The 2015 General Election Megathread

[HaymarketJambo]

The UK Governments, in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s should have looked at Norway, it has an oil fund for the future and when the oil price is down like it is now, they have an oil fund which they have put away over the last 40 years so when the oil price goes down or when there is no oil left in the North Sea, they are covered,  but on the flip side Norway is heavily taxed as well? 

 

As for National debt that was living in the boom and bust years,  Conservative and Labour Governments are to blame for that nobody else      

[Boris]

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/aug/19/corbynomics-why-we-should-take-it-seriously?CMP=fb_gu

 

Interesting read.  I'm no expert on economics, but I found this positive.

[Hasselhoff]

Hoff I've no idea how old you are but you'll be a long time dead waiting on this countries politicians clearing 1.5 trillion. As for being paranoid I doubt it. Next year the SNP will win another majority, then if the Labour Party hasn't found its values by 2020 the SNP will retain its MP numbers at WM. there will come a time when the unionist parties will have to face the facts they'll be unelectable in Scotland, and by kbing everything the SNP asks for in WM it'll start to look like a mild form of dictatorship.

It is normal for a country to have debt, we will likely never get rid of that but we don't want it to be that high. Only once we remove the deficit will that stop increasing and go in the other direction. Get the debt down to a manageable amount and keep in a surplus.

 

Snp will win most of not all seats purely due to FPTP - they are powerless in the UK for the next 5 years though. They will have to show they are capable of using their new powers in Scotland once they get them. If they succeed, there will be no need for indy. If they fail, why would anyone trust them with even more powers.

[Boris]

It is normal for a country to have debt, we will likely never get rid of that but we don't want it to be that high. Only once we remove the deficit will that stop increasing and go in the other direction. Get the debt down to a manageable amount and keep in a surplus.

 

Snp will win most of not all seats purely due to FPTP - they are powerless in the UK for the next 5 years though. They will have to show they are capable of using their new powers in Scotland once they get them. If they succeed, there will be no need for indy. If they fail, why would anyone trust them with even more powers.

 

Who says it would be them governing in an independent Scotland???

[TheMaganator]

He's right that independence is further away than ever. 

 

The SNP will not hold another referendum until they are sure that they'll win it. That will not happen during the next 5 years. Unless something massive happens like another major war or the UK votes to pull out of the EU (that won't happen though).

 

They'll likely storm the next holyrood election but their supporters can only ignore their record in government for so long. The soft SNP vote will fade away. 

 

2014 was the perfect storm for the SNP and they lost that referendum. The dream is lost. 

 

If you are a Yes supporter I suggest you move on and help build a better Scotland within the UK. Take the constitutional issues off the table and let the country move on. You are holding Scotland back. 

[Boris]

He's right that independence is further away than ever. 

 

The SNP will not hold another referendum until they are sure that they'll win it. That will not happen during the next 5 years. Unless something massive happens like another major war or the UK votes to pull out of the EU (that won't happen though).

 

They'll likely storm the next holyrood election but their supporters can only ignore their record in government for so long. The soft SNP vote will fade away. 

 

2014 was the perfect storm for the SNP and they lost that referendum. The dream is lost. 

 

If you are a Yes supporter I suggest you move on and help build a better Scotland within the UK. Take the constitutional issues off the table and let the country move on. You are holding Scotland back. 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with your analysis regards support for the SNP dropping (a little though, can't see them nose diving like Labour for example) and I agree about moving on to build a better Scotland within the UK (albeit a YES supporter would still, rightly campaign and argue for independence).

 

I take issue with you when you say "take the constitutional issues off the table though".  If we are to remain in the UK then, in the interests of democracy, federalism, proper PR, elected second chamber must all, imo, be campaigned for IF the Union is to succeed and Scotland be part of it.  You can't paint those who voted YES as simply SNP drones.  I suspect many voted YES as they are fed up of the undemocratic society that is the UK and if it wouldn't change, then at least there is the avenue of creating a new state that is.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Boris

[jambo1185]

I take issue with you when you say "take the constitutional issues off the table though".  If we are to remain in the UK then, in the interests of democracy, federalism, proper PR, elected second chamber must all, imo, be campaigned for IF the Union is to succeed and Scotland be part of it.  You can't paint those who voted YES as simply SNP drones.  I suspect many voted YES as they are fed up of the undemocratic society that is the UK and if it wouldn't change, then at least there is the avenue of creating a new state that is.

 

I thought it was pretty clear he just meant independence Boris, not the wider issues you raise which can, should and will, form intrinsic parts of future campaigns?

[Boris]

I thought it was pretty clear he just meant independence Boris, not the wider issues you raise which can, should and will, form intrinsic parts of future campaigns?

 

It wasn't to me, as constitutional means a shed load of things.  I'd argue that the current settlement IS what is holding Scotland (and the UK!) back! 

 

But I'd agree that there isn't the demand, for want of a word, for another referendum right now.  

Edited August 20, 2015 by Boris

[Boris]

I really don't get why people are still going on about the referendum it's done.

 

I get why independence is still some people dream etc and campaign for it.

 

However, it is off the table for the foreseeable unless something dramatic happens.

 

So yes voters console yourself with next time. No voters don't worry about it it's off the table for the moment.

 

I really think it would be better if people focused arguments on how we can improve things.

Instead of indulging in what ifs.

 

IMO this country was held back over a single issue and no vision/plan on improving things without that change. This was reflected in policies that were little more than short term to get people on side. However, has done little to address the core issues.

 

I really rather politicians and people concentrated on improving things as opposed to a pointless yes/no argument.

 

Totally agree!

[Psychedelicropcircle]

It is normal for a country to have debt, we will likely never get rid of that but we don't want it to be that high. Only once we remove the deficit will that stop increasing and go in the other direction. Get the debt down to a manageable amount and keep in a surplus.

Snp will win most of not all seats purely due to FPTP - they are powerless in the UK for the next 5 years though. They will have to show they are capable of using their new powers in Scotland once they get them. If they succeed, there will be no need for indy. If they fail, why would anyone trust them with even more powers.

 

Pre 2008 0.35 trillion...if this is acceptable when do you think well get there? I will predict now that osbourne will be nowhere near his target come 2020 and will be proposing more austerity whilst the bank shares will be sold off at a massive loss. (You know that responsible gov you speak of) you'll have to consider if the SNP are powerless with almost all scottish MPS that sooner or later people will start to think why are they constantly KB'ing scottish proposals? I.e keeping VAT on police scotland, devolving all scottish crown estate bar the fort, weakening our energy dependancy through bigger fee connections to the grid with no alternative to replace closures, to name just 3.

[jambo1185]

Maybe Corbyn is a light-red Tory after all, just seen on twitter he's voted with them 263 times, including a number of times when he was defying the Labour Whip.

 

Also interesting that he is demanding the PLP fall into line with his leadership, despite him being a known rebel his entire career, which seems a tad hypocritical.

 

It's really going to be fascinating watching this all play out. At least no one can accuse politics of being boring these days!

[TheMaganator]

It wasn't to me, as constitutional means a shed load of things. I'd argue that the current settlement IS what is holding Scotland (and the UK!) back!

 

But I'd agree that there isn't the demand, for want of a word, for another referendum right now.

Should have been clearer - I only meant independence.

 

Would be happy to discuss vote system reform.

 

It's not off the table whilst it's still in manifestos. SNP could easily state that independence is still the aim by they respect the settled will of the people at the last referendum and don't propose to campaign for a second referendum for the next term (at least).

[Boris]

Should have been clearer - I only meant independence.

 

Would be happy to discuss vote system reform.

 

It's not off the table whilst it's still in manifestos. SNP could easily state that independence is still the aim by they respect the settled will of the people at the last referendum and don't propose to campaign for a second referendum for the next term (at least).

 

I think the SNP have done that in all but name, whilst hedging their bets with their "material change" line.

 

This could all be nipped in the bud if there was concerted action to genuinely reform and democratise the UK.  Sadly neither Labour or the Tories seem to want to.

[jambos are go!]

With the economy growing at around 2% and inflation set to return to that level the burden of the debt will slowly wither on the vine and become more and more affordable . That is why mainstream economists are challenging the need for the level of austerity proposed. Heard former BBC Economic Editor Stephanie Flanders saying very much this after the budget.

 

Its much the same as the dominance of your mortgage on your family finance deminishing as the years go by.

 

This would be as true for an independent Scotland or the RUk if inflation and growth were similar. Thats why the UK can borrow cheaply. Its conjecture if the Market will take a similar view on an Independent Scotland but not impossible.

[Smack]

I'd vote for a Corbyn Labour Party. Anyone else and I'm sticking with the SNP.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Smack

[Hasselhoff]

Pre 2008 0.35 trillion...if this is acceptable when do you think well get there? I will predict now that osbourne will be nowhere near his target come 2020 and will be proposing more austerity whilst the bank shares will be sold off at a massive loss. (You know that responsible gov you speak of) you'll have to consider if the SNP are powerless with almost all scottish MPS that sooner or later people will start to think why are they constantly KB'ing scottish proposals? I.e keeping VAT on police scotland, devolving all scottish crown estate bar the fort, weakening our energy dependancy through bigger fee connections to the grid with no alternative to replace closures, to name just 3.

 

If our spending is out of control, of course we should be having more austerity and taxing more people who can afford to pay. 

 

If you think the bank shares are being sold for a bargain amount, go out and buy some and make a killing when the shares go up in value. A government shouldn't be owning a bank and so it is sensible to pass it back so that there is incentive to make profits for shareholders. If it was held on for longer and the share price dropped further due to being rudderless under government ownership, we'd make a lot more than ?1bn loss. 

 

Scottish Government were warned by the UK gov that centralising Police Scotland and Fire services would stop their VAT exclusion. They went ahead with it despite those warnings almost knowing it would give them something to moan about the union further down the line. 

 

As for the Longannet being priced out of joining the Grid, in the white paper, it states "Under our proposals, a single GB-wide market for electricity and gas will continue, with the current market trading arrangements, provided that they meet Scottish requirements for energy security supply"

 

So independence wouldn't change anything about Scotland putting our electricity onto the grid and they didn't seem to be bothered about the cost in the white paper either. 

[jambos are go!]

Like even greater tax breaks for the rich?

 

A Tory government is NEVER going to reinvest into the country as it is completely the opposite of their political mantra.

 

Deficit reduction is simply a smoke screen for them to dismantle the apparatus of the state, to hive off public services to private contractors which ultimately reduces service delivery, quality and affordability to those with little disposable income.

 

Do we have to go back to the Victorian era and then fight all those battles again?

NO. Thats what the Labour Party is for. It won these battles remember. Meanwhile inexplicably the timid SNP thrives on a diet of feed the well off.

[HaymarketJambo]

I'd vote for a Corbyn Labour Party. Anyone else and in sticking with the SNP.

 

I'll stick with the SNP, I don't agree on a lot Corbyn say's and I certainly don't like the company he keeps from Ireland.

 

The SNP have made mistakes like all parties in Government, but they stick up for the people of Scotland and that's what counts for me anyway. 

[Smack]

NO. Thats what the Labour Party is for. It won these battles remember. Meanwhile inexplicably the timid SNP thrives on a diet of feed the well off.

In a UK setting that might be the case. The SNP operate on a more fluid basis.

[TheMaganator]

I'll stick with the SNP, I don't agree on a lot Corbyn say's and I certainly don't like the company he keeps from Ireland.

 

The SNP have made mistakes like all parties in Government, but they stick up for the people of Scotland and that's what counts for me anyway. 

What about in the Holyrood elections?

 

What company does he keep from Ireland?

[Boris]

NO. Thats what the Labour Party is for. It won these battles remember. Meanwhile inexplicably the timid SNP thrives on a diet of feed the well off.

I agree! But the fact you have Corbyn streets ahead in the leadership race shows how far from that message Labour has strayed!

[jambo1185]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/19/social-media-politics-reformation?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

This is generic, but good.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Sin Fien, I think he got pick of stick in past for having meetings with in commons. When the troubles were still on the go.

 

Pretty sure he believes Ireland should be a single country. Not that I think that's a negative or positive.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/how-sinn-fein-strolled-through-westminster-1353534.html

It's entirely his view, which is fine. But alligning himself with Sinn Fein is a dubious move and will not win him many votes.

[HaymarketJambo]

What about in the Holyrood elections?

 

What company does he keep from Ireland?

 

SNP, they have done not a bad job.

 

Sinn Fein.  

[TheMaganator]

SNP, they have done not a bad job.

 

Sinn Fein.  

Salmond is pretty chummy with Martin McGuiness

[HaymarketJambo]

Salmond is pretty chummy with Martin McGuiness

 

Well Maganator, considering that Salmond was First Minster of Scotland at the time Martin McGuiness was Deputy First Minster of Northern, I think they would have to talk, so maybe you should show me a quote that they were chummy please?

[HaymarketJambo]

Salmond is pretty chummy with Martin McGuiness

Sorry Deputy First Minster of Northern Ireland. 

[Psychedelicropcircle]

If our spending is out of control, of course we should be having more austerity and taxing more people who can afford to pay.

 

If you think the bank shares are being sold for a bargain amount, go out and buy some and make a killing when the shares go up in value. A government shouldn't be owning a bank and so it is sensible to pass it back so that there is incentive to make profits for shareholders. If it was held on for longer and the share price dropped further due to being rudderless under government ownership, we'd make a lot more than ?1bn loss.

 

Scottish Government were warned by the UK gov that centralising Police Scotland and Fire services would stop their VAT exclusion. They went ahead with it despite those warnings almost knowing it would give them something to moan about the union further down the line.

 

As for the Longannet being priced out of joining the Grid, in the white paper, it states "Under our proposals, a single GB-wide market for electricity and gas will continue, with the current market trading arrangements, provided that they meet Scottish requirements for energy security supply"

 

So independence wouldn't change anything about Scotland putting our electricity onto the grid and they didn't seem to be bothered about the cost in the white paper either.

 

Sweet cheeks we lost a billion the other night there....we'll lose a lot more and seen as the gov is allowing banks to do wot ever they choose this nonsense of them being gov owned and a problem ends here I'd say. even if I wanted to buy the realised bank shares I'm afraid they were not on offer to us mere mortals ? No matter how you look at it if we have to import energy from England then surely it'll go up in price as the debate seems to be about length of travel? nowt on the fort I see! It seems to me that Scotland being seen as weaker in the union is good news to you. Also explain how it's justified that our frontline services should pay VAT when others done? Edited August 20, 2015 by Psychedelicropcircle

[ToadKiller Dog]

Salmond is pretty chummy with Martin McGuiness

The Reverand Iain Paisley and Martin Mcguiness were on friendly terms and had a good working relationship so much so that Mcguiness had a tear when reading a tribute at Paisleys death .

Edited August 20, 2015 by ToadKiller Dog

[TheMaganator]

Well Maganator, considering that Salmond was First Minster of Scotland at the time Martin McGuiness was Deputy First Minster of Northern, I think they would have to talk, so maybe you should show me a quote that they were chummy please?

Looking quite chummy at the Ryder Cup last year

 

[aussieh]

Our ability to pay it.

 

It is beyond the comfortable level of debt to have but we have a responsible party in place to focus on getting it down.

Eh, no.

[TheMaganator]

The Reverand Iain Paisley and Martin Mcguiness were on friendly terms and had a good working relationship so much so that Mcguiness had a tear when reading a tribute at Paisleys death .

They are both fairly loony tbh tbf

[Psychedelicropcircle]

Looking quite chummy at the Ryder Cup last year

 

You need therapy.

[JamboX2]

Well Maganator, considering that Salmond was First Minster of Scotland at the time Martin McGuiness was Deputy First Minster of Northern, I think they would have to talk, so maybe you should show me a quote that they were chummy please?

Gerry Adams is the leader of the official opposition in Ireland I believe.

 

Corbyn done something that was necessary to achieve peace which was talk with the political side of the republicans. The UK government would later do so. And Sinn Fein are a legitimate political party elected by the people.

 

May not like it but he took a step which the government later did as a step towards a lasting peace.

[aussieh]

It is normal for a country to have debt, we will likely never get rid of that but we don't want it to be that high. Only once we remove the deficit will that stop increasing and go in the other direction. Get the debt down to a manageable amount and keep in a surplus.

 

Snp will win most of not all seats purely due to FPTP - they are powerless in the UK for the next 5 years though. They will have to show they are capable of using their new powers in Scotland once they get them. If they succeed, there will be no need for indy. If they fail, why would anyone trust them with even more powers.

Im confused.

So, its normal for a country to run a debt,just not Scotland, or the SNP.

Hows that?.

[HaymarketJambo]

Looking quite chummy at the Ryder Cup last year

 

So were does it say that they were chummy then? 

[jambo1185]

Gerry Adams is the leader of the official opposition in Ireland I believe.

 

Corbyn done something that was necessary to achieve peace which was talk with the political side of the republicans. The UK government would later do so. And Sinn Fein are a legitimate political party elected by the people.

 

May not like it but he took a step which the government later did as a step towards a lasting peace.

 

By inviting them into the commons a few days after they'd tried to blow up the government and killed innocent citizens?

 

It was gross error of judgement X2. Come on, it was absolutely ludicrous in the context of the time. Why so soon, or even if well intentioned, why not on neutral ground? You can talk with the "political" side of the republicans to achieve piece, but inviting them into the home of the people they were trying to blow up (as an opposition backbencher, not as a member of said government it should be remembered) so so soon to the bombings was, in my view, wrong, but could also have been very dangerous. 

 

Yes, you can reach out to these people, even so soon after such an atrocity, but to bring them into the Houses of Parliament, the institution they wanted to destroy through violence with no care for loss of life, is completely and validly open to huge criticism.

 

You imagine the reaction (including on the far left) if the UKIP MP decided to invite Jihadi John or an ISIS "political spokesperson" into the commons for lunch a week after a publicised atrocity in the aim of "reaching out"? There would (rightly) be absolute uproar.

Edited August 20, 2015 by jambo1185

[TheMaganator]

You need therapy.

Abuse is against forum rules. Reported.

[TheMaganator]

So were does it say that they were chummy then?

Why is this any different to what Corbyn was up to? You said you didn't like the company he keeps.

 

Why is it different for Salmond?

[HaymarketJambo]

Gerry Adams is the leader of the official opposition in Ireland I believe.

 

Corbyn done something that was necessary to achieve peace which was talk with the political side of the republicans. The UK government would later do so. And Sinn Fein are a legitimate political party elected by the people.

 

May not like it but he took a step which the government later did as a step towards a lasting peace.

 

That was down to the parties in Northern Ireland getting together, I never read anything about Corbyn's involvement?

 

Sinn Fein might be legitimate party, but they don't take their seats in Westminster, but they do in Dublin.      

 

But I take your point.   

[HaymarketJambo]

Why is this any different to what Corbyn was up to? You said you didn't like the company he keeps.

 

Why is it different for Salmond?

 I support the SNP, not Alex Salmond, and I'll say it again show me a quote were its say's that they are chummy. 

[TheMaganator]

I support the SNP, not Alex Salmond, and I'll say it again show me a quote were its say's that they are chummy.

He was the leader of the party you support. I don't remember you being critical at the time but I may just have missed it.

 

There's a quote about them being chummy above.

[Psychedelicropcircle]

Abuse is against forum rules. Reported.

You defo need therapy if you think that's abuse??

[HaymarketJambo]

He was the leader of the party you support. I don't remember you being critical at the time but I may just have missed it.

 

There's a quote about them being chummy above.

 

 

He was the leader of the party you support. I don't remember you being critical at the time but I may just have missed it.

 

There's a quote about them being chummy above.

 

I don't see the quote above.

 

And when was that I was not being critical or is that another that you said have missed? 

[coconut doug]

If our spending is out of control, of course we should be having more austerity and taxing more people who can afford to pay. 

 

If you think the bank shares are being sold for a bargain amount, go out and buy some and make a killing when the shares go up in value. A government shouldn't be owning a bank and so it is sensible to pass it back so that there is incentive to make profits for shareholders. If it was held on for longer and the share price dropped further due to being rudderless under government ownership, we'd make a lot more than ?1bn loss. 

 

 

Some countries where there is higher than average government ownership of banks Germany, Iceland, Korea

 

Some countries where there is lower than average levels of government ownership of banks Greece, Cyprus, Ireland, Zimbabwe, Italy, U.K.

 

Not sure that making profits for shareholders is the only factor here.

 

Are all countries with state owned banks managing their banks in a rudderless way or is this just a U.K. thing?

[aussieh]

Some countries where there is higher than average government ownership of banks Germany, Iceland, Korea

 

Some countries where there is lower than average levels of government ownership of banks Greece, Cyprus, Ireland, Zimbabwe, Italy, U.K.

 

Not sure that making profits for shareholders is the only factor here.

 

Are all countries with state owned banks managing their banks in a rudderless way or is this just a U.K. thing?

Exactly, can they not make a profit for the taxpaying shareholders.

Oh, I forgot, we're not Gideons pals.

[JAYEL]

In a UK setting that might be the case. The SNP operate on a more fluid basis.

 

 

I wont be voting for an English Labour party

[coconut doug]

Exactly, can they not make a profit for the taxpaying shareholders.

Oh, I forgot, we're not Gideons pals.

Where are Fred the Shred and Andy Hornby when you need them with their entrepenurial skills and high moral standards?

 

Not like the U.K.s biggest bank creating shareholder profit from:

Arms dealers http://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/oct/29/banks-fund-cluster-bomb-trade

 

Drug dealers http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/15/hsbc-has-form-mexico-laundered-drug-money

 

Terrorists http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2012/07/16/hsbc-helped-terrorists-iran-mexican-drug-cartels-launder-money-senate-report-says/

 

Tax avoiders http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/hsbc-tax-avoidance-scandal-timeline-of-britains-biggest-banking-leak-10054442.html

 

Rate fixing http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26526905

 

There are multiple examples of all of these. Nobody can accuse them of being rudderless. Gideon's pals - surely not.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Is the QE proposing just basically kenysian economics.

 

Therefore meh.

No but it is trying the same thing except printing makes the government borrowing rate zero.

 

Let's just say that Japan is trying this under Abe and it is still not working there.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Gerry Adams is the leader of the official opposition in Ireland I believe.

 

Corbyn done something that was necessary to achieve peace which was talk with the political side of the republicans. The UK government would later do so. And Sinn Fein are a legitimate political party elected by the people.

 

May not like it but he took a step which the government later did as a step towards a lasting peace.

Behave yourself! Corbyn did nothing to achieve peace. The reason the likes of Adams came to the table was the realisation that they couldn't win by terrorism and the ballot box, especially when Joe Hendron beat him in the 1992 General Election. Corbyn was the typical "Troops Out!" useful idiot in the 1980s.