https://twitter.com/CPBritain/status/964903002145525760" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One thing is for sure, there is a yawning chasm called the centre that is getting bigger all the time.

You bloody sandal wearer.

(Sorry wrong thread)

At this time of night?

Just a pair of socks!

Lancasterclaret wrote:At this time of night?

Just a pair of socks!

That's an image I could do without!

Lancasterclaret wrote:At this time of night?

Just a pair of socks!

Erm...I hope your kids are upstairs and sound asleep, Lancaster.

God, you two have dirty minds

I've of course got more than just socks on.

The gimp suit chaffs a bit it has to be said

Saw a bit about this lot on the news this week.

https://renewbritain.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ignore the "rethink Brexit" bit for fear of another one of those threads but they reckon to be a centrist party. What the country needs but they're unlikely to make any significant impact.

Me and Lancaster can fill the centre chasm.

Contrary to popular belief I get played on the opposite wing occasionally, when I'm really a right sided centre midfielder who finds himself on the left sometimes.

Don't pigeon hole me.

The way its going, there is almost certainly going to be either splits in either party, or a complete change in British politics.

As the Conservatives are running the most incompetent government of all time, and are still neck and neck with Lab in the polls, it does suggest to me that Lab have already gone too far left and the further they go, the less people will vote for them.

Lancasterclaret wrote: As the Conservatives are running the most incompetent government of all time.

We're you hibernating between 1997 and 2010? Prior to that most of the 1970s when we were kids. Strikes, power cuts, 3 day week, bins not emptied, dead not buried. That raised incompetence to a whole new level.

Herts Clarets wrote:We're you hibernating between 1997 and 2010? Prior to that most of the 1970s when we were kids. Strikes, power cuts, 3 day week, bins not emptied, dead not buried. That raised incompetence to a whole new level.

The country was booming for most of The 97-2010 period.

Quickenthetempo wrote:The country was booming for most of The 97-2010 period.

Illegal war in Iraq.

Quickenthetempo wrote:The country was booming for most of The 97-2010 period.

AND then the credit card bill landed on the doormat.

Imagine just how bad schools and the NHS would be now though if it wasn't for that period between 97-2010?

No fan at all of Labour, but you've picked a strange period to pull them up on!

Lancasterclaret wrote:Imagine just how bad schools and the NHS would be now though if it wasn't for that period between 97-2010?

No fan at all of Labour, but you've picked a strange period to pull them up on!

Illegal war in Iraq.

Yeah, but people actually give more of a **** about schools and the NHS

Lancasterclaret wrote:Yeah, but people actually give more of a **** about schools and the NHS

There were plenty of people who gave a **** about the war in Iraq in the period you referred to. A massive decision as history has proven.

Ah you mean they threw more money at the problem.

Like the £11 billion or so on the failed computer system...

Is that what you mean by caring?
Or increasing the amount of work farmed out to private hospitals?

There are other examples but you get the point.

taio wrote:Illegal war in Iraq.

I agree about that but was talking about the state of the country.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Imagine just how bad schools and the NHS would be now though if it wasn't for that period between 97-2010?

No fan at all of Labour, but you've picked a strange period to pull them up on!

And we are paying for those schools and hospitals many times over for the next 30 years thanks to PFI and the genius of Gordon Brown. That's before we mention him screwing everybody's pensions and flogging the gold reserves at the bottom of the market. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands killed in 2 wars in pursuit of destroying the Middle East, courtesy of Tony and his claret chum. Alastair and Blair have something in common. If you look at both of their names you can make 'Liar' out of them.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Yeah, but people actually give more of a **** about schools and the NHS

Introduction of tuition fees (as a Lib Dem supporter thought you'd frown upon that)
Accelerated privatisation of NHS and use of PFI in both schools and NHS.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Imagine just how bad schools and the NHS would be now though if it wasn't for that period between 97-2010?

No fan at all of Labour, but you've picked a strange period to pull them up on!

It will have to be the same again when Labour get in. All this underfunding will need to be re-addressed.

So you'd rather they weren't built?

Whether you or Sid or anybody else likes it or not those buildings needed to be built as the old ones where falling apart. They should have just raised taxes and paid for it the usual way, but us Brits want the earth and won't pay for it.

And anyone who thinks the Middle east was destroyed by those wars needs to look at a history book.

I don't know why I'm defending Blair Labour vision anyway, I'm a bloody Lib Dem!

But when you look at stuff, especially infrastructure that the country desperately needed, it tended to get built in that period.

Herts Clarets wrote:We're you hibernating between 1997 and 2010? Prior to that most of the 1970s when we were kids. Strikes, power cuts, 3 day week, bins not emptied, dead not buried. That raised incompetence to a whole new level.

The three day week was brought in by Edward Heath and removed as soon as Harold Wilson was returned to power.

And Herts, I know you are older than me but not that much older!

Christ, I was only born in 1973, have you been hiding your real age?

Lancasterclaret wrote:So you'd rather they weren't built?

Whether you or Sid or anybody else likes it or not those buildings needed to be built as the old ones where falling apart. They should have just raised taxes and paid for it the usual way, but us Brits want the earth and won't pay for it.

And anyone who thinks the Middle east was destroyed by those wars needs to look at a history book.

PFI requires the assets to be paid mulitple times over - a complete waste of taxpayers money. Alternative ways to finance such capital expenditure.

Your attempt to side step the illegal war in Iraq as some sort of irrelevent point is rather amusing.

They needed to be built. But not at 3 times the expected cost to be paid over the next 30 years.

Middle East. More or less stable since Saddam, Gaddafi and co were ousted by Blair and co? More. Less. Which one?

Lancasterclaret wrote:I don't know why I'm defending Blair Labour vision anyway, I'm a bloody Lib Dem!

So I got the correct thread after all.

Lancasterclaret wrote:And Herts, I know you are older than me but not that much older!

Christ, I was only born in 1973, have you been hiding your real age?

Your comment was the most incompetent government of all time. I include the 1970s in that period.

If you had said they are currently led by the weakest leader in that same period, i would agree with you as long as you excluded Gordon Brown.

I had a friend turn up at work today complaining at the NHS prescription service he received at his local health center. It took them 40 minutes to process his prescription when it takes 5 at the chemist on the high street.
The difference between public, and private sector effiency is staggering, and on full view in every place they compete.
Private companies need to be efficient and orderly or else they go to the wall. It seems like public funded enterprises go as far out of their way to not work so that they receive more funding.
Corbyn is madness. I cannot fathom why anyone with any sense of pulling their own weight in society would consider him worth voting for

Britain under comrade Corbyn

A farm worker greets Josef Stalin at his potato farm.

“Comrade Stalin, we have so many potatoes that, piled one on top of the other, they would reach all the way to God,” the farmer excitedly tells his leader.
“But God does not exist,” replies Stalin.
“Exactly,” says the farmer. “Neither do the potatoes.”

Two guards spot a man skulking around the Kremlin.
"Stop! Who goes there? Documents!" He shouts.
The frightened person chaotically rummages through his pockets and drops a paper. The guard picks it up and reads it.
"Urine Analysis...
“Hmm... a foreigner, sounds like," says the other guard.
Then the first guard reads further: "'Proteins: none, Sugars: none, Fats: none...”
“You are free to go, proletarian comrade,” says the second guard.

After years of saving up, a Soviet man finally has enough to buy a car. He goes to the appropriate ministry and informs them that he would like to purchase a vehicle.
“There are currently shortages, it will be three years before your car is available,” the minister informs the man. “We will have it sent to your house when it’s ready.”
"Three years," he responds. "What month?"
"August," says the minister.
"August? What day in August?" Asks the man.
"The Second of August," says the minister.
"Morning or Afternoon?" Asks the man.
"Why do you need to know?" Asks the minister, getting exasperated.
"The plumber is coming in the morning," the man responds.

Under communism, every man has what he needs. That's why the butcher puts a sign up that says "nobody needs meat today."

A Briton, a Frenchman, and a Russian are standing and staring at a portrait of Adam and Eve.
"Look at their calm, their reserve" says the Briton. "Surely they must be British!"
"Nonsense!" Replies the Frenchman. "They are beautiful. Surely they must be French!"
The Russian finally speaks, "they have no clothes, no shelter, only an apple to eat, and are being told this is paradise. They are Russian."

An American who found himself in Moscow asks a man carrying two suitcases what the time was.
"Certainly," says the Russian, setting the two bags on the ground and looking at his wrist. "It is 11:43 and 17 seconds. The date is February 13th, the moon is nearing its full phase, and atmospheric pressure stands at 992 hectopascals rising."
Amazed, the American asks the man if his watch is from Japan. The man assures him that it is Soviet technology.
"That's fantastic!" the American says.
"Yes," the Russian answers, picking up the two suitcases. "Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go charge the batteries."

Your attempt to side step the illegal war in Iraq as some sort of irrelevent point is rather amusing.

Middle East. More or less stable since Saddam, Gaddafi and co were ousted by Blair and co? More. Less. Which one?

Read a history book

Start at around the time of the Balfour declaration.

They needed to be built. But not at 3 times the expected cost to be paid over the next 30 years.

Not disagreeing with the cost bit, but unless I'm missing something you seem to be unable to accept that a conservative govt wouldn't have built them.

Totally agree. I have worked in the private sector all my life and it is a constant battle for efficiency and cost reduction. I now find myself running a department within a local authority, within the field i have worked in for 30 years. It is one of only 2 areas within the council that is a net contributor to the finances, and the split of the 2 busineses is 15% the other dept, 85% mine. Some of the practices and ways of working need dragging into the real world and making more financially viable. Fortunately the council are on board with the way we want to take the business and are supporting the vision with investment in IT to drive productivity.

The difference between private and public is that in the private sector there is a competitor, so you have to compete. Public sector there is no alternative so the consumer has to accept what you serve to them.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Read a history book

Start at around the time of the Balfour declaration.

Cut the patronising bullshit - what the **** are you on about? I simply referred to the illegal war in Iraq and the huge difficulty that caused, including a terrible reflection on the Labour government. To the extent that it's Blair's legacy. Are you saying it didn't happen and/or it wasn't massive political decision and disaster in the period in question?

How do you know for certain the Tories wouldn't have done them?

We don't know for certain, what we do know is Labour overpaid for stuff and threw good money after bad.
Most governments tend to get things wrong but Labour really went balls deep to do it.

Best bit about those Blair/Bush wars was Blair going on to be the Middle East Peace Envoy.

Someone was clearly on crack the day they made that decision.

Damo wrote:I had a friend turn up at work today complaining at the NHS prescription service he received at his local health center. It took them 40 minutes to process his prescription when it takes 5 at the chemist on the high street.
The difference between public, and private sector effiency is staggering, and on full view in every place they compete.
Private companies need to be efficient and orderly or else they go to the wall. It seems like public funded enterprises go as far out of their way to not work so that they receive more funding.
Corbyn is madness. I cannot fathom why anyone with any sense of pulling their own weight in society would consider him worth voting for

HMRC are abysmal. They changed the name of taxpayers to "customers" a few years back - presumably in hopes that we would think we're getting "customer service" and not the current abysmal performance.

Their current trick is for tax returns received on paper (overseas landlords, mostly, in my case). They receive lots of tax returns close to the due date, 31st January; they're 22 days behind with processing them at the last count. They know they've got them, but they haven't updated the system.

But they are sending out letters to all our clients fining them £100 for not submitting the return. They know the returns are in, they know their system isn't working, they know that the obvious and straightforward thing to do is to hold onto the fines until their parerwork is straight - but do they? No. Why should they? It's not as if they care about their "customers" - we can't go anywhere else.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Not disagreeing with the cost bit, but unless I'm missing something you seem to be unable to accept that a conservative govt wouldn't have built them.

Neither you nor i can say whether a Conservative, or indeed Lib Dem, UKIP, Monster Raving Loony or any of the other unelectable parties would have built them. I am fairly confident however that even the Silly Party from the election night sketch from the Pythons wouldn't be so stupid that they would build 10bn worth of schools and hospitals and pay 40bn for them.

That stupidity is the preserve of the Labour party.

And on that note i wish you a goodnight. UTC

The logic that the Tories aren’t interested in saving lives (which new facilities do) is one of the biggest delusions of our time.....

....but there is an element of truth. The Tories tend to be late to the party on this stuff and in time they will wake up and realise that will be their undoing.

Back to the NHS and Labour though, we did indeed have buildings falling down among us, but they didn’t have to be funded in that manner as a political manoeuvre to keep them off the balance sheet, and staff didn’t need paying the ridiculous amounts they were. I remember Agenda For Change back in the days I was an employee - it hammered non-clinical staff, I remember putting in a grievance, but it rewarded clinical staff which in some senses had little benefit. Labour capitulated on the consultant contract, the GP contract, the Junior Doctor’s contract and on nurse pay. They ended up paying a fortune and getting little back. Now many years later we still don’t have 24 hour 7 day a week NHS. Never mind, there are only lives at stake. Incompetence gone mad at the time.

The Tories would probably have built new stuff and paid staff a competitive wage, but they would have taken longer and ****** people off. Including me. Sure fire evidence to take the NHS away from politicians.

Now, Labour are doing it again. Total incompetence. Talking about a custom’s union which is the worst of both worlds in Brexit. No influence, no votes, but no ability to strike deals nor change tariffs or quotas. I get the opposition to hard Brexit but this is ridiculous, it’s not soft, it’s stupid. Then there’s the communist support in the OP’s tweet.....

The saddest thing about Corbyn as far as I am concerned is that he has promised to fund all of his socialist ideas by getting people's grand kids to pay.
The bonds he is going to issue are appealing to certain sections of society and it sickens me as a parent, knowing my kids and grand kids will pick up the tab.

Damo wrote:The bonds he is going to issue are appealing to certain sections of society and it sickens me as a parent, knowing my kids and grand kids will pick up the tab.

I hope you don't have a private pension. You wouldn't want to be accused of being a hypocrite, now, would you?

Corbyn needs Brexit as it allows him to renationalise everything without the EU blocking it.

Lancasterclaret wrote:https://twitter.com/CPBritain/status/964903002145525760

One thing is for sure, there is a yawning chasm called the centre that is getting bigger all the time.

The yawning chasm of anyone to the right of karl Marx

Spiral wrote:I hope you don't have a private pension. You wouldn't want to be accused of being a hypocrite, now, would you?

My private pension is funded by the few. Not by the many

Herts Clarets wrote:We're you hibernating between 1997 and 2010? Prior to that most of the 1970s when we were kids. Strikes, power cuts, 3 day week, bins not emptied, dead not buried. That raised incompetence to a whole new level.

The Tories were in government for most of the 70's, lead by the "alleged" paedophile/ child murderer Ted Heath. The 3 day week ended when the Labour government took power.

Damo wrote:My private pension is funded by the few. Not by the many

I've a feeling you didn't quite understand the point I was making and wanted to bail on the argument. Am I right?

Spiral wrote:I've a feeling you didn't quite understand the point I was making and wanted to bail on the argument. Am I right?

I know what drives my investments.
If you can explain what I am set to gain from Jeremy Corbyns privatisation plans, that my children and grandchildren won't suffer from greatly, then I'm all ears

Damo wrote:The saddest thing about Corbyn as far as I am concerned is that he has promised to fund all of his socialist ideas by getting people's grand kids to pay.
The bonds he is going to issue are appealing to certain sections of society and it sickens me as a parent, knowing my kids and grand kids will pick up the tab.

Yes, we must stop Jeremy Corbyn from becoming prime minister so that future generations are not saddled with the debts which were racked up by the selfish and irresponsible generations before them.

Just in case you didn't spot the sarcasm, that is already happening, without Corbyn.

I appreciate that you don't like him, but at least make a constructive argument as to why you don't like him, instead of that pi5s weak effort.