the snap general election thread

hallmark

Moby wrote: »

I think the residents themselves are asking serious questions and from what I hear they support his points!

The residents have the right to ask questions & demand answers.

However what they deserve is proper answers based on facts. Not opportunist MPs using their tragedy to try to score some political points.

Moby

zarf2007 wrote: »

que momentum scum chiming in...

Thanks for your helpful contribution.I'm not in Momentum though but I'm thinking of joining! Guardian today.......(David) Lammy says the fire was 'corporate manslaughter' The Labour MP for Tottenham, David Lammy, said that what happened amounted to “corporate manslaughter”. Lammy said that a close friend of his family, Khadija Saye, and her mother Mary were missing in Grenfell Tower. Saye, a 24-year-old artist, worked for Lammy’s wife, who is also an artist. Lammy said she was “a beautiful young woman with an amazing career ahead of her”. He had heard nothing from her, he said. “Obviously as the seconds pass we grow more sad and bleak at every second,” he said. He was hoping she was in hospital, he said, “and not perished in the building as I suspect hundreds will have done by the end of this count”. He also said that the fact that those living in the tower block were predominantly poor was a factor in what happened. This is the richest borough in our country treating its citizens in this way and we should call it what it is. It is corporate manslaughter. That’s what it is. And there should be arrests made, frankly. It is an outrage.

steampowered

antrobus wrote: »

If you borrow money it has to be repaid. The deficit is simply the amount of money you are borrowing now. The national debt is simply the accumulated total of previous deficits.

Hang on a minute. I was responding to a post which claimed that the deficit had been "repaid".

None of the debt caused by the deficit has been repaid. Nothing has been repaid. The current government is still borrowing. That's the point.

Only if you are ignore inflation.

Actually, this government is on course to have borrowed more than every Labour government put together even after adjusting for inflation by 2020.

What point are you trying to make? Are you saying we should be more like Germany and run a budget surplus. Or more like Romania and reduce our national debt to 37.6% of GDP?

The point I am making is exactly what I said - that one of the key reasons why the UK has struggled to get rid of its deficit (and will continue to struggle) is that we are experiencing very low economic growth.

Slashing government spending is not necessarily the best way to get rid of a deficit - particularly if it means reducing capital expenditure, reducing investment in skills or reducing investment in infrastructure; as all of those things impact current and future economic future.

steampowered

hallmark wrote: »

The residents have the right to ask questions & demand answers.

However what they deserve is proper answers based on facts. Not opportunist MPs using their tragedy to try to score some political points.

Your post seems completely contradictory to me. On the one hand you say the residents should get "proper answers". On the other hand you criticise politicians for seeking "answers"?????

There is only one mention of Corbyn in the article you linked. And I can't see how it is any different to you seeking "proper answers":

"Jeremy Corbyn said it was "everyone's worst nightmare" and praised the emergency services but added that questions needed to be answered."

steampowered

zarf2007 wrote: »

I see it didn't take long for that idiot Corbyn to capitalise on the deaths of Grenfell residents, this guy will do anything for votes:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40276900

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

JC just lost a lot of the respect he had recently gained. And in doing so has IMHO lost and not gained from his ill-considered attempt at capitalising.

How is saying that "questions needed to be answered" capitalising?

What JC actually said, according to that article, is as follows: "Jeremy Corbyn said it was "everyone's worst nightmare" and praised the emergency services but added that questions needed to be answered."

That sounds bloody reasonable if you ask me. There are most definitely questions which need to be answered. The opposition would be failing in their duty if they didn't ask them.

hallmark

steampowered wrote: »

Your post seems completely contradictory to me. On the one hand you say the residents should get "proper answers". On the other hand you criticise politicians for seeking "answers". What?

Corbyn has already been on TV making suggestive comments. He didn't even wait a day until appearing on TV yesterday saying "if you make cuts somebody pays the price eventually" which anybody can see is the most thinly veiled way possible of blaming the Conservatives for yesterday's tragedy.

Then today we have David Lammy calling it "Corporate manslaughter" when as of yet nobody knows ANY details on what caused this.

Truly disgusting by both of them.

Stick up for them if you want, or if you're so tribal you simply can't bring yourself to do anything but defend what Labour do, but any decent person can see that what they are doing is beneath contempt. They couldn't care less if they add to the anguish of the people involved with their open speculation, which is designed to do nothing but score political points. Truly vile excuses for human beings.

hallmark

steampowered wrote: »

There are most definitely questions which need to be answered. The opposition would be failing in their duty if they didn't ask them.

Nobody has suggested for a moment that there won't be a full enquiry or that every possible question shouldn't be answered in full. Likewise if people or organizations are found to have been negligent nobody is going to defend those people.

None of that requires Corbyn or Lammy to intrude on people's grief by getting on their soapbox & turning this into a political circus, literally the day after it happened. They are both beneath contempt.

Moby

steampowered wrote: »

How is saying that "questions needed to be answered" capitalising?

What JC actually said, according to that article, is as follows: "Jeremy Corbyn said it was "everyone's worst nightmare" and praised the emergency services but added that questions needed to be answered."

That sounds bloody reasonable if you ask me. There are most definitely questions which need to be answered. The opposition would be failing in their duty if they didn't ask them.

Yet again I think we see Corbyn is actually in touch with the feelings and mood of real people. He has campaigned on such issues for many years and can therefore speak with moral authority on such matters. The fallout continues:-“Various ministers have said over the years that there will be an imminent review, but it keeps being put on hold, in spite of organisations like ourselves campaigning very hard.” Among the areas the FPA wanted reviewed, Glocking said, was a lack of compulsion for external insulation underneath cladding on tower blocks to be fire resistant, and tighter regulations over timber-framed buildings, now the most common method for social housing. Ronnie King, formerly the chief fire officer and now honorary secretary of the all-party parliamentary group on fire safety and rescue, said the regulations “badly need updating” and “three successive ministers have not done it”. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/14/review-of-fire-safety-rules-pledged-by-minister-last-year-yet-to-be-published

hallmark

Moby wrote: »

Yet again I think we see Corbyn is actually in touch with the feelings and mood of real people. He has campaigned on such issues for many years and can therefore speak with moral authority on such matters.

And yet you couldn't stand him when he was first put in charge of Labour. Strange since the evidence of his campaigning & moral authority had apparently been there for many years.

He's a despicable opportunist.

Moby

hallmark wrote: »

And yet you couldn't stand him when he was first put in charge of Labour. Strange since the evidence of his campaigning & moral authority had apparently been there for many years.

He's a despicable opportunist.

My problem with Corbyn was not his politics though. I didn't think he was electable and I also believed that he was destroying the Labour Party. I always thought he was a great campaigner. I didn't think he could be a leader though. I totally acknowledge I was wrong about him.