Snap General Election?
Discussion
Eddie Strohacker said:
sidicks said:
Eddie Strohacker said:
If you like, I''l take the view that anyone who criticises the standard of debate & in the very next post calls someone an idiot, irrespective of whether they subjectively are or not has shot themselves in the foot. Hilariously.
You'll obviously have missed the numerous previous posts in this thread and a wide variety of others with the same outcome:]- JawKnee posts absolute nonsense
- he is challenged and is asked a few questions to clarify his claims
- he ignores all reasonable questions and all the evidence that explains why he is wrong
- he makes further stupid comments
It's trolling 101.
gothatway said:
Derek Smith said:
I've been trying to work out why May has called a GE, and so quickly. I could see better use of dissolving parliament.
She's not stupid so the assumption that there's a reason for this decision (over and above the one stated of course - she's a politician) is reasonable.
The only time constraint that comes to mind are the reports filed by the police on election fraud...
Another time factor is the final leaving of the EU in 2019. She will no longer be concerned then about an election the following year; she'll have a couple of years post-Brexit to see things settle down (or not !) before having to face the lectorate again.She's not stupid so the assumption that there's a reason for this decision (over and above the one stated of course - she's a politician) is reasonable.
The only time constraint that comes to mind are the reports filed by the police on election fraud...
This is a risk. There have been PMs before who have decided they've got it cracked, and things have not turned out the way they expected. Heath had all the polls in his favour, although not as great a lead as May has. However, this is being presented almost as a vote of confidence by May. She needs to get a considerable increase in numbers for it to be seen as a victory for her.
The polls might be spot on, or they might even underestimate her lead. I don't know but the point is, neither does she.
Lots of MPs have suggested that things can change in politics at short notice. The only voters that are important are the floating voters. We don't know what might be in the news tomorrow that might affect their point of view. A week, or two weeks according to some, is a long time in politics. We've got a lot more than two to get through.
If May does not get a substantially increased majority it will hurt her. If we get a minority government at the time when the most important negotiations are taking place, it will hurt everyone.
I'm not happy with risk taking. If you are right and it is because she looks to be PM beyond 2020 then that's a condemnation of the woman. She should be thinking of what's best for the UK at this time.
NRS said:
If Sidicks is using it as "a person of low intelligence" then he may well feel his is being descriptive of JK is correct based on the lack of relevant answers to important questions. I would place myself politically between them, and I don't agree with a number of Sidicks views.
In fairness, 99% of people are between JawKnee and Sidicks politically.Derek Smith said:
Rovinghawk said:
Derek Smith said:
I've been trying to work out why May has called a GE, and so quickly. I could see better use of dissolving parliament.
She's not stupid so the assumption that there's a reason for this decision (over and above the one stated of course - she's a politician) is reasonable.
The only time constraint that comes to mind are the reports filed by the police on election fraud. It is probably probable that any found guilty would be subject to reelection, which would give rise to another dozen or so elections. This would, of course, cost May her majority. This way, there's no scandal before an election.
If any miscreants are reelected in the GE then the electoral law commission cannot order the fraudulent MPs to seek reelection.
Whoever organised the fraud could be imprisoned and/or fined. But after the GE.
Ideally after a fair trial rather than the GE but I defer to your stated greater knowledge in this sort of thing.She's not stupid so the assumption that there's a reason for this decision (over and above the one stated of course - she's a politician) is reasonable.
The only time constraint that comes to mind are the reports filed by the police on election fraud. It is probably probable that any found guilty would be subject to reelection, which would give rise to another dozen or so elections. This would, of course, cost May her majority. This way, there's no scandal before an election.
If any miscreants are reelected in the GE then the electoral law commission cannot order the fraudulent MPs to seek reelection.
Whoever organised the fraud could be imprisoned and/or fined. But after the GE.
You pick one point, a minor one, but ignore the major one, your normal MO. It is obviously a strange time for May to opt for a GE. There must be a reason, and one of great importance to her. 13 MPs having to go for reelection, and in seats which required a great deal of extra money to fight it would appear, fits the bill.
Derek Smith said:
I will admit to believing I have a greater in depth knowledge of such matters than you.
It's my understanding that you know more about anything than anyone & have a suitable real-life experience to cover any eventuality that might arise.You might think that people will go to prison or be fined but I assure you that they WILL go to trial before that can happen. Just because you presume guilt doesn't make it so.
My understanding is that not-guilty MPs don't give TM cause for an election. It's entirely possible that her reasons for calling a GE are to do with matters other than your supposition. You would appear to be the one with the blinkers.
gothatway said:
It used to be the case that the UK was one of the few countries which moved public holidays so they fell during the working week, so if for example May 1st fell on a Sunday, workers in other countries would not benefit. Don't know whether that's still the case.
New Zealand did that recently and Mondayised holidays. Made absolutely no difference to the economy, it turns out GDP isn't strongly tied to the number of hours worked. When you give people an extra day off they just become more productive that week. What Labor are proposing is quite clever because people will do just as much work but think they are getting something for "free." Classic electioneering!
There's been a lot of speculation on tax cuts as well but I don't see it as likely, the UK is still struggling to manage it's deficit but has been aided somewhat by recent falls in GBP value but currency movements are "transitory" particularly given the UKs unusual situation. We're likely well into this bull market cycle so debt should be beginning to be repaid and the rate of infrastructure spending should be increasing.
BlackLabel said:
Oh s
t.Game changer. Labour FTW.
Strocky said:
Patrick Bateman said:
It depends.
Look how many votes UKIP got overall last time yet only 1 MP.
Wouldn't worry, this time 2015 UKIP voters will have at least 350 MP's to represent them this timeLook how many votes UKIP got overall last time yet only 1 MP.
Derek Smith said:
I've been trying to work out why May has called a GE, and so quickly. I could see better use of dissolving parliament.
She's not stupid so the assumption that there's a reason for this decision (over and above the one stated of course - she's a politician) is reasonable.
The only time constraint that comes to mind are the reports filed by the police on election fraud. It is probably probable that any found guilty would be subject to reelection, which would give rise to another dozen or so elections. This would, of course, cost May her majority. This way, there's no scandal before an election.
If any miscreants are reelected in the GE then the electoral law commission cannot order the fraudulent MPs to seek reelection.
Whoever organised the fraud could be imprisoned and/or fined. But after the GE.
So, fraud - by tories only? Which dozen or more MPs would these be then? I know Farage made claims about the fraudulent overspending of the Tories, but even he hasn't followed that up. I'm puzzled? Do you think other parties don't get embroiled in election 'fraud'?She's not stupid so the assumption that there's a reason for this decision (over and above the one stated of course - she's a politician) is reasonable.
The only time constraint that comes to mind are the reports filed by the police on election fraud. It is probably probable that any found guilty would be subject to reelection, which would give rise to another dozen or so elections. This would, of course, cost May her majority. This way, there's no scandal before an election.
If any miscreants are reelected in the GE then the electoral law commission cannot order the fraudulent MPs to seek reelection.
Whoever organised the fraud could be imprisoned and/or fined. But after the GE.
Here's the fraud allegations and complaints recorded to the police via the electoral commission last March. There's loads of it!!
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/asset...
I was trying to see if anyone has been jailed but I got fed up reading it - I did note a LibDum among others did get jail sentences (all suspended of course).
Me, I think May when entertaining the other 'Donald', the Tusk, at No. 10 the week prior to her calling the GE probably got a bit more than the usual EU threats aimed at her Brexit plans, so she had decided to do things her way.
Just like the 'middle hair parting' toothy Guy the Bonfire Verhofstadt has been giving out his EU threats to May today.
I hope she stuffs it to them.
BlackLabel said:
This is typical of the socialist policies that this country is stuck with.They all seem such great ideas until they have to be paid for.
I see it like this...
Labour says "Let's borrow some money to buy a big telly to watch Sky TV on". They manage to pay the Sky subs and get the loan extended on the telly before the Tories come into power and realise that the house needs a new roof. The Nasty party now has to tell the kids they have to reduce the Sky package so we can fix the roof.
The moral of the story is we couldn't afford Sky in the first place - and we didn't need it.
We don't need another four bank holidays.
speedy_thrills said:
gothatway said:
It used to be the case that the UK was one of the few countries which moved public holidays so they fell during the working week, so if for example May 1st fell on a Sunday, workers in other countries would not benefit. Don't know whether that's still the case.
New Zealand did that recently and Mondayised holidays. Made absolutely no difference to the economy, it turns out GDP isn't strongly tied to the number of hours worked. When you give people an extra day off they just become more productive that week. What Labor are proposing is quite clever because people will do just as much work but think they are getting something for "free." Classic electioneering!
Outside of an office, though, you can't lay 1250 bricks a day for four days instead of 1000 bricks a day, or drive 625 miles per day instead of 500. And if you pay double rates, either the bricky doesn't get the holiday or the house costs more.
Instant 2% increase on the UK wage bill for 0% productivity increase.
pingu393 said:
Having worked in an office for 20 years, I would agree with you. You can do more paper shuffling to make up for the day off, but...
Outside of an office, though, you can't lay 1250 bricks a day for four days instead of 1000 bricks a day, or drive 625 miles per day instead of 500. And if you pay double rates, either the bricky doesn't get the holiday or the house costs more.
Instant 2% increase on the UK wage bill for 0% productivity increase.
And don't forget Labour want to increase the minimum wage to £10 ph for all workers.Outside of an office, though, you can't lay 1250 bricks a day for four days instead of 1000 bricks a day, or drive 625 miles per day instead of 500. And if you pay double rates, either the bricky doesn't get the holiday or the house costs more.
Instant 2% increase on the UK wage bill for 0% productivity increase.
More cost on business.
It's a familiar refrain, the 'people' spoke in the last general election but obviously Theresa May is not happy with what they had to say...
Will she keep having referendums... sorry..., calling general elections until she gets the result she wants?
Seriously though, if she got five years with not as big a majority as she wants - could she go again in another year?
Will she keep having referendums... sorry..., calling general elections until she gets the result she wants?
Seriously though, if she got five years with not as big a majority as she wants - could she go again in another year?
BlackLabel said:
Laughable. Some members of the Labour treat the cross of St George with the same contempt as they do the Nazi flag. There is no way the Abbott creature and her buddies will let there be a "celebration of colonialism, slavery and racism". However the decision to have an extra bank holiday for Wales, Scotland and N.Ireland will no doubt be left to their respective assemblies....And with the Labour Party's core membership these days where would the excuses to have a day off end?
LGBT day?
Marx day?
Chairman Mao day
Benn day?
Never going to happen. (For St Georges day anyway.)
pingu393 said:
speedy_thrills said:
gothatway said:
It used to be the case that the UK was one of the few countries which moved public holidays so they fell during the working week, so if for example May 1st fell on a Sunday, workers in other countries would not benefit. Don't know whether that's still the case.
New Zealand did that recently and Mondayised holidays. Made absolutely no difference to the economy, it turns out GDP isn't strongly tied to the number of hours worked. When you give people an extra day off they just become more productive that week. What Labor are proposing is quite clever because people will do just as much work but think they are getting something for "free." Classic electioneering!
Outside of an office, though, you can't lay 1250 bricks a day for four days instead of 1000 bricks a day, or drive 625 miles per day instead of 500. And if you pay double rates, either the bricky doesn't get the holiday or the house costs more.
Instant 2% increase on the UK wage bill for 0% productivity increase.
Shops will still open, stuff needs to be delivered etc. Many businesses are directly affected by the number of working days. I'm paid by the day so 4 days extra holiday means I lose 4 days pay, same for my wife.
My work does not disappear because I'm not at work, deadlines remain fixed and I need to work to those deadlines, even if that means working overtime (unpaid).
Obviously extra holidays DO affect the economy, if that wasn't the case then Corbyn could announce a 2 day working week and the economy would be just fine. Its just that 4 days would not be noticable to the average person, they would get a day off but costs would go up. One way or another you are paying for those holidays.
Edited to add....a quick search on the web indicates about 2bn per public holiday.
Edited by 98elise on Sunday 23 April 08:12
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff