Jump to content

Recommended Posts

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Which is why it's agood election for Labour to

> lose - the Tories will be beaten with Cutters once

> gain and the LDs will be called 'tories'...I

> notice a sudden refreshed step in the likes of

> Balls, Milliband, Clarke etc this morning. The

> wiser and more visionary members of the Labour

> party know that this is a good election to have

> lost.



I would not necessarily be so confident if I were them. It was a long wait the last time. The economy will eventually improve despite current doom and gloom and its hard to win an election if you are in opposition when the economy eventually picks up a head of steam.

We shall see. I think there is a lot of old school malevolence in the tory party that would like to see this fail and Cameron will have to stand up against if indeed he has the genuine will to make this work and he?s not just playing games.


I think Clegg will face similar from some sections of the LibDems but not to the same extent.


If this works it will be testament to both their leadership capabilities.

Well...


Boris is helping his twin brother "Horace" in looking for a job, maybe Dave or Nick have some useful contacts


Any suggestions ?


I'm "Boris" http://www.madametussauds.com/SiteImages/Assets/1/Default-sidebysidepx.jpg ..and I'm "Hh h hhhhorace" ( he has a stutter BTW )




Personally, I think Boris is the more "identical" of the twins




W**F

ruffers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Indeed, although I'd be astonished if this

> coalition hangs together that long.


If it requires a majority vote of no confidence in the government then is there anything to prevent the two staying together.


Vince Cable is the one in the spotlight now after announcing a higher CGT rate and possibly a bank levy too, the whole City will potentially be up in arms. That's the most likely thing that will bring this coalition down, if he is castigated and its generally seen that the Tories would be better without him and Clegg. The Tories then call a general election as they think they can win a clear majority, after all who is going to vote Lib Dem ever again if you are really voting Tory? Increased majority for the Tories will follow next time.

For the sake of common sense and the good of the country I sincerely hope you are wrong on all those counts.


I?m sure the city?s propaganda machines are already starting to grind into action. It should be similar to the protests a while ago. You here the employees speaking about whichever truth they are currently being sold a few hours before it breaks as a news story somewhere.

I am not unhappy at the change of Government. Not because I support the Conservatives, but because I felt that the Labour Goverment was tired and had run out of new ideas. Change was needed for catharsis.


Gordon saved our arses during the economic crash - at huge cost BUT that was required.


Questions have to be asked about why he introduced deregulation to the City that allowed the City institutions and high street banks to become inter-twined in such a way the bank account holder on the street was threatened by exotic and toxic financial instruments dreamt up in the city and based on dodgy loans given to poverty stricken Americans to buy over-priced badly built homes; but then, only Vince Cable was pointing out the stupidity of this.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Marmora Man Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > bequeathes a damaged

> > economy, the highest national debt and fiscal

> > deficit ever.

>

> What would the tories have done differently? There

> was a world-wide recession, lots of countries are

> in the same boat. I actually think that GB did an

> OK job of keeping the economy afloat.

>

> > left in disgrace after taking the country into

> two major

> > wars - losing the lives of over 500 British

> > servicemen and women.

>

> The Conservatives supported the war too, though.

> Only the lib dems were opposed to it, as I

> recall.

>

> By all means, pull Labour up on their failures -

> but try to do so objectively...


Jeremy - don't really want to get into tit for tat arguments but ........


1. Other countries were / are affected by the global financial crisis but not many (if any) had already built up a major deficit by funding so much of gov't spending by debt.


2. Yes Tories voted for the war - but they didn't write the dodgy dossier on which much of the parliamentary decision was based and, generally if Tories send troops to war they are given full support and back up. The Falklands was a war no one anticipated but all stops were pulled out to fund all necessary actions and equipment to back up the military - even to the extent of converting SS Canberra over a weekend to take helicopters and act as a hospital ship.

Actually a few countries had already over-borrowed before the crisis (Greece being the obvious example) but I take your point.


The dossier was totally lacking in substance... regardless of who cooked it up, anyone who agreed it was a basis for war is not without guilt!

jenny1840 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> i think surely the biggest cock ?


You say this in jest Jenny, however, much like an iceberg, 2/3 of the biggest cocks are hidden.


In reality they are even bigger cocks than they seem.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • In 2016 London City Airport began using concentrated flight paths. When there's a predominantly westerly wind, incoming aircraft approach from East London (north of the River). When there's a predominantly Easterly wind, incoming aircraft approach the airport from the West: circling through Forest Hill, Dulwich, Vauxhall, Tower Hamlets, Docklands. This latter flight path affects many of us in South East London. https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/london-city-airport-concentrated-flight-paths The planes going into City are often below 2,000 ft, so very noisy. Sometimes we have incoming Heathrow at the same time, flying higher. The early flights that I hear e.g. 04:30 are incoming to Heathrow. They are scheduled to land at 05:30 but are 'early'. Apparently the government allows a percentage of flights to arrive early and late (but these are now established as regular occurrences, informally part of the schedule). IMHO Londoners are getting very poor political representation on this issue. Incredible that if you want to complain about aircraft noise, you're supposed to contact the airport concerned! Preposterous and designed solely in favour of aviation expansion.
    • Yet another recommendation for Jafar. Such a nice guy, really reliable and fair. He fixed a problem with our boiler and then incredibly kindly made two more visits to replace a different part at no extra cost. 
    • I didn't have any problems with plane noise until city airport started flying planes to and from about 5-8 minutes apart from 5.30 am or  6 am,  and even with ear plugs and double glazing I am woken at about 6 well before I usually would wake  up. I have lived here since 1986 and it is relatively recently that the planes have been flying far too low over East dulwich. I very much doubt that they are headinbg to Heathrow or from Heathrow. As the crow flies we are much , MUCH closer to City Airport than Heathrow or Gatwick. I even saw one flying so low you could see all the windows, when I was in Peckham Rye Park.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...