Camerons First Term

Message boards : Politics : Camerons First Term
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 17 · Next

AuthorMessage
AndyJ
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 02
Posts: 248
Credit: 27,380,797
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1207596 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 19:51:27 UTC - in response to Message 1207173.  

More broadly Cameron is accepted in enough of the country as being the best of the current options available.
English voters
are not confronted with a long menu of potential prime ministers. The choice is binary. Right now that means choosing between David Cameron and Ed Miliband.

The Labour leader already has severe difficulty persuading voters to take him seriously. Cameron has weaknesses, but he looks confident and comfortable being PM. The trip to visit the Obamas should be seen in those terms. Existing perceptions have been reinforced and Ed Miliband's problems exacerbated.


Cameron is a bland nothingness, but that is just my opinion. Going to the States is usually an attempt to raise profiles. I have totally had it with UK politicians.
US politics is so much more fun.

A lot of people around here will take issue with the red highlighted text.
Bless the Telegraph.

Regards,

Andy

ID: 1207596 · Report as offensive
AndyJ
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 02
Posts: 248
Credit: 27,380,797
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1207616 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 20:40:50 UTC - in response to Message 1207606.  

It is also traditional in UK politics for Governments to get rubbished and bashed mid-term, as we are now. It will polarise in the run up to 2015.


Ok, fair enough. To me, here right now, it is getting increasingly difficult to tell one from the other. Don't get me wrong, I do not wish for radical politics, God forbid.
The present lot, and I mean all of 'em, are hardly inspiring. Dull as dishwater, in fact. And then you have the Welsh Assembly. Useless, powerless, gravy-train riding, with all the hangers on, that do absolutely nothing but supply hot air to Cardiff. The Last Thing Wales Needs is MORE politicians.

Just to fire it up a bit, how about a fantasy election between Margaret Thatcher and Aneurin Bevan.

By the way, no reply on the "red text?"

Kind Regards,

A

ID: 1207616 · Report as offensive
Nick
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 4344
Credit: 3,313,107
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1207652 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 22:27:03 UTC
Last modified: 18 Mar 2012, 22:49:46 UTC

I think what we are seeing here is that the political system as we know it
has had it's day. I really don't think this system works well for the UK now so
time for a different way of doing things. I'd rather see the UK put under a
managed system where those who manage are actually fully qualified to do so.
i.e. he who manages the health system has actually got medical experience. The
same for he who manages the economy...he has actually had hands on experience
in the industry itself. The benefits of the latter would be that the person
managing the economy does so for the benefit of the UK and not for the benefit
for a minor proportion of the electorate that normally gets done so to buy votes.
Added to this a back-up political system to over-see that the managers are doing
the job correctly. This should mean that politicians will need to be qualified
to a certain degree themselves in ability to understand that which they are
over-seeing. This system would ultimately remove, what I consider to be criminal,
the lobbyist sect. Also this system would remove career politicians who seem to
know nothing other than politics itself. So in other words we can remove
politics out from running the UK and put people in who know and can do the job
correctly. Added to this we could also put time constraints on politicians by
limiting their term of duty to a maximum of about 15 years, this may work or it
might not.

As you can guess, I absolutely detest politicians in their role of running
the UK, THEY JUST DO NOT HAVE THE NOUNCE FOR IT.
Prime example, introduce the 50% tax threshold. Told time and time again that
it would not work. It did not work, it did not work because it was politically
motivated to buy votes from the lesser mortals of the UK. So now it's going
to be dropped and most probably going to be replaced by some form of
wealth tax. Well I've heard of "born again Christians" but never of
"born again idiots". These are the kind of stupid policies that only politicians
and possibly " Communists" too could ever dream up. When you start to legislate
away a persons wealth then you know your countries on a downwards spiral. It
just tells you that the politicians have run out of useful ideas on how to
manage the economy. That because the modern economies need new ways to run
them and unqualified politicians are just not up to the job. Unfortunately
the USA is following in our footsteps too.

Solution:- You have to start to vote outside the box...as they say.
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.
ID: 1207652 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24501
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 1207654 - Posted: 18 Mar 2012, 22:35:24 UTC - in response to Message 1207596.  


Cameron is a bland nothingness.....


Quite agree. Bring back "Spitting Image" Great program & today's bunch of muppets would make the lot referred to on that show look like "proper" politicians!
ID: 1207654 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24501
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 1207679 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 0:16:25 UTC
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 0:16:45 UTC

Think that Cameron should practice what he preaches & do the honourable thing in returning the benefits he received....that is if he really believes in his "Welfare Reform" policy......

Scroll down to 5th story
ID: 1207679 · Report as offensive
Profile John Clark
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 99
Posts: 16515
Credit: 4,418,829
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1207712 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 1:50:42 UTC

I recon that Cameron's election policy to give each Parliamentary session a fixed 5 year term, and Prime Ministers 2 terms then push off is right. That way the Government will be less manipulative of the economy when they can choose when to call a General Election.
It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues



ID: 1207712 · Report as offensive
Profile Orgil

Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 05
Posts: 979
Credit: 103,527
RAC: 0
Mongolia
Message 1207746 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 5:23:17 UTC
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 5:27:38 UTC

Just wondering which party or which prime minister was responsible for that 400% debt explosion?! Although my prime suspicion is it is dual parties job that spanning a decade or two.
Mandtugai!
ID: 1207746 · Report as offensive
Profile John Clark
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 99
Posts: 16515
Credit: 4,418,829
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1207780 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 10:16:04 UTC - in response to Message 1207746.  
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 10:18:04 UTC

Just wondering which party or which prime minister was responsible for that 400% debt explosion?! Although my prime suspicion is it is dual parties job that spanning a decade or two.


The Labour Party, under Gordon Brown, was in power until 2010 and were responsible for the UK's public debt explosion. It was Gordon Brown's responsibility for the debt explosion in the public sector, despite the ameliorating effect of his relatively good Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling.

They did some good things with other peoples money, but this is the second time Labour has nearly bankrupted the country (back in 1976 to 1979).

The Cameron lead coalition Government is the one sorting out the Fiscal mess Labour left, and it will take the best part of 10 years to sort - over 4 years of that has already passed.
It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues



ID: 1207780 · Report as offensive
Profile Orgil

Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 05
Posts: 979
Credit: 103,527
RAC: 0
Mongolia
Message 1207820 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 14:01:09 UTC - in response to Message 1207780.  
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 14:13:20 UTC

Just wondering which party or which prime minister was responsible for that 400% debt explosion?! Although my prime suspicion is it is dual parties job that spanning a decade or two.


The Labour Party, under Gordon Brown, was in power until 2010 and were responsible for the UK's public debt explosion. It was Gordon Brown's responsibility for the debt explosion in the public sector, despite the ameliorating effect of his relatively good Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling.

They did some good things with other peoples money, but this is the second time Labour has nearly bankrupted the country (back in 1976 to 1979).

The Cameron lead coalition Government is the one sorting out the Fiscal mess Labour left, and it will take the best part of 10 years to sort - over 4 years of that has already passed.



Before Gordon Brown the debt was around 300% which seemingly it is systematic joint parties negligenous effort of ballooning the debt to its whatever possible super limit which existing more than 1 or 2 decades.

The interesting thing is americans are crying, shouting, cursing, itching and showing all other side effects of their 100% debt pressures while britains are really peaceful about it although it is 400%.

But now japan has 230% of debt and seemingly eu's new money king germany has even 150% of debt too meaning the Elite debt club has many super members.
Mandtugai!
ID: 1207820 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24501
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 1207824 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 14:16:03 UTC - in response to Message 1207789.  
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 14:16:32 UTC


Ivan died at 6 years old in February 2009, and it is utterly disgraceful that the press and others try to make political capital out of it.



I disagree! If he did that just to see how the "other half" lives, then he should also have stated that he returned the funds as they were not needed. This was not done so one can only assume that he kept the money, in which case, the press were correct in highlighting his duplicity!
ID: 1207824 · Report as offensive
Nick
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 4344
Credit: 3,313,107
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1208008 - Posted: 19 Mar 2012, 19:52:22 UTC
Last modified: 19 Mar 2012, 19:58:32 UTC

Every MP sits on at least a couple of Parliament Select Committees in addition to his job as a local MP. It is their job to scrutinise what goes on and make sure that Government is called to account.


To answer just one of your comments against my post, Chris.

The above does not work else the Labour party would not have been able to
get us into debt to the level that they did. No Select Committee called the
Government to account here at the time because none on these select committees
had any understanding as to what was happening.

The system we have does not
work anymore and only suits those who enjoy the cut and thrust involved around
politics. The system is dead on it's feet, it's out dated, it's had it's
good times where it worked. No system ever works for ever all eventually end
up dead on their feet. Those who recognise that the system needs to change
and react accordingly reap the benefits coming form this change earlier than
those who are blind to change and choose to labour along supporting a defunct
system. It took a virtual civil war in England to take away the Kings total
control over this country. Done so because having a monarchy in control stopped
working for the benefit to the country as a whole. Thank god they did wrestle
power away from the Monarchy because this eventually lead the UK as a whole
generating two industrial revolutionist, a feat not repeated by any other nation.
So it's now time for change again because as we all know our current
system is pretty disfunctional. It may hurt people occupied in politics to
have to accept that change is due and that politicians need to be relegated
to the second division somewhat. But I stand on the highest mountain and shout
to the four corners of this Earth, "The UK political system involved in running
this nation has stopped working so time for change and recognise that it is
time for change". America, you will be next to have to change so be brave and
and look for change and take it when it is offered to you...you will not be
disappointed if you do.
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.
ID: 1208008 · Report as offensive
Nick
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 4344
Credit: 3,313,107
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1208272 - Posted: 20 Mar 2012, 22:42:45 UTC
Last modified: 20 Mar 2012, 23:22:24 UTC

"New Chief Secretary to the Treasury David Laws has revealed his predecessor left him a note reading: "Dear Chief Secretary, I'm afraid there is no money. Kind regards - and good luck! Liam"

Mr Laws, speaking alongside Chancellor George Osborne, said he opened the note expecting some advice only to find it was "slightly less helpful".


Yes, utter recklessness and total irresponsibility too. Yet they get away with it
and walk away without a shadow on their conscious. No wonder the bankers show
no regrets over their misdeeds that helped cause the banking crises. How can
you expect the bankers to accept regulations if your government ministers
show scant respect for any form of it. Had the Exchequer been run under a more
independent framework where ministers themselves don't actually hold the cheque
book then getting the state into debt through mismanagement can be avoided.
Ministers unfortunately will not accept this because at times they wish to
over-spend when it's time to curry favour with the electorate normally the
times when a general election is due. I suspect this is what the Labour party
was doing during their term of tenure. The problem some of the electorate would
find, with a more balanced and pragmatical approach to finance, is that the
state would have to cut down on the social budget. Here I would not include
the Health Service but more with the welfare handouts, far too much is given
away and we just can't afford it. Yet whilst politicians hold the purse strings
then this will go on because to change it would inevitably cost that incumbent
government's, who implement the cut's, party votes. So you can see why the
system is in dire need of fundamental and radical change. We can not hope to
go forwards plus be able to mix it with the new rising economies in Asia and
South America unless we match them on their terms. To do this then some in
the UK will have to suffer, namely those who do not produce in wave-shape or
form.
The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.
ID: 1208272 · Report as offensive
Nick
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 11
Posts: 4344
Credit: 3,313,107
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1209118 - Posted: 23 Mar 2012, 1:21:25 UTC


We can not hope to go forwards plus be able to mix it with the new rising economies in Asia and South America unless we match them on their terms.


If you want to live in a dictatorship or a Republic and have no choice how you are governed then fine.


Now Chris, the answer directly above here it what one would expect to receive
from a politician. How matching Asia and South America on their terms equates
to having to become a Republic or circuming to a dictatorship then I do not
know, I was talking about the economics here at this point.



The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.
ID: 1209118 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 17624
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 1209269 - Posted: 23 Mar 2012, 15:12:57 UTC

Has Cameron's Chancellor of the Exchequer, decided the next general election, because of the Granny tax.

For those from foreign parts, in this weeks budget, he sneaked in reduction of the tax free allowance for pensioners. Because of the way it works he has hit the people, who are not rich, but have organised a reasonable level of pension to live on in their later years. And at the same time given more money to those who haven't saved.

He seems to have not noticed that for the next few years there well above average numbers joining the pensioner generation. Therefore if this government runs its full term of office the will be over 2 million more pensioners, of which at least 50% will have a significant income decrease.

This is on top of last years decision to decrease the annual rate of rise in goverment paid pensions. That is to doctors & nurses, teachers, civil servants, emergency services etc.
ID: 1209269 · Report as offensive
Profile John Clark
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 99
Posts: 16515
Credit: 4,418,829
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1209327 - Posted: 23 Mar 2012, 18:02:00 UTC
Last modified: 23 Mar 2012, 18:13:36 UTC

The Granny Tax is all smoke and mirrors and complaint by Labour and the pensioners who think it will hurt. As a pensioner who will be affected (right age too) I am of a completely different view, based of fact not perception.

The Granny Tax is a freezing, not a reduction, in the Age Related Personal Tax allowance which will kick in in April 2013. So, it will not affect anyone during this next 12 months. When it does tale place there is a freeze on the Age Related Personal Tax allowance, and it will not be uprated as in the past and is frozen at the current allowance. This will continue until the average Tax Payers Tax Allowance has caught up to the same value.

People drawing their pensions, such as myself, have a extra £2,325 Tax Free allowance over and above those working during the next 12 months to April 2013, and, many, having the same income as us pensioners.

It is the loss of this potential additional Tax Allowance these people are moaning about, and any real pain it is still 12 months away.

When next year's Tax Allowances are inplemented in the first week of April, 2013, then the Pensioner Tax allowance advantage falls to £1,295. This means Pensioners are paying an extra £83 tax per year (on average) - big deal.

It seems to me that pensioners, and Labour, wingers are interested in a good story rather than the truth.

Moreover, pensioners, as a group, have, up until now, been well protected from the Austerity Reduction.
It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues



ID: 1209327 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 17624
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 1209372 - Posted: 23 Mar 2012, 19:54:32 UTC - in response to Message 1209327.  

Moreover, pensioners, as a group, have, up until now, been well protected from the Austerity Reduction.

Not if your pensions come from goverment coffers (civil servnts, emergency services and teachers etc.) as the increases from last year were reduced because they now use CPI not RPI. On average, governments figure, difference is 1.4%.

Based on the decomposition of the differences between these measures, further analysis in this paper suggests that a plausible range for the long-run difference between RPI and CPI inflation is around 1.3 to 1.5 percentage points (Table 3.1). For the basis of our November 2011 EFO, we assume that the difference between RPI and CPI inflation is around 1.4 percentage points in the long run. This represents the mid-point of the plausible range of estimates set out in Chapter 3.


Which means, if I live another 20 years my pension increases, at that point, will be 34% less than first promised.
ID: 1209372 · Report as offensive
Profile John Clark
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 99
Posts: 16515
Credit: 4,418,829
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1209399 - Posted: 23 Mar 2012, 21:42:45 UTC - in response to Message 1209372.  
Last modified: 23 Mar 2012, 21:50:10 UTC

Moreover, pensioners, as a group, have, up until now, been well protected from the Austerity Reduction.


Not if your pensions come from government coffers (civil servants, emergency services and teachers etc.) as the increases from last year were reduced because they now use CPI not RPI. On average, governments figure, difference is 1.4%.


Which it does

I am afraid your are wrong again.


This years pension increases (national pension, civil service pensions, armed services pensions, and all other public sector pensions) are based on RPI, and the RPI recorded in September. Last September (2011) was recorded as 5.2%, which just happened to be the uplift in Government paid pensions.

The move to CPI, from RPI, takes place this September, and from April 2013 your comments are then correct.

Based on the decomposition of the differences between these measures, further analysis in this paper suggests that a plausible range for the long-run difference between RPI and CPI inflation is around 1.3 to 1.5 percentage points (Table 3.1). For the basis of our November 2011 EFO, we assume that the difference between RPI and CPI inflation is around 1.4 percentage points in the long run. This represents the mid-point of the plausible range of estimates set out in Chapter 3.1.

Which means, if I live another 20 years my pension increases, at that point, will be 34% less than first promised.


Except for this next 12 months!

This disingenuous propaganda is adrift by 12 months before things happen. A point conveniently not mentioned by all the Red Top and TV media (except for the broad sheets) when they interview Ed Balls-up and all the moaning pensioners saying how hard up they are suddenly becoming since Wednesday's Budget.

Given time and no reduction in inflation they will be correct, and in the very long term with the move to CPI, from RIP, the pension uplifts will be smaller and cumulative.

But all the moaning I read, see and hear in the media is about the short term, over the next 12 months ...
It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues



ID: 1209399 · Report as offensive
BarryAZ

Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 16,982,517
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1209441 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 0:18:26 UTC - in response to Message 1209422.  

Same thing happens in the US with FauxNews and the Limburger.




What worries me is that this large section of the potential vote will believe what they read, and maybe vote accordingly.



ID: 1209441 · Report as offensive
Profile John Clark
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Sep 99
Posts: 16515
Credit: 4,418,829
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1209453 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 1:19:38 UTC - in response to Message 1209422.  
Last modified: 24 Mar 2012, 1:20:49 UTC

That is why I still believe it has been a political shot in the foot.



You are probably very right, Chris. But, at least there is 2 to 3 years before the next General Election and the further cuts, especially getting the Bludgers prised out of the Benefits System, have yet to come.

Plenty of controversy yet to come.

I think memory will be short on this as the pensioners (a group with significant turn out at Elections) will have other priorities.

I think they may have forgotten. Maybe?
It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues



ID: 1209453 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 17624
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 1209481 - Posted: 24 Mar 2012, 2:57:50 UTC - in response to Message 1209399.  
Last modified: 24 Mar 2012, 3:57:22 UTC

I quote from the 2011 Armed Forces Newsletter 2011

2011 pension increases
In June 2010 the government announced the intention to link increases to the CPI. If this receives parlimentary approval the full incease will therefore reflect the rise of 3.1% in the CPI for the 12 months ended 30th September 2010, which has always been the month used for this uplift.


edit] the RPI figure, for september 2010, used previously was 4.6%

edit2] because of that change my pension for 2012/13 will be >£250/annum less than under the previous (promised) rules. And now I am going to be taxed more on the lower pension.
ID: 1209481 · Report as offensive
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 17 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Camerons First Term


 
©2022 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.