"and an end to education as politics by other means"
What does that mean, in plain language?
If Scotland had a decent education system, I wouldn't need to explain that. But fascinating as the gaps in you knowledge are I'm off to the evening service. I'll pray for your further enlightenment. Pax tibiscum.
@SouthamObserver " It's going to become increasingly difficult to justify claims that things would be worse in an independent Scotland. "
I'm pretty indifferent to Scottish independence. I'm however unconvinced they can do better than in the UK unless the EU funds their deficit to a degree which is unlikely- ask Ireland,Portugal, Spain, etc
Instinctively I am a unionist, but I am finding it harder to justify in its current form. If I lived in Scotland I have a feeling I'd vote Yes. The whole UK needs the shake-up independence would bring. The current elite in all it's forms needs to be confronted with its failures. The end of the country they have so badly run for the last 60 years might be an excellent start.
Dammit SO stop making me agree with you ! The Uk needs to decentralise and put decision making locally starting with a proper Federal Structure instead of the current half way house.
Alan, We will have you and SO as fervent supporters before the vote. You know it makes sense.
"Agreed. I make it 6. You. Tim. NPXMP. Surbiton. Mick Pork. And Ben M. Agreeing for all infinity on the awfulness of Tories."
Ah. Now I see your problem. You're underestimating the potential for wehatetories.com to reach out to a whole new audience that wearemoderatedbytories.com could never reach.
Excellent speech and whilst I doubt he would be perfect as a leader of the government on Independence, it is very hard to believe that he could do worse than the current lot
Agree - finely judged speech. Salmond is clearly the most fluent of our leaders - only Cameron comes close on big 'set piece' occasions.
But I do sometimes wonder if Salmond also (tho to a lesser extent) has a touch of Cameron's inattention to detail - a bit too much 'vision' and not enough 'nitty gritty' - and he's going to need plenty of 'nitty gritty' to carry the argument for independence.
Carlotta, I agree he can get carried away at times but he is streets ahead of Cameron. Cameron really is just a rich PR nonentity who is clueless. He seems to have no clue how to run the country and just surrounds himself with similar chums who are equally out of touch and have no clue as to what real life is like. Salmond despite his faults understands the issues and has empathy with real people. Whether he can solve Scotland's ills is a moot point but at least he will have a clue as to how to go about it , Cameron and his muppets are useless and do not really care about anything beyond their small circle.
You stated that there was no way to show inequality in the UK. It would be impossible for anyone living in the UK not to be able to see it in all its glory , with the exception of the political elite who live in a gilded cage and never have to come in contact with the poor.
OGH would it not be far better to castigate the Observer/Guardian for completely misleading you and others about that poll finding. They should go into the "doubt to be trusted" box until they apologise and promise not to do it in future.
Not so sure it's reliant on the Tory's actual record though; more UKIP leakage and tactical anti-Tory voting combined.
I suspect there's very little the Tories can do about it, since the answer to UKIP is to vacate the centre while the answer to tactical anti-Tory voting is to own it.
They may come up with a cunning plan though, which currently looks possible in the welfare area.
The reason why UKIP is growing is because the Tories keep on banging on about Europe/Immigration/Welfare!
All it does is confirm to those UKIP inclined people they are right and the world is going to hell in a handcart. The Tories won't change this fact so why vote Tory. And all the time they lose the center ground.
The Tories should focus on cost of living issues and low wages. But they won't cos Osborne and Crosby are idiots.
Hmm. As King of Danceria I shall be a benevolent monarch, and provide free wiffle sticks to my many subjects. Let no shirt be without lace, and no trousers without bells!
You do twist and turn in your policies, Mr. Dancer. It was not that long ago that the Morris Dancer manifesto included the commitment that wearing school uniform would be compulsory for all attractive young ladies between 16 and 24. I distinctly remember reading it, on this very site.
LABOUR high-flier Chuka Umunna was last night under pressure for using multiple online identities. Wikipedia records reveal the party-loving Streatham MP used a pseudonym to create his own flattering profile page in 2007.
Since this one's hit The Sun, as a Wikipedia editor, I think I should explain. The Sun is wrong to talk of "posing as one of the online encyclopaedia’s editors" since the term "editor" is purely descriptive. Anyone can edit Wikipedia (though practically speaking you'd need to have a basic understanding of how to), so if he's edited it then he is an editor, rather than posing as one. Similarly it says "the fake name Socialdemocrat" but there's nothing wrong about a pseudonym, like mine. The only point is about editing under a conflict of interest (editing the article about yourself or something connected with you) below.
Politicians, if you're reading, we'd love you to contribute to your own articles (since only about five are even close to good enough) but in the right way. I'd say the biggest things to remember is that Wikipedia is there to host encyclopedic content, not magazine-esque interviews. I find it helpful to think about what they might write about the subject in fifty or a hundred years. The second is to manage the fact you are writing about yourself and you probably take a different view of yourself to history.
If you can, be open about who you are and I recommend using the talk page (you can find this by clicking the "Talk" tab). If you're not prepared to be open about who you are (whether your username is your real name or not), then definitely stick to the talk page. There are probably lots of good things you can point out are wrong or missing (although you'd still need to point to a source confirming they are wrong, but a constituency page would be good enough mostly and I'm guessing current politicians can get that sort of thing uploaded).
Lastly realise that ensuring neutrality is likely to be your biggest hurdle and it's best if you can talk the talk on that. Neutrality is, in short, ensuring that the article has the same balance of pro and anti- views on a given topic as the material in the public domain on a given topic, particularly academic or reflective writing. Obviously I can't say every possible thing about editing, not least actually how to. I can be contacted here.
Ideas were wanted for making Britain less unequal.
How about cutting off Norfolk and moving it around to fill in the big hole off Blackpool?
That's about the only way to get more equality without the sort of government intervention that would make Michael Foot's eyes water, never mind any Conservative PBers.
Mr. Grandiose, that might be a deliberate line from the paper.
On the other hand, sometimes the Establishment seems entirely unaware of how the internet works (cf attempts to 'ban' adult content or have an opt-in system and database of men with sprained wrists enthusiasts).
@SouthamObserver " It's going to become increasingly difficult to justify claims that things would be worse in an independent Scotland. "
I'm pretty indifferent to Scottish independence. I'm however unconvinced they can do better than in the UK unless the EU funds their deficit to a degree which is unlikely- ask Ireland,Portugal, Spain, etc
Instinctively I am a unionist, but I am finding it harder to justify in its current form. If I lived in Scotland I have a feeling I'd vote Yes. The whole UK needs the shake-up independence would bring. The current elite in all it's forms needs to be confronted with its failures. The end of the country they have so badly run for the last 60 years might be an excellent start.
Dammit SO stop making me agree with you ! The Uk needs to decentralise and put decision making locally starting with a proper Federal Structure instead of the current half way house.
Alan, We will have you and SO as fervent supporters before the vote. You know it makes sense.
Good evening, Mr.G.,
Its grand to see such obviously sensible people as Mssrs Brooke and Observer making their first tentative steps towards the true path. It won't be long before they become full supporters of the Scottish National Party (English Provisional Wing).
Over the past week or so I have also noticed a few other likely future members posting. Maybe we are starting to win the battle in England; if only more of your compatriots would see sense.
@SouthamObserver " It's going to become increasingly difficult to justify claims that things would be worse in an independent Scotland. "
I'm pretty indifferent to Scottish independence. I'm however unconvinced they can do better than in the UK unless the EU funds their deficit to a degree which is unlikely- ask Ireland,Portugal, Spain, etc
Instinctively I am a unionist, but I am finding it harder to justify in its current form. If I lived in Scotland I have a feeling I'd vote Yes. The whole UK needs the shake-up independence would bring. The current elite in all it's forms needs to be confronted with its failures. The end of the country they have so badly run for the last 60 years might be an excellent start.
Dammit SO stop making me agree with you ! The Uk needs to decentralise and put decision making locally starting with a proper Federal Structure instead of the current half way house.
Alan, We will have you and SO as fervent supporters before the vote. You know it makes sense.
Good evening, Mr.G.,
Its grand to see such obviously sensible people as Mssrs Brooke and Observer making their first tentative steps towards the true path. It won't be long before they become full supporters of the Scottish National Party (English Provisional Wing).
Over the past week or so I have also noticed a few other likely future members posting. Maybe we are starting to win the battle in England; if only more of your compatriots would see sense.
Mr Llama I've always favoured more local accountability and a Federal structure would work just fine. I would even give a nod to Alex Salmond for putting the issue one the agenda and not grit my teeth. What I don't like is the nonsense we have today which is basically a Labour stitch up and discriminates against those of us living in England. Begorrah.
The reason why UKIP is growing is because the Tories keep on banging on about Europe/Immigration/Welfare!
All it does is confirm to those UKIP inclined people they are right and the world is going to hell in a handcart. The Tories won't change this fact so why vote Tory. And all the time they lose the center ground.
The Tories should focus on cost of living issues and low wages. But they won't cos Osborne and Crosby are idiots.
Pretty rich suggesting policies for the Tories when you don't have any of your own.
It doesn't matter if you are Ulsterman, or for that matter from the Free State, we in the EPW of the SNP don't discriminate. All we ask is that you live in England and support the idea of an independent Scotland.
I totally agree with you about the constitutional arrangements as left by Labour. However, unless Scotland does the decent thing, they will not be improved. Indeed, more devolution to the Scots, which will be the result if there is a "No" vote in 2014, without addressing the WLQ, which Labour the Lib Dems won't, will just make them worse.
For everyone in the UK Scottish independence will be the best thing that we can hope for.
@HurstLlama Scotland seceding from the union won't solve the West Lothian Question, which will still exist (albeit on a smaller scale) for as long as devolution in the Principality of Wales and Province of Northern Ireland continues.
It doesn't matter if you are Ulsterman, or for that matter from the Free State, we in the EPW of the SNP don't discriminate. All we ask is that you live in England and support the idea of an independent Scotland.
I totally agree with you about the constitutional arrangements as left by Labour. However, unless Scotland does the decent thing, they will not be improved. Indeed, more devolution to the Scots, which will be the result if there is a "No" vote in 2014, without addressing the WLQ, which Labour the Lib Dems won't, will just make them worse.
For everyone in the UK Scottish independence will be the best thing that we can hope for.
Sorry Mr L while quite happy with Devo max I'm not for independence. I've had to listen to the best part of a century of Irish Nats blaming all their abject failures on England and the thought of Scots taking over the baton is just too grim to countenance.
@HurstLlama Scotland seceding from the union won't solve the West Lothian Question, which will still exist (albeit on a smaller scale) for as long as devolution in the Principality of Wales and Province of Northern Ireland continues.
No, Mr. Town by itself it won't, but what it will cause is not so much a constitutional crisis but a fundamental review of the constitutional arrangements - the existing settlement will be dead in the water. Next time we can try an do it properly and equitably.
The reason why UKIP is growing is because the Tories keep on banging on about Europe/Immigration/Welfare!
All it does is confirm to those UKIP inclined people they are right and the world is going to hell in a handcart. The Tories won't change this fact so why vote Tory. And all the time they lose the center ground.
The Tories should focus on cost of living issues and low wages. But they won't cos Osborne and Crosby are idiots.
You may be right re Europe, but the reason the Tories bang on about immigration and welfare is because they know there are Labour votes to be lost in those areas.
Basing a strategy on the belief that this is idiotic might not be entirely productive.
Don't be so sure. The Lib Dems could end up taking seats off the Tories if they continue to cock things up as they are now.
Correct. Therein lies the lib dems greatest hope. Huge amounts of tactical voting leading to the lib dems taking seats off the tories based on the sheer toxicity of the nasty party to centre and left of centre voters. Right now it looks like a shrewd calculation.
Comments
What does that mean, in plain language?
I think I may have answered my own question there.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BHQp6EkCIAEGwYY.jpg:large
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/04/welfare-and-language/
In the highly unlikely event that PB ever becomes wehatetories.com, one thing is for sure - it will have considerably more than three readers.
Ah. Now I see your problem. You're underestimating the potential for wehatetories.com to reach out to a whole new audience that wearemoderatedbytories.com could never reach.
I seriously don't understand your comment.
Don't be so sure. The Lib Dems could end up taking seats off the Tories if they continue to cock things up as they are now.
Main point granted.
Not so sure it's reliant on the Tory's actual record though; more UKIP leakage and tactical anti-Tory voting combined.
I suspect there's very little the Tories can do about it, since the answer to UKIP is to vacate the centre while the answer to tactical anti-Tory voting is to own it.
They may come up with a cunning plan though, which currently looks possible in the welfare area.
The reason why UKIP is growing is because the Tories keep on banging on about Europe/Immigration/Welfare!
All it does is confirm to those UKIP inclined people they are right and the world is going to hell in a handcart. The Tories won't change this fact so why vote Tory. And all the time they lose the center ground.
The Tories should focus on cost of living issues and low wages. But they won't cos Osborne and Crosby are idiots.
I also remain committed to the construction of a small fleet of Death Stars, and a trebuchet-based justice system.
Politicians, if you're reading, we'd love you to contribute to your own articles (since only about five are even close to good enough) but in the right way. I'd say the biggest things to remember is that Wikipedia is there to host encyclopedic content, not magazine-esque interviews. I find it helpful to think about what they might write about the subject in fifty or a hundred years. The second is to manage the fact you are writing about yourself and you probably take a different view of yourself to history.
If you can, be open about who you are and I recommend using the talk page (you can find this by clicking the "Talk" tab). If you're not prepared to be open about who you are (whether your username is your real name or not), then definitely stick to the talk page. There are probably lots of good things you can point out are wrong or missing (although you'd still need to point to a source confirming they are wrong, but a constituency page would be good enough mostly and I'm guessing current politicians can get that sort of thing uploaded).
Lastly realise that ensuring neutrality is likely to be your biggest hurdle and it's best if you can talk the talk on that. Neutrality is, in short, ensuring that the article has the same balance of pro and anti- views on a given topic as the material in the public domain on a given topic, particularly academic or reflective writing. Obviously I can't say every possible thing about editing, not least actually how to. I can be contacted here.
How about cutting off Norfolk and moving it around to fill in the big hole off Blackpool?
That's about the only way to get more equality without the sort of government intervention that would make Michael Foot's eyes water, never mind any Conservative PBers.
On the other hand, sometimes the Establishment seems entirely unaware of how the internet works (cf attempts to 'ban' adult content or have an opt-in system and database of men with sprained wrists enthusiasts).
Its grand to see such obviously sensible people as Mssrs Brooke and Observer making their first tentative steps towards the true path. It won't be long before they become full supporters of the Scottish National Party (English Provisional Wing).
Over the past week or so I have also noticed a few other likely future members posting. Maybe we are starting to win the battle in England; if only more of your compatriots would see sense.
I wonder how long today's policy of paying ex-bankers bigger welfare payments than teenage mothers will last, though?
RT @BBCPropaganda: http://www.defra.gov.uk/statistics/foodfarm/food/pocketstats/
2011 expenditure on alcoholic drinks increased 9.1%, while spending on food increased 3.1%. Catering decreased of 0.9%.
There was a net reduction in registered food enterprises of over 6,000 in 2010 following a net reduction of over 4,500 in 2009.
The lowest 10% of households by income reduced purchases of fruit and vegetables by 20% between 2007 and 2010. Labour called that "5 a day"
The UK produces 51.8% of what we eat and imports the rest
Food prices rose 32% in the UK between 2007 and 2012 while rising only 13% in France and Germany. Thank you Labour.
It doesn't matter if you are Ulsterman, or for that matter from the Free State, we in the EPW of the SNP don't discriminate. All we ask is that you live in England and support the idea of an independent Scotland.
I totally agree with you about the constitutional arrangements as left by Labour. However, unless Scotland does the decent thing, they will not be improved. Indeed, more devolution to the Scots, which will be the result if there is a "No" vote in 2014, without addressing the WLQ, which Labour the Lib Dems won't, will just make them worse.
For everyone in the UK Scottish independence will be the best thing that we can hope for.
Scotland seceding from the union won't solve the West Lothian Question, which will still exist (albeit on a smaller scale) for as long as devolution in the Principality of Wales and Province of Northern Ireland continues.
Basing a strategy on the belief that this is idiotic might not be entirely productive.
If HenryGManson's less detached posts don't stop me coming here, I reckon I can live with Mr Smithson's occasional bilious rampage.