the snap general election thread

economic

Moby wrote: »

Despite what you may believe I am not answerable to you and what you consider to be inconvenient is not my concern.;)

I found that pic actually pretty funny.


probably also because it does come from a poster who is a bit dim.

Moby

hallmark wrote: »

Still can't answer the question eh?

You realise it shows up your attacks on the Tories for what they are when you don't? Politically motivated bile & using a tragedy to further a political agenda.

Repeating the same old lines time and time again changes nothing Hallmark. This is a little forum for people to discuss things ..........not vent their spleen of hate. Just sling your hook mate....no offence I'm really not interested in what you think.:)

economic

whys should the whole of uk taxpayer fund the £5m fund? should it not be the borough only?

Thrugelmir

economic wrote: »

whys should the whole of uk taxpayer fund the £5m fund? should it not be the borough only?

With 4,000 tower blocks in the UK. The same principle should be applied to all the borough's concerned?

ThinkingOutLoud_2

Moby wrote: »

If you go back a few pages I posted the link ...

Yes. No need to report again what is marginally above.

It is a fact that there were many past lessons to learn from.

I see this as somewhat comparable to seat belts and smoke alarms and smoking - long after their is evidence is known - action is forthcoming.

To blame the last in post may have some justification. But, to claim all predecessors are innocent is to sprinkle the responsibility too lightly.

To blame austerity is to repoint the finger at the government prior to the global meltdown which they did have that to deal with. None of which is truly unhelpful.

Instead of fingerpointing - a plan that said take this money and do this now would be truly useful.

Moby

economic wrote: »

whys should the whole of uk taxpayer fund the £5m fund? should it not be the borough only?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/16/my-council-tax-rebate-from-kensington-and-chelsea-is-blood-money

In 2014, I received my Kensington and Chelsea council tax bill and a letter from the leader of the council, Nicholas Paget-Brown, explaining that all residents who pay council tax in full would “receive a one-off payment of £100”, to be deducted from the bill. This bonus, the letter continued, was due to the council’s careful management of its finances over the years, “consistently delivering greater efficiencies while improving services”. Austerity, K&C style: you give to the rich while taking from the poor (nobody with discounted bills or claiming council tax support was eligible to share in the bounty of the town hall blue-chips).

On a Conservative website, Paget-Brown further explained that “thanks to an overachieving efficiency drive”, the council was “well ahead of [its] savings targets for the year”. Triple AAA credit status, how nice. In deciding what to do with this surplus, he continued, “we have taken the view that it is simply wrong to discount from our calculations whose money this was in the first place. In short, we think the right place for it is back with our residents.”

In May 2014, the local election returned a huge majority of Conservative councillors. Business as usual. For years, the Royal Borough has got away with bribing the electorate with its own money.

Moby

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

Yes. No need to report again what is marginally above.

It is a fact that there were many past lessons to learn from.

I see this as somewhat comparable to seat belts and smoke alarms and smoking - long after their is evidence action is forthcoming.

To blame the last in post may have some justification. But, to claim all predecessors are innocent is to sprinkle the responsibility too lightly.

To blame austerity is to repoint the finger at the government prior to the global meltdown which they did have that to deal with. None of which is truly unhelpful.

Instead of fingerpointing - a plan that said take this money and do this now would be truly useful.

Fair point...all Govmt's whatever colour bear some responsibility.
My point is that the present position we are now in is much further beyond that. There is a growing vocalised view that 'Austerity' has been turned into something else and taken to extremes. Also that the poor suffer the consequences, because the richer are more able to protect themselves. I also give credit to people like Corbyn because he has always said these things. He is not politicking over a tragedy. It's unfair to say that, he has been consistent! To accuse him of politicking is imo another smear by those who have their own agenda.

FrankieBoyle

hallmark wrote: »

This nonstop attempt to pretend that fire risk is some new thing caused by "austerity since 2010" is repulsive.

Labour are repulsive.

FrankieBoyle

Isn't it strange how celebrities from show business, sports superstars and music industry millionaires get less resentment for being mega rich than those who have worked hard in industry or commerce?

Anyone advocating the burning down of Lilly Allen or Simon Cowell's mansions? Idols of the masses = its ok to be mega rich.

Maybe that is why Lily behaves the way she does - please don't burn my house down look how much I care - hearts lots of hearts.

FrankieBoyle

Lakanal House happened on Labour's watch.

Did anybody blame Gordon Brown and the 12 years of Blair's government?