Bolitics The New Condem Government

[drat01]

I can't remember any other UK political party doing this - any examples?

[Eames]

Not off the top of my head to be fair..... the only example that  I can recall now is the surprise at Nick Cleggs apology over tuition fees. 

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

I can't remember a party actively trying to erase their recent history, but then again no government has had the tools to carry out such a sinister and undemocratic act, which this lot do as everything is stored online and can quite easily be done away with.

Edited November 14, 2013 by CarewsEyebrowDesigner

[PauloBarnesi]

No one can remember because they have been effective at doing it 

 

All political parties now face the same problem of the impossibility of burying the past and its a massive problem for them. Even major scandals/change of policies, etc in the old days had a way of dying a death. Maybe in the future they will be wiser about things and not make promises they can’t keep, and not get into bed with the wrong bedfellows.

 

I think though its the conservative party doing it, not the state itself, which would be something even more sinister...

[drat01]

Apparently next stop is a re-writing of the Bible - here is a leaked first copy

 

"In the beginning the UK was governed by a terrible evil regime called the Labour Party. The leader of the Labour party despite imposing the evil and unfair tax of the NHS said that all people should return to their home town for a census. In 1925 Mary and Joseph (as they were known at the time) Thatcher returned to Grantham and gave birth in a grocers shop to a daughter who they called Margaret.

 

Wise men called Reagan from the West, Gorbachov from the East and Tebbit from down below came to witness the birth and gave presents of shares, derivatives and any money they could avoid paying tax on.

 

Margaret grew up as a Chemist and quickly gained a following of many by standing up to the tyranny of the evil Labour party and their henchmen the Unions!

 

As a member of parliament she did many great things like removing the cancer forming, obese initiating free milk for Children. She gained great credibility and despite mocking became the leader of the Tories and led them through the wilderness of the North of England, parting the Mersey Canal on the way, to rule this country.

 

While running the country many questioned her wisdom but she ruled with great authority and when asked questions on disputes she crushed those who opposed her with a Happy carefree manner that all her subjects, especially those based in the enchanted city of London enjoyed.

 

As time went on Margaret became weak from so much good she bestowed on her people, so she happily stood down for one of her followers Judas Major. Major tried his best but he failed to carry on the good work of Margaret and the country became again a hotbed of Marxist policies under the Blair. 

 

During these dark times a follower of Margaret was growing up in humble circumstances as a multi-millionaire at Eton. David Cameron was his name and he felt it was his privilege to run the country along with his disciples of Gideon, Boris and Ashcroft. 

 

And so it came to pass that Blair passed on his evil throne to a man from the devils land of Scotland and David saw his chance to return the country to it's rightful ways of greed and privilege. David defeated the one eyed monster that was brown and became the leader of all of the free world.

 

David continued to rule over the people of the UK and gave them back things they had not seen for many many years, such as mass unemployment, poverty and rising crime rates. David was happy though and even let the Samaritan Clegg into the inner circle of his Government.

 

David lived happily ever after (unlike his citizens) and we should all be thankful to him

 

Amen "

[mockingbird_franklin]

16 Saturday Nov 2013

 

Etymological maps of common words like ‘clegg’, ‘cameron’ and ‘duncan smith’

 

2) ‘clegg‘

3) ‘duncan smith‘

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2013/11/16/etymological-maps-of-common-words-like-clegg-cameron-and-duncan-smith/

[Jon]

No, it isn't April Fools Day:

 

Boris Johnson: Super-rich an oppressed minority like homeless people

By Adam Bienkov Monday, 18 November 2013 9:03 AM22

<img src="http://p2.politics.co.uk/rwd-full-photos/johnson-it-is-my-duty-to-stick-up-for-every-p.21396342.jpg" alt="Johnson: "It is my duty to stick up for every put-upon minority in the city" " title="Johnson: "It is my duty to stick up for every put-upon minority in the city" " /> Johnson: "It is my duty to stick up for every put-upon minority in the city"

 

The super-rich are a "put-upon minority" like homeless people and Irish travellers and should be protected from any further "bullying" from the public, Boris Johnson claimed today.

Johnson called for an end to "bashing" the richest people in Britain and suggested they should instead receive "automatic knighthoods" for their contribution to the UK exchequer.

"It is my duty to stick up for every put-upon minority in the city – from the homeless to Irish travellers to ex-gang members to disgraced former MPs," wrote the Conservative mayor of London in the Daily Telegraph.

"But there is one minority that I still behold with a benign bewilderment, and that is the very, very rich."

He said the public should instead extend their "humble and hearty thanks" to the super-rich who "now pay 29.8 per cent of all the income tax and national insurance received by the Treasury."

"We should stop any bashing or moaning or preaching or bitching and simply give thanks for the prodigious sums of money that they are contributing to the tax revenues of this country, and that enable us to look after our sick and our elderly and to build roads, railways and schools," he claimed.

Johnson believes the super-rich have been "brow-beaten and bullied and threatened with new taxes, by everyone from the Archbishop of Canterbury to Nick Clegg".

He suggested that taxes on the super rich could instead be cut and that the richest people in the country should be automatically awarded honours by the Queen.

"Indeed, it is possible, as the American economist Art Laffer pointed out, that they might contribute even more if we cut their rates of tax; but it is time we recognised the heroic contribution they already make.

"In fact, we should stop publishing rich lists in favour of an annual list of the top 100 tax heroes, with automatic knighthoods for the top 10."

Johnson's comparison between the super-rich and homeless people will enrage campaigners against homelessness.

The London Mayor had promised to end rough sleeping in London by the end of 2012.

However, research released this year found that the number of rough sleepers had doubled in the capital over the past five years.

Johnson has been a long-term advocate of reducing taxes for Britain's wealthiest people. Earlier this year he called for a new "flat tax" which would have reduced the top rate of tax to just 30%.

He has sometimes been accused of being too close to the City of London. His first mayoral election campaign was heavily financed by City donors.

Donations to his second mayoral election campaign were routed through Conservative central office, meaning that names of individual donors did not have to be revealed.

Labour today described Johnson's comments as "deeply offensive".

“Many hard-pressed Londoners will find Boris’ views on the super-rich difficult to stomach, at a time when people are struggling with the cost of living crisis his comments are deeply offensive," London Assembly Labour group leader Len Duvall said.

"Rather than cosying up to the 0.1% he should be spending his time using his position as our Mayor to ease the burden on ordinary Londoners."

[Eames]

Oh Boris. Oh Boris, Boris, Boris. 

 

Googled "Facepalm" for a clever image...... this one seemed the most appropriate. 

 

[Awol]

While the knighthoods and hearty humble thanks schtick is obviously none sense, he has a point about their huge relative contribution to the exchequer and therefore national well being.

I've always felt the hatred of the super rich in this country is mainly on account of jealousy over the success of others - a particularly unpleasant character trait. In a free society people are entitled to get rich and good for them if they do imho.

[chrisp65]

I know if I had a choice of being homeless or super rich it wouldn't be an easy choice, I really like cardboard and getting my head kicked in.

 

On the other hand, I also like extended foreign holidays and phoning a tory to tell him to jump.

 

So it's a tricky one.

 

There's a reason somebody pays a lot of tax, it's because they have a lot of money. If they don't like it, they can give enough away for the problem to be sorted.

[drat01]

While the knighthoods and hearty humble thanks schtick is obviously none sense, he has a point about their huge relative contribution to the exchequer and therefore national well being.

I've always felt the hatred of the super rich in this country is mainly on account of jealousy over the success of others - a particularly unpleasant character trait. In a free society people are entitled to get rich and good for them if they do imho.

Suffice to say I completely and utterly disagree with that.

 

So basically you are saying that people should doff their caps and bow down to the rich in society? Jealousy has nothing whatsoever to do with it, a resentment that people continue to make money off the well being of others and often by nothing more than who they know rather than what they know is more the case. Why should attendance places like Eton give such privilege? Major certainly hit a correct note recently with his comments re influence.

 

"

The Conservative grandee said the dominance of the wealthy and well-educated in the ‘upper echelons’ of public life was ‘truly shocking’...." (Note: I loved how the Mail tried to make that an attack on Labour !)

Comments from people like that frankly obnoxious clearing in the woods Boris, certainly do nothing but confirm what a lot of people suspect

[Awol]

 

While the knighthoods and hearty humble thanks schtick is obviously none sense, he has a point about their huge relative contribution to the exchequer and therefore national well being.

I've always felt the hatred of the super rich in this country is mainly on account of jealousy over the success of others - a particularly unpleasant character trait. In a free society people are entitled to get rich and good for them if they do imho.

Suffice to say I completely and utterly disagree with that.

 

So basically you are saying that people should doff their caps and bow down to the rich in society?

Wow, you've even quoted the part of my post where I said doing that is nonsense!

 

I was simply saying that he is right when mentioning how much tax the super rich pay towards our national income (and therefore the funding of public services for all) and therefore they are not quite the bogey men some people make them out to be. After all there is no guarantee that the wealth they hold would simply be distributed amongst the population if they didn't have it, it may not even be in the country.

 

Jealousy has nothing whatsoever to do with it, a resentment that people continue to make money off the well being of others and often by nothing more than who they know rather than what they know is more the case. Why should attendance places like Eton give such privilege?

Right, everyone who is super rich is simply exploiting some poor bastard or has been handed a wedge because they went to Eton...

[colhint]

he does have a bit of a point though. If you pay a million to a political party you are enobled or knighted at least. If you pay a million to the exchequer you are a exploiting b.....rd ripping off employees and customers and only got where you are because of family connections.

[bickster]

Truth of the matter is that "rich people" pay a much smaller percentage of their income in tax than the less well off and that is why what Boris is talking about is utter nonsense.

On another level it is fairly transparent that he's saying this now to set his stall out for Cameron's future inevitable demise and his claim to the throne.

[drat01]

As others have liked and commented on the issue is quite a simple one and something that an ex leader of the Tory party and pm has raised recently . You may have no issue with status borne out of birth but many do. Wealth is not the issue it's how you attain it is.

[Awol]

On your last point about it mattering to you whether someone earns their wealth (fine, apparently) or inherits it (terrible) I don't get why you feel it's your business? If I work hard, have a bit of luck and become a self made rich dude, why on earth should it then be unacceptable for me to leave that to my children in order to improve their lives and those of their children?

I find your attitude in that respect to be perverse. It's human nature and entirely respectable to want to do your best for your family, whether during your lifetime or after it.

[drat01]

 As said wealth is not the issue, but you are consistently missing that point, how you attain that wealth and what you then do with it is.

Shame a valid point and the questioning of it has been spoiled by deflecting any questioning of Boris and his views. 

Have fun and don't forget we are all here to serve the elite :-)

[bickster]

C'mon girls untwist your g-strings

[snowychap]

I've always felt the hatred of the super rich in this country is mainly on account of jealousy over the success of others

What trite shite, Jon - that's a political judgement rather than the etymological one that Mr Mooney explained to us on VT a few years ago.

[Awol]

 

I've always felt the hatred of the super rich in this country is mainly on account of jealousy over the success of others

What trite shite, Jon - that's a political judgement rather than the etymological one that Mr Mooney explained to us on VT a few years ago.

 

Trite shite it may be in your opinion, that doesn't change the fact it is mine.  Insofar as it's the business of government at all, I'm more concerned with trying to pull more people up than pulling a few people down.