Jump to content

UK Politics - Democracy for the 0.27% - Worst Past The Post edition


Which Tyler
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Apparently the requirement for passports to get into UK from Europe has hit the short-term tourism industry ie day visitors to places like Canterbury. A lot of money lost.

More Brexit winning

 

Surely those day tourist dollars will be replaced and then some by Australian and NZ visitors who can get there much easier with work visas now...no? The distance between the UK and NZ/Aus is still the same as it was before Brexit you say? That's just remoaner talk, you'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like much of Britain's waterways, Starmer is full of shit. Like Johnson and his Tories, he thinks we've all got zips up the back of our heads.

Just another awful lying cunt.

#BurnhamIn

 

 

Edited by Spockydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is true that public debt was much higher when Attlee nationalised. However, that was because we had just fought World War II. 

It is also true that there was, as a result of those debt levels, very little money to invest in the newly nationalised industries.

It's fair to say that the current level of public debt shouldn't make it impossible to nationalise several key industries. However, it is also fair to say that it is not something that can simply be handwaved away and would have to be seriously considered in any plan to do so. It's a legitimate point for Starmer to make in that interview. 

It's also also true that nationalising the energy industries etc., while it may be necessary in the medium to long term, won't help much in the short term. Even in the medium to long term, it would produce little benefit unless we could also properly invest in their infrastructure in the way that the private companies running them have failed to do. 

I'm in favour of nationalising these industries. I think their privatisation in the first place was ill-advised, ideological and based on untested and unproven (and now discredited) ideas of how a market could work in those areas of the economy. I think the investment we'll need in these areas and the need to protect the vulnerable can only be addressed by common ownership.

But calling Starmer a liar because he's making a reasonable point helps that discussion not at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mormont said:

But calling Starmer a liar because he's making a reasonable point helps that discussion not at all. 

No. I am calling him a liar because he has broken almost every single promise he made in order to get elected.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a question:

If Starmer came out today and said that when elected he would nationalize energy and water first, then the trains, and then all the rest of the things the Tories should never have sold off that are now making people's lives a misery.

How do you think that would go down with the electorate at large?

Do you think they would say "Oooooh, I'm not sure Sir Keir has fully considered the fiscal and economic impact of blah blah blah blah. Best stick with the Tories."

GTFOH.

He is a coward. But not only that, he is pretty fucking stupid and missing a massive opportunity.

Observe:

Half of Tory voters want energy to be nationalised

Quote

 

Nearly half of Conservative voters support the renationalisation of Britain’s energy industry, a poll has found, putting pressure on the incoming prime minister to embrace radical solutions to the cost of living crisis.

Forty-seven per cent of Tory voters favour returning the energy companies to public ownership, with 28 per cent opposed to such a move and 25 per cent unsure. Among those who voted for the Conservatives in 2019, including many in the red wall seats of the northeast and the Midlands, the figure rises to 53 per cent in favour of renationalisation.

 

I believe the term is 'political open goal.'

Edited by Spockydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, DaveSumm said:

This sounds exactly like a British voter…

But ignores completely the absolute state of the nation. 

The British Voter has never had to pay so much for so little in return. All while the rich get richer.

 

Edited by Spockydog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Edwina Currie scolds Martin Lewis for exaggerating the energy price crisis by calling it a ‘catastrophe’.

Apparently people freezing to death is an inconvenience 

 

That's a great point: government can't do everything. One thing your government should stop doing ASAP is subsidizing the lives of shitheel politicians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said:

That's a great point: government can't do everything. One thing your government should stop doing ASAP is subsidizing the lives of shitheel politicians.

Yeah. Cut expenses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some good news. Between the Hornsea 2 wind farm, which went online today, and the Dogger Bank wind farm which fires up next year, 7.3 million British homes will be powered by new sources of renewable energy. That's more than a quarter of the total, and doesn't count those already powered by wind or solar. More windfarms are coming on stream as well.

Not fast enough to alleviate the current energy bill crisis, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Some good news. Between the Hornsea 2 wind farm, which went online today, and the Dogger Bank wind farm which fires up next year, 7.3 million British homes will be powered by new sources of renewable energy. That's more than a quarter of the total, and doesn't count those already powered by wind or solar. More windfarms are coming on stream as well.

Not fast enough to alleviate the current energy bill crisis, though.

I remember reading about another new windfarm a couple of weeks ago which has just started to generate off the coast of Scotland and would provide another 1.1GW when fully operational.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liz Truss apparently looking at axing British motorway speed limits.

I thought it was initially moronic, but then realised that dramatically increasing the number of people killed on the motorway will reduce demand for heat and electricity, and creation additional churn in the job marketplace, so the economic benefits could offset that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...