This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
CambridgeEagle Sydenham 06 Oct 17 10.25am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Willo
I will not do a 'Gusset' by trawling the Internet for sites but can inform you that Labour, now engaged in a virulent class war is totally and utterly wrong when it claims the gap between rich and poor has widened. According to the independent 'Institute for Fiscal Studies' the gap has narrowed over the past decade, particularly in London this is because the Conservatives have given tax cuts to the poorly paid so that many, many don't pay Income Tax at all. Got to go out now with my wife prior to attending the CPF.
Latest IFS release: The national picture Average (median) income in 2015–16 (the latest data available) was only 3.7% higher than before the recession (2007–0. With real wages currently falling and working age benefits and tax credits being cut, income growth since then is likely to have been very weak. Evidence from data on employees’ earnings shows that those towards the very top (99th percentile) have been harder hit than those at the middle (median). Earnings at the 99th percentile are still around 10% below their pre-crisis level, compared with a 5% fall at the median. However, it should be noted that it is hard to track how the household incomes of the very richest have been changing. Absolute poverty (according to the official government measure) has changed little over the last decade. This lack of progress is historically unusual and reflects the more general lack of real income growth. It follows especially large reductions in poverty over the preceding decade as the incomes of low-income households grew strongly.
So in summary the Tory strategy has been to make everyone worse off but allow the GFC to make the richest the most worse off. London has the most reduced inequality due to having had the most very high earners over the past 10 years. Your conclusion is bogus. This is not a policy success story. It's a mask for failure.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
CambridgeEagle Sydenham 06 Oct 17 10.27am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
There was nothing noticeable and if the rest of the Tory party think like you that those 3 miniscule policies are worthy of leadership then you're mistaken. The 5,000 annual housing and student debt policies are so pathetic they may as well not bother. I didn't notice any vision and I haven't heard any commentators mentioning one either. David Mellor tore right into her yesterday. She blew it. This is a very good point. She's bereft of any really policy ideas due to her terribly weak position. At least the coalition had policies, even if you didn't like them.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 06 Oct 17 10.34am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
This is a very good point. She's bereft of any really policy ideas due to her terribly weak position. At least the coalition had policies, even if you didn't like them. The cabinet maybe haven't cooperated with innovative ideas like previous cabinets, possibly due to her failures and uncertain future. Or if they really are willing to let her ride out Brexit, she just isn't a leader of a team and getting down to policy drafting doesn't happen. So not a country leader or leader of people with her cold nature. Perfect.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Lyons550 Shirley 06 Oct 17 10.37am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Lyons550 Shirley 06 Oct 17 10.39am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
She does, but it just adds to all the other shortcomings. You know, virtually no policies. Or policies already released, or copied from Labour.
The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 06 Oct 17 10.47am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Lyons550
I agree with that. I didn't actually mind when early on when nearly every policy had been pinched from Labour or they backtracked on after realising it couldn't happen, although that was happening a bit too often. The self employed NI changes was an epic c0ck up and misunderstanding or p1ss take of some of her core vote. The problem this time is 3 policies. 2 of them pathetic and one of them Labour's, and dismissed by the Tories when Ed Miliband came out with it. She either doesn't have the credentials to do anything or she thinks just Brexit will do.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
npn Crowborough 06 Oct 17 10.49am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Lyons550
Sadly you just need to watch Question Time or listen to Any Questions to see that in action
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 06 Oct 17 10.56am | |
---|---|
Didn't anyone on here find Paul Kaye's Dennis Pennis funny? Just the same. She won't be going because of the piece of paper and she won't be the only politician and leader to have to deal with that kind of prank. If people have enough of Labour after 7 years with a useless PM they'll face it too.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
susmik PLYMOUTH -But Made in Old Coulsdon... 06 Oct 17 11.09am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
There were far too many idiots in the conference hall already so he could not get in to give Corbyn his P45!
Supported Palace for over 69 years since the age of 7 and have seen all the ups and downs and will probably see many more ups and downs before I go up to the big football club in the sky. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 06 Oct 17 11.26am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
It happened because she's in a precarious position without the authority of a PM. If Corbyn was making a hash of it, which he might, he'd be taken the p1ss out of (more). She's more of a fool than he is if she thinks that waste of time on Wednesday was credible even for a conference under no pressure. She's useless. Corbyn may (probably will in my view) try to take on too many issues we can't afford. But at least there's substance. Are you being ironic ?
"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 06 Oct 17 12.03pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by nickgusset
1. Isnt it annoying when somebody sees what one person does and then says the whole party is like that when it blatantly not true (See your last sentence for an example) Are you still using that reductionism? Prejudice is about associating certain behavior with certain groups. It is a perception which is sometimes based on ignorance but often on experience. It is a self preserving, self serving mechanism which everyone has. Get over it.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Rudi Hedman Caterham 06 Oct 17 12.21pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by dannyh
Are you being ironic ? I call policies and a vision, substance. YOU may not like it or think it's feasible, and I fear too much too soon will happen, but it has substance. What do you call next to nothing and not much improvement on 'strong and stable'?
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.