So Who Is egb Going To Vote For?

[Smurf]

I was watching the Westminster SNP leader Angus Robertson (A good guy fwiw) being interviewed on the BBC's Straight Talk with Andrew Neil, and he confirmed that it's SNP policy that the UK should be borrowing more money in order for a stimulus next year...

Andrew Neil appearing incredulous then asked something along the lines of "So we'd end up borrowing more than Greece? Are you aware of the money markets..."

His reply was along the lines of "Politics is about making choices...".

I then suddenly thought "M cannae vote for the Nats!".

True?

 

[Dub]

I was watching the Westminster SNP leader Angus Robertson (A good guy fwiw) being interviewed on the BBC's Straight Talk with Andrew Neil, and he confirmed that it's SNP policy that the UK should be borrowing more money in order for a stimulus next year...

Andrew Neil appearing incredulous then asked something along the lines of "So we'd end up borrowing more than Greece? Are you aware of the money markets..."

His reply was along the lines of "Politics is about making choices...".

I then suddenly thought "M cannae vote for the Nats!".

True?

I'm listening to the chancellors debate on Channel 4 at the moment and tbh I cant see M voting for any of them either.


Greens

 

[egb_hibs]

Whoever is most likely to defeat labour in my constituency.

That said, I'm warming to the idea of a labour victory. For the long term future it would be good for them to face their own mess for once; it would finish them forever.

Instead they'll just get to sit and witter about the nasty party as the tories set about fixing things.

That said we might not be able to take another five years; there might not be a long term future worth a fig after another labour stint.

 

[Canon Hannon]

:chers: Party

 

[1 Mcnamara]

Whoever is most likely to defeat labour in my constituency.

That said, I'm warming to the idea of a labour victory. For the long term future it would be good for them to face their own mess for once; it would finish them forever.

Instead they'll just get to sit and witter about the nasty party as the tories set about fixing things.

That said we might not be able to take another five years; there might not be a long term future worth a fig after another labour stint.

aye so they would :pullhair: cause the last time they were in power there was never any unemployment, strikes or market crashes

 

[egb_hibs]

aye so they would :pullhair: cause the last time they were in power there was never any unemployment, strikes or market crashes

This is the point; it takes a long time and a lot of hurt to fix things.

Labour are the nastiest party; they piss things away and ruin the country then fuck off as the tab comes in.

 

[gun ainm]

tactical voting aside - you do wonder where the natural political home of our friend EGB is?

for a bit of fun.....

curiously he doesnt fit in with any of the mainstream parties despite advocating a continuity of the mainstream system - he's quite reactionary at times so maybe he just needs to find a single issue party - a parliament of Martin Bells perhaps? secretly i think he knows the games a bogey and would love to have the cojones to argue for radical change but cant quite bring himself to take the gamble.

 

[1 Mcnamara]

This is the point; it takes a long time and a lot of hurt to fix things.

Labour are the nastiest party; they piss things away and ruin the country then fuck off as the tab comes in.

I aint no nu labour man, but I doubt very much if the tories would have us in any other position than we are now, had they been in power over the last 10 years
I fear we are soon to find out all about the tory way though, and their great love for all things Scottish :hmmm

 

[LunaCWsauzee]

I think if the Tories come in they would make big changes, which they would want to come across as sorting out the economy, however it would just lead Labour to declare that it was the 80's all over again and they'd be back in within 5 years.

I think Labour could do with a long period out of Government to sort themselves out, they've bent over far too much for the middle England votes.

From what I've heard from Vince Cable I've liked and i wish the Lib Dems could've had a chance of gaining power at the next election, although I know this is pretty much out the question.

For personal reasons I'd quite like the Tories in, it would hopefully push up the want for independence.

 

[egb_hibs]

tactical voting aside - you do wonder where the natural political home of our friend EGB is?

for a bit of fun.....

curiously he doesnt fit in with any of the mainstream parties despite advocating a continuity of the mainstream system - he's quite reactionary at times so maybe he just needs to find a single issue party - a parliament of Martin Bells perhaps? secretly i think he knows the games a bogey and would love to have the cojones to argue for radical change but cant quite bring himself to take the gamble.

I'm not in the slightest reactionary; which infers harking back to an antiquated and outmoded political system. It is conventional socialists who are reactionaries nowadays.

However I don't believe in the absurd assumption that nothing from the past has value. I also don't believe in the equal folly of refusing to learn from evident mistakes. Both smack of hubris and vanity to me.

There are two political positions which appeal to me though they are quite different; european style Christian Democracy, and Libertarian Conservatism (which is almost a tautology- there is no other feasible form of libertarianism). I consider the latter to be unproven and perhaps utopian, but maybe worth a roll of the dice, while I consider the former to be full of shortcomings, but dependable enough. That said, those positions may reverse; like all big state systems, CD is starting to look utopian given changing demographics. Libertarianism is perhaps our only (democratic) chance now. If it doesn't work...

Anyway, neither of these are unusual positions, both have millions of adherents, but neither is represented in the UK system.

In the UK I am quite interested in the 'Red Tory' project, but suspect it will turn out to be yet another form of socialist bonkersness,

 

[egb_hibs]

I aint no nu labour man, but I doubt very much if the tories would have us in any other position than we are now, had they been in power over the last 10 years
I fear we are soon to find out all about the tory way though, and their great love for all things Scottish :hmmm

I'd be surprised if the tories had left us with such a bloated and authoritarian state.

And proceeding from that, while they would have been unlikely to be immune from it, they wouldn't have had the need to cultivate the credit bubble to the same extent.

They couldn't have avoided it entirely though; present social models are unaffordable organically, and so the whole ponzi scheme of it all was necessary to sustain the illusion.

In the long term; what happens next in this respect is the big question, ie how do we continue to fund the basic model of the western state.

 

[Smurf]

I'd be surprised if the tories had left us with such a bloated and authoritarian state.

And proceeding from that, while they would have been unlikely to be immune from it, they wouldn't have had the need to cultivate the credit bubble to the same extent.

They couldn't have avoided it entirely though; present social models are unaffordable organically, and so the whole ponzi scheme of it all was necessary to sustain the illusion.

In the long term; what happens next in this respect is the big question, ie how do we continue to fund the basic model of the western state.

M up until the worldwide recession the Tories were intending to match Labour's spending. This suggests to me that where we are today would be no different under them.

There is going to have to be cuts. Big cuts at that and i simply trust Labour to do it with much more sensitivity particularly as it's lower income folk that will be hit the hardest.

This National Insurance 'tax cut' introduced by the Tories this week and supported by their big business friends and backers tells me quite a lot.

It tells me that it's Labour that is being the more honest (Though of course they are not revealing all) about the need for a combination of tax rises, efficiency savings and real cuts to get down the deficit. And they are committed to reduce it by half over the term of the next parliament.

The Tories are saying that they'll get the deficit down further and much faster by.... A huge cut in Inheritance Tax to benefit their friends... Further efficiency savings (Though they've previously ridiculed this!). Whilst at the same time protect the budgets of health and overseas aid....

Why won't they outline just how much more they'd reduce the deficit? And if they are saying that they'll reduce it further and faster they must know where they are going to cut accordingly...

Back to my OP yesterday we had Salmond again calling for no cuts and increased borrowings....

So surely you couldn't vote for the SNP? Obviously Labour is a total no no... So what's left?

Admit it you've gone blue!

 

[egb_hibs]

M up until the worldwide recession the Tories were intending to match Labour's spending. This suggests to me that where we are today would be no different under them.

It suggests to me that they were doing exactly as labour did when prior to their election in 97 they promised to match tory spending; ie trying not to scare the horses.

There is going to have to be cuts. Big cuts at that and i simply trust Labour to do it with much more sensitivity particularly as it's lower income folk that will be hit the hardest.

What exactly does 'sensitively' mean here? This line is trotted out by the labour propaganda machine all the time; but what does it mean?

This National Insurance 'tax cut' introduced by the Tories this week and supported by their big business friends and backers tells me quite a lot.

what does it tell you?

it's the most regressive form of taxation, and an impediment to business growth. not pursuing the rise (which is not a 'cut') avoids a tax that is unfair on lower income people and helps the private sector grow versus labour's one trick pony of ever more unsustainable public spending.

now it may still be the wrong thing to do, if it is in itself unaffordable. but in principle it's a good idea. i do wonder why it is now so unaffordable while a vat reduction until recently was not.

It tells me that it's Labour that is being the more honest (Though of course they are not revealing all) about the need for a combination of tax rises, efficiency savings and real cuts to get down the deficit. And they are committed to reduce it by half over the term of the next parliament.

You jest. Labour have totally traduced NI which is meant to be about healthcare and pensions - they've turned it into a thinly disguised income tax. They've been dishonest about NI since their very first day in power.

The Tories are saying that they'll get the deficit down further and much faster by.... A huge cut in Inheritance Tax to benefit their friends... Further efficiency savings (Though they've previously ridiculed this!). Whilst at the same time protect the budgets of health and overseas aid....

If that's more 'insensitive' than labour, what are they going to cut?

Why won't they outline just how much more they'd reduce the deficit? And if they are saying that they'll reduce it further and faster they must know where they are going to cut accordingly...

You must be joking again? Neither they nor labour can do that; it would make them unelectable. Only the already unelectable vince cable can talk freely here, which seems to make him a hero to the easily impressed.

Back to my OP yesterday we had Salmond again calling for no cuts and increased borrowings....

So surely you couldn't vote for the SNP? Obviously Labour is a total no no... So what's left?

I have always said my support for SNP is single issue.

Admit it you've gone blue!

I will vote for whoever (short of the BNP) who has the best chance of defeating labour in my constituency. I'm honestly not sure who that is, and need to swot up before the election.

 

[Kurt]

Tactical vote, then?

Some claim a voting system which encourages you to vote another way than your preference is unfair. I don't. I'm not fond of PR.