Quote: sootyj @ 15th May 2015, 11:31 PM BSTI think there's a fundamental honesty with the Conservatives
*jaw drops open emoticon*
General Election 2015 Page 36
Look I mean fundamentally honest, like when Dick Dastardly twirls his moustache.
You know what they're about, cut back loads of stuff, privatise other stuff, blame the poor, beat the patriotic drum then set fire to a tramp.
I didn't say it was good, or anything to be proud of.
Where as Labour is more like Flash Harry.
"Socialist policies sir? Oh I've got some in the van, very finest Marxist and Spencers....oh you mean, you want national socialist policies? Why didn't you say that sir, here lets see how that benefit cap fits."
Quote: keewik @ 16th May 2015, 12:02 AM BSTUnclean! Unclean!
I loathe Tory and Labour equally for different reasons, so what do you do?
Well in the end I got sick of being told to hate Torys, or UKIP for that matter.
They're political parties that's all. Thatcher actually did far more to spread wealth evenly and make the welfare state fairer and more generous.
Even if it was a cost of real jobs and industries.
They're all a bag of shite.
And SNP have no expectation to be taken seriously by anyone. Until they actually start using the tools they've got to reduce inequality in Scotland.
That and working towards partial control of sterling before indepedence.
Otherwise expect a lot more trips from Cameron to wave his posh bottom in Nicola Sturgeon's face.
If Conservatives had ditched IDS, put someone more humane in his place. And finally pushed through the integrated system for universal benefits, I might have voted for them.
Quote: sootyj @ 16th May 2015, 12:31 PM BSTThey're all a bag of shite.
Yes.
What was the year when house building was by far and away the highest? There were two periods actually. From memory, Harold Macmillan went on a massive housebuilding drive in the mid 1950s before he ever became Conservative Prime Minister. And later in a separate drive under Labour the peak year was almost certainly 1969. I haven't got the precise figures to hand but I think you will find that the average house price before Macmillan got going was £500-£800. By the end of 1969, it was - I dunno - something like £6,500. So in the greatest decade and a half of building homes, the prices of houses did not fall. They multiplied by something like 10-13 times. This according to economists is about demand. The demand was increasingly outstripping supply even when the supply was huge.
But economists like to do a Paul Daniels when it comes to slipping that word "demand" in dialogue. We are told there is massive demand for housing now. It is just that people can't afford homes. That's the sort of definition of demand which equals the type of demand the average member of the public has for a lucrative oil field. No one says that they demand an oil field and most people are not regarded as demanding an oil field. Why? Because the economists say it is unrealistic to think that Joe Public could afford an oil field. To say that the public are demanding oil fields would be nonsense. But if you take what they say about, quote, "housing demand", then demand doesn't exclude those who can't afford housing. So they want it both ways. If demand for housing is as they say, then everyone is in demand of an oil field too because no one would turn an oil field down if they could afford one.
Once you have the economists on that point, they switch the argument. They say "ah but housing is needed for individual survival and an oil field isn't". Then you can come back and say "well, you haven't addressed the first point but home ownership isn't an essential for living, is it, because it is simply housing that is the essential". And then they say "oh well, but there aren't enough homes of any sort" and you say "free up the 2 million that are standing empty then". And only then do they say "but people want to own their own homes". You reply "fine - I fully understand it but that isn't survival is it - it's a lifestyle preference". At which point all of them switch off and actually are as happy as Larry because they have managed to steer the conversation miles away from the fact that massive building doesn't reduce prices. Yes, the prices could fall but history shows it often means they rocket.
So massive housebuilding isn't a guarantee of anything much other than it is likely to destabilise the economy purely because its impacts are so unpredictable. In summary, it is essentially a big gamble.
"They're all a bag of shite."
Been saying that for 30 years. Load of f**king toss-pots.
I don't see how Tory's austerity fibs are good for business, but no one seems to have noticed this.
Quote: Steve Sunshine @ 16th May 2015, 12:23 AM BSTThe funny thing about my Brothers girlfirend
Is that she will bang on about social housing & fairness but had two council houses on the go while she fleeced the system like a proud stereotypical Tory
That's not a stereotypical Tory; that's a stereotypical benefits-scrounging probably non-voting but Labour-grateful underclass!
(Steve, you're picking up sooty's habits of weird
Mid-sentence line breaks and abrupt endings.
So watch out!)
Quote: sootyj @ 16th May 2015, 12:31 PM BSTLook I mean fundamentally honest, like when Dick Dastardly twirls his moustache.
You know what they're about, cut back loads of stuff, privatise other stuff, blame the poor, beat the patriotic drum then set fire to a tramp.
I didn't say it was good, or anything to be proud of.
Where as Labour is more like Flash Harry.
"Socialist policies sir? Oh I've got some in the van, very finest Marxist and Spencers....oh you mean, you want national socialist policies? Why didn't you say that sir, here lets see how that benefit cap fits."
Does anyone actually like Pimms?
May I ask:
Why have we since the election not seen Cameron with his shirt sleeves rolled up anymore? Has he suddenly lost 'the passion'?
Quote: Gussie Fink Nottle @ 17th May 2015, 5:13 PM BSTMay I ask:
Why have we since the election not seen Cameron with his shirt sleeves rolled up anymore? Has he suddenly lost 'the passion'?
He's no longer getting down to business. He's back in kowtowing mode. We are, of course, talking here about two forms of business. The first business was getting elected. That meant looking as if he was able to muck in, as taught to him by Rebekah and her horse. The public is shite and once in half a decade it needs a good clean. Possibly it's grooming from MPs these days too if the papers are to be believed. Anyhow, it may thank you for its four week care programme if you are very fortunate. The second business is - well, it's business. The kowtowing is by proxy as he is that business himself so all the cap doffing is actually required of the general public. Kowtow if you know what is good for you.
So, do you think Ed Miliband is still being pursued by teenage girls, all wanting to take a selfie with him? Because, that too, would not have been a pretence, would it? 
Quote: Gussie Fink Nottle @ 17th May 2015, 6:19 PM BSTSo, do you think Ed Miliband is still being pursued by teenage girls, all wanting to take a selfie with him? Because, that too, would not have been a pretence, would it?
My understanding of that one was it was a bit like a bloke who is 47 stone with the appearance of a hippopotamus and all the girlies gathering round him saying "isn't he lovely?" just to take the piss. In that way, it was St Trinians. They will end up in a future Tory cabinet slashing pensions to the bone or else in a revitalised Labour one telling the public all men are murderers. What it wasn't was a fan club.
Quote: A Horseradish @ 17th May 2015, 6:26 PM BSTMy understanding of that one was it was a bit like a bloke who is 47 stone with the appearance of a hippopotamus and all the girlies gathering round him saying "isn't he lovely?" just to take the piss. In that way, it was St Trinians. They will end up in a future Tory cabinet slashing pensions to the bone or else in a revitalised Labour one telling the public all men are murderers. What it wasn't was a fan club.
I think your St Trinians theory may have been the case with that hen party incident. But all the others?
One could not escape the impression - given that, like all the other candidates, Miliband was usually just meeting carefully selected audiences - that Labour party activists had been asked to show an interest, for the benefit of the press present.
Ironically, this nonsense was then replicated by the Tories. Cameron's last speech was in Carlisle. There were two people among those standing behind him at that event everlastingly flashing their mobile phones, apparently seeking to take a photograph.
Why they should show such an interest in getting a picture of the back of David Cameron's head, was beyond me. But I suspect that someone in Tory central office thought that - if Labour did it, then they best follow suit.
And let's not forget Nicola Sturgeon. It seemed that every Scot on the planet wanted to take his photo with her. Again, here was someone so popular, it hurt.
The media seemed to focus on the nonsense of Nigel Farage only ever being pictured inside or immediately outside a pub, usually with a pint in his hand.
Strangely, the phenomenon of other politicians - universally disliked by the populace - supposedly being mobbed by adoring folk wishing to take their photos was never pointed out.
Who knows, perhaps the Kippers were right and there was a bias...
Anyway, I will miss Cameron trying to look as though he were auditioning for Gardener's World and Miliband and Sturgeon trying to look as though they were pop starlets arriving on the red carpet at the Brit Awards.
Quote: Gussie Fink Nottle @ 17th May 2015, 6:47 PM BSTI think your St Trinians theory may have been the case with that hen party incident. But all the others?
One could not escape the impression - given that, like all the other candidates, Miliband was usually just meeting carefully selected audiences - that Labour party activists had been asked to show an interest, for the benefit of the press present.Ironically, this nonsense was then replicated by the Tories. Cameron's last speech was in Carlisle. There were two people among those standing behind him at that event everlastingly flashing their mobile phones, apparently seeking to take a photograph.
Why they should show such an interest in getting a picture of the back of David Cameron's head, was beyond me. But I suspect that someone in Tory central office thought that - if Labour did it, then they best follow suit.And let's not forget Nicola Sturgeon. It seemed that every Scot on the planet wanted to take his photo with her. Again, here was someone so popular, it hurt.
The media seemed to focus on the nonsense of Nigel Farage only ever being pictured inside or immediately outside a pub, usually with a pint in his hand.
Strangely, the phenomenon of other politicians - universally disliked by the populace - supposedly being mobbed by adoring folk wishing to take their photos was never pointed out.
Who knows, perhaps the Kippers were right and there was a bias...Anyway, I will miss Cameron trying to look as though he were auditioning for Gardener's World and Miliband and Sturgeon trying to look as though they were pop starlets arriving on the red carpet at the Brit Awards.
Ah yes. I am glad to see you have picked up on the connection between the gorgeous model in ZZ Top's "Legs" riding a giraffe and wee Nicola astride a circus horse. The less attentive and the more discriminating wouldn't have got it. Quality leaves the greatest impression but it shouldn't ever be to the detriment of noticing a theme, should it? So, if the politicians want to sex it up in future, it will have to be giraffe every time for what a curious allure they have when set below the lingeried next to a pool. I say this as one who has horse in my name but I'm not a horse but rather A Horseradish.
ZZ Top - Legs (A Modern Video)
The adoration of Milliband was surely manufactured by Labour acolyte numpties. The man has as much sex appeal as a liquidated beetroot. Or am I too old to appreciate it? He's a loose-lipped, starey-eyed alien.
He's got geek charm, he's sort of vulnerable and a bit helpless.
Girls like him, for the same reason they like gay guys. Looks pleasant and highly unlikely to approach them with a knobber.
But come on Salmond has a weird wee Jimmy Krankee apeal.
