General Election 2015

[BLOCK F]

First point is political, so can't disagree with your opinion.

I know the soundbite is that the SNP want to break up the UK, actually they don't, they just want to remove Scotland from it. I don't have a problem with that view in all honesty. If I was in a country where 80% of us regularly voted left, and yet we were continually ruled by the right, I'd be a bit disenfranchised with it.

I feel what Scotland needs is not more pushing away, but an arm around her shoulder - we need to show Scotland some love. I think as the majority in the UK parliament, we need to accept our fellow members aren't entirely happy with things. If you or I love the UK, then we have to love Scotland, Wales and NI and not resent their need for independence.

I actually think it would be ideal to have the SNP in a coalition - bring the party that wants to leave the UK into the very heart of the UK. #ShowScotlandLove

I love Scotland already! In fact, my roots are in Stornoway on The Isle of Lewis. I have more Scottish blood than anything else.
However, I happen to believe the UK is stronger together, as the rather overused expression goes.There is no doubt that Nicola wants independence and will be pushing for another referendum. I reckon that a Labour /SNP coalition would be rather more bumpy than the Con/ Lib Dems has been and that would not be good for the country as a whole.
She comes over very well and despite not agreeing with her views, I do enjoy listening to her.........just wish her hair would move a bit more!

 

[Machiavelli]

It might actually suit Labour to lose this election as it would present some very awkward options in the case of a hung parliament. Realistically the only chance I see miliband becoming PM would be with the SNP's support and there would be a heavy price to pay. Would he deal with the SNP and hope to contain Sturgeon and if so how long for? Ultimately the SNP's main agenda would take priority.
I don't think Labour have any realistic chance of governing the country in 3 weeks. However in 5 years they may be better placed with a leader the country warms to but I still believe they may need the support of the SNP who after another 5 years of Tory Westminster may prove far more difficult to deal with. I do not believe the SNP in coalition would result in anything other than the break up of the Union and subsequently any chance of a future Labour government.

I think you're wrong on two things here:
1, the likelihood is that neither Labour nor the Tories will be able to govern without the support of the SNP; if that happens, it's either another election (which won't be popular), or Labour and SNP (and perhaps others) agree to work together somehow.
2, the SNP aren't going to call for another referendum until they're in a position to win it; that's highly unlikely to pertain in the next parliament.

 

[crookie]

This. There's so much unsubstantiated fear about the SNP -- NSC's overlord, when taking a break from teasing some on here about politics, even claimed that he was frightened by the SNP -- on here. Scotland has 59 seats. FPTP will ensure that the SNP gets the lion's share of those this election. So why don't the fear mongers blame FPTP, for instance?
And Labour have already ruled out a coalition with the SNP, although a confidence-and-supply or issue-by-issue arrangement is a likely scenario.
All these NSC fear mongers ought to address the question of whether they want to keep the UK together. If they do, then they'll have to accept the SNP. If they don't accept the SNP, then they'll hasten the breakup of the UK (as will voting OUT in an EU referendum). And the SNP are not going to call for a referendum in the next parliament. They're not going to call one until opinion polls consistently point towards a victory, and it's highly unlikely that'll be in the next parliament.

My main problem with the Nationalist parties and the Greens are their determination to end austerity as they call it. let's be honest, the coalition have hardly taken an axe to public sector expenditure in total, more a small cheese slice. we still spend millions more every day than we take in tax. the only way we can sustain the interest payments on this gargantuan debt we have built up, by both Labour and Con/Lib by the way, is because the debt markets have confidence that we can repay those debts, and that's why the interest rate on our debt is very low. Tear up the debt reduction/spending cut plans and go on an unfunded spending spree, and the markets will take fright at our massive debt, rates will go through the roof, and the debt will become unsustainable

 

[Bold Seagull]

So you think it's a good idea to have the leader of our country as some soft idiot that needs braving up by some minor party member. Great. To be clear, I'm not suggesting that Milliband is a soft idiot, unless if he needs Sturgeon to make him brave, in which case god help us.

I make it 13 years Labour, 12 years Tory, 5 years Tory/Lib Dem coalition. Hardly 22 years of Tory rule.
So what? There are parts of the UK that always vote to the right, and they've had to be ruled by a Labour government. So what, that's how it works.

The SNP want another vote for independence, and want to keep having them until they get what they want. And they want to take as much money from the rest of the UK to spend in Scotland as they can. They want to take the oil that belongs to the UK. They want to control the UK's currency after they leave. They want it all. That's not cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I don't mind them being to the left. If that's their policy, that's cool, let people vote. It's the fact that they want to leave, but take the silver with them that bothers me.

The tories don't look like winning either, so a Labour/SNP coalition seems like a real possibility, and I don't see how that's good for the country.

I sometimes forget how infuriating it is to get into a discussion with you. Clearly when I said 30 ODD years, I meant taking in the Tory government going back to Thatcher (because working out why I said 22 years shouldn't have been difficult...). If you think this last 5 years hasn't been Tory rule then you are deluded as you are obtuse.

As for your highlighted statement above - I would have thought that the very strength of the opinion of one country in the Union would be reason enough to ask 'so what?' and then what can we do about it. Surely it's like working hard in a marriage, if you're pissing your spouse off and she looks like she might leave, if you love her, then presumably you stop pissing her off and seeing what you can do to compromise.

All I've been saying is that rather than all this rhetoric of fear, 'they want to take all the silver...they want our oil' and all that crap, it's time to have a rhetoric of positivity about our country, to show willingness to embrace the Union, not fight for it, then just carry on as if nothing happened.

As for all your other stuff, in fighting for their independence, or divorce to continue the analogy, then of course they want to take as much as they can. Why wouldn't they? And we'd try to keep as much as we can. Unfortunately any kind of break up ends that way eventually. Hopefully, with a positive outlook, even with the Scots electing the SNP to represent them, they will see enough of the UK embracing them as to never give any other referendum a chance.

 

[Gwylan]

My main problem with the Nationalist parties and the Greens are their determination to end austerity as they call it. let's be honest, the coalition have hardly taken an axe to public sector expenditure in total, more a small cheese slice. we still spend millions more every day than we take in tax. the only way we can sustain the interest payments on this gargantuan debt we have built up, by both Labour and Con/Lib by the way, is because the debt markets have confidence that we can repay those debts, and that's why the interest rate on our debt is very low. Tear up the debt reduction/spending cut plans and go on an unfunded spending spree, and the markets will take fright at our massive debt, rates will go through the roof, and the debt will become unsustainable

That's one opinion.

On the other hand, an email's just arrived in my inbox that offers another opinion. Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz is in London to describe how austerity policies are harming economies.

To quote ... "Stiglitz will expose the neoliberal policies, such as deregulation and tax cuts for the rich, which he claims are causing many people to fall further and further behind. He will propose real solutions: increasing taxes on corporations and the wealthy; helping homeowners instead of banks; investing in education, science, and infrastructure; and, most importantly, doing more to restore full employment."

Still, he only won the Nobel Prize for economics, what does he know?

 

[Triggaaar]

I sometimes forget how infuriating it is to get into a discussion with you.

Brace yourself, it's gonna get bumpy.

As for your highlighted statement above - I would have thought that the very strength of the opinion of one country in the Union would be reason enough to ask 'so what?'

Scotland isn't a country. If it was, they wouldn't need to ask for permission to vote for independence for a start.

Clearly when I said 30 ODD years, I meant taking in the Tory government going back to Thatcher. If you think this last 5 years hasn't been Tory rule then you are deluded as you are obtuse.

We have a coalition government, that's just the way it is. And saying 22 out of the last 30 suggests 8 years of Labour, which is misleading. So you don't want me to correct you when you get something wrong? No wonder you get infuriated.

Surely it's like working hard in a marriage, if you're pissing your spouse off and she looks like she might leave, if you love her, then presumably you stop pissing her off and seeing what you can do to compromise.

Yes, but I'd think that applies to all parts of the UK. Northern towns that have been in decline since we stopped mining and lost of lot of our manufacturing industry, and also affluent areas. I think it's daft to talk about Scotland being ruled by a party they didn't vote for while ignoring all the other areas that have the same problem. That will always be the case. And if Scotland became independent, it would again happen inside Scotland, where two dominant parties would fight for power, and half the new country would get ruled by a party they didn't vote for.

All I've been saying is that rather than all this rhetoric of fear, 'they want to take all the silver...they want our oil' and all that crap, it's time to have a rhetoric of positivity about our country, to show willingness to embrace the Union, not fight for it, then just carry on as if nothing happened.

I'm simply saying that I'm concerned about the amount of influence the SNP will have, as I don't think that party are good for the UK as a whole.

Hopefully, with a positive outlook, even with the Scots electing the SNP to represent them, they will see enough of the UK embracing them as to never give any other referendum a chance.

The opposite appears to be the case. They feel that they were lied to (on the BBC) in the election campaign, and that they were lied to (false promises not realised) by Westminster. I was told by my Scottish friends this week that the Scottish GDP to benefit (per capita) ratio was higher than England and London, and that they subsidise London. God knows where they're getting their facts, because I googled it, and it appears London has the highest GDP per capita of any city in the world.

 

[Triggaaar]

On the other hand, an email's just arrived in my inbox that offers another opinion. Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz is in London to describe how austerity policies are harming economies.

To quote ... "Stiglitz will expose the neoliberal policies, such as deregulation and tax cuts for the rich, which he claims are causing many people to fall further and further behind. He will propose real solutions: increasing taxes on corporations and the wealthy; helping homeowners instead of banks; investing in education, science, and infrastructure; and, most importantly, doing more to restore full employment."

Still, he only won the Nobel Prize for economics, what does he know?

"He will propose real solutions". Great, I look forward to those. Maybe while we wait for the Nobel Prize for economics winner to come up with something, we shouldn't pretend that the solutions are easy.

 

[Bold Seagull]

And saying 22 out of the last 30 suggests 8 years of Labour, which is misleading.

I said 30 odd years. If you think saying '30 odd' means something else other than a number bigger than 30, then we'll end our chat here thanks.

 

[Gwylan]

"He will propose real solutions". Great, I look forward to those. Maybe while we wait for the Nobel Prize for economics winner to come up with something, we shouldn't pretend that the solutions are easy.

It says he will propose solutions, nowhere does it say "easy"

 

[crookie]

I wonder why I didn't hear of any of these wise economists predicting the global financial crash

 

[Bold Seagull]

My main problem with the Nationalist parties and the Greens are their determination to end austerity as they call it. let's be honest, the coalition have hardly taken an axe to public sector expenditure in total, more a small cheese slice. we still spend millions more every day than we take in tax. the only way we can sustain the interest payments on this gargantuan debt we have built up, by both Labour and Con/Lib by the way, is because the debt markets have confidence that we can repay those debts, and that's why the interest rate on our debt is very low. Tear up the debt reduction/spending cut plans and go on an unfunded spending spree, and the markets will take fright at our massive debt, rates will go through the roof, and the debt will become unsustainable

I wonder why I didn't hear of any of these wise economists predicting the global financial crash

Were you talking to yourself?

 

[Gwylan]

I wonder why I didn't hear of any of these wise economists predicting the global financial crash

Perhaps you didn't read the right publications or websites: there were plenty who did

 

[Titanic]

Survation poll for Daily Mirror:

CON 34% (+4)
LAB 33% (-2)
UKIP 17% (+1)
LIB 7% (-1)
SNP 4% (NC)
GRN 3% (-1)
AP 1% (NC)

 

[jakarta]

This. There's so much unsubstantiated fear about the SNP -- NSC's overlord, when taking a break from teasing some on here about politics, even claimed that he was frightened by the SNP -- on here. Scotland has 59 seats. FPTP will ensure that the SNP gets the lion's share of those this election. So why don't the fear mongers blame FPTP, for instance?
And Labour have already ruled out a coalition with the SNP, although a confidence-and-supply or issue-by-issue arrangement is a likely scenario.
All these NSC fear mongers ought to address the question of whether they want to keep the UK together. If they do, then they'll have to accept the SNP. If they don't accept the SNP, then they'll hasten the breakup of the UK (as will voting OUT in an EU referendum). And the SNP are not going to call for a referendum in the next parliament. They're not going to call one until opinion polls consistently point towards a victory, and it's highly unlikely that'll be in the next parliament.

What you are essentially saying is that 5 million Scots voters are more important than 53 million English.

I disagree and I won't accept a United Kingdom when less than 10% of the population have the whip hand.

I'm happy to see the Sweaties f*ck off and try their Socialist Paradise any day of the week.

Would love to see what the markets make of their financial plans.

 

[Hampster Gull]

It's to throw vulnerable people on the streets through benefit sanctions and allowing low wages so parents have to choose between feeding and clothing their children or feeding themselves. That's the reality of the Nasty Tory Party with his rich buddies who avoid tax are above the law of the land it seems.

That is ludicrous. We are at last coming out of an economic crisis, the worst in 100 years. But we now have the strongest growth amonst the big economies, inflation is low to non extistence, unemployment if falling, employment is rising, real wages are rising. There is no one starving in the UK. I see less people on the streets of London now than in the last Labour governments period. Not all is rosy for sure, far from it, and it never will be, whoever is in power. But we are moving again

 

[Silk]

I see less people on the streets of London now than in the last Labour governments period

Rofl. As if what "you see" matters. The figures on homeless.org.uk show homelessness had risen year on year since 2010, particularly steeply in London.

 

[Hampster Gull]

Perhaps you didn't read the right publications or websites: there were plenty who did

Shame it didnt include our much loved chancellor and PM Brown. "No more boom or bust" was one of his favourite lines.

 

[Triggaaar]

It says he will propose solutions, nowhere does it say "easy"

So what was your point? There maybe better solutions, but they've not been put forward yet, so governments have to work with the options available now. We haven't had much austerity, but the fact that the government were proposing it is what kept our credit rating high and our interest rates low, and that's saved us a fortune.

 

[Hampster Gull]

Rofl. As if what "you see" matters. The figures on homeless.org.uk show homelessness had risen year on year since 2010, particularly steeply in London.

Yes, the government has data going back to 2010 but no before based on their revised measure. I was comparing to the early 2000. I may be wrong, as you say, its my perception. I do remember friends coming over from Vienna and after a couple of days saying how shocked they were with rough sleeping and it opened my eyes.

 

[Hampster Gull]

That's one opinion.

On the other hand, an email's just arrived in my inbox that offers another opinion. Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz is in London to describe how austerity policies are harming economies.

To quote ... "Stiglitz will expose the neoliberal policies, such as deregulation and tax cuts for the rich, which he claims are causing many people to fall further and further behind. He will propose real solutions: increasing taxes on corporations and the wealthy; helping homeowners instead of banks; investing in education, science, and infrastructure; and, most importantly, doing more to restore full employment."

Still, he only won the Nobel Prize for economics, what does he know?

In economics, and indeed life, there are many views. He is notoriously left wing and winning the nobel prize doesnt make him necessarily right. there are many nobel prixe winners who diagree with him.