Politics Thread!

[pogo]

I'll give you this one. Apparently the double-dip recession was "revised away" - by the narrowest of margins.

"revised away" meaning that when they got the final figures there was no recession. It appeared in early estimates but they were just that estimates.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/oct/08/alan-johnson-backs-darling-timetable

Now let's have your retraction ..

A detailed programme, not some vague commitment. One fact for you: the Tories have found it hard to cut, and are on course to miss their deficit target by a wide margin. They did so with unions resisting them all the way. You think Labour would have found it any easier, given how they're bankrolled by the unions? Miliband was the choice of the unions remember. So it only counts if they say what they would cut.

Vague babble saying nothing in particular. What we have seen are some of the most regressive policies imaginable that hit hardest the people who need it least. ... The policies are regressive across the board, and are based on immoral ideological principles.

Which policies? I've pointed out major one, the raising of the personal allowance, which was very progressive. If you mean cuts then that's not ideological: as you've noted Labour also planned to make cuts (though we don't know which).

How many of them are in work programmes pogo ??

You will have to tell me. Frankly I'm less interested in programmes like that, but more interested in where the economy is going as a recovering economy is the best cure for too many people unemployed. All the problems with work programmes, part time and zero hours are best solved by creating enough full time jobs for all the people who want them.

Ah: found how many. See page 8 of this:

The number of people on government supported training and employment programmes decreased by 37,000 to reach 120,000.

So as the economy recovers people are leaving these schemes, as you'd expect.

[(o)(o)]

I'll give you this one. Apparently the double-dip recession was "revised away" - by the narrowest of margins.

"revised away" meaning that ..

I know what "revised away" means. I fucking wrote it !!

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/oct/08/alan-johnson-backs-darling-timetable

Now let's have your retraction ..

A detailed programme, not some vague commitment.

You are just being a dishonourable weasel as usual. Alaistair Darling laid out a plan of cuts if you had been paying attention.

One fact for you: the Tories have found it hard to cut, and are on course to miss their deficit target by a wide margin.

FACTZ!

In fact the Tories have slashed away quite merrily - that is a matter of fact - that they miss on deficit targets is because they are employing ideological policies, not economic ones.

Vague babble saying nothing in particular. What we have seen are some of the most regressive policies imaginable that hit hardest the people who need it least. ... The policies are regressive across the board, and are based on immoral ideological principles.

Which policies?

Fucking all of them, basically. Except those enforced by EU directives.

Bedroom tax, legal aid, work programmes, the disability denial machine, bludgeoning badgers, fracking, opening up the NHS to USA competition, the Royal Mail sell off, student fees.. the list is practically endless.. every day some new BS pops up.. the only "progressive" policies are PR exercises.

I've pointed out major one, the raising of the personal allowance, which was very progressive.

Allowances going up. Wages going down !!

If you mean cuts then that's not ideological: as you've noted Labour also planned to make cuts (though we don't know which).

Completely bizarre statement not founded on logic.

How many of them are in work programmes pogo ??

You will have to tell me. Frankly I'm less interested in programmes like that,

Nor will you then be interested in the 80000 people who are concurrently not counted uneployed because their benefits are sanctioned, nor that Osbourne enshrined "Help to Work" in April which forces people exiting Work Programmes which they have been on for TWO YEARS to do community work (as per criminal offenders) to receive benefits (perhaps that's where your 37000 not-unemployed-employed people went). No.. why would you be interested in the validity of unemployment figures you parrot off like a government shill..

[pogo]

"revised" suggests they changed how to calculate it to eliminate it. My point was it simply never happened. There was no second dip.

"weasel": We're going in circles. Please link then to Alistair Darling's detailed cuts programme.

"FACTZ!" That makes no sense: you can't blame them for cutting too much ("slashing away merrily") and not enough so they missed the target. In fact their benefit cuts have been quite limited. The main cuts have been to civil service pay and jobs, as that's where the government spends most, and we now employ fewer civil servants than any time since before 2000.

Spoiler: show

This has been happening slowly but steadily, to minimise the impact on the economy and in particular on employment. So despite public sector employment falling by 1m over four years (though that includes some reclassification) overall employment is up and unemployment is dowb.

"Wages going down !!" Due to the recession. You can't blame this government for that, all you can ask is that they get us out of it. Which they're doing.

And as I noted there are 120,000 on govt programmes, all of them, down 1/4 since a year ago. That too is moving in the right direction. It's also worth noting, from the same report (page 9), that the vast majority of jobs created were full-time, which also suggests things are getting better.

[zip accident]

I have a book recommendation ideal for someone like you.. posting shortly in the what are you reading thread.

Well I, for one, am not impressed.

If all the ills of mankind are due to the emergence of psychopaths as our leaders, then obviously psychopaths are doing something correctly. Natural Selection is what it is, and it is ruthlessly effective, and always will be. Natural Selection is (IMO) a side effect of entropy, and entropy isn't going anywhere, whatever anyone, or any religion, legislates.

I don't believe psychopaths are that common, and I don't believe that they have that much control over society.

[Absolute_Zero]

Seems like an instance of projection, to me.

[Darkflame]

NHS actually pretty good value shock;


http://io9.com/the-u-s-has-the-most-exp ... 1591403515

Now, obviously theres many subjective things here, like weighting and value scales. Yet still seems to point strongly though that anyone that wants to change the UK system in anything but marginal ways is idiot.

[gravy]

INTERLUDE

In the interest of fairness post Pogo's incisive "LOL MILLIBAND LOOKS FUNNY!!!!!!" here's a dose of Gove

[zip accident]

I have heard it said that the end justifies the means. I have heard it said that the end never justifies the means. Nobody was joking.

[TFO]

[pogo]

More here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-27902683

[(o)(o)]

There was no second dip.

We were a whisker away from one.

Please link then to Alistair Darling's detailed cuts programme.

Oh.. you want the specifics of a budget that couldn't exist because Alistair Darling wasn't in office? Don't be a dick - Darling's plans were to halve the deficit in 4 years far slower than Osbourne this is common knowledge.

you can't blame them for cutting too much ("slashing away merrily") and not enough so they missed the target.

Try and understand the difference between cuts and costs. Many CONDEM cuts COST MORE MONEY THAN THEY SAVE.

Very predictably too. A clear indicator that the policies are ideological.

The conservatives primary goals were not to reduce the deficit. The UK debt was pretty minor historically everyone knows that.

No - conservative agenda is to a) shrink government b) dismantle welfare c) private everything especially NHS d) inflict cruelty on badgers and disabled etc

In fact their benefit cuts have been quite limited.

What kind of douchebag says something like that when people are committing suicide due to the brutality of cuts.

[(o)(o)]

Well I, for one, am not impressed.

If all the ills of mankind are due to the emergence of psychopaths as our leaders, then obviously psychopaths are doing something correctly. Natural Selection is what it is..

Not sure I get your point. Seems like a passive approach.

Everything "is what it is".

Don't intervene.. is that your suggestion??

I don't believe psychopaths are that common, and I don't believe that they have that much control over society.

Have you read the book or studied any other materials on the subject ?? You are going against expert opinion here.

Psychopaths are everywhere.

[zip accident]

Well I, for one, am not impressed.

If all the ills of mankind are due to the emergence of psychopaths as our leaders, then obviously psychopaths are doing something correctly. Natural Selection is what it is..

Not sure I get your point. Seems like a passive approach.

My approach is that there are things that are worth doing, and there are things that really, really are very bad indeed, and it's a very good idea to be clear about which are which.

Everything "is what it is".

Don't intervene.. is that your suggestion??

Intervening against natural selection would be one of the very bad ideas I was talking about. It's on the same order of sillyness as intervening against gravity, which can be done in limited local circumstances if you understand exactly what you are doing (aeroplanes fly, for an example), but in general, no.

I don't believe psychopaths are that common, and I don't believe that they have that much control over society.

Have you read the book or studied any other materials on the subject ?? You are going against expert opinion here.

Psychopaths are everywhere.

By which definition of psychopath? I'm sure there are people that other people don't like all over the place. Most of them don't like the people they are disliked by straight back. Without a clinical assessment, I wouldn't accept either of those people's unqualified word on the other's psychopathology.

I did look at Amazon's look inside feature for that book, and most unedifying it was, there were introductions to prefaces to introductions, when you got to the actual text it burbled on for a couple of pages without saying anything significant, by which time I came to the conclusion I have better things to do with my time.

[(o)(o)]

Intervening against natural selection would be one of the very bad ideas I was talking about.

Oh, right. So what are prisons for then?

Why don't we just let outlaws rampage.

Psychopaths are everywhere.

By which definition of psychopath?

The internationally recognized Hare Psychopathy Checklist.

I did look at Amazon's look inside feature for that book, and most unedifying it was, there were introductions to prefaces to introductions, when you got to the actual text it burbled on for a couple of pages without saying anything significant, by which time I came to the conclusion I have better things to do with my time.

Your loss.

[(o)(o)]

Very dangerous game the Condems played with our economy as this article lays clear.

If the country is achieving growth despite Condemn's attempts to destroy everything... what better a position would the country be in now if it weren't for their 'help'.

Only god knows.

In a letter published by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), a non-partisan department established by Chancellor George Osborne to assess the government's fiscal policies, chairman Robert Chote challenged the prime ministers' claim that it had declared the programme of tax increases and spending cuts "not responsible, in fact, quite the opposite" for Britain's flirtation with a triple-dip recession.