Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Griff9of13

Compassionate Conservatism

Recommended Posts

Ahhh so you're claiming labour were responsible for the Tory of Sir Winston Churchill winning the war?

Find out the truth lol, hasn't the gospel already spoken? I'm perfectly aware what's wrong with our country and have already highlighted this. Your socialist dogma will only lead the country down the pan, see Venezuela/Argentina

 

I don't like the inclusion of Argentina in there. They might have been our enemy in the Falklands War, but their current plight is not solely of their own making. The American venture funds that bought Argentine bonds knowing full-well they were "junk bonds" at something like 10 cents in the dollar have demanded payment in full - that is 100 cents in the dollar. The venture funds have received the full backing of the US courts to pursue their demands and, effectively, bankrupt Argentina. I think the Argentinian term "vulture fund" is entirely appropriate.


Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society

Founder (and, so far, only) member.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh so you're claiming labour were responsible for the Tory of Sir Winston Churchill winning the war?

Find out the truth lol, hasn't the gospel already spoken? I'm perfectly aware what's wrong with our country and have already highlighted this. Your socialist dogma will only lead the country down the pan, see Venezuela/Argentina

No I'm not claiming what you say.  Churchill didn't win the war, that was my dad and his mates.  What Churchill didn't do was surrender which is what Chamberlain and Halifax wanted to do. No doubt it's what Rothermere wanted too, after all just over a year before he sent a telegram to Hitler congratulating him on his takeover of Czechoslovakia,  What's led this country down the pan is short term policies aimed at short term profits for city spivs encouraged by Rothermere's grandson.  The rest of us have to live with the consequences of that culture.

Edited by Trojan

“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good to see people questioning Letwins sincerity, the same people who'll buy McDonnells "apology" about how he wants the murderers of Warringtonian schoolchildren honoured. They'll probably even pay £3 to join that little hypocritical club.

We know.

What about the murderers of Derry schoolchildren?  Once you start a war there's no telling who will get hurt.  The only sure thing is that someone will.


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the inclusion of Argentina in there. They might have been our enemy in the Falklands War, but their current plight is not solely of their own making. The American venture funds that bought Argentine bonds knowing full-well they were "junk bonds" at something like 10 cents in the dollar have demanded payment in full - that is 100 cents in the dollar. The venture funds have received the full backing of the US courts to pursue their demands and, effectively, bankrupt Argentina. I think the Argentinian term "vulture fund" is entirely appropriate.

Whilst that's a fair comment, if you don't pay your debts what do you expect? Their financial plight is due to their socialist policies which put them in a position whereby they couldn't afford to pay their debts. Fortunately their new man in charge seems to have a handle on what's wrong but it'll be a big task to rectify

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst that's a fair comment, if you don't pay your debts what do you expect? Their financial plight is due to their socialist policies which put them in a position whereby they couldn't afford to pay their debts. Fortunately their new man in charge seems to have a handle on what's wrong but it'll be a big task to rectify

you can of course prove this or is it just dogma?


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the murderers of Derry schoolchildren? Once you start a war there's no telling who will get hurt. The only sure thing is that someone will.

What has that got to do with to Labour Shadow Chancellor and his belief that the murderers of schoolchildren should be "honoured"?

It seems that Letwins apology was insincere while the terrorist sympathisers was genuine according to the Labour hypocrites.

We know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can of course prove this or is it just dogma?

It's common knowledge, hence why the public decided to change course at the election. DYOR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's common knowledge, hence why the public decided to change course at the election. DYOR

And when the public vote in the evil socialists?


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What has that got to do with to Labour Shadow Chancellor and his belief that the murderers of schoolchildren should be "honoured"?

It seems that Letwins apology was insincere while the terrorist sympathisers was genuine according to the Labour hypocrites.

We know.

But who is a terrorist?  The point is that the IRA saw themselves as freedom fighters.  We may not like this, but the fact is that as far as they are concerned we are occupying a fairly large slice of their country.


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst that's a fair comment, if you don't pay your debts what do you expect? Their financial plight is due to their socialist policies which put them in a position whereby they couldn't afford to pay their debts. Fortunately their new man in charge seems to have a handle on what's wrong but it'll be a big task to rectify

 

Rather disingenuous. Argentina, as you correctly state, could not pay its debts and was, therefore, bankrupt. What then happened was that the Argentine bonds were sold off as "junk bonds" - in other words, worthless - which everyone accepted and only a fool - or a rapacious predator - would buy. Guess what? American "venture capitalists" bought up the bonds at (say) 10 cents in the dollar and then demanded payment in full - 100 cents in the dollar! The US courts are now backing these venture capitalists and making it impossible for Argentina to recover from its bankruptcy. I accept that Argentina screwed up, but lots of companies screw up and declare themselves bankrupt, which means that their debts are written off. Not for these "vulture funds" in America, who are using the full weight of US law to screw Argentina even further. If an American company had declared itself bankrupt, owing the Argentine government millions of dollars, do you think the US courts would be pushing for settlement in full? Of course they wouldn't!


Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society

Founder (and, so far, only) member.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good to see people questioning Letwins sincerity, the same people who'll buy McDonnells "apology" about how he wants the murderers of Warringtonian schoolchildren honoured. They'll probably even pay £3 to join that little hypocritical club.

We know.

What about those who are not "the same people"?  Those of us who think McDonnell should be no-where near public office, didn't vote labour and didn't pay our £3 to vote for there leader, are we allowed to question Letwins sincerity and be concerned that his man is shaping policy to this day and for all we know holds the same views now as he did 30 years ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather disingenuous. Argentina, as you correctly state, could not pay its debts and was, therefore, bankrupt. What then happened was that the Argentine bonds were sold off as "junk bonds" - in other words, worthless - which everyone accepted and only a fool - or a rapacious predator - would buy. Guess what? American "venture capitalists" bought up the bonds at (say) 10 cents in the dollar and then demanded payment in full - 100 cents in the dollar! The US courts are now backing these venture capitalists and making it impossible for Argentina to recover from its bankruptcy. I accept that Argentina screwed up, but lots of companies screw up and declare themselves bankrupt, which means that their debts are written off. Not for these "vulture funds" in America, who are using the full weight of US law to screw Argentina even further. If an American company had declared itself bankrupt, owing the Argentine government millions of dollars, do you think the US courts would be pushing for settlement in full? Of course they wouldn't!

Weren't Argentina bankrupt before under the extremely right wing Galtireri?  Hardly a socialist I think.


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about those who are not "the same people"?  Those of us who think McDonnell should be no-where near public office, didn't vote labour and didn't pay our £3 to vote for there leader, are we allowed to question Letwins sincerity and be concerned that his man is shaping policy to this day and for all we know holds the same views now as he did 30 years ago?

Concern is one thing, condemnation without supporting evidence is quite another. He may still hold the same views, but he also may not. If he does then he shouldn't be in the position he is in, but we simply don't know what his views are 30 years later. The list of politicians of all parties who have changed their minds on issues over the years would be a very long one.


I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concern is one thing, condemnation without supporting evidence is quite another. He may still hold the same views, but he also may not. If he does then he shouldn't be in the position he is in, but we simply don't know what his views are 30 years later. The list of politicians of all parties who have changed their minds on issues over the years would be a very long one.

It would be helpful then if he was more explicit about his views today, instead of just apologising.  He based his advice on prejudice,  He didn't know the facts but he felt perfectly justified in condemning large numbers of people to continue to live in poor housing, with poor prospects.  He did this (IMO) like Archer, Aitken, Hamilton and the rest of them, thinking he'd never be found out.  It's to cure this attitude in the Tory party that we need an opposition that at least looks as though it could be an alternative government.  ATM Corbyn doesn't convince me, let alone the Tories!


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about those who are not "the same people"? Those of us who think McDonnell should be no-where near public office, didn't vote labour and didn't pay our £3 to vote for there leader, are we allowed to question Letwins sincerity and be concerned that his man is shaping policy to this day and for all we know holds the same views now as he did 30 years ago?

Indeed, there are very few on here, one or two at most, who are out and out Corbyn/McDonell supporters.


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But who is a terrorist?  The point is that the IRA saw themselves as freedom fighters.  We may not like this, but the fact is that as far as they are concerned we are occupying a fairly large slice of their country.

Northern Ireland was created for those who wanted to remain part of the UK.  The IRA weren't fighting for freedom as they had it already - the Republic of Ireland.  They were terrorists who did not respect the rights of those who wanted to remain British.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the rights of those in ulster who never wanted to be part of Britain but were subject to aggressive British rule in the first place.

I'm not going to pretend to understand the long historical complexities of ulster.... but it's certainly not as straight forrad as you'd suggest.


"I love our club, absolutely love it". (Overton, M 2007)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the rights of those in ulster who never wanted to be part of Britain but were subject to aggressive British rule in the first place.

I'm not going to pretend to understand the long historical complexities of ulster.... but it's certainly not as straight forrad as you'd suggest.

I'm not suggesting anything is straightforward.  I'm stating that those who, for example, put bombs in bins and time them to go off on a Saturday afternoon in Warrington killing two young boys are not 'freedom fighters'; they are terrorists.  Just as ISIS are terrorists. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather disingenuous. Argentina, as you correctly state, could not pay its debts and was, therefore, bankrupt. What then happened was that the Argentine bonds were sold off as "junk bonds" - in other words, worthless - which everyone accepted and only a fool - or a rapacious predator - would buy. Guess what? American "venture capitalists" bought up the bonds at (say) 10 cents in the dollar and then demanded payment in full - 100 cents in the dollar! The US courts are now backing these venture capitalists and making it impossible for Argentina to recover from its bankruptcy. I accept that Argentina screwed up, but lots of companies screw up and declare themselves bankrupt, which means that their debts are written off. Not for these "vulture funds" in America, who are using the full weight of US law to screw Argentina even further. If an American company had declared itself bankrupt, owing the Argentine government millions of dollars, do you think the US courts would be pushing for settlement in full? Of course they wouldn't!

 

It's not as clear cut as that Tony though. The socialist government openly and actively antagonised and attacked these funds, refusing to get around the table and negotiate with them to seek a way forward. Not the best tactic if you're trying to get companies/people to invest in your country to create jobs and grow the economy. They also renationalised YPF which was owned by Spanish company Repsol, without their agreement. This also put any major companies from seeking to invest.  

 

The same principles (rightly or wrongly) don't apply for countries going bankrupt, as companies, which is why there was so much uproar about Iceland and it's banks in the recession and the UK/Dutch holding Iceland to paying the debts in full, although it will be over 30 year period. This is called negotiation, which the socialist Argentine government refused to enter into. They've created their own mess, didn't pay their debts and then refused to sit down with the 'vulture funds' to seek a way forward on how to structure repayments. They only have themselves to blame. Fortunately the new President is much more pragmatic and understands how the markets work so I'm sure he'll reach agreement with the funds and create an environment where companies feel willing and secure enough to invest in their economy.

 

The same applies in Greece whereby Germany and the Eurozone don't want to accept a haircut and just prolong the repayment of debt by Greece over a longer period of time. Given the rate of return on the interest payments, people could make a very strong argument for saying some should be written off as they've more than had a return on the debt in the current low interest rate market conditions, but this is what happens when countries don't pay debts.

 

This is why I think it's so important we as the UK stop building up debts - we're heading towards 90% of GDP as the national debt, this is a terrible infliction to pass onto the next generation. The repayment on interest each year is staggering - we currently pay about £43 BILLION A YEAR in interest payments - think of what this could be used to in schools, NHS, infrastructure etc. When interest rates go up, this will only get worse. But of course austerity is bad, a dirty dirty word, let's all continue to live beyond our means and the debt will magically vanish away

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weren't Argentina bankrupt before under the extremely right wing Galtireri?  Hardly a socialist I think.

 

They probably were, they have a history economic and political mismanagement. I'm not sure what your point is though?

 

My point is socialism does more harm than good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Northern Ireland was created for those who wanted to remain part of the UK.  The IRA weren't fighting for freedom as they had it already - the Republic of Ireland.  They were terrorists who did not respect the rights of those who wanted to remain British.

And those who wanted to remain part of Great Britain were those who'd been planted there by the British and taken the land from the native inhabitants. Nothing is straightforward, black or white.  One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist is all I'm saying.


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They probably were, they have a history economic and political mismanagement. I'm not sure what your point is though?

 

My point is socialism does more harm than good

As does unbridled  capitalism.  Especially capitalism that contributes nothing in the way of taxes to the land where it makes most of its profit.


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is why I think it's so important we as the UK stop building up debts - we're heading towards 90% of GDP as the national debt, this is a terrible infliction to pass onto the next generation. The repayment on interest each year is staggering - we currently pay about £43 BILLION A YEAR in interest payments - think of what this could be used to in schools, NHS, infrastructure etc. When interest rates go up, this will only get worse. But of course austerity is bad, a dirty dirty word, let's all continue to live beyond our means and the debt will magically vanish away

The question is who do we pay it to?  And the answer is mainly to pension funds that provide all our private pensions, mainly not to some nasty overseas creditors as portrayed in the Tory press.  Deficit is the classic way to combat recession, ask any Keynsian.  You pay down the deficit when times get better.  If the thirties taught us nothing else it was this fact.  The policies Osborne was pursuing only made matters worse.  His policies are now behind a smokescreen and no one really knows what's happening.


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And those who wanted to remain part of Great Britain were those who'd been planted there by the British and taken the land from the native inhabitants. Nothing is straightforward, black or white.  One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist is all I'm saying.

I know what you're saying.  You are excusing the IRA, as others have before you.  I'm sure there are many who think ISIS are freedom fighters too.  Do you?  Because, after all, they are fighting for freedom from alleged heretics and others they see as oppressors.

Edited by Saintslass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...