Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The UK General Election - May 7th 2015


bee
 Share

Recommended Posts

The best news for me at least to come from the 2015 election was Galloway losing his seat,

I honestly think I would have welcomed Anjem Choudary as MP for Blackburn over this traitor

10985398_457805847728873_6520653010206153551_n.jpg?oh=ce96f839c70c6d6087762f39d8e61a62&oe=55D8B3A3&__gda__=1439417289_cd2cdbe8b8a5d997d65cc282b5620a7f

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great to see that progressives are being obliterated on both sides of the Atlantic. Historic losses for the progressives in the UK and USA mean that people are finally waking u and realizing that their polices just don't work and in all cases make things worse. Only sad thing in the US is that the democrat leadership didn't quit here too although Dingy Harry is calling it quits soon.

What do you mean by "progressive"? It's one of those words like "Liberal" that are a general and somewhat vague term of abuse in the world of American politics, but, like Liberal, it seems to be one of those words that's infinitely flexible to fit any policies that people don't like. Anyway, the Labour govt. that Mr. Milliband promised wouldn't have been very progressive, I think they'd have liked to bring everything back into State control and and give power to the Unions (who are their major financial supporters). He may have tried to distance himself from Blair's "New labour", but they'd have had very much the same desire to control and centralise everything as much as possible, I think.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

What do you mean by "progressive"? It's one of those words like "Liberal" that are a general and somewhat vague term of abuse in the world of American politics, but, like Liberal, it seems to be one of those words that's infinitely flexible to fit any policies that people don't like. Anyway, the Labour govt. that Mr. Milliband promised wouldn't have been very progressive, I think they'd have liked to bring everything back into State control and and give power to the Unions (who are their major financial supporters). He may have tried to distance himself from Blair's "New labour", but they'd have had very much the same desire to control and centralise everything as much as possible, I think.

I think your dreaming there, widespread nationalization is in no way part of Labours platform.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You clearly didn't hear their wannabe Transport Minister blustering about "taking the railways back into state control", a very easy populist bit of bluster to make. Does anyone believe that that would have made the trains run on time?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

You clearly didn't hear their wannabe Transport Minister blustering about "taking the railways back into state control", a very easy populist bit of bluster to make. Does anyone believe that that would have made the trains run on time?

Its actually a very sensible policy to take the railways back into state control. Prices have risen massively since privatization and levels of investment have not kept up with requirements. Pricing people off the railways is not a sensible approach to addressing any of the issues that public transport can address.

But what you actually said is that the labour party want to nationalise everything - which is clearly untrue and not even a close approach to the truth.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its actually a very sensible policy to take the railways back into state control. Prices have risen massively since privatization and levels of investment have not kept up with requirements. Pricing people off the railways is not a sensible approach to addressing any of the issues that public transport can address.

But what you actually said is that the labour party want to nationalise everything - which is clearly untrue and not even a close approach to the truth.

Br Cornelius

The railways have been failed by politicians and the lack of foresight of successive governments dating back decades. Taking them back into state ownership is a step backwards and nothing more than nostalgia for a time that never existed.

If you want a top class service you have to pay for it, when a company is driven by profits they'll strive to achieve better, but like anything publicly owned by the state it doesn't take long for it to become a bottomless, wasteful money pit.

we want less state not more and lets face it the years under Labour was a disaster - Socially. Their policy of allowing people to wallow on benefits gave birth to the benefit culture, and with that a rise in anti social behaviour has the devil made work for idle thumbs.

Labour ceased being the party for the Working man years ago. I've personally witnessed improvements under the Tory party. I know families who under the labour government were happily left on benefits, I use to be going to work and they'd still be in their pyjamas hanging about the street. Here in Liverpool a stupid craze started and could be witnessed in other parts of the country where people where actually going to the shops in their pyjamas, That to me summed up the social problems - a mindset of "i've give up" when people cant even be bothered to change their clothes.

But look at it now the same people, under a Tory government they have been forced into work, i don't give a crap if its Zero hour or minimum wage, they were long term useless. now they are productive, no longer can the devil make work for their idle thumbs.

roll on more public cuts, reducing the burden on the state. less government is better for everyone. unless you think your entitled to state benefits.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You clearly didn't hear their wannabe Transport Minister blustering about "taking the railways back into state control", a very easy populist bit of bluster to make. Does anyone believe that that would have made the trains run on time?

Not even Mussolini managed that....(Contrary to the popular legend)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the main problem with the railways that they were run into the ground by under investment in successive government hands. Once they had hit crisis point they sold them on expecting private companies to wave some magic wand fixing decades of neglect whilst keeping fares low.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best news for me at least to come from the 2015 election was Galloway losing his seat,

I honestly think I would have welcomed Anjem Choudary as MP for Blackburn over this traitor

And how is Galloway a traitor exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

The railways have been failed by politicians and the lack of foresight of successive governments dating back decades. Taking them back into state ownership is a step backwards and nothing more than nostalgia for a time that never existed.

If you want a top class service you have to pay for it, when a company is driven by profits they'll strive to achieve better, but like anything publicly owned by the state it doesn't take long for it to become a bottomless, wasteful money pit.

we want less state not more and lets face it the years under Labour was a disaster - Socially. Their policy of allowing people to wallow on benefits gave birth to the benefit culture, and with that a rise in anti social behaviour has the devil made work for idle thumbs.

Labour ceased being the party for the Working man years ago. I've personally witnessed improvements under the Tory party. I know families who under the labour government were happily left on benefits, I use to be going to work and they'd still be in their pyjamas hanging about the street. Here in Liverpool a stupid craze started and could be witnessed in other parts of the country where people where actually going to the shops in their pyjamas, That to me summed up the social problems - a mindset of "i've give up" when people cant even be bothered to change their clothes.

But look at it now the same people, under a Tory government they have been forced into work, i don't give a crap if its Zero hour or minimum wage, they were long term useless. now they are productive, no longer can the devil make work for their idle thumbs.

roll on more public cuts, reducing the burden on the state. less government is better for everyone. unless you think your entitled to state benefits.

There are many state run railway services which both deliver a good service and value for money. Private ownership is in no way an automatic guarantor to better outcomes, and the British example is proof of that.

The Government effectively made a strategic decision to destroy the railways way back with Beeching, and the policy hasn't really changed much ever since.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

Isn't the main problem with the railways that they were run into the ground by under investment in successive government hands. Once they had hit crisis point they sold them on expecting private companies to wave some magic wand fixing decades of neglect whilst keeping fares low.

Exactly.

To claim that it was anything other than intentional sabotage is been dishonest.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean by "progressive"? It's one of those words like "Liberal" that are a general and somewhat vague term of abuse in the world of American politics, but, like Liberal, it seems to be one of those words that's infinitely flexible to fit any policies that people don't like. Anyway, the Labour govt. that Mr. Milliband promised wouldn't have been very progressive, I think they'd have liked to bring everything back into State control and and give power to the Unions (who are their major financial supporters). He may have tried to distance himself from Blair's "New labour", but they'd have had very much the same desire to control and centralise everything as much as possible, I think.

Liberal politics is about respecting individual rights and freedom.

The Conservative party play for the centre-right so there is some socialism but mainly capitalism within their policies plus a hint of being liberal.

The Labour party play for the centre-left so there is some hint of capitalism but mainly socialism within their policies plus a hint of being liberal.

People would expect the Liberal Democrats to be liberal but again there is only a hint at it. Instead they cherry pick the policies of the other two because they cannot think for themselves. Judging from the oddball ideas they come out with its probably the best thing lmao.

UKIP are the most liberal. They will give Brits their freedom and remove everything holding our economy back imposed by the EU. UK politics isn't like the USA where its right vs left. Its more complex than that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many state run railway services which both deliver a good service and value for money. Private ownership is in no way an automatic guarantor to better outcomes, and the British example is proof of that.

The Government effectively made a strategic decision to destroy the railways way back with Beeching, and the policy hasn't really changed much ever since.

Br Cornelius

I'm actually going to agree that railways should be nationalised but not because it supports your ideals Cornelius. If firms paid at cost for the transport of goods around the country it would mean they can compete better on price against foreign imports as their logistics costs would be lower. A nationalised rail service allows that.

Nationalism or privatisation shouldn't be used as tools to promote anyone ideology. Its about doing what's best for a competitive economy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how is Galloway a traitor exactly?

IMO that is..if people are still allowed to have them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

I'm actually going to agree that railways should be nationalised but not because it supports your ideals Cornelius. If firms paid at cost for the transport of goods around the country it would mean they can compete better on price against foreign imports as their logistics costs would be lower. A nationalised rail service allows that.

Nationalism or privatisation shouldn't be used as tools to promote anyone ideology. Its about doing what's best for a competitive economy.

My position on the Railways has absolutely nothing to do with ideology, it is a practical matter that dividing up a railways system into competing companies is practically stupid and has demonstrably not produced the benefits claimed for it.

Don't assume that I am in favour of nationalization in general - I am in favour of whatever works in any given situation. Ideology I leave to you rabid.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it practically stupid? Should there be one state owned supermarket chain? One state owned car manufacturer (And no imports allowed)? One state owned airline? Is all that practically stupid? If not why not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My position on the Railways has absolutely nothing to do with ideology, it is a practical matter that dividing up a railways system into competing companies is practically stupid and has demonstrably not produced the benefits claimed for it.

Don't assume that I am in favour of nationalization in general - I am in favour of whatever works in any given situation. Ideology I leave to you rabid.

Br Cornelius

So you would agree privatisation also works depending on the situation? You are changing from red to purple. Carry on at this rate and you'll end up blue lol

Edited by RabidMongoose
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it practically stupid? Should there be one state owned supermarket chain? One state owned car manufacturer (And no imports allowed)? One state owned airline? Is all that practically stupid? If not why not?

If its state owned then not if we can help it because once the Unions get in then we would need to resurrect Maggie to save the country again. If its private we want at least two so it isn't a monopoly otherwise the consumer gets a bad deal.

Edited by RabidMongoose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

So you would agree privatisation also works depending on the situation? You are changing from red to purple. Carry on at this rate and you'll end up blue lol

It depends entirely on the situation. take for example your idea of privatizing the prisons - a really really bad idea.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends entirely on the situation. take for example your idea of privatizing the prisons - a really really bad idea.

Br Cornelius

Do you mean putting prisoners to work on the cheap? That was part punishment part repaying the state.

Edited by RabidMongoose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Br Cornelius

Do you mean putting prisoners to work on the cheap? That was part punishment part repaying the state.

That comes on the back of privatization and has numerous negative unforeseen outcomes.

A person in prison is there for rehabilitation and punishment not to pay back the state. When the state enslaves those it calls criminals we are on a very slippery slope to totalitarianism.

Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said all countries are tossing progressives out, just the two major players on the Atlantic seaboard.

Well. Thank you for that 'pat on the head'.

Edited by Likely Guy
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.