Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Guardian ICM phone poll sees the Tories down 3 and the Lib

13

Comments

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,709
    edited December 2014
    isam said:

    Mr. Isam, you don't think the eurozone sovereign debt crisis affected the economic situation over the course of the Parliament?

    Oh I thought you were joking!

    Sorry

    To the man in the street three big promises were made by the Coalition parties

    Cut net migration
    Eliminate the deficit
    Scrap tuition fees

    None have been made good on. Whatever the reason it just looks like slippery politicians making excuses
    I don't the LibDems promised the first two.

    Mind the s**t they got themselves over the third is deep enough. Although the fact that a lot of new graduates aren't actually paying anything back yet is softening the blow, I gather ..... albeit on a very limited sample.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Good grief, Obama has finally done something useful.

  • Bobajob_Bobajob_ Posts: 195
    Alan

    Some might say I am mellowing as I get older...
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,972
    edited December 2014
    Jonathan

    "Promised to eradicate the deficit"

    I wonder whether anyone outside of Robert Chote would know they'd failed to eradicate the deficit-or even what the deficit is?

    I think the pubic only register big brush strokes like unemployment or the economy doing well/badly.

    All we've been getting for the last year is unemployment down and the 'best economy in show'.

    I'm sure most voters have their personal reasons for supporting or opposing the government but listening to the news over the last year with one ear they seem to be smelling of roses.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    Mr. Isam, you don't think the eurozone sovereign debt crisis affected the economic situation over the course of the Parliament?

    Oh I thought you were joking!

    Sorry

    To the man in the street three big promises were made by the Coalition parties

    Cut net migration
    Eliminate the deficit
    Scrap tuition fees

    None have been made good on. Whatever the reason it just looks like slippery politicians making excuses
    I don't the LibDems promised the first two.

    Mind the s**t they got themselves over the third is deep enough. Although the fact that a lot of new graduates aren't actually paying anything back yet is softening the blow, I gather ..... albeit on a very limited sample.
    Sorry I didn't mean to imply the Coalition promised them as a coalition, but that the parties in the coalition individually promised these things
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    @FalseFlag

    Regarding the 'death' of a US shale company.

    You know who lost?

    It's shareholders.

    Do you know what will happen to its production?

    It will continue.

    Do you know what will happen to its acreage?

    It will be acquired for cents on the dollar by another (stronger) US oil company, and when (if) the oil price rises about $80 or so, the acreage will be drilled and fracc'ed, and more production will come on stream.

    It is economically illiterate to talk of a low oil price 'killing' tight oil in the US. It can send it in to hibernation, sure, but the oil and gas still exists, trapped in the pores of the rock, and ready to flow if oil prices rebound.

    Even if every oil and gas company in the US went bust, the frac trucks and the rigs would still exist, and would be ready to roll should the oil price rise again.

    The idea you can permanently 'kill' US unconventional production is absurd.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Just looked at this years 12 ICM polls and the Lib Dem vs UKIP shares

    6 Lib Dem leads
    5 UKIP leads
    1 tie

    Averages

    UKIP 11.83
    LD 11.75

    Lib Dem "crossover" would be less of a shock than UKIP "crossover"
  • Good grief, Obama has finally done something useful.

    Bay of Pig-Dog Traitors?? :-)
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited December 2014
    isam said:



    Oh I thought these polls were bad for the Tories because they were carried out for left wing papers?

    But it's because its Christmas...

    I'm sure it's just a coincidence that polls in the right wing press tend to favour right wing parties, while those in the left wing press tend to favour the left wing parties.

    The point about the time of year is that people are trying to attribute a 'change' (if it actually exists') to whatever was on the news yesterday or last week.

    In the long run, these things don't matter, in my view. People just read them the way they are pre-disposed to.



  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    MikeL said:

    stodge said:


    The campaign this time, given the presence of Nigel Farage, is much harder to read.

    I think the biggest issue yet to be determined is just how "present" Farage will be - ie will OFCOM give UKIP major party status?

    For as many GEs as I can remember the coverage rules have been 5/5/4.

    If UKIP doesn't get major party status, what will it be - 5/5/4/? 1? 2?

    If UKIP does get major party status will it be 5/5/4/4? or maybe 5/5/3/3?

    In my view this is the single biggest issue yet to be determined which will affect the result.
    I can't remember the last time I watched broadcast news.
    In 2001, I must have seen it at least five times a week.

    The world has changed: the BBC and ITV are massively less important than they used to be.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    Good grief, Obama has finally done something useful.

    He's resigned, become a British citizen and will fight Mark Reckless for Rochester???
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,972
    Alanbrooke

    "Good grief, Obama has finally done something useful."

    Certainly has though I'll believe it when something happens. And why did he wait six years......
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Was Lord Ashcroft saying the other day that the party who leads at the end of the year before election day, is usually the party that goes on to win?

    I imagine if Labour go into Xmas still with a lead in the "poll of polls" (however narrow), that should give them a psychological boost.
  • Mr. Isam, wasn't asking the man in the street, but you for your view on the impact the eurozone sovereign debt crisis had. I don't think it's valid to imply, as you seem to be, it's a matter of small (or no) consequence.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723
    edited December 2014
    rcs1000 said:

    MikeL said:

    stodge said:


    The campaign this time, given the presence of Nigel Farage, is much harder to read.

    I think the biggest issue yet to be determined is just how "present" Farage will be - ie will OFCOM give UKIP major party status?

    For as many GEs as I can remember the coverage rules have been 5/5/4.

    If UKIP doesn't get major party status, what will it be - 5/5/4/? 1? 2?

    If UKIP does get major party status will it be 5/5/4/4? or maybe 5/5/3/3?

    In my view this is the single biggest issue yet to be determined which will affect the result.
    I can't remember the last time I watched broadcast news.
    In 2001, I must have seen it at least five times a week.

    The world has changed: the BBC and ITV are massively less important than they used to be.
    As always it's worth checking the actual figures rather than relying on a general impression.

    December 2014 (week 1) - BBC1 6pm news averaged 5m

    December 2001 (week 1) - BBC1 6pm news averaged 6.5m

    Down yes. But not by miles. And still very substantial.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited December 2014

    Mr. Isam, wasn't asking the man in the street, but you for your view on the impact the eurozone sovereign debt crisis had. I don't think it's valid to imply, as you seem to be, it's a matter of small (or no) consequence.

    I have no opinion on it, I really wouldn't know. Economic data seems to be manipulated to suit arguments far too easily. I cant remember any politician ever admitting to getting it wrong

    The Tories say Gordon Brown was to blame for the 2007/8 recession.. he blames Eurozone/USA

    Labour say Osborne is to blame for only halving deficit... he blames Eurozone etc

    Just all smells like partisan bullshit

    All I know is that they said it would be eliminated in five years, poured scorn on the idea that it should only be halved, then presented halving it as a success
  • Mr. Isam, cheers for the answer, although I must say I think that it's unfair not to consider that the crisis had an impact on us [not sufficient to account for all the failure to reduce the deficit to zero, but certainly a sizeable part of it].
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    MikeL said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MikeL said:

    stodge said:


    The campaign this time, given the presence of Nigel Farage, is much harder to read.

    I think the biggest issue yet to be determined is just how "present" Farage will be - ie will OFCOM give UKIP major party status?

    For as many GEs as I can remember the coverage rules have been 5/5/4.

    If UKIP doesn't get major party status, what will it be - 5/5/4/? 1? 2?

    If UKIP does get major party status will it be 5/5/4/4? or maybe 5/5/3/3?

    In my view this is the single biggest issue yet to be determined which will affect the result.
    I can't remember the last time I watched broadcast news.
    In 2001, I must have seen it at least five times a week.

    The world has changed: the BBC and ITV are massively less important than they used to be.
    As always it's worth checking the actual figures rather than relying on a general impression.

    December 2014 (week 1) - BBC1 6pm news averaged 5m

    December 2001 (week 1) - BBC1 6pm news averaged 6.5m

    Down yes. But not by miles. And still very substantial.
    Yeah, but most of the people who watch it these days are Romanian immigrants who are just trying to improve their English
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited December 2014

    Mr. Isam, cheers for the answer, although I must say I think that it's unfair not to consider that the crisis had an impact on us [not sufficient to account for all the failure to reduce the deficit to zero, but certainly a sizeable part of it].

    That's ok

    The counter to that is he should have factored in the possibility of a Eurozone crisis before making the claim

    If I recommend a bet on, lets say, Aguero to score a hat trick and he scores two then gets subbed with 15 mins left, people who backed him and lost 100% of their money will say I should have factored that in, not that we were unlucky

    ...and the people who recommended backing him to score anytime or to score twice would be saying told you so
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,709

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Good points. The need for food banks is a very big blot on the Governments record.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Good points. The need for food banks is a very big blot on the Governments record.
    So no-one will use a foodbank under Labour ?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    So no-one will use a foodbank under Labour ?

    The next Labour Government will make it illegal to talk about foodbanks...
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    4 million go hungry as obesity threatens to overwhelm the NHS?

  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited December 2014

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Since Miliband walloped the poor with his Green energy policies under the previous Labour government, he can share the blame for empty tummies. And he's done it again with the unforeseen results of his threat to control power prices.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    edited December 2014
    chestnut said:

    4 million go hungry as obesity threatens to overwhelm the NHS?

    According to various leftist social scientists malnutrition causes obesity. It's a calorific mystery.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    edited December 2014

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised to cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Since Miliband walloped the poor with his Green energy policies under the previous Labour government, he can share the blame for empty tummies. And he's done it again with the unforeseen results of his threat to control power prices.
    Plus the govt are now berating the supermarkets for food waste. We waste £billions in thrown away food. We have an obesity crisis and socialists resort to all this rubbish. its all part of a policy to pretend that the govt cuts are unbearable when in fact they are achievable and necessary. But Labour want it two ways. They say 1 - cuts are too deep. Then they say 2 - the deficit is too big.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Since Miliband walloped the poor with his Green energy policies under the previous Labour government, he can share the blame for empty tummies. And he's done it again with the unforeseen results of his threat to control power prices.
    Controlling power prices = people going hungry ! Only a PBTory could come up with something like this. Barmy !
  • Mr. Surbiton, in the 4th century Ammianus Marcellinus criticised Julian the Apostate on precisely the basis that it was well-known commodity price fixing could lead to famine.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    I have been thinking about the economy sentiment thing.

    First, @Roger is right - people wouldn't know a deficit (still less a structural deficit) if it sat on their face.

    Secondly, people are feeling bad about the economy, relatively, because...

    ...

    ...It's Christmas!!

    And there is so much stuff to buy, and people are spending left, right and Chelsea, and know the long number along the middle of their card off by heart so no effing wonder they are depressed about the economy.

    I am depressed about the economy and I believe GO has done a cracking job. Or at least a non-horrendous one.

    People are human, remember...
  • Mr. Topping, 'people are human', except for those who are lizards, obviously.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,469
    surbiton said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Since Miliband walloped the poor with his Green energy policies under the previous Labour government, he can share the blame for empty tummies. And he's done it again with the unforeseen results of his threat to control power prices.
    Controlling power prices = people going hungry ! Only a PBTory could come up with something like this. Barmy !
    Surely "controlling power prices" was Miliband's stupid wizard wheeze from last year. I think TW might be referring to all of the green levies that Miliband threw on people when he was in charge of DECC. These have cost people a lot of money ...
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Good points. The need for food banks is a very big blot on the Governments record.
    Can you tell us what is wrong with our £112 billion welfare bill that there is a need for food banks?
    Alternatively can you tell us what is wrong with our domestic science education that people are incapable of feeding themselves when we have falling food prices?
  • Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Since there is a major famine currently ravaging the UK, I imagine you'd like to cancel the foreign aid budget.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Oooh. Clever.

    You switched mid-sentence from absolute numbers to percentages to try and link the 87% with the 4m in people's minds.

    But can you post a link to explain how the 4m becomes 8m?
  • Very poor poll for the Tories. It might just be the case they've pissed off everyone* who used to, or might have considered, voting for them. I still think they'll pull at least even with Labour in votes next year. It's a question of what happens to the seats.

    *Apart from the pensioners. Solid deal if you're a pensioner.
  • Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Since there is a major famine currently ravaging the UK, I imagine you'd like to cancel the foreign aid budget.
    And, presumably, our contributions to white countries in the EU?
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    surbiton said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Since Miliband walloped the poor with his Green energy policies under the previous Labour government, he can share the blame for empty tummies. And he's done it again with the unforeseen results of his threat to control power prices.
    Controlling power prices = people going hungry ! Only a PBTory could come up with something like this. Barmy !
    Surely "controlling power prices" was Miliband's stupid wizard wheeze from last year. I think TW might be referring to all of the green levies that Miliband threw on people when he was in charge of DECC. These have cost people a lot of money ...
    Indeed I was. Ed's Green policies as Sec of State, helped ratchet up the energy bills of the poor.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,972
    edited December 2014
    Volcano

    "There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year"

    This is the image that goes some way to explain why the Tories are doing badly despite headline figures suggesting Osborne's the boy wonder. Voters with a heart (ie excluding dyed in the wool Tories and UKIPers) don't trust this government's instincts.

    Most are appalled by food banks and the idea that people are going hungry. Nasty echoes of the early 80's-a period from which the Tories have never recovered.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    Mr. Topping, 'people are human', except for those who are lizards, obviously.

    No, not the lizards. Obviously.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Roger said:

    Volcano

    "There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year"

    This is the image that goes some way to explain why the Tories are doing badly despite headline figures suggesting Osborne's the boy wonder. Voters with a heart (ie excluding dyed in the wool Tories and UKIPers) don't trust this government's instincts.

    Most are appalled by food banks and the idea that people are going hungry. Horrible echoes of the early 80's-a period from which the Tories have never recovered.

    I would love, absolutely bloody love someone to ask EdM where his nearest foodbank is.

    He wouldn't know in a million years.

    Indicative of anything? Not particularly. Extremely amusing? Oh yes.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited December 2014
    surbiton said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Since Miliband walloped the poor with his Green energy policies under the previous Labour government, he can share the blame for empty tummies. And he's done it again with the unforeseen results of his threat to control power prices.
    Controlling power prices = people going hungry ! Only a PBTory could come up with something like this. Barmy !
    I was referring to his Green policies as Sec of State under the previous Labour administration.

    Ed's teary efforts at saving the melting penguins, must have added £hundreds to the energy bills of the poor.
  • Mr. Roger, didn't the Conservatives win 3 consecutive elections after the start of the 1980s?
  • TOPPING said:

    Roger said:

    Volcano

    "There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year"

    This is the image that goes some way to explain why the Tories are doing badly despite headline figures suggesting Osborne's the boy wonder. Voters with a heart (ie excluding dyed in the wool Tories and UKIPers) don't trust this government's instincts.

    Most are appalled by food banks and the idea that people are going hungry. Horrible echoes of the early 80's-a period from which the Tories have never recovered.

    I would love, absolutely bloody love someone to ask EdM where his nearest foodbank is.

    He wouldn't know in a million years.

    Indicative of anything? Not particularly. Extremely amusing? Oh yes.
    Does Dave know where his nearest one is?
  • I'm shocked (I thought he had recanted his EDL past)

    Far-right activist Tommy Robinson has announced his support for Ukip at the next general election.

    Having previously endorsed Nigel Farage's party in a tweet, the former English Defence League leader has restated his support for Ukip in an interview.

    Robinson, real name Stephen Yaxley Lennon, suggested that he had met quietly with members of Farage's eurosceptic party: "I’m not at liberty to go into details but all I know is that 100% Ukip fully understand the threat of Islamic ideology."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/12/17/english-defence-league-to-uk-independence-party_n_6341684.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,961
    edited December 2014
    So first Nick Griffin, now Tommy Robinson, I'm utterly perplexed why UKIP are attracting the heavyweights of the far right?

    Anyone got any ideas why UKIP are attracting these sorts of people?
  • Incidentally, just checked Twitter, and it seems the first bid to elect a Greek president has failed.

    There are two more opportunities, on 23rd and 29th December.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    The BbC and Labour are the twats that cried wolf. Growth, falling prices, falling employment, rising wages - they have got it wrong again and again.

    Pray they don't get back into wreck it.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    edited December 2014
    isam said:

    Mr. Isam, wasn't asking the man in the street, but you for your view on the impact the eurozone sovereign debt crisis had. I don't think it's valid to imply, as you seem to be, it's a matter of small (or no) consequence.

    I have no opinion on it, I really wouldn't know. Economic data seems to be manipulated to suit arguments far too easily. I cant remember any politician ever admitting to getting it wrong

    The Tories say Gordon Brown was to blame for the 2007/8 recession.. he blames Eurozone/USA

    Labour say Osborne is to blame for only halving deficit... he blames Eurozone etc

    Just all smells like partisan bullshit

    All I know is that they said it would be eliminated in five years, poured scorn on the idea that it should only be halved, then presented halving it as a success
    Brown did not blame the Eurozone - he said it all started in America. The tories blamed him for his lack of regulation of our home grown institutions.
    One of the quite correct policies of this govt has been to ensure that banks increase their reserves - which has been at the expense of lending.
    Osborne delayed quite openly the pace of reducing the deficit against a specific date because of what I guess we will call a sovereign debt crisis and what most people were calling the imminent colapse of the Euro.
    Do you deny that took place?
    Given that it did then what was the correct course of action?
    If you had been chancellor would you have -
    carried on with the same level of cuts taxes
    eased the cuts taxes
    intensified the cuts taxes.
    Better still tell us what your policies would be?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    edited December 2014
    Charles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Oooh. Clever.

    You switched mid-sentence from absolute numbers to percentages to try and link the 87% with the 4m in people's minds.

    But can you post a link to explain how the 4m becomes 8m?
    It's back to the famous Guardian article where they stated that one in every 329 women in the UK was a trafficked Vietnamese nailbar worker.

    I have no reason to doubt the figures (do I?) but 4m people is in "someone everyone knows" territory.

    Shall we do a PB straw poll?

    I'll start - I don't know anyone who uses a foodbank. But then I wouldn't necessarily expect me to.

    What about some of the lefties on here?


  • That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.


    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?

    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.



    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.


    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?



    Oooh. Clever.

    You switched mid-sentence from absolute numbers to percentages to try and link the 87% with the 4m in people's minds.

    But can you post a link to explain how the 4m becomes 8m?

    It's back to the famous Guardian article where they stated that one in every 329 women in the UK was a trafficked Vietnamese nailbar worker.

    I have no reason to doubt the figures (do I?) but 4m people is in "someone everyone knows" territory.

    Shall we do a PB straw poll?

    I'll start - I don't know anyone who uses a foodbank. But then I wouldn't necessarily expect me to.

    What about some of the lefties on here?

    They are more likely to know people who use champagne & oyster bars.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Better still tell us what your policies would be?

    Say what you like Mr Flightpath, the current run of polls shows that the vast majority of people still are not feeling the economic recovery.

    Not even close.
  • Roger said:

    Volcano

    "There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year"

    This is the image that goes some way to explain why the Tories are doing badly despite headline figures suggesting Osborne's the boy wonder. Voters with a heart (ie excluding dyed in the wool Tories and UKIPers) don't trust this government's instincts.

    Most are appalled by food banks and the idea that people are going hungry. Nasty echoes of the early 80's-a period from which the Tories have never recovered.

    Some of us support foodbanks by contributing to them.

    Anyone who is not busy supporting British industry to export more, and improving education standards to give us the core of qualified people to do that is adding to the problem.

    The British economy is full of low paid jobs largely because British Governments of all hues have failed to steer people into high tech industries required for the future. (note "steer",,)

    As a classic example of failure see the NHS: much beloved of the Left. It relies on other Governments to train nurses and doctors. If it had to rely on UK trained staff only , it would collapse.


    This is a total and utter abject failure of Governments top force their own NHS to train UK staff ..

    You can see what the end result is going to be...


  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @TOPPING
    About half a dozen, though usually only for short periods.
    ( I am talking about households, not the number of people)
  • numbercrunchernumbercruncher Posts: 136
    edited December 2014
    Re this ICM poll: My hunch was that the publication delay (the fieldwork took four days) could have been due low response rates over what is likely to be one of (if not the) busiest shopping weekends of the year. Since 85% of interviews are by landline, this matters.

    But anyway, look at the tables: In November, their raw poll contained 129 2010 Lib Dems, so the weighting adjustment needed to achieve a representative sample of 131 was extremely small. In December, however, the raw sample contained only 102 such respondents, requiring a rather hefty 28% weighting-up.

    There are two consequences of this. Firstly, large weighting adjustments of this kind magnify the sampling error in that portion of the sample. Secondly, if a lot of people were indeed out shopping, it follows that there is a significant risk those that were home to answer their landlines could have been unusually unrepresentative of the 2010 Lib Dem cell as a whole.

    Unfortunately we have to wait until Jan for the next ICM!

    https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/545278853514821632
  • audreyanneaudreyanne Posts: 1,376
    Re the poll, it's Christmas so yes economic optimism is down.

    Polls are pointless until mid January.
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Roger said:

    "What evidence is there of VI shifting much during the campaign?"

    Why the Tories aren't doing better is a mystery. My guess is that voters suspect they're wolves in sheep's clothing

    That and the fact they are a bit rubbish. Pain for no real gain. Promised to eradicate the deficit, delivered sweet FA. Five wasted years.
    A bit rubbish, unless the electorate are as ignorant as you.
    The tories promised to eliminate the structural deficit. Its cutting spending to do that.
    The government made a clear choice in the face of the Euro crisis to delay its programme for 2 years. If you are not happy about that what more would you cut?
    Tories used to take responsibility. In this parliament they have blamed the opposition, the Euro and even the weather. Never themselves.

    The simple fact is they promised to cut the deficit, they rubbished alternative plans as being inadequate. The fact they have failed to match the plans they rubbished should be hung around their neck during the election campaign.

    They promised tom cut the structural deficit and they refused to ply on further cuts to meet that when the euro zone walked into crisis. Personally I do not criticise the govt for doing the right thing.
    As it is it is cutting its managed expenditure. It is 40.5% of GDP this year, having come down from 45.3% in 2009-10. According to the OBR it needs to come down to 36% of GDP by 2018-19 to eliminate the budget deficit. Thats the whole deficit and give a small surplus. To me given the changes we have already seen that is a comforting situation. I'm a tory not a socialist so I see no worries in voting tory again.
    There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year.What on earth is the point of having a £23 billion surplus on the current account in 3 years time when maybe 8 million aren't eating?Do you call this success?

    Those baby eating Tories certainly aren't going hungry.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Smarmeron said:

    @TOPPING
    About half a dozen, though usually only for short periods.
    ( I am talking about households, not the number of people)

    So is it a cashflow issue?

    Will the govt's recent announcement to address delays in benefit payments help or do you also know people who are "structurally" poor?

    If so, and I suppose the pin-up girl for these people is Jack Monroe, I would find it interesting to know why the benefit regime should not be sufficient for people to feed themselves.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,972
    edited December 2014
    MD

    "Mr. Roger, didn't the Conservatives win 3 consecutive elections after the start of the 1980s?"

    There have been many cases where people have done things that seemed logical at the time but for which they felt heartily ashamed afterwards. The Tories bribed people with cheap council houses and and with their allies in the right wing press they then terrified them about the consequences of voting for an alternative.

    When they woke up from their stupor in '97 the electorate punished the Tories like they'd never been punished before and even 17 years later they haven't recovered.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @TOPPING
    Not to put to fine a point on it, the Job Centre staff have a tendency to pick on the less bright for sanctions.
    Morality goes out the window when your boss is biting your ear.
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312

    So first Nick Griffin, now Tommy Robinson, I'm utterly perplexed why UKIP are attracting the heavyweights of the far right?

    Anyone got any ideas why UKIP are attracting these sorts of people?

    1. UKIP dislike people raping kids.
    2. UKIP dislike public religious ceremonies being disrupted by your buddies.
  • Ninoinoz said:

    So first Nick Griffin, now Tommy Robinson, I'm utterly perplexed why UKIP are attracting the heavyweights of the far right?

    Anyone got any ideas why UKIP are attracting these sorts of people?

    1. UKIP dislike people raping kids.
    2. UKIP dislike public religious ceremonies being disrupted by your buddies.
    Who are my buddies?
  • The Supreme Court has today given its reasons for dismissing the appeal in Moohan v Lord Advocate [2014] UKSC 68, which was a judicial review of the Scottish Independence Referendum (Franchise) Act 2013. Two convicted prisoners averred that the Act violated article 3 of protocol 1 to the ECHR and was thus outwith the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore & Lord Wilson JJSC would have allowed the appeal, and presumably would have reduced the relevant provisions of the Act. The majority of the Court disagreed. There is a particularly interesting remark in the judgment of Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury PSC (with whom Baroness Hale of Richmond DPSC, Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony, Lord Hodge & Lord Reed JJSC agreed) at [47]:
    Fourthly, decisions of the of the Strasbourg Court indicate that A3P1 only applies to directly effective elections - ie to elections which ipso facto result in what the people voted for, and not to ballots which require some further legal step to produce that result. Thus, in a general election in the UK, a Member of Parliament is elected as soon as all the votes are cast. Nothing else is needed, apart from the pure machinery of counting the votes and announcing the result. On the other hand, while the main political parties had committed themselves to accept the result of the Referendum, a “yes” vote would not of itself have triggered independence for Scotland. If there had been a “yes” vote, Scotland would not have achieved independence unless and until the UK Parliament had voted in favour, and, whatever the main parties had promised, Members of Parliament would have been free, indeed constitutionally bound, to vote as they saw fit.
    This remark is part of the ratio, and thus binds all Scottish courts. There could be no more conclusive a demonstration that the supposed sovereignty of the Scottish people is, in law, a fiction.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Douglas Murray ‏@DouglasKMurray 17m17 minutes ago
    Apparently blowing on the back of someone's neck and not serving a meal fast enough also now constitutes 'torture'. http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/douglas-murray/2014/12/the-oldest-trick-in-the-detainees-book/
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    Roger said:


    The Tories bribed people with cheap council houses.

    Yeah, like Labour has never subsidised council housing.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,341

    Roger said:

    Volcano

    "There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year"

    This is the image that goes some way to explain why the Tories are doing badly despite headline figures suggesting Osborne's the boy wonder. Voters with a heart (ie excluding dyed in the wool Tories and UKIPers) don't trust this government's instincts.

    Most are appalled by food banks and the idea that people are going hungry. Nasty echoes of the early 80's-a period from which the Tories have never recovered.

    Some of us support foodbanks by contributing to them.

    Anyone who is not busy supporting British industry to export more, and improving education standards to give us the core of qualified people to do that is adding to the problem.

    The British economy is full of low paid jobs largely because British Governments of all hues have failed to steer people into high tech industries required for the future. (note "steer",,)

    As a classic example of failure see the NHS: much beloved of the Left. It relies on other Governments to train nurses and doctors. If it had to rely on UK trained staff only , it would collapse.


    This is a total and utter abject failure of Governments top force their own NHS to train UK staff ..

    You can see what the end result is going to be...


    Part of the reason is the commercialisation/marketisation of the NHS in England, I was told by someone who works in medical education. Trusts (etc) just aren't so interested in anything which doesn't bring in the money, and that includes staff training.

    University fees are also another factor, I expect.

  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @TOPPING

    http://stupidsanctions.tumblr.com/

    Some of these are really funny, knock yourself out.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Ninoinoz said:

    Roger said:


    The Tories bribed people with cheap council houses.

    Yeah, like Labour has never subsidised council housing.
    Indeed, or as this is more familiarly known: "policies".
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited December 2014

    isam said:

    Mr. Isam, wasn't asking the man in the street, but you for your view on the impact the eurozone sovereign debt crisis had. I don't think it's valid to imply, as you seem to be, it's a matter of small (or no) consequence.

    I have no opinion on it, I really wouldn't know. Economic data seems to be manipulated to suit arguments far too easily. I cant remember any politician ever admitting to getting it wrong

    The Tories say Gordon Brown was to blame for the 2007/8 recession.. he blames Eurozone/USA

    Labour say Osborne is to blame for only halving deficit... he blames Eurozone etc

    Just all smells like partisan bullshit

    All I know is that they said it would be eliminated in five years, poured scorn on the idea that it should only be halved, then presented halving it as a success
    Brown did not blame the Eurozone - he said it all started in America. The tories blamed him for his lack of regulation of our home grown institutions.
    One of the quite correct policies of this govt has been to ensure that banks increase their reserves - which has been at the expense of lending.
    Osborne delayed quite openly the pace of reducing the deficit against a specific date because of what I guess we will call a sovereign debt crisis and what most people were calling the imminent colapse of the Euro.
    Do you deny that took place?
    Given that it did then what was the correct course of action?
    If you had been chancellor would you have -
    carried on with the same level of cuts taxes
    eased the cuts taxes
    intensified the cuts taxes.
    Better still tell us what your policies would be?
    Even better still, read my comment that you have answered

    I haven't criticised any action he did or didnt take, just said that the public will remember a pledge that has not been fulfilled.

    You cant use the excuses that "I didn't know this or that was going to happen" because the answer to that is "well you shouldn't have made the pledge if there were factors outside your control that might mean you might not be able to make good on it"
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited December 2014

    So first Nick Griffin, now Tommy Robinson, I'm utterly perplexed why UKIP are attracting the heavyweights of the far right?

    Anyone got any ideas why UKIP are attracting these sorts of people?

    The other three parties looked the other way while rapists abused thousands of children because they were frightened of looking racist?
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312

    Ninoinoz said:

    So first Nick Griffin, now Tommy Robinson, I'm utterly perplexed why UKIP are attracting the heavyweights of the far right?

    Anyone got any ideas why UKIP are attracting these sorts of people?

    1. UKIP dislike people raping kids.
    2. UKIP dislike public religious ceremonies being disrupted by your buddies.
    Who are my buddies?
    I'd thought you'd bite.

    I am, of course, referring to the Papal Visit in 2010.

    But, equally disgraceful but not directly affecting me, there was the 'welcome' afforded the fallen in Royal Wootton Bassett by members of your ethno-religious group. Now, I opposed the Gulf War too, but there was no need for that.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Suzanne Evans ‏@SuzanneEvans1 32m32 minutes ago
    Tories to Sue Mark Reckless http://guyfawk.es/1szP2xf Pathetic.
  • isam said:

    So first Nick Griffin, now Tommy Robinson, I'm utterly perplexed why UKIP are attracting the heavyweights of the far right?

    Anyone got any ideas why UKIP are attracting these sorts of people?

    The other three parties looked the other way while rapists abused thousands of children because they were frightened of looking racist?
    Well it's got the evening thread sorted out.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited December 2014
    Ninoinoz said:

    So first Nick Griffin, now Tommy Robinson, I'm utterly perplexed why UKIP are attracting the heavyweights of the far right?

    Anyone got any ideas why UKIP are attracting these sorts of people?

    1. UKIP dislike people raping kids.

    So UKIP don't like priests?
  • Mr. Oz, Islam is a religion, not an ethnicity. There have been white Islamist lunatics as well.

    And, whilst there is a serious problem of Islamic extremism, it's not reasonable to hold every Muslim responsible by association for the acts of a lunatic few.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    edited December 2014
    madasafish - says - ''The British economy is full of low paid jobs largely because British Governments of all hues have failed to steer people into high tech industries required for the future. (note "steer",,)''

    And alternatively low paid jobs are there to serve the needs of all these high tec well paid people in industries. The BBC I think it was has just run a news story about a hi tec industry that has doubled in size over the last 4 years. These alleged low paid jobs do not exist in Jaguar Land Rover Mini or Nissan etc. In terms of the construction industry I was talking to an employer over the weekend who was saying he has to make eye watering pay increases to keep good staff. He could let them go and pay new staff less but they would not be as good. I suspect the situation is the same in other sectors.
    People talk about low paid jobs but what are these jobs. Is it 'appropriate' pay not 'low' pay? And are these jobs better than being on the dole?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    TOPPING said:



    It's back to the famous Guardian article where they stated that one in every 329 women in the UK was a trafficked Vietnamese nailbar worker.

    I have no reason to doubt the figures (do I?) but 4m people is in "someone everyone knows" territory.

    Shall we do a PB straw poll?

    I'll start - I don't know anyone who uses a foodbank. But then I wouldn't necessarily expect me to.

    What about some of the lefties on here?

    I expect that the 4m is an example of absurd extrapolation. "We did a survey of one foodbank in a very deprived area and then multipled the ratio of users:population by the UK population" or something like that.

    Also, I suspect there is some "definitional slippage". For example, twice a week one of the local churches runs a soup kitchen for the homeless near my office. They have been doing so for as long as I remember - but I suspect they have been reclassified as a food bank. Similarly (and I don't know) if they run the same activity at 2 other sites on 2 days each, I wouldn't be surprised if it was counted as 3 foodbanks, and the users (even if they are the same) counted three times
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,961
    edited December 2014
    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    So first Nick Griffin, now Tommy Robinson, I'm utterly perplexed why UKIP are attracting the heavyweights of the far right?

    Anyone got any ideas why UKIP are attracting these sorts of people?

    1. UKIP dislike people raping kids.
    2. UKIP dislike public religious ceremonies being disrupted by your buddies.
    Who are my buddies?
    I'd thought you'd bite.

    I am, of course, referring to the Papal Visit in 2010.

    But, equally disgraceful but not directly affecting me, there was the 'welcome' afforded the fallen in Royal Wootton Bassett by members of your ethno-religious group. Now, I opposed the Gulf War too, but there was no need for that.
    Well the arrival of the head of the greatest Paedophile protection network in the world was always going to raise protests, what did you Papists expect?

    On the second part, as someone who isn't religious, I've found the religious protests at military funerals/the fallen both sides of the pond repugnant.
  • One of my proudest achievements was being called a Fag-Enabler by members of the Westboro church.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Roger said:

    Volcano

    "There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year"

    This is the image that goes some way to explain why the Tories are doing badly despite headline figures suggesting Osborne's the boy wonder. Voters with a heart (ie excluding dyed in the wool Tories and UKIPers) don't trust this government's instincts.

    Most are appalled by food banks and the idea that people are going hungry. Nasty echoes of the early 80's-a period from which the Tories have never recovered.

    Some of us support foodbanks by contributing to them.

    Anyone who is not busy supporting British industry to export more, and improving education standards to give us the core of qualified people to do that is adding to the problem.

    The British economy is full of low paid jobs largely because British Governments of all hues have failed to steer people into high tech industries required for the future. (note "steer",,)

    As a classic example of failure see the NHS: much beloved of the Left. It relies on other Governments to train nurses and doctors. If it had to rely on UK trained staff only , it would collapse.


    This is a total and utter abject failure of Governments top force their own NHS to train UK staff ..

    You can see what the end result is going to be...


    I've just finished a rather fun airport novel "All Our Tomorrows" talking about the failure of collective will & the implications.

    (Obviously given it was written in 1981, the concept of a Soviet takeover was still realistic!)

    But some of the quotes that the writer puts into the mouths of people talking about UK politicians are very similar to some of the phrases our Kipper friends use today!

    http://www.amazon.com/All-Our-Tomorrows-Ted-Allbeury/dp/0445409142
  • Lab 2.6% ahead on simple average of this week's five polls so far.

    A "part-ELBOW" (now including ICM data from tables) has them 2.0% ahead.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited December 2014
    Carnyx said:

    Roger said:

    Volcano

    "There are 4 million people going hungry in the UK because of government cuts and malnutrition has increased by 87% in a year"

    This is the image that goes some way to explain why the Tories are doing badly despite headline figures suggesting Osborne's the boy wonder. Voters with a heart (ie excluding dyed in the wool Tories and UKIPers) don't trust this government's instincts.

    Most are appalled by food banks and the idea that people are going hungry. Nasty echoes of the early 80's-a period from which the Tories have never recovered.

    Some of us support foodbanks by contributing to them.

    Anyone who is not busy supporting British industry to export more, and improving education standards to give us the core of qualified people to do that is adding to the problem.

    The British economy is full of low paid jobs largely because British Governments of all hues have failed to steer people into high tech industries required for the future. (note "steer",,)

    As a classic example of failure see the NHS: much beloved of the Left. It relies on other Governments to train nurses and doctors. If it had to rely on UK trained staff only , it would collapse.


    This is a total and utter abject failure of Governments top force their own NHS to train UK staff ..

    You can see what the end result is going to be...


    .....University fees are also another factor, I expect.

    "University fees are also another factor, I expect."
    Well the move to making all new nurses get a degree will have pushed up the cost of training that falls on the NHS...... Presumably nurses trained from outside the UK do not have that requirement? Anyone spot the attraction of foreign trained nurses to the NHS?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,709
    edited December 2014


    Alternatively can you tell us what is wrong with our domestic science education that people are incapable of feeding themselves when we have falling food prices?

    Back now.
    Much of the "welfare" bill goes on pensions IIRC.
    Too many people are only wages or benefits which are "just enough". If anything goes wrong .....
    That's not suggesting that people shouldn't try to save against a rainy day. The problem is that for some people there have been too many of those.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Charles said:

    TOPPING said:



    It's back to the famous Guardian article where they stated that one in every 329 women in the UK was a trafficked Vietnamese nailbar worker.

    I have no reason to doubt the figures (do I?) but 4m people is in "someone everyone knows" territory.

    Shall we do a PB straw poll?

    I'll start - I don't know anyone who uses a foodbank. But then I wouldn't necessarily expect me to.

    What about some of the lefties on here?

    I expect that the 4m is an example of absurd extrapolation. "We did a survey of one foodbank in a very deprived area and then multipled the ratio of users:population by the UK population" or something like that.

    Also, I suspect there is some "definitional slippage". For example, twice a week one of the local churches runs a soup kitchen for the homeless near my office. They have been doing so for as long as I remember - but I suspect they have been reclassified as a food bank. Similarly (and I don't know) if they run the same activity at 2 other sites on 2 days each, I wouldn't be surprised if it was counted as 3 foodbanks, and the users (even if they are the same) counted three times
    Obviously, this has gone under your skin otherwise you would not be writing such a long piece. Foodbanks indeed are a blot on this nation - whatever the number you come with.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    edited December 2014
    I would have thought this poll reflects concern for many, in regard to how they individually feel about their own prospects for the future.

    The upward trend in personal debt for many, will be day to day running costs.


    Total net lending to individuals (excluding student
    loans) was £2.6 billion in October 2014. Net lending
    has been relatively low since mid-2008, but has
    been on a broadly upward trend since 2013..

    The hangover from Christmas will last some time.
    The reduction in fuel prices should ameliorate some of that.

    However to keep saying to people they are better off, because wage rises are beating inflation, will feel like a sick joke, after the last few years.

  • Mr. Oz, Islam is a religion, not an ethnicity. There have been white Islamist lunatics as well.

    And, whilst there is a serious problem of Islamic extremism, it's not reasonable to hold every Muslim responsible by association for the acts of a lunatic few.

    As we saw tragically yesterday, over a hundred of the latest victims of Islamism were their fellow Muslims.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Smarmeron said:

    @TOPPING

    http://stupidsanctions.tumblr.com/

    Some of these are really funny, knock yourself out.

    Actually it just shows bureaucrats behaving like bureaucrats and failing to use the discretion available to them
  • Dr. Prasannan, well, quite. That's what makes ISIS and their ilk so demented. They proclaim it's all about Sharia, and 90%+ of the people they kill are Muslims.

    It's as stupid as the Fourth Crusade, but played over and over and over again.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Charles
    Is the weather nice in La La land Charles?
  • numbercruncher thanks.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    taffys said:

    Better still tell us what your policies would be?

    Say what you like Mr Flightpath, the current run of polls shows that the vast majority of people still are not feeling the economic recovery.

    Not even close.

    And you can say nothing. How clever is that?
    I have just posted about expansions in hi tec. About wage rises in construction. Clearly there has been pay restraint. This has led to people keeping their jobs to new jobs being created and to falling inflation.
    Someone sneered about no pain no gain when attacking Osborne (for not cutting more). You point out their has been pain (which the govt did not flinch from).
    Both attacks cannot be right.
    The reality is that pay restraint has led us to a situation where we have growth and falling inflation; rising employment and still slack in the economy plus the opportunity for increased productivity if and when that slack disappears.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    surbiton said:

    Charles said:

    TOPPING said:



    It's back to the famous Guardian article where they stated that one in every 329 women in the UK was a trafficked Vietnamese nailbar worker.

    I have no reason to doubt the figures (do I?) but 4m people is in "someone everyone knows" territory.

    Shall we do a PB straw poll?

    I'll start - I don't know anyone who uses a foodbank. But then I wouldn't necessarily expect me to.

    What about some of the lefties on here?

    I expect that the 4m is an example of absurd extrapolation. "We did a survey of one foodbank in a very deprived area and then multipled the ratio of users:population by the UK population" or something like that.

    Also, I suspect there is some "definitional slippage". For example, twice a week one of the local churches runs a soup kitchen for the homeless near my office. They have been doing so for as long as I remember - but I suspect they have been reclassified as a food bank. Similarly (and I don't know) if they run the same activity at 2 other sites on 2 days each, I wouldn't be surprised if it was counted as 3 foodbanks, and the users (even if they are the same) counted three times
    Obviously, this has gone under your skin otherwise you would not be writing such a long piece. Foodbanks indeed are a blot on this nation - whatever the number you come with.
    Not particularly. Sorry. And I don't think that 5 sentences counts as "a long piece"...

    But it strikes me as a pretty sensible market reaction to a bureaucratic failure.

    (this answer was also 5 sentences)
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Smarmeron said:

    @Charles
    Is the weather nice in La La land Charles?

    About 17oC, since you ask.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Charles said:

    TOPPING said:



    It's back to the famous Guardian article where they stated that one in every 329 women in the UK was a trafficked Vietnamese nailbar worker.

    I have no reason to doubt the figures (do I?) but 4m people is in "someone everyone knows" territory.

    Shall we do a PB straw poll?

    I'll start - I don't know anyone who uses a foodbank. But then I wouldn't necessarily expect me to.

    What about some of the lefties on here?

    I expect that the 4m is an example of absurd extrapolation. "We did a survey of one foodbank in a very deprived area and then multipled the ratio of users:population by the UK population" or something like that.

    Also, I suspect there is some "definitional slippage". For example, twice a week one of the local churches runs a soup kitchen for the homeless near my office. They have been doing so for as long as I remember - but I suspect they have been reclassified as a food bank. Similarly (and I don't know) if they run the same activity at 2 other sites on 2 days each, I wouldn't be surprised if it was counted as 3 foodbanks, and the users (even if they are the same) counted three times
    That's a good point. We help out a few hours a week at the local soup kitchen run by our synagogue and supported by all of the other local churches. The service users are mostly addicts and others who don't fit into society for one reason or another.

    In the UK some box ticker would probably reclassify it as a 'food bank' if anyone felt the urge to create a politically motivated statistic for a report. Never really crossed our minds that we were a disgraceful shameful outrageous byproduct of the sins of evil banksters or something. Tomorrow when I'm on I'll add a side-dollop of Capitalist Sadistic Bastardry to show them that Fatcha still hates them all.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012


    Alternatively can you tell us what is wrong with our domestic science education that people are incapable of feeding themselves when we have falling food prices?

    Back now.
    Much of the "welfare" bill goes on pensions IIRC.
    Too many people are only wages or benefits which are "just enough". If anything goes wrong .....
    That's not suggesting that people shouldn't try to save against a rainy day. The problem is that for some people there have been too many of those.
    Why blame pensioners? I deliberately excluded pensions.
    The welfare bill is 112 billion. We spend huge sums on welfare. Welfare as separate from pensions which are paid from contributions.
    So given 112 billion, why do people need to go to free food banks for tins of baked beans?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    So first Nick Griffin, now Tommy Robinson, I'm utterly perplexed why UKIP are attracting the heavyweights of the far right?

    Anyone got any ideas why UKIP are attracting these sorts of people?

    The other three parties looked the other way while rapists abused thousands of children because they were frightened of looking racist?
    Well it's got the evening thread sorted out.
    In all seriousness, it gets a bit boring on here when no ones trolling UKIP or faking moral outrage. Disappointing polls for the big two just mean tumbleweeds or people pretending none of it matters anyway
  • numbercruncher thanks.

    No problem. Fwiw ICM have said that the delay was due to the length of the survey, they didn't mention poor response rates. However the timing is still relevant in respect of all other point raised...
  • Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    edited December 2014



    Well the arrival of the head of the greatest Paedophile protection network in the world was always going to raise protests, what did you Papists expect?

    The Catholic Church has probably the strictest child protection measures of any institution that operates in this country. You don't just need an enhanced CRB there are extensive additional identity checks, an interview and two referees are also needed. Its hard work and puts volunteers off, but the Catholic Church had the courage to admit there was a problem, co-operate with the police and ask Law Lord Lord Nolan to produce the Nolan report to to put robust protection measures in place, and be seen to be doing so. Similar measures are being taken in other parts of the world.

    Meanwhile no living MP has to the best of my knowledge yet been questioned about Westminster Pedo Rings (despite the activities of people including two longstanding now deceased knighted MPs and a now deceased former deputy director of MI6 among others now being widely known).

    It is also now known that all sorts of cover ups were put in place; even to the extent of including D notices being placed on the media according to a reputable newspaper http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/22/media-gagged-westminster-child-abuse-ring

    Compare and contrast.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366
    edited December 2014
    Topping,

    "Shall we do a PB straw poll?"

    Well, this year I was asked if I wanted to attend a food bank and to spread the message around my friends (I may have looked haggard).

    And my son, who lives in the socialist paradise of Copenhagen, will be helping out at a soup kitchen this Christmas. Does that count?
This discussion has been closed.