Balanced Question Time panel tonight - of course not!
Discussion
It's a shame someone didn't ask Brand why he doesn't vote Green or some of the small loony left people that stand. Are they all the same types, no difference between Green and Ukip ?
I doubt Brand is prepared to do even one forty hour week to achieve anything outside of his media career and shagging people. I'm not sure why he didn't just say he can't be bothered. He really is the part time pied piper of the gullible and easily led - 'revolution brothers, but I'm busy and can't be joining you' . Reminds me of that scene in The Life of Brian with the raid to kidnap pilots wife - Reg, our glorious leader and founder of the P.F.J., will be coordinating consultant at the drain head, though he himself will not be taking part in any terrorist action, as he has a bad back.
I doubt Brand is prepared to do even one forty hour week to achieve anything outside of his media career and shagging people. I'm not sure why he didn't just say he can't be bothered. He really is the part time pied piper of the gullible and easily led - 'revolution brothers, but I'm busy and can't be joining you' . Reminds me of that scene in The Life of Brian with the raid to kidnap pilots wife - Reg, our glorious leader and founder of the P.F.J., will be coordinating consultant at the drain head, though he himself will not be taking part in any terrorist action, as he has a bad back.
FredClogs said:
Reduced welfare spending, tax cuts for the rich, grammer schools... UKIP is chock full or people who think the Tories have gone soft we all know it, an appeal to any political parties manifesto or policy statement as an explanation of their beliefs and motives is ridiculous, we all know politicians lie and deceive, don't kid yourself that UKIP are any different.
It's just easier if you admit "I can't".How I saw it was that the majority of questions were a waste of time if the key issue is that there is too much money and power at the top of the class system and blame directed to the bottom.
In my opinion that is why Brand didn't engage on the majority of the topics.
If you fix the main big problem of wealth distribution then the other issues are reduced and therefore moot.
Fractional Reserve Banking.
The fact the Bank of England is a private entity
That corporations have loopholes for paying less tax
That if we collected the tax that should be due then we wouldn't be making cuts.
etc.
But that's just me.
In my opinion that is why Brand didn't engage on the majority of the topics.
If you fix the main big problem of wealth distribution then the other issues are reduced and therefore moot.
Fractional Reserve Banking.
The fact the Bank of England is a private entity
That corporations have loopholes for paying less tax
That if we collected the tax that should be due then we wouldn't be making cuts.
etc.
But that's just me.
Abagnale said:
Brand is a fool & angry never plays well in politics. And neither do his written down views if people care to analyse them.
Farage though, I just can't get on board with his brand (no pun intended) of the politics of fear. Time & time again we see populist half formed parties rise in times of astringency & decline. People all too easily turn to pedlars offering easy answers.
I was reminded of this in the first question, pretty inconsequential stuff, but a reminder of what lies beneath. Farage equated knockabout petty debate in Australia with high voter turn out as a de facto rebuttal of the question, neglecting to mention compulsory voting laws.
He would have known that, or been seriously remiss if he didn't & so the response is in fact wrong, untruthful, factually inaccurate or a lie. Take your pick, but for me if that's the level of rigour in a question about nothing much at all, he & his priapic, never ending scandal ridden pals can stick it on the big issues.
Can you remind us when was the last time a 'half formed' party registered the majority of UK votes in a national election (like the May euro election)? Has there been another one within living memory? SDLP? UUP? Greens?Farage though, I just can't get on board with his brand (no pun intended) of the politics of fear. Time & time again we see populist half formed parties rise in times of astringency & decline. People all too easily turn to pedlars offering easy answers.
I was reminded of this in the first question, pretty inconsequential stuff, but a reminder of what lies beneath. Farage equated knockabout petty debate in Australia with high voter turn out as a de facto rebuttal of the question, neglecting to mention compulsory voting laws.
He would have known that, or been seriously remiss if he didn't & so the response is in fact wrong, untruthful, factually inaccurate or a lie. Take your pick, but for me if that's the level of rigour in a question about nothing much at all, he & his priapic, never ending scandal ridden pals can stick it on the big issues.
As for pedlars of easy answers, yesterdays headline of Ed offering to cut the defecit in every year of a Labour govenrment would seem to fit that charge.
Mr_B said:
Who really buys he part time revolutionary act ? Surely only the most loony of students who think they are radicals, Fred Clogs and various other loons
I know you are, but what am I?(Am I doing this correctly, it's not everyday that I descend to name calling strangers on the internet...)
There is nothing particularly revolutionary about Brand's stance, 70% of people already don't vote... Perhaps because most conversations on political ideology end up with someone calling someone a name... Eh? Mr B.
Guam said:
whoami said:
Indeed "Russel won innit" 
TEKNOPUG said:
The poor might be less poor if there wasn't a limitless supply of cheap foreign labour, driving down wages and encouraging zero-hour contracts. I appreciate that this viewpoint confirms that I'm a fear-mongering racist...
I'm not sure if this is the correct thread for such a discussion, but the point you raise should be scrutinised as if often repeated as a truth but I suspect when you really look into it you'll find little evidence that it is the case and given that UKIP are a party who wholeheartedly extol the virtues of Hayekian based market economics I very much doubt that they'll do anything to create market regulation when it comes to peoples individual employment contracts and wages. If you want controlled wages and representation in the workplace then you'll probably want to vote labour.FredClogs said:
Mr_B said:
Who really buys he part time revolutionary act ? Surely only the most loony of students who think they are radicals, Fred Clogs and various other loons
I know you are, but what am I?(Am I doing this correctly, it's not everyday that I descend to name calling strangers on the internet...)
There is nothing particularly revolutionary about Brand's stance, 70% of people already don't vote... Perhaps because most conversations on political ideology end up with someone calling someone a name... Eh? Mr B.
Guam said:
whoami said:
Indeed "Russel won innit" remkingston said:
That if we collected the tax that should be due then we wouldn't be making cuts.
etc.
Damn, and you wonder why no one has thought of the answer before! Tell that to the Greeks ..etc.
Back on QT, I'm just fed up with politicos scapegoating minority groups who contribute massively to the UK economy yet are subjected to vitriolic attacks every time the economy is mentioned.
Btw i'm talking about financial services workers aka "bankers".
Edited by fido on Friday 12th December 11:34
The Don of Croy said:
Can you remind us when was the last time a 'half formed' party registered the majority of UK votes in a national election (like the May euro election)? Has there been another one within living memory? SDLP? UUP? Greens?
As for pedlars of easy answers, yesterdays headline of Ed offering to cut the defecit in every year of a Labour govenrment would seem to fit that charge.
I made no mention of Labour, so I'm not sure why you're trying to drag me down that path?As for pedlars of easy answers, yesterdays headline of Ed offering to cut the defecit in every year of a Labour govenrment would seem to fit that charge.
As for the Euro elections, you discredit the electorate. People will use what they know to be meaningless votes to register a protest if they feel aggrieved. It's a well known phenomenon & not in any realistic sense proof of UKIP's unstoppable march. I also refer you to Bolter, Bloom, Kilroy-Silk, John Houston, David Abbott, Geoffrey Clarke, gay marriage for flooding and any number of frankly incredible (in the purest sense of the word) f
k ups they have made in the past ten years that doubtless will attract within minutes some fanboi to point out indiscretions within other partys & how UKIP come under unfair levels of scrutiny.Bulls
t. It attracts a disproportionate amount of fearful people because it peddles overly simplistic rhetoric that appeals largely to the hard of thinking such as people who watch on as Camilla Cavendish speaks insightfully & lucidly on QT then take to their keyboards the next morning to express how they would like to fk her.Top debating.
JustAnotherLogin said:
Smiler. said:
I don't. But the whole of the south east is like one big city. It soon will be.
Oh I agree the SE is over-crowded.But then if you choose to live around a major capital city then frankly you should expect that
That doesn't mean the whole country is
Smiler also said:
Some parts absolutely are
We agree then.And this "choosing to live" b
ks......Scuffers said:
MarshPhantom said:
Smiler. said:
I don't. But the whole of the south east is like one big city. It soon will be.
It really isn't and won't be any time soon.Did you know that in Surrey there is more land used for golf courses than there is for housing?
the reality is that even if you just draw the line at the M25, there are some 12M people living within that line, (and that's based on the ones that actually appear on the census, there are a huge number that don't), in an area that's only some 2,600 square miles (UK is a total of 94,000) so some 2.7% is inside the M25 yet has ~18% of the population.
remind me how that's not over-crowded?
It's a lefty thing. They will argue black is blue depending upon who said what. After the labour performance on last night's QT, they must be feeling a bit surplus to requirements.
FredClogs said:
TEKNOPUG said:
The poor might be less poor if there wasn't a limitless supply of cheap foreign labour, driving down wages and encouraging zero-hour contracts. I appreciate that this viewpoint confirms that I'm a fear-mongering racist...
I'm not sure if this is the correct thread for such a discussion, but the point you raise should be scrutinised as if often repeated as a truth but I suspect when you really look into it you'll find little evidence that it is the case and given that UKIP are a party who wholeheartedly extol the virtues of Hayekian based market economics I very much doubt that they'll do anything to create market regulation when it comes to peoples individual employment contracts and wages. If you want controlled wages and representation in the workplace then you'll probably want to vote labour.I can tell you for certain that wages are determined by demand for labour versus supply of labour. If supply of labour exceeds demand, then wages are only going one way.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff