Printable View
Not a great comparable but let's go with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by sawmiller
If all the past government said the world was flat yet all they showed you was it was round. Then a buffoon comes along and says in 4 years I will show you the world is flat and he does. Would you then vote for him?. He gave you exactly what you wanted so the answer should be simple
What impartial sources would you recommend Grist?Quote:
Originally Posted by Grist_To_The_Mill
Tories have done very little for me or my family in all the time I've voted. Don't despise the Tories, just won't vote for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by caytonmiller
Don't particularly like Boris or Cummings and think Rishi Sunak and Raab come across much better.
My kids / grandkids were brought up to realise everyone can better themselves and not to sponge off other people, all of them are doing fine.
Didn't vote in December so can't say too much.
Expecting some unpalatable legislation pushed through later on next year
The sooner Keir Starmer gets Labour organized the better, you do need effective opposition regardless who is in Government.
One thing I disagree with animal is about the Tony Blair years.
I do think animosity directed towards you on here is rather sickening. The "fake solicitor" nonsense is extremely childish (I suppose for some it substitutes for the hilarious Warney barbeque/green tea jibes now that we're not actually playing football)Quote:
Originally Posted by KerrAvon
Some posters even seem to have a serious personal vendetta going on.
I often disagree with your opinions but I find that you invariably put your case well and fairly.
I am certainly not wanting to join the lynch mob and I realise that you can easily look after yourself anyway.
So, it's without prejudice that I have to say that I think you are way off the mark with your "no significant risk" line of argument.
I did post this before and you wrote that it had to be taken in context with other posters' comments understating the ridiculous behaviour of the press outside Cummings' house.
However, since then you have repeated it a few times - as I said before this really surprises me.
Even his allies have not been daft enough to suggest that driving up and down the country (at that time) posed no significant risk. Their argument, in his defence, has always been that the "serious" risk to his son outweighed the risk of driving.
The government's position was most definitely that people driving long distances could put strain on the emergency services - services which would be stretched trying to save lives during the pandemic. Several local police forces issued serious warnings for the same reason.
Of course, one person taking a trip is highly unlikely to have an accident. That seems to be your argument, Surely you see the flaw in that? If everybody believes that they are that one person who will not have an accident and the roads get busy the likelihood of affecting the emergency services increases. Who decides who the trusted few are to be who can drive about with "no significant risk"?
Doubtless there are a lot of critics with their own agenda re Cummings but there are a lot of people justified in their anger that he would appear to be one of the exempt few. They may be wrong - his risk assessment re the threat to his son may be right.
However I've not seen anybody else playing down the importance of not driving long distances - just you.
As I said - surprised.
In your reply Cayton you said if the Tories threw a decent amount of money at the NHS would be an example of trying to solve a difficult problem with a simple solution .Quote:
Originally Posted by caytonmiller
These days although I'm busy in the garden whilst on furlough it does give you the opportunity to think and reflect a little .
Certainly more time to do it than the cut and thrust of working life .
How's about everyone in the political arena stops pyssing around and starts to become honest on this topic .
Tories refrain from privatisation solves everything and Labour stop defending sometimes the indefensible with the NHS because they brought it in to existence .
How's about we go 50/50 on this and keep it on a not for profit basis but also kick in an NHS tax , not to cover the entire cost but to substantially help it along .
Give it some kind of accountability to the public instead of the vague general taxation .
On top of that if you smoke , take drugs , drink heavily or are obese there's a surcharge to pay if your admittance to the NHS can be proved to be caused by the above .
Why the feck should people who look after themselves pay for those who don't ? .
I'm someone who smoked up until I had two stents having to be put in to my main artery , if the NHS billed me £500 for the procedure I'm at a loss to defend it .
I haven't the answers I'm simply opening up a debate because just throwing tax payers money at it isn't the full story .
John people shouldn’t have to recommend impartial sources to you, as a grown man you should be able to use googleQuote:
Originally Posted by John2
Leaving aside the fact that you seem happy that unelected Cummings is running the government, could you put your finger on exactly what the negative impact of these unelected bureacrats have? What exactly do they do, or stop us doing, that makes you want them gone? Can you help me by giving some examples?Quote:
Originally Posted by great_fire
And if Cummings succeeds in ridding us of these people, what does he stand for then that you find so attractive and makes you overlook him lying to you?
Starmer's made a good start Frank but making a monkey out of Johnson every Wednesday lunchtime doesn't win elections on its own .Quote:
Originally Posted by CASPER-64-FRANK
William Hague made Blair look like an idiot in the HOC but got tonked at the election .
Policies and credibility behind them is where it's at .
It shouldn't be that bloody difficult the Tories have had nowt to add since the mid 70's unless you count the helpline for cones on the motorway !!! .
Tony Blair is a decisive one with me , great at winning elections don't get me wrong , he had middle england eating out of his hand .
Should have done better in the heartlands , the Mandelson they have no where else to go anyway Tony was a total lack of respect to the people in towns like ours and in anycase Mandelson got that one wrong .
Now Labour do have to listen and act up here if there's any good to come out of last December's debacle .
Nobody is asking for the world here but the country doesn't end at Watford Gap either .
As everyone knows. the universe revolves around BaaaarnsleyQuote:
Originally Posted by animallittle3
I actually said pour sensible money into the NHS. IE like your suggestion.Quote:
Originally Posted by animallittle3
Blair threw bucket loads of cash at the NHS then kept moving the goal posts until he left office where the NHS was in the same state as he started.
Let's be honest the only way the NHS can prosper is with good infrastructure and a sht load of cash.
Tbh I can't see where the money will come from and the infrastructure is shocking. So maybe Johnson can't sort it.
If he did it would be a pretty impressive achievement though, don't you think?
For me I want this government over the next 4 years to build a stable economy, get the NHS back to something recognisable, like it's intentions. And get Brexit deal close to what we had whilst In Europe but without all the extra bull shiboz.
It would be impressive if the torys managed this in normal times. With covid around it would be near on impossible.
I for one would doff my cap if they achieved it .
Problem is I was brought up like most on here.
"You don't vote Tory scum. Only posh folk vote Tory" so like many I vote labour or I don't vote.
I certainly hope I get to vote in my future for any party that does the job not for a loyalty banner