ITV News Tells It How It Is.

#1
At last. After showing a clip of Ed Balls spouting his customary opportunist propaganda, an economist was asked what difference the Labour party's ideas would make if implemented. The answer was, and I'm paraphrasing, 'About £9b- from a total sum of £1.5tr.'
So in actual fact the parties are closer than thay care to admit and all the posturing and bullshit is just desperate manoeuvring to stay in / take power. But the meaningless sneering and baseless digs from Balls and his trained monkey can't be doing much for anyones morale but their own. I do wish they would shut up if they have nothing constructive to say.
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
#3
Two problems with assuming people will see the stupidity of Balls's proposals.

1) It was no accident that Labour created a large client state of the work shy living on benefits. If IDS takes away their comfortable 'professionally unemployed' life style, they'll vote Labour in the hopes of getting it back.

2) I would guess that 10% - 30% of the electorate don't understand the remotest thing about economics and will vote for the party that promises them the most benefits and handouts.

People don't sit down and agonise over which party is best for the UK - they vote for the one that best serves their personal interests.

Wordsmith
 
#4
So in actual fact the parties are closer than thay care to admit and all the posturing and bullshit is just desperate manoeuvring to stay in / take power. But the meaningless sneering and baseless digs from Balls and his trained monkey can't be doing much for anyones morale but their own. I do wish they would shut up if they have nothing constructive to say.
The idea of being in opposition is not to venomously oppose absolutely everything the incumbent government does, even when it happens to be one of your own policies. Then again, what do you expect from a party that managed to find somebody even posher than Cameron to put across their "out of touch" message.
 
#5
ITV news has never told anyone anything that wasn't 3rd class turgid tabloid shite.
 
#6
Two problems with assuming people will see the stupidity of Balls's proposals.

1) It was no accident that Labour created a large client state of the work shy living on benefits. If IDS takes away their comfortable 'professionally unemployed' life style, they'll vote Labour in the hopes of getting it back.
I think it depends. Most of the workshy would likely enjoy working for a living if pushed into it. The trick is to do it very early on, and when the economy is doing well enough to ensure they have work. Ah...

2) I would guess that 10% - 30% of the electorate don't understand the remotest thing about economics and will vote for the party that promises them the most benefits and handouts.
I'd guess it's rather more than 30%. Even intelligent people seem to think of the government like a spoilt child thinks of its father.

People don't sit down and agonise over which party is best for the UK - they vote for the one that best serves their personal interests.
Agreed, and they're quite open about it. For all their idealism when it comes to bankers and rich people, they're incredibly self interested when it comes to voting.
 
#7
When I was a kid I asked my dad why he used to buy more than one newspaper each day, and he told me that it was so he could see what everyone with relevance had to say about current affairs and be better able to make his own mind up as to what he thought (course he explained it in an appropriate form as I was about 7 at the time).

This, obviously, before the media environment we now enjoy... sage advice in hindsight... Every now and then the media types are blindsided by someone with common sense who has learned his song well before starting to sing, and nice it is to see too...well done that economist..



Or maybe dad just liked to see more than one page 3 set of tits and was bulshitting me...
I am assuming that your point is that it is helpful to take your open source info from a number of sources? If so I quite agree, however the point remains that ITV news is utter shite.

This is demonstrated by the the way that they have got a random economist (professional witness) to take on a member of the opposition ( who is not an economist) in order to produce some spurious stats that no doubt 100 other economists picked at random would dispute.

I couldn't give a toss about the party politics involved, I would rather have dry, objective facts; my point is that the majority of media outlets (and particularly ITV news) are more concerned with the former than the later.

I would also happily throttle Alister Stewart
 
#8
Two problems with assuming people will see the stupidity of Balls's proposals.

1) It was no accident that Labour created a large client state of the work shy living on benefits. If IDS takes away their comfortable 'professionally unemployed' life style, they'll vote Labour in the hopes of getting it back.

2) I would guess that 10% - 30% of the electorate don't understand the remotest thing about economics and will vote for the party that promises them the most benefits and handouts.

People don't sit down and agonise over which party is best for the UK - they vote for the one that best serves their personal interests.

Wordsmith
You are talking about those that bother to vote. 35% of the electorate couldn't be arrsed at the last general election..
 
#9
Two problems with assuming people will see the stupidity of Balls's proposals.

1) It was no accident that Labour created a large client state of the work shy living on benefits. If IDS takes away their comfortable 'professionally unemployed' life style, they'll vote Labour in the hopes of getting it back.

2) I would guess that 10% - 30% of the electorate don't understand the remotest thing about economics and will vote for the party that promises them the most benefits and handouts.

People don't sit down and agonise over which party is best for the UK - they vote for the one that best serves their personal interests.

Wordsmith

I would raise your 10-30% to 80-95%

The number of times I've tried to explain that a Public sector employee's tax doesn't actually add anything new to Government coffers because that's where it came from after it was taken from the private sector..... Most flatly refuse to believe it.

The UK economy is expected to run like some sort of financial perpetual motion machine.
 
#10
I never absorb any of the figures bandied about by Ed Balls. Whenerver I see him, all I can concentrate on are the eyes... The mad staring eyes...

_46804778_balls.jpg
 
#12
The number of times I've tried to explain that a Public sector employee's tax doesn't actually add anything new to Government coffers because that's where it came from after it was taken from the private sector..... Most flatly refuse to believe it.
From what University or polytechnic did you get your degree in Simple maths? You do realise that you are incorrect, dont you?
 
#13
It is odd that Ed Balls is a labour politician; he has a distinctly ultra-right-wing look about him.
 
#14
Fox and horses. It would help your argument if you actually presented it.
 
#15
The number of times I've tried to explain that a Public sector employee's tax doesn't actually add anything new to Government coffers because that's where it came from after it was taken from the private sector..... Most flatly refuse to believe it.
Do you realise that not ALL Public sector workers are paid from the Government coffers?

Please list the public sector workers you are referring to?
 
#16
Everybody conveniently forgets that we are currently in the second part of a double dip recession and this government has been in power for two years. Labour has always said that it would reduce spending drastically to balance the books. In that sense, they are very close to what this coalition government says. The method Labour would use is dramatically different though. They would space the cuts over a much wider period of time to lessen the painful effects. That's the difference.

So far just to name a few, this government has attacked and cut my pension, made me work for a further year of my life, penalised university applicants by massively increasing their debt, announced plans to cut money from the disabled and the elderly, done absolutely nothing to encourage business and enterprise to take on workers and yet, the rich are quite a lot richer due to their substantial tax cut.

Cameron is fooling no one by jumping up and down about the euro either at the moment. He and his policies are to blame for the double dip. The economy needs to expand to provide jobs so that people who sit on their arses actually can be put to work. This government has too many millionaires in it who have never held down an honest job and are just looking after their own.
 
#18
I happened to watch the '10 O'Clock' ITV News last night - first time for a long time, and I, too, saw the interview with the Economist who succinctly summed up the size of our economy, size of public debt and, frankly, the 'draining a lake with a thimble' efforst by the Government to resolve the situation. The difference between the parties - in terms of tackling the deficit - is the size of the thimble.

A least we haven't had a run on a Bank for a few years...yet.
 
#19
The old saying is true "people get the government they deserve". My dad, god bless him, was a working class, trade unionist steelworker - but even he used to say to me " The working man should never have been given the vote, because he doesn't know what to do with it"
And it's true what previous posters have said - a large proportion of our illiterate, poorly educated, brainwashed population have no understanding of the political system, basic economics or what they're actually voting for. I'm sick of meeting people who say "I'm Labour" or "I'm Tory", but when you ask them WHY they voted that way they say "Well I always have" or "My dad did" My vote varies depending on the issues of the day and the type of election/candidate eg local council, Welsh Assembly, General Election, European Parliament. That involves looking at the issues and candidates and weighing up choices, which unfortunately for a large proportion of our electorate, just gives them a headache. even though I accept that apart from more extreme parties, there is not much to choose between the main parties these days.
 
#20
F&H. Which Public Sector workers are not paid for from Gopvernment funds? I cant think of any. In fact I would say that the term Public Sector is pretty much defined by the fact that it is government funded.

You are right about bollocks political catch phrases though.

The simple fact is we are economically****ed as is most of the so called civilised world. We are all (even the Americans, some of whom are in denial of the fact) supporting socialist welfare states that we cannot afford to sustain.

The population at large has grown to expect a luxury lifestyle as a right without accepting that productivity is a reciprocal responsibility.

The real dilemna for the current government (and many others around the globe) is that they know that if they make the cuts they need to make, the eventual ecomonic stability and benefits that result will not be felt in this term of office and they will not be re-elected. We are trying to kae omelettes without breaking eggs and it just isnt possible.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top