  |
 Budget |
| Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum |
 18th March 2016, 10:24 PM
Post
#21
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,856 User: 17,376 
   |
Either IDS has seen the moral light in a flash of religious bolting from the blue, or he is now free to slag off Cameron and the pro-EU with venom, happy in the knowledge that if Johnson gets to be PM he will be rewarded big-time.
I'm absolutely sure he is now a reformed man, a caring man for the needy and the low paid in society, who will now do his utmost for all peoples of the world and to right wrongs...... They say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but they haven't heard IDS tell a joke. Till today..... |
 |
 
|
|
18th March 2016, 10:34 PM
Post
#22
|
|
 WINTER IS COMING
Joined: 7 March 2006
Posts: 45,604 User: 88
      |
Personally for me, he's seen all the real negative PR, maybe even heard rumours of the government backtracking and decided to jump ship. Win-win for him really - some people think he has a moral backbone... and gives him free reign to try harder to push us to leave the EU.
|
|
|
|
|
19th March 2016, 10:32 AM
Post
#23
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 13 April 2007
Posts: 36,679 User: 3,272
     |
Now that he has time on his hands, perhaps Duncan Smith can explain why he didn't resign a week ago when his own department published proposals for benefit cuts. By implication he must have supported the cuts at the time. What made him change his mind?
In his resignation letter, he pointed to the contrast between cuts in benefits for people with disabilities and tax cuts for the better off. Why didn't he resign a few years ago when Osborne started cutting taxes for the rich? Of course, one part of his letter could be interpreted as saying "I've known all along that these cuts in benefits have been all to do with cutting taxes for the rich. Unfortunately, the plebs in the electorate finally seem to have cottoned on to this, so I think it's time for me to go." Of course, there is always the little matter of the legal ruling ordering the publication of a report on the effects of his various policies. That legal ruling was slipped out while attention was focused on the Budget so it wasn't widely reported. However, when the government complies with the ruling, the report will probably not paint Duncan Smith in a terribly good light. Now his successor, some bloke called Crabb, is left to pick up the pieces and try to explain why black is white, up is down, and everything within the DWP is tickety-boo. |
|
|
|
|
19th March 2016, 12:08 PM
Post
#24
|
|
 BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 24 February 2007
Posts: 20,625 User: 2,980 
   |
QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Mar 18 2016, 10:24 PM)  Either IDS has seen the moral light in a flash of religious bolting from the blue, or he is now free to slag off Cameron and the pro-EU with venom, happy in the knowledge that if Johnson gets to be PM he will be rewarded big-time I think its more likely this. |
|
|
|
|
19th March 2016, 12:20 PM
Post
#25
|
|
|
#38BBE0 otherwise known as 'sky blue'
Joined: 27 October 2008
Posts: 16,173 User: 7,561
   |
This clearly has nothing to do with his ‘social conscience’ and as stated above is about manoeuvring himself into a more favourable position for if/when Boris becomes PM.
Also: Universal Credit is a cataclysmic disaster waiting to explode and IDS probably wanted out before that (in the words of Obama) ‘shit show’ became exposed. |
|
|
|
|
19th March 2016, 09:05 PM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Shakin Stevens
Joined: 29 December 2007
Posts: 46,163 User: 5,138
  |
I can feel the power vacuum sucking away from the Cameron-Osbourne axis which has been there since 2005!
|
|
|
|
|
19th March 2016, 09:24 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,856 User: 17,376
|
well I've been waiting for the Tory Civil War over Europe for some time and it's fairly obvious it's an attempt to use the budget by the Outs to court the working classes onto their side - given the leader of the Labour Party is about as enthusiastic for staying in as they are in reality even if not in mouth.
In one corner we have the unpopular poor-bashing rich-higging Cameronites, and the still discredited New Labour legacy, in the other we have the Euro-haters bringing it all down to a Trump-style slagging off match (they also have no real policies or evidence of anything much). Place your bets now... |
|
|
|
|
20th March 2016, 11:23 AM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Shakin Stevens
Joined: 29 December 2007
Posts: 46,163 User: 5,138
|
Corbyn did very well at highlighting the reduction in capital gains and the reduction in PIPs IMO not that certain quarters will give him any credit.
Funny how you highlight the moderate Tories and New Labourites, they are one and the same to me |
|
|
|
|
20th March 2016, 12:11 PM
Post
#29
|
|
|
DROTTNING!
Joined: 15 April 2006
Posts: 63,953 User: 480
         |
He won't get any credit because the credit wasn't his to begin with. Iain Duncan Smith resigning has literally nothing to do with anything Corbyn said on Budget Day. This is of the Tories' own making, much as the cheerleaders would wish it to be otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
20th March 2016, 12:14 PM
Post
#30
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,856 User: 17,376
|
Yeh it kinda IS Corbyn's job to do that though, and given the scale of the Tory cuts and policies the Labour Party reply overall is weedy and inadequate at best and Corbyn's ongoing reluctance to engage with the media is self-defeating. It's his job to answer questions directly, make comments forecefully, not to quote a few people in PMQ. Being right isn't enough these days, I'm afraid.
 As it turned out IDS did a better hatchet job than Corbyn in promoting the unfairness of it all. Not for altruistic reasons, granted. 
|
|
|
|
|
20th March 2016, 02:50 PM
Post
#31
|
|
|
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908 User: 10,596
 |
QUOTE(Steve201 @ Mar 20 2016, 11:23 AM) Funny how you highlight the moderate Tories and New Labourites, they are one and the same to me Have you been paying attention for the last six years? |
|
|
|
|
20th March 2016, 10:27 PM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Shakin Stevens
Joined: 29 December 2007
Posts: 46,163 User: 5,138
|
QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Mar 20 2016, 02:50 PM) Have you been paying attention for the last six years? Yes and there is little difference ideologically IMO! |
|
|
|
|
20th March 2016, 11:13 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me
Joined: 6 February 2010
Posts: 12,908 User: 10,596
|
QUOTE(Steve201 @ Mar 20 2016, 10:27 PM) Yes and there is little difference ideologically IMO! Just so we're on the same page, who are you counting as moderate Tories? |
|
|
|
|
21st March 2016, 09:26 PM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Shakin Stevens
Joined: 29 December 2007
Posts: 46,163 User: 5,138
|
The current Cameron-Osbourne government and people like Tim Montgomerie in the think tank end of things. And yes I know you will ridicule that but they are considered moderates in their party on much of the major issues always looking for that middle England vote that Blair won between 94-04!
|
|
|
|
|
21st March 2016, 09:35 PM
Post
#35
|
|
|
DROTTNING!
Joined: 15 April 2006
Posts: 63,953 User: 480
|
Would that be the Tim Montgomerie who just left the Conservatives on the basis that immigration and the deficit haven't come down quickly enough and who considers the universal credit a 'significant achievement'?
Yes, no difference at all! |
|
|
|
|
21st March 2016, 11:07 PM
Post
#36
|
|
|
Shakin Stevens
Joined: 29 December 2007
Posts: 46,163 User: 5,138
|
The difference is paper thin though and ideologically they all play along that thin arguments of a few cuts/investment here or there - broadly they try to attract the same voter and defend the same middle income earners and ideological ground accepting the broadly pro market consensus.
And yes I was aware of Montgomerie leaving lately but his think tank was the one that tried to promote compassionate conservatism and which realised the party had to get rid of its nasty image! So called 'moderate' Labourites can stand in opposition being aghast at the current Tory government all they want (See Chuka Ummuna/Tristam Hunt and co)knowing full well that if they're side of the party got into power they would use the same old triangulation methods which got the current labour movement into the situation they're in at present and stand there never challenging the system at all. This post has been edited by Steve201: 21st March 2016, 11:10 PM |
|
|
|
|
21st March 2016, 11:50 PM
Post
#37
|
|
|
DROTTNING!
Joined: 15 April 2006
Posts: 63,953 User: 480
|
The difference is certainly not bloody paper thin. I couldn't care less about immigration figures in and of themselves (though I do care about ameliorating the knock-on effects of high immigration figures). I don't consider the aim of reducing the deficit to be to create a smaller state for the least well-off and lower taxes for the most well-off. I consider the aim of reducing the deficit to be to make it possible to actually borrow for a proper stimulus at the next recession rather than leave us - and the least able to weather a recession - caught short when it happens again. My impulse in the event of more cash is not to shove it to Mr and Mrs 3 cars of Epsom - or Mr and Ms doing a fine job of paying off their tuition fees on a £30k salary of Epsom for that matter.
I'm pro-market to the extent that literally every prosperous nation on earth with low poverty rates is pro-market. There is no other practical option that doesn't leave the least well-off starving in the streets, queueing for hours, or being sent care packages of toilet paper and batteries from relatives abroad. I am in favour of a market economy in the sense that every mainstream left-wing party in the developed world for the last fifty years has been in favour of a market economy, because there are many different types of market economy. I'm in favour of one that redistributes the proceeds to ensure a basic living standard for all and as level a playing field as possible for all. Moderate Conservatives are less fussed on the former and more blind to slants for the latter. It's also worth nothing that, yes, we broadly try to attract the same voter because that voter is the type that decides elections. I even fell for Ed Miliband's prospectus that the realignment of former Lib Dems meant a victory that tried to bypass that voter was possible. It was very, very, very, very, very resoundingly proved wrong. |
|
|
|
|
22nd March 2016, 12:41 PM
Post
#38
|
|
|
BuzzJack Legend
Joined: 18 July 2012
Posts: 22,856 User: 17,376
|
the last para: effectively did in two parties and left us where we are now...
I pretty much agree with those comments. I always like to point out to Mr & Mrs Outraged-at-paying-more-tax-in-total-than-low-paid-menials that there is no God-given right for anyone to have a well-paid job over someone who has a low-paid job, it's purely luck and circumstances of birth, with a bit of right-time-it's-wjo-you-know/how-well-you-come-across-in-interviews/looks/going-to-the-"right"-schools. Well paid people are contributing towards a fair stable society that allows them to keep on being relatively affluent. If you have an unfair society with many who have nothing to lose by disturbing society then what's you leave yourself open to. It doesn't take much for society to descend into chaos. Plus, rich people poor people to do all the crappy jobs they don't want to do, but still whinge about paying tax towards, like police, NHS, dustbinmen. |
|
|
|
|
22nd March 2016, 10:41 PM
Post
#39
|
|
|
Shakin Stevens
Joined: 29 December 2007
Posts: 46,163 User: 5,138
|
QUOTE(Qassändra @ Mar 21 2016, 11:50 PM) The difference is certainly not bloody paper thin. I couldn't care less about immigration figures in and of themselves (though I do care about ameliorating the knock-on effects of high immigration figures). I don't consider the aim of reducing the deficit to be to create a smaller state for the least well-off and lower taxes for the most well-off. I consider the aim of reducing the deficit to be to make it possible to actually borrow for a proper stimulus at the next recession rather than leave us - and the least able to weather a recession - caught short when it happens again. My impulse in the event of more cash is not to shove it to Mr and Mrs 3 cars of Epsom - or Mr and Ms doing a fine job of paying off their tuition fees on a £30k salary of Epsom for that matter. I'm pro-market to the extent that literally every prosperous nation on earth with low poverty rates is pro-market. There is no other practical option that doesn't leave the least well-off starving in the streets, queueing for hours, or being sent care packages of toilet paper and batteries from relatives abroad. I am in favour of a market economy in the sense that every mainstream left-wing party in the developed world for the last fifty years has been in favour of a market economy, because there are many different types of market economy. I'm in favour of one that redistributes the proceeds to ensure a basic living standard for all and as level a playing field as possible for all. Moderate Conservatives are less fussed on the former and more blind to slants for the latter. It's also worth nothing that, yes, we broadly try to attract the same voter because that voter is the type that decides elections. I even fell for Ed Miliband's prospectus that the realignment of former Lib Dems meant a victory that tried to bypass that voter was possible. It was very, very, very, very, very resoundingly proved wrong. You do make a good arguement above about your Centre left social democratic position but it simply confirms my opinion that the difference is paper thin - you defend your position by attacking moderate Tory motives in politics but they would say exactly the same as yourself only the other way round saying they really stand up for working people. Your arguement basically shouts TINA at anyone with a more right/left wing view than yourself! |
|
|
|
|
22nd March 2016, 11:21 PM
Post
#40
|
|
|
Buffy/Charmed
Joined: 18 April 2013
Posts: 44,116 User: 18,639
     |
Meanwhile this budget is FINALLY waking up the people to the Tory chronyism and how the tax cuts and bailouts and privatisations are for THEM and the companies they have their hands in - RBS and private health. Even their right wing media stooges from BBC to The Daily Mail can't do anything. Their cuts affect those who don't vote for them as IDS said as he bails the sinking ship.
Meanwhile the budget is derailing the Tories as the public now OFFICIALLY prefer socialism to capitalism in the UK and the trend is the same in USA. Labour has overtaken the Tories even with the righr wing stooges attacking Corbyn at every turn as he is a threat to the post-war elite right wing consensus. The grass roots have spoken. The momentum is ours. Socialism is coming!! |
|
|
|
|
| Time is now: 27th April 2024, 07:12 PM |
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 BuzzJack.com
About | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
