Current Affairs EU In or Out

[jal123]

I was twenty in 73 and twenty two in 75, recent voting shows just how we shouldn't allow the young to have a decisive input. The voting age should have been 25 or 30. I'm glad you agree with me.......

There should be an upper limit on voting, say 60, as those people aren't voting for their own future but instead voting to ruin ours.

They've had over 40 years to vote then, I think that's fair.

 

[hibbo'sclass]

There should be an upper limit on voting, say 60, as those people aren't voting for their own future but instead voting to ruin ours.

They've had over 40 years to vote then, I think that's fair.

Preposterous idea.
When I reach 60 the only joy in life will be knowing that I can ruin everything for future generations.

!Shuffles off muttering about youngsters these days/when I was a lad/bring back National Service repeatedly.

 

[Gwladysstreetlad]

There should be an upper limit on voting, say 60, as those people aren't voting for their own future but instead voting to ruin ours.

They've had over 40 years to vote then, I think that's fair.

Great, let's block the only age group that consistently have the common sense to vote in large numbers. It's their fault the young are always outnumbered at voting stations and nothing to do with the fact that young people can't be bothered to make an effort for most elections and decisions. What we saw in this past election is younger people actually bothering on mass for once and guess what? They made a difference and stopped an outright Tory majority so maybe it's time for them to do so consistently or stop whining at the wicked old people.

 

[Old Blue 2]

There should be an upper limit on voting, say 60, as those people aren't voting for their own future but instead voting to ruin ours.

They've had over 40 years to vote then, I think that's fair.

So you take out of the equation those with the greatest experience and knowledge of life, and leave it in the hands of those like you with the above view.

Sheesh...! Such gradual removal of rights happened in a central European country in the 1930s.

I will say no more for fear of being castigated, or banned. I will just leave others to judge jal's comment as a stand-alone point...

 

[peteblue]

There should be an upper limit on voting, say 60, as those people aren't voting for their own future but instead voting to ruin ours.

They've had over 40 years to vote then, I think that's fair.

I agree, why should I have to worry about it when you will be picking up the bill anyway. It's about time the youth took some responsibility for themselves.......

 

[peteblue]

So you take out of the equation those with the greatest experience and knowledge of life, and leave it in the hands of those like you with the above view.

Sheesh...! Such gradual removal of rights happened in a central European country in the 1930s.

I will say no more for fear of being castigated, or banned. I will just leave others to judge jal's comment as a stand-alone point...

It's what the young do. Remember the old joke about hiring 17 year olds, while they still know everything.......

 

[peteblue]

Along with immigration and more recently the EU, the economy is all the political class talk about. Endlessly. If you are suggesting the government must be tougher with tax evasion, I agree; but what do you propose? What are your solutions? See this link from today's Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ervice-sector-car-sales-economy-business-live

You will see that the service sector - which constitutes almost all of the UK's GDP - has hit a four month low. In a previous post you said the government and, previously, the coalition government were beginning to control the economy. In which way?



What do you mean by "a grown up fashion"? In which way is McDonnell potentially less responsible than Philip Hammond or George Osborne?

The problem with the economy started in this country in 1979 via the introduction of Neoliberalism. Corbyn and McDonnell, to their great credit, are two of the only politicians brave enough to challenge the assumed doctrine of neoliberal capitalism. It is why both men, particularly Corbyn, are popular with the electorate.

McDonnell doesn't even recognise the UK debt and only wishes to add to it. Both men are popular because they offer free money and pay rises and the more irresponsible members of society buy it........

 

[jal123]

Lads you've got to make it more difficult for me, if all I had to do to get the coffin dodgers out in force and acting like precious little snowflakes was to suggest a removal of one of your human rights it wouldn't have taken so long!

 

[Raphael_Hythloday]

McDonnell doesn't even recognise the UK debt and only wishes to add to it.

What I don't understand is you lack of understanding. The current government have done this, which is exactly what you are accusing McDonnell of wanting to do.

Both men are popular because they offer free money and pay rises and the more irresponsible members of society buy it........

How do you know that? The reason for the Labour party's increased popularity is because some of the electorate agree with the party's policies.

they offer free money

There is no such thing as "free money". Presumably you mean paying workers a better wage for a day's work. Seems fair to me. No?

and pay rises

Two things:

1. Workers in the public sector have not had a pay increase (outside the 1%) for seven years. The average increase of pay of private sector is 2.6%.

2. Do you disagree with the Conservative soon to be U-turn over public sector pay?

 

[hibbo'sclass]

Lads you've got to make it more difficult for me, if all I had to do to get the coffin dodgers out in force and acting like precious little snowflakes was to suggest a removal of one of your human rights it wouldn't have taken so long!

Disrespect of your elders.
Shameful but predictable behaviour from a callow youth.

 

[peteblue]

What I don't understand is you lack of understanding. The current government have done this, which is exactly what you are accusing McDonnell of wanting to do.



How do you know that? The reason for the Labour party's increased popularity is because some of the electorate agree with the party's policies.



There is no such thing as "free money". Presumably you mean paying workers a better wage for a day's work. Seems fair to me. No?



Two things:

1. Workers in the public sector have not had a pay increase (outside the 1%) for seven years. The average increase of pay of private sector is 2.6%.

2. Do you disagree with the Conservative soon to be U-turn over public sector pay?

Public sector pay goes in cycles because of the policies of Labour. Labour always pour money into what is effectively their client state, screw the economy, then the Conservatives have to sort it out again. This 'increased popularity' of course had nothing to do with proposed salary increases for every part of the public service and offering students free tuition and the writing off of outstanding loans.....

 

[Number_25]

Yes, we have almost full employment, but what constitutes employment these days?

ZHC and the gig-economy aren't sustainable in the long run, going to have lots of poor pensioners that can't afford to live because of the lack of pensions.

Unlike other cycles, the workers haven't organsied so those at the top haven't felt the need to innovate their ways out of this mess.

Complete lack of ambition and imagination. We need something radical.

 

[AndyC]

Lads you've got to make it more difficult for me, if all I had to do to get the coffin dodgers out in force and acting like precious little snowflakes was to suggest a removal of one of your human rights it wouldn't have taken so long!

Can you drop the derisory comments aimed at the older generation please, they're not nice and folks are getting offended.

 

[Brennan]

Public sector pay goes in cycles because of the policies of Labour. Labour always pour money into what is effectively their client state, screw the economy, then the Conservatives have to sort it out again. This 'increased popularity' of course had nothing to do with proposed salary increases for every part of the public service and offering students free tuition and the writing off of outstanding loans.....

Totally untrue though isn't it.

A quick look at the actual evidence reveals that only two Labour governments have ever left office leaving the national debt higher than it was when they came to power, all of the others have lowered the national debt as a percentage of GDP.

On the two occasions that Labour oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt, Clement Attlee's 1945-51 government reduced the national debt by 40% of GDP despite having to rebuild the UK economy from the ruins of the Second World War. Harold Wilson's 1964-70 government reduced the national debt by 27% of GDP and even the Wilson-Callaghan government of 1974-79 managed to reduce the debt by 4% of GDP.

The majority of Labour governments have ended up reducing the national debt, and the two that didn't coincided with the biggest global financial crisis of the 20th Century and the biggest global financial crisis so far in the 21st Century.

In order to put this "cleaning up Labour's mess" narrative to the test, it is useful to look at George Osborne's own record as Chancellor of the Exchequer. In his first 3 years as Chancellor George Osborne managed to add more to the national debt than the supposedly "profligate and irresponsible" Labour party did in the 13 preceding years. In fact, in just 4 years George Osborne has increased the national debt in real terms more than every Labour party chancellor in history combined!

By George Osborne's own estimates, the national debt will have grown by 26% of GDP between 2010 and 2015. In the last 200 years of economic history there have only been three periods of debt accumulation worse than George Osborne's tenure as Chancellor of the Exchequer:

 

[Walken]

So you take out of the equation those with the greatest experience and knowledge of life, and leave it in the hands of those like you with the above view.

Sheesh...! Such gradual removal of rights happened in a central European country in the 1930s.

I will say no more for fear of being castigated, or banned. I will just leave others to judge jal's comment as a stand-alone point...

I'm more in favour of an eskimo policy of leaving you all out in the snow, reduce spending on top, it's the kindest thing