|
Saki posted:You guys sure do like saying how much you want all tories to die every few posts. How else are we meant to eat them? Eating a live animal is just cruel. Edit: on this day in 1223 the greatest invasion of Europe by the hordes of the Mongolian Empire started. We've been scared of them foreigns ever since. notaspy fucked around with this message at 11:09 on Jan 14, 2015 |
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 18:42 |
|
|
Would renationalisation be affordable? I was thinking about the mechanics the other day - is it as simple as waiting for (e.g.) rail contracts, or hospital contracts to expire, by which point they are nationalised by default? For actual companies, such as Royal Mail or British Gas - presumably the government would have to reach into its pockets and find £billions to physically purchase the shares. BT has a market cap of £50bn just by itself for example.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:02
|
|
|
Saki posted:You guys sure do like saying how much you want all tories to die every few posts. Do you not want all tories to die? Answer wisely. We are watching you. We are always watching you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:06
|
|
|
I'm somewhere in the middle, just like the answer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:12
|
|
|
Saki posted:You guys sure do like saying how much you want all tories to die every few posts. I literally and unironically wish death on all tories.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:23
|
|
|
Special Brew getting % cut. Another piece of my childhood destroyed.quote:The brand enjoys 37 million UK off-trade sales each year, says Chris Wisson, senior drinks analyst at Mintel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:26
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Special Brew getting % cut. Another piece of my childhood destroyed. By sucking up to The Man.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:28
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Special Brew getting % cut. Another piece of my childhood destroyed. They have the option of making the can smaller, which they'll take instead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:29
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Would renationalisation be affordable? I was thinking about the mechanics the other day - is it as simple as waiting for (e.g.) rail contracts, or hospital contracts to expire, by which point they are nationalised by default? Parliamentary sovereignty - the government could simply pass a law saying all that poo poo is theirs now. Sure, there would be fallout, but we don't have to deal with a written constitution so the government can do pretty much whatever it wants. Anyway, what does affordable even mean for an entity that gets to print its own money?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:35
|
|
|
Good article on the housing shortage. I don't think there's anything earth-shattering here - the usual culprits of bureaucracy, lack of available land, and private builders keeping supply low to increase demand and profitability, but it's a good summary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:38
|
|
|
Wolfsbane posted:Parliamentary sovereignty - the government could simply pass a law saying all that poo poo is theirs now. Sure, there would be fallout, but we don't have to deal with a written constitution so the government can do pretty much whatever it wants. They can't actually do that. Well they can, but it would have absolutely massive repercussions and would cause more harm to the economy than another decade of Torydom - at the very least it would almost certainly get us kicked out of the EU and sanctioned to gently caress by the rest of the world if we did it by outright taking, or make the global financial markets poo poo the bed if we did it by printing sterling.. To answer the original question - yes, franchise-type privatisation and many PFI/PPP deals can be reversed at the end of the contracts (or much quicker by just refusing to renegotiate them upwards, so many of them are so ridiculously lowballed that the companies involved will willingly give them up if they can't screw any more money out of HMG). Given that those are the deals that are causing us the most active harm/expense right now, that's probably enough to be going on with. The outright selloff-type privatisations like Royal Mail and the utilities could probably be reversed more slowly by converting subsidies provided to equity swaps - we'll give them their extra money for universal service provision only if we get equity in the companies back. However it's probably best just to wait for the GLORIOUS FREE MARKET to gently caress them up then buy them up at pennies on the pound, maybe giving them a nudge along the way by using price caps/actually making them pay taxes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:57
|
|
|
Wolfsbane posted:Parliamentary sovereignty - the government could simply pass a law saying all that poo poo is theirs now. Sure, there would be fallout, but we don't have to deal with a written constitution so the government can do pretty much whatever it wants. Fallout, like the UK's international obligations to uphold a certain level of private property law. The government can pass a law taking it, but they will have to provide fare compensation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:57
|
|
Wolfsbane posted:Parliamentary sovereignty - the government could simply pass a law saying all that poo poo is theirs now. Sure, there would be fallout, but we don't have to deal with a written constitution so the government can do pretty much whatever it wants. It is a basic concept in British constitutional law that those who have their property confiscated should be compensated, a principle that has only been violated recently in times of war emergency. Add to that that the Europeans would be super pissed, as would investors in the country. As for money printing, the government doesn't in actuality spend the money it prints, it simply uses it to bulk out the balance sheets of banks on paper in the hope that the banks will lend (which is why QE isn't that inflationary, unlike dropping money out of helicopters). It's much easier to nationalise or acquire a stake by recognised and legitimate means.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:06
|
|
|
So Cameron is saying he won't take part in any TV debate unless the Green party are represented. I don't get it, what's his angle?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:08
|
|
|
I thought the government was still massively subsidising the privatised rail companies and everything anyway so buying them up wouldn't be much more expensive than what we're doing now. I admit to knowing nothing about this though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:08
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:They can't actually do that. Well they can, [reasons it would be a terrible idea] Which was my point. One of the problems I have with politics at the moment is the conflation of "what can we do" with "what is politically likely". There are a huge number of things we could do, but the discussion is always about the huge gulf of ideology between 12% cuts and 14% cuts, or the precise details of what's on the school curriculum (entire education system will remain the same in all respects). Also, this bit: goddamnedtwisto posted:make the global financial markets poo poo the bed if we did it by printing sterling gets said a lot, but I don't think I've ever seen anything to back it up. Is it just "this might happen in theory", or is there actually a case of "this country tried it and it was a terrible idea"? Note please that the UK is not Zimbabwe in any respect.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:08
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:So Cameron is saying he won't take part in any TV debate unless the Green party are represented. UKIP in the debates is very bad for him, so he wants the Greens in the debate to make the Lib Dems and Labour also look like poo poo. Also, incumbents don't tend to benefit from debates all that much, because it makes you look like 'just another one of the politicians' as opposed to 'the highest authority in the land'.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:10
|
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:So Cameron is saying he won't take part in any TV debate unless the Green party are represented. He wants UKIP out of the debates, but doesn't want to straight-up deliver an ultimatum on that because it'd fuel UKIP's oppression complex. He has a lot of leverage here, a leaders debate without the party that currently holds the biggest share of power would be a farce.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:11
|
|
|
Spooky Hyena posted:He wants UKIP out of the debates, but doesn't want to straight-up deliver an ultimatum on that because it'd fuel UKIP's oppression complex. He has a lot of leverage here, a leaders debate without the party that currently holds the biggest share of power would be a farce. If they empty chaired him he'd pretty much have to show up though right? It'd be political suicide not to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:15
|
|
|
Spooky Hyena posted:He wants UKIP out of the debates, but doesn't want to straight-up deliver an ultimatum on that because it'd fuel UKIP's oppression complex. He has a lot of leverage here, a leaders debate without the party that currently holds the biggest share of power would be a farce. Of course the entire staff of the BBC would then be fed to Rupert Murdoch as hamburger, but still.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:26
|
|
|
How is Milliband in debates? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess "bad".
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:41
|
|
|
I also read a theory (here, I think) that since the tories always loving suck at debating they want to turn the entire thing into an unmanageable circus with as many participants as is credibly possible so that everybody comes out of it looking equally poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:41
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:I also read a theory (here, I think) that since the tories always loving suck at debating they want to turn the entire thing into an unmanageable circus with as many participants as is credibly possible so that everybody comes out of it looking equally poo poo. This was what I was thinking. Because Cammy knows he'd get slain in a normal debate, he just wants to sink it by making it completely unmanageable. Debate M.A.D.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:47
|
|
|
mfcrocker posted:They have the option of making the can smaller, which they'll take instead. At least they can't readily redefine a gram of whizz or a drop of vod.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:47
|
|
|
I found this interesting. Do we think the opposite because people constantly post stuff here from the edl twitter or facebook? Or is it because UKIP isn't considered "far right"? http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/14/support-british-far-right-groups-20-year-low-bnp-edl
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:49
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:If they empty chaired him he'd pretty much have to show up though right? It'd be political suicide not to. Zephro posted:I'm not sure I agree. If they stuck an empty chair in the studio he would look like a fool. I don't think it'd be that bad for them. Remember they are doing it (nominally) out of fairness and solidarity for a political opponent, so it's easily spun as a noble thing. Jippa posted:I found this interesting. Do we think the opposite because people constantly post stuff here from the edl twitter or facebook? Or is it because UKIP isn't considered "far right"? It's because it isn't considered "far right". You can't make assumptions that because someone (or, in this case, a group of people) shifts from BNP to UKIP that they're not far right racists anymore. Group identity only goes so far. Spooky Hyena fucked around with this message at 12:54 on Jan 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:50
|
|
|
Cameron is afraid of UKIP splitting his vote. He wants the Greens to split the Labour vote, so having them in the debate is good for him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:54
|
|
|
Its all a hilariously depressing and damning indictment of our political system. Parties are supporting their natural enemies and sabotaging their natural allies in order to.... gently caress their opponents and strengthen themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:58
|
|
|
To be fair, there's no obvious reason the Greens shouldn't be involved. They have an MP, and and almost as many members as UKIP, and are polling up to 10%. The idea of a two-party system is looking more ragged than it has for decades.
Zephro fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Jan 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:07
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Its all a hilariously depressing and damning indictment of our political system. Parties are supporting their natural enemies and sabotaging their natural allies in order to.... gently caress their opponents and strengthen themselves. My God, you're right..
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:08
|
|
|
Saki posted:How is Milliband in debates? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess "bad". I sincerely hope they bring out a bacon sandwich eating contest half-way through.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:09
|
|
|
I'm even flirting with the idea of voting Green. The pseudoscience stuff annoys me, but on the other hand we have the Saatchi Bill right now so what else is new? I'm pro-nuclear in theory but very, very anti the government's present nuclear policy because it's so vastly expensive and a huge cash handout to a bunch of private companies who will, as a consequence, have us over a barrel and ask for more in future.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:10
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Its all a hilariously depressing and damning indictment of our political system. Parties are supporting their natural enemies and sabotaging their natural allies in order to.... gently caress their opponents and strengthen themselves. I would say this is one of the largest contributors too alienating the "normal person" from the political process.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
KKKlean Energy posted:I sincerely hope they bring out a bacon sandwich eating contest half-way through. A true test of character.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:12
|
|
|
Saki posted:A true test of character. A great way to get the Green Party to devour itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
Wolfsbane posted:Which was my point. One of the problems I have with politics at the moment is the conflation of "what can we do" with "what is politically likely". There are a huge number of things we could do, but the discussion is always about the huge gulf of ideology between 12% cuts and 14% cuts, or the precise details of what's on the school curriculum (entire education system will remain the same in all respects). The trouble is that passing a law to appropriate shares from private citizens and companies with no compensation is theft, plain and simple. Rational economic actors, be they Britons or foreigners would react accordingly to an assault on private property rights like this. Britons would move assets abroad where they could, to avoid a future appropriation. Foreigners would be reluctant to let the government buy goods or services on credit, or invest in substantial UK assets that might be appropriated in future. There would probably be another run on the pound. It would be so disruptive that you could imagine it leading to market turmoil and a falling stock market perhaps? We run a substantial current account deficit with the rest of the world. Currently we can let it trundle along, with the promise that these foreign liabilities are repaid in the future. If the rest of the world loses confidence in sterling or the British economy, we may find ourselves unable to finance the current account deficit, which would necessitate an abrupt reduction in consumption for the country. As for real world examples, perhaps Venezuela in the 1960s? That led to international sanctions. I'm sure there must be other, more recent examples, that I'm not aware of - has Russia done this in the last few years? There's an article on whether it's legal under international law here but I don't have access to journals so can't see the conclusion. I'd be interested to hear any thoughts on consequences from someone with more economics knowledge than me though. Prince John fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Jan 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:18
|
|
|
Saki posted:How is Milliband in debates? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess "bad". Actually not so bad. The worst thing for the Tories would be a competent performance from him as it'd derail the whole bacon-sandwich eating weirdo narrative.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:20
|
|
|
The Greens will have a crisis of conscience, Milliband will do what he always does but worse because of all the pressure, and Cameron will fail to understand the concept of physical sustenance. I think the only winner of a bacon sandwich eating contest will be Farage. He'll say something about how the consumption of bacon should be on a british citizenship test, and then after the media lynch him he will get more support than ever before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:22
|
|
|
I think I actually dislike the Greens more than UKIP. The Greens, in my mind, should know and do better. They're more disappointing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 18:42 |
|
|
Can Labour not just put Gordon Brown up for the debate and hope no-one notices? Preferably in his 'I'm totally a socialist guys, no really look how passionate I am' mode
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 13:26
|
|
