Click to expand...

And what you gain in increased exports you lose in falling domestic demand. Snap! Austerity is a policy designed to smash the bottom line for worker's pay and conditions. Tories have been following this set of policies ever since they came into being. So forget about budget repair and all the other pretexts these neo-liberals use. When was a the last time these grubs ever supported a wage rise. I'll answer that for you....never!
 
Gutter Boy said:
To achieve balance of payments. I'm no capitalist, but a country needs to earn at least what it spends.
Click to expand...


Sound to me a lot like "I'm not a racist but..." That is so much orthodox right wing bunk. This is the stuff that the establishment force feed everybody all the time and it is crap. Running a nation's economy is not like running a household, which is the normal false analogy that the Tories use when selling this snake oil. Christ, when are people going to wake up to this self serving rubbish?
 
Last edited:
Gilzeantoscore said:
And what you gain in increased exports you lose in falling domestic demand. Snap! Austerity is a policy designed to smash the bottom line for worker's pay and conditions. Tories have been following this set of policies ever since they came into being. So forget about budget repair and all the other pretexts these neo-liberals use. When was a the last time these grubs ever supported a wage rise. I'll answer that for you....never!
Click to expand...
Does a decrease in domestic demand always match the increase in overseas demand? I've never heard of that happening before and it sounds like an incredibly simplistic view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back