• 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

Gutter Boy said:
They could run them as arms-length charities. Where they have to be financially self-sustaining, but dividends get reinvested
Click to expand...
Doesn't even need to be that complicated.
Run as an arm's length body, acting independent of political Influence but with budget delivered from the home dept and still answerable to parliament.

The scrutiny with this model allows the scrutiny needed to keep services running and on budget without the inherent risks of public companies going bust.
Private companies will still be used for some goods and services, so there is still a positive contribution to the economy but it takes away the risk of going bust, like almost private companies do at some point
 
Gutter Boy said:
I'm pretty sure it will happen in 2022. My only reservation is the Fascist Left he brings with him - the anti-Semitism and misogynism typified by the likes of Jared O'Mara and co.
Click to expand...

Sometimes you make thought provoking posts, but other times you just spout the most outrageous flimflam. The above is demonstrative of the latter In what way is O'Mara typical of Labour? He is an aberration. He should never have been pre selected, but in hindsight the twit was not meant to get anywhere near elected office. He is a oncer, if ever there was one. There is also a world of difference between voicing opinions that are critical of Israel and being anti Semitic. This is the propaganda message of the Jewish fascists. Ironic really.
 
Last edited:
Pensions - Why do we allow private or for that matter any company to hold pension contribution in their bank accounts.
As they are paid they need to be safely held/transferred to an independent body on behalf of all employees. This body can the audit the investments and above all their security.
We have had so much thievery with Tata, BHS and now Carillion.
With many more coming down the pipe I would suspect.
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
Sometimes you make thought provoking posts, but other times you just spout the most outrageous flimflam. The above is demonstrative of the latter In what way is O'Mara typical of Labour? He is an aberration. He should never have been pre selected, but in hindsight the twit was not meant to get anywhere near elected office. He is a oncer, if ever there was one. There is also a world of difference between voicing opinions that are critical of Israel and being anti Semitic. This is the propaganda message of the Jewish fascists. Ironic really.
Click to expand...

He was "Momentum's First MP". I know it's a sample of 1, but they've also got 100% failure rate. There's all the intimidation (social media and bricks through windows) of female Blairites that has been happening too.

Considering they took over the NEC yesterday, Momentum have got a lot of baggage and undesirables from their Socialist Workers' Party days to cleanse themselves of
 
856.png


As we knew already (tho some on here thought not) the EU is open to the UK changing its mind. Tusk now on record saying as much.

Farrage was only anti-EU for a job so it transpires. How he's been paid £130k odd per year to drink wine in France and snear at the EU is beyond belief, all travel paid for of course. He clearly likes it after all.
 
Last edited:
Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile
 
monkeybarry said:
Doesn't even need to be that complicated.
Run as an arm's length body, acting independent of political Influence but with budget delivered from the home dept and still answerable to parliament.

The scrutiny with this model allows the scrutiny needed to keep services running and on budget without the inherent risks of public companies going bust.
Private companies will still be used for some goods and services, so there is still a positive contribution to the economy but it takes away the risk of going bust, like almost private companies do at some point
Click to expand...
Where is the pressure to reduce costs going to come from?

We know that it won't come from the electorate, because all the time they think it's someone else's money being spent then they insist on more, more more. When was the last time you heard a(n electable) politician state that they were going to intentionally decrease NHS spending? Even the ones that want to have to campaign on increasing it.

What happens with an outdated industry such as coal mining? It's been shown that various governments would rather prop it up with our money instead of facing the difficult but necessary decision to close the industry.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
I think that if the EU would, apparently, quite happily forget it ever happened - rather than insist on renegotiated terms - suggests we may be in a stronger position than many remainers here would have us believe.
Click to expand...

EU membership should be renewable every X amount of years like a subscription. In an Ideal world....;)

I dont care about being in it! But hate paying to leave it! So I would stay. But have no love for it, indifference would be nearer the mark. But leaving is far too expensive and there is little that truly bothers me being in it. :cool:
 
scaramanga said:
Where is the pressure to reduce costs going to come from?

We know that it won't come from the electorate, because all the time they think it's someone else's money being spent then they insist on more, more more. When was the last time you heard a(n electable) politician state that they were going to intentionally decrease NHS spending? Even the ones that want to have to campaign on increasing it.

What happens with an outdated industry such as coal mining? It's been shown that various governments would rather prop it up with our money instead of facing the difficult but necessary decision to close the industry.
Click to expand...

You make the mistake of focusing on reducing costs rather than delivering a value for money service.
Life isn't all about lining someone's pocket.
And the pressure comes from parliamentary scrutiny and, more to the point, the National Audit Office.
The pressure and focus on delivering good and legitimately justifying the use of public money is incredibly highly focused on in the civil service every day. That comes from good structure and employing staff with the right attitude. Despite what the daily mail will have you believe.


As far as industries that are outdated etc.
That comes from viability audits.
The problem to delivering any of the above..... politicians....... which is why the appropriate model is as an Arm's Length Body, independent of political (ie cabinet) influence.
Answerable to parliament of course, but not open to being used at political whim as some govt can be.
It works. I'm doing it.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
I think that if the EU would, apparently, quite happily forget it ever happened - rather than insist on renegotiated terms - suggests we may be in a stronger position than many remainers here would have us believe.
Click to expand...

You still believe that? Wow. First round went brick brick, want to put a bet on how the second round will go? Through escrow of course.... I don't trust Brexiteers they make brick up.

This offer is open to any britexiter on this thread... limit of betweeb £200 - £2000 depending on the terms agreed.
 
Last edited:
DTA said:
You still believe that? Wow. First round went brick brick, want to put a bet on how the second round will go? Through escrow of course.... I don't trust Brexiteers they make brick up.

This offer is open to any britexiter on this thread... limit of betweeb £200 - £2000 depending on the terms agreed.
Click to expand...
Supporting Brexit and trusting our current government to deliver it properly are entirely separate issues.

Your criticism here appears to of the latter but aimed at the former.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
I think that if the EU would, apparently, quite happily forget it ever happened - rather than insist on renegotiated terms - suggests we may be in a stronger position than many remainers here would have us believe.
Click to expand...

How does the EU allowing the UK to revoke article 50 mean the UK is in a stronger position? If you mean we could cancel Brexit, then I’d agree, if you mean it somehow means we have a stronger trade negotiating position - how are you jumping to that conclusion? I don’t see how it changes anything?

Weren’t you arguing the EU wouldn’t possibly let us back in on the old terms a few pages back?


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
DTA said:
You still believe that? Wow. First round went brick brick, want to put a bet on how the second round will go? Through escrow of course.... I don't trust Brexiteers they make brick up.

This offer is open to any britexiter on this thread... limit of betweeb £200 - £2000 depending on the terms agreed.
Click to expand...

Are we going to do that dance again? The one where you fly off and start responding to points that havent been made? ;O)

Go back through the 652 pages and you will see a distinct narrative forming around remainers. It has a few facets, but one of them is that basically we are fudged without the EU, they are everything to us, but we dont make a difference to them and they will just carry on building eutopia without us.

Now, consider that position. We say we will leave. Do the EU say:

a) Off you go then, good luck.
b) If you wanted to stay you would have to come in on a full membership, no special treatment, or
c) If you want to pretend like nothing happened, thats absolutely fine?

a) would support the remainer view of the EU being bullet proof and us being stuffed.
b) would support the EU making the most of their position to strengthen the union going forward.
c) would suggest that maybe, just maybe, the remainers view on the EUs strength of position is not quite what they think it is. IE, as I actually said "suggests we may be in a stronger position than many remainers here would have us believe"

Look at what has happened, not your ideology or dogma, what does it say? For the EU to welcome us back with no change at all says to me they know they are much better off with us. It says we do actually have hand in these negotiations.

Frankly Im surprised they didnt go with b, I fully expected they would try and capitalise on the situation. Then, as I think of it, its also just as likely Barnier is fudging with us. I wouldnt put it past him to sow discord before the next round.

SpurMeUp said:
How does the EU allowing the UK to revoke article 50 mean the UK is in a stronger position? If you mean we could cancel Brexit, then I’d agree, if you mean it somehow means we have a stronger trade negotiating position - how are you jumping to that conclusion? I don’t see how it changes anything?

Weren’t you arguing the EU wouldn’t possibly let us back in on the old terms a few pages back?
Click to expand...

See above, read the point actually made.

Stronger than remainers would have us believe. Its a simple sentence, it shouldnt take much explanation.

And yes, I did argue they wouldnt let us back in on the old terms. And I still think thats the case.
I did also think they wouldnt let us stay in on the old terms, I thought they would take it as a chance to finally have us fully integrate, but it appears not.
Which is why I suggest we might have a larger hand to play than remainers would like to think.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Is this one of the latest Brexit myths? Brexit is a good idea, just the government are delivering it wrong.

How should they be implementing Brexit?


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Click to expand...
It's not even as deep as that.
If you voted Brexit, you voted for the Tories to deliver it. And even a modicum of political knowledge leads to the conclusion that the current position was possible.
So a vote for Brexit WAS a vote for what we currently have.
And people knew what they were voting for, ergo they voted for this.
People need to take ownership of their votes.
 
monkeybarry said:
You make the mistake of focusing on reducing costs rather than delivering a value for money service.
Life isn't all about lining someone's pocket.
And the pressure comes from parliamentary scrutiny and, more to the point, the National Audit Office.
The pressure and focus on delivering good and legitimately justifying the use of public money is incredibly highly focused on in the civil service every day. That comes from good structure and employing staff with the right attitude. Despite what the daily mail will have you believe.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you mention value for money, as that's one of my biggest gripes with the public provision of services.

I pay more than twice as much for the NHS per month than I do for private healthcare. So in order to provide value for money, the NHS needs to become significantly better whilst halving its costs. For people further up the tax chain than me, that's only going to be worse.

Over the last 10 years I've paid £000s in taxation that's been spent on transport - it would be even more if the government were running other services. Just how good does public transport have to be to provide value for money when in that time I've saved up and bought the car I've wanted for a long time? How much value for money does a disease-infested peasant wagon have to provide to even get close to sitting in a soft leather seat in a climate controlled environment, listening to my music, leaving from my driveway and getting precisely where I want at the time I want at whatever speed I choose (keeping an eye out for speed traps allowing)?

What about the thousands a year I spend on the welfare state? Apparently I get some loosely connected suggestion that the great unwashed might rise up and start stealing all my brick if I don't pay for them to not work. It's not a theory I entirely subscribe to, especially not when I could just have some really brick hot security for around a 10th of what I spend annually on the welfare state.

Figures from here:
https://www.one.org/international/action/calculate-how-your-taxes-are-spent-by-the-uk-government/
(isn't entirely accurate for high salaries but is a good approximation).

I don't buy the suggestion that the right attitude is enough to make government properly efficient - that's what makes people want to be better, it's not what makes people be better. You can't tell me that the same drive is there for someone who just has the right attitude as it is for someone who could lose their business, house, car, etc. Why do you think equity investors ask for "hurt money" when investing? It's to ensure the drive to be better is properly implemented. It's competition that drives improvements and the risk of failure that drives efficiency - that's something borne out across every industry everywhere there's a market not propped up by taxes.

monkeybarry said:
As far as industries that are outdated etc.
That comes from viability audits.
The problem to delivering any of the above..... politicians....... which is why the appropriate model is as an Arm's Length Body, independent of political (ie cabinet) influence.
Answerable to parliament of course, but not open to being used at political whim as some govt can be.
It works. I'm doing it.
Click to expand...
Do you honestly think that will work? It's a great idea, but what government would have closed the coal mines without having to go through what Thatcher had to in order to build public support? Even under the best PM this country has ever had, in a very strong government, taking what was clearly required action, against an obviously violent and disruptive enemy, it still took years.

The public whim swings and sways far too much to have financial decisions in the hands of those accountable to them unless absolutely necessary. You might describe an independent body, but the public pressure to influence and/or take control of that body when tought decisions are needed will be strong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back