Cameron: "Cuts will change our way of life"

[Major Tom]

In what are no doubt seen as simpler times, I do remember the governments of the day making specifically that point when required - that general taxes were to rise in order to pay for things like the NHS.  Then again, the populace was more enlightened in terms of the 'good of the country' - certainly people were less selfish and self obsessed - and thus were less likely to write to the Daily Mail and Telegraph and help to create UKIP.  

 

It seems almost unthinkable now that a political party would have the courage to do this, at least for the working and middle classes. 

 

The good old days. But I have been arguing pretty much this point in this thread.

 

If Labour campaigned on a ticket which said increased taxes for better services, how would they fare in the GE, in your opinion?

[stringvest]

I think that raising taxes is just one of the myriad of budgetary options open to the Labour Party, or anyone else for that matter.  

 

To answer your question, it would be a brave step, because people over the last three decades have been weaned off the conscious investment in the collective through almost every channel accessible to them.  The right wing majority media would tear into them.  The Tories would have a field day.  And the career politicians (the majority) in their own party would probably prevent it getting off the ground in the first place.  Conviction politics sounds an almost quaint turn of phrase now, but it's a measure of how far we have receded in terms of social evolution that it is the case.

 

So, the question is moot, because the Labour party, or at least as it is defined by their MPs, doesn't believe in it.  

 

What would happen?  If they had the talent to articulate the message effectively and argue the socio-political benefits - and the conviction to drive it through, I feel it could be a net vote winner in enough constituencies to at least make them competitive.  It could be argued that they have nothing to lose anyway - their support is tailing away as we near the election.  

 

 

But, as I said in my first sentence, it's one of many options open to them, and it's undoubtedly the least palatable, so it won't happen. 

[Moctezuma]

Petition for the Green Party to be in the Leaders debates:

 

https://www.change.org/p/bbc-itv-channel-4-sky-include-the-green-party-in-the-tv-leaders-debates-ahead-of-the-2015-general-election?utm_source=action_alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=159339&alert_id=dcftuElrSK_eS1%2BKWBi1D986sc1IsroJqOG98PqDMu7kLn57Z1gMB0%3D

[Section_31]

The Greens are fucked with things like this because they want nice things which, be definition, isn't news worthy. The media love coverage of UKIP because Farage and because of their extreme and divisive policies.

[Major Tom]

But, as I said in my first sentence, it's one of many options open to them, and it's undoubtedly the least palatable, so it won't happen. 

 

Agreed.

[Major Tom]

The Greens are fucked with things like this because they want nice things which, be definition, isn't news worthy. The media love coverage of UKIP because Farage and because of their extreme and divisive policies.

 

Certain sections of the media love UKIP because they stand for the same things.

[stringvest]

The Greens are fucked with things like this because they want nice things which, be definition, isn't news worthy. The media love coverage of UKIP because Farage and because of their extreme and divisive policies.

 

I wish it was as simple as that Mark.  There are other influences in play which means the Greens would never get a fair crack of the whip.  Who knows, in three or four elections' time, the web may have democratised the news agenda?  

 

Nah, I'm just being optimistic and naive.  The Corporates would have found a way of filtering and focussing the agenda through this channel as effectively as they have done through printed and traditional communications media.  

[Moctezuma]

^ One of the big impediments to the democratisation of the news agenda long term will come in the form of pay walls on the internet and two speed band widths, so that only those who have the capacity to pay get the best internet coverage with highest speeds.

[Gnasher]

Lets not get distracted by the nonsense Stronts spouts, the strike yesterday had little to do with doctors it had everything to do with people on the lower end of the pay scale not getting the 1% the independent body awarded them which this government are trying to overturn. The same govts that see's no need to change the 9% rise given to them.

 

When nurses feel so undervalued to opt for strike action for the first time in thirty years we should at least give them/thier union a fair hearing before passing judgement..here you go..

 

https://www.unison.org.uk/at-work/health-care/key-issues/nhs-pay/the-facts/

 

The alternative is listening to stronts " taxpayers paying mega salary to the Nhs" bullshit.

[Section_31]

I wish it was as simple as that Mark. There are other influences in play which means the Greens would never get a fair crack of the whip. Who knows, in three or four elections' time, the web may have democratised the news agenda?

 

Nah, I'm just being optimistic and naive. The Corporates would have found a way of filtering and focussing the agenda through this channel as effectively as they have done through printed and traditional communications media.

True, I think some serious effort needs to be made by these parties to use socoal media to get their message out. Mass communication is as diverse and accessible as it's ever been yet they're still cow towing to the Murdoch press. They could be using twitter, celebrity endorsements, YouTube videos, viral ads, short films, independent news and radio channels etc, hell even Labour could and should have done that.

[Major Tom]

I wish it was as simple as that Mark.  There are other influences in play which means the Greens would never get a fair crack of the whip.  Who knows, in three or four elections' time, the web may have democratised the news agenda?  

 

Nah, I'm just being optimistic and naive.  The Corporates would have found a way of filtering and focussing the agenda through this channel as effectively as they have done through printed and traditional communications media.  

 

Not the BBC.

[stringvest]

Not the BBC.

 

 

So you believe the BBC is transparent and objective in it's news agenda MT?

[xerxes]

Certain sections of the media love UKIP because they stand for the same things.

UKIP have made it easy for the media- it's about immigration and the EU. Just as Salmond grabbed the headlines by it being either yes or no.

 

To be fair for any party of government, or opposition party aspiring to be one, its a bit more of a complicated message than that.

 

The Greens have the advantage of being more than a single issue party with a genuine philosophy, but the disadvantage that their policies are more complex than can be served by sound bite politics.

[stringvest]

UKIP have made it easy for the media- it's about immigration and the EU. Just as Salmond grabbed the headlines by it being either yes or no.

 

To be fair for any party of government, or opposition party aspiring to be one, its a bit more of a complicated message than that.

 

The Greens have the advantage of being more than a single issue party with a genuine philosophy, but the disadvantage that their policies are more complex than can be served by sound bite politics.

 

That's their challenge, should they choose to accept it. 

[Rico1304]

Lets not get distracted by the nonsense Stronts spouts, the strike yesterday had little to do with doctors it had everything to do with people on the lower end of the pay scale not getting the 1% the independent body awarded them which this government are trying to overturn. The same govts that see's no need to change the 9% rise given to them.

When nurses feel so undervalued to opt for strike action for the first time in thirty years we should at least give them/thier union a fair hearing before passing judgement..here you go..

https://www.unison.org.uk/at-work/health-care/key-issues/nhs-pay/the-facts/

The alternative is listening to stronts " taxpayers paying mega salary to the Nhs" bullshit.

The bit about the the MPs and their pay rise isn't true though is it? As I understand it the independent body set up to agree wage reviews has the power to impose a pay rise (because if it couldn't impose them they wouldn't be able to reduce them if that was the recommendation) but the govt have said they'll disband the body if it pushes it through. Happy to be proved wrong.

[Strontium]

Lets not get distracted by the nonsense Stronts spouts, the strike yesterday had little to do with doctors

 

Er, when did I say it did? Don't invent stuff, thanks.

 

it had everything to do with people on the lower end of the pay scale not getting the 1% the independent body awarded them which this government are trying to overturn.

 

Well, this isn't quite true, is it. All staff are getting at least a 1% pay rise, however the staff who are contractually entitled to a pay rise of between 2% and 5% aren't getting the 1% on top of that.

 

The strike is about staff believing they should be entitled to the 1% in addition to their contractual 2-5%.

 

The same govts that see's no need to change the 9% rise given to them.

 

MPs are unable to change the 9% award to them, we took control of MPs pay out of their hands, if you remember.

 

If you're going to support an NHS strike based upon the independent pay body's recommendations not being taken up, then criticising the decision of the recommendation of another independent pay body is somewhat contradictory.

[Gnasher]

Er, when did I say it did? Don't invent stuff, thanks.Well, this isn't quite true, is it. All staff are getting at least a 1% pay rise, however the staff who are contractually entitled to a pay rise of between 2% and 5% aren't getting the 1% on top of that.The strike is about staff believing they should be entitled to the 1% in addition to their contractual 2-5%.MPs are unable to change the 9% award to them, we took control of MPs pay out of their hands, if you remember.If you're going to support an NHS strike based upon the independent pay body's recommendations not being taken up, then criticising the decision of the recommendation of another independent pay body is somewhat contradictory.

The 1% rise is a one off payment which 60% of health service workers won't get, it is not added to annual income or hourly rate unless you are at the top end of the pay spectrum. Hunt ignoring the pay reviews findings seems a divide and rule ploy which has already damaged moral of nurses.

 

Milliband outlined plans for a 5% pay cut for ministers if Labour win the next election. It can be done.

[Major Tom]

So you believe the BBC is transparent and objective in it's news agenda MT?

 

In politics, yes.

[Jairzinho]

Haha.

[Stu Monty]

I don't know where you get that idea from. I've never been bound by anything of the sort.

 

I don't recall any gymnastics.

 

Incidentally, Royal Mail shares are currently trading at 394p, a mere 64p above their initial share price, and rendering most of the criticism of Cable moot.

 

I'm sure you're going to explain why.

 

I was talking about the party. Very clearly. 

 

You've stated in the past that the Lib Dems couldn't just go shooting their mouths off about things they disagreed with if they wanted to be considered a mature party of government, and that they have collective responsibility so why have you changed your stance here for Williams?

 

And you knew I meant that. Because you're not an idiot... you just pretend to be to try and avoid honest discussion.

[VladimirIlyich]

In politics, yes.

Are you serious?

 

One of the things that Russell Brand and Max Keiser, in particular,have espoused is the bias and propaganda being dished out by the BBC in recent times.

[Jairzinho]

It would be laughable just how biased the BBC is, if it weren't so utterly hateful.

[VladimirIlyich]

Here is a list of all the parties with at least 1 seat in Parliament,the same as UKIP and how many of these will be featuring in the TV debates?

 

Conservative 303 Labour 257 Liberal Democrat 56 Democratic Unionist 8 Scottish National 6 Sinn Fein 5 Independent 3 Plaid Cymru 3 Social Democratic & Labour Party 3 Alliance 1 Green 1 Respect 1

[Strontium]

I was talking about the party. Very clearly. 

 

You've stated in the past that the Lib Dems couldn't just go shooting their mouths off about things they disagreed with if they wanted to be considered a mature party of government, and that they have collective responsibility so why have you changed your stance here for Williams?

 

And you knew I meant that. Because you're not an idiot... you just pretend to be to try and avoid honest discussion.

 

I think I'd like to see what I'm supposed to have said in the past, because I'm afraid I don't trust your recollection of it, and I certainly can't recall precisely what I said either.

[Major Tom]

 

Here is a list of all the parties with at least 1 seat in Parliament,the same as UKIP and how many of these will be featuring in the TV debates?

 

%age of the vote is surely a better indicator.