BBC Blog Network

User Profile

UglyJohn

Listed below are comments made by UglyJohn between Monday, 21st July 2008 and Thursday, 7th August 2008.

«Newer
Older»

Celebrating the knife 11:58am on 07 Aug 2008 Yet again, a journalist uncritically parrots the party line, that crime is falling, without any reference to concerns that those figures may be rigged in a way that would impress Eldrige Gerry.
Citizen and the state 3:27pm on 05 Aug 2008 Mr Blair argued, admitting that during his period in office he had too often felt it necessary to control from the centre.

This is a neat little euphemism to cover off both Blair’s Messiah complex and his inability to promote anyone of consequence and ability into the Cabinet. The former was born of his conviction that only he could save Britain, as he had personally saved the Labour party, the second resulted from his own insecurities that he was unable to banish.

The reasons why the bottom sector of society is getting so far from the top is that they are the the least solvent in society, and thus the worst affected by Labour’s increasingly bizarre attempts at social engineering.

‘Notting Hill, Nu-Labourites’ will barely notice the impact of an increase in car tax. They will literally not have to think twice about how to pay for it. Two people keeping a 15 year old car going on a miniscule collective income will think of little else. Arguments that reducing part of the 0.4% of World CO2 emissions generated by UK cars will not cut much ice.

The simple fact is that the State isn’t much good at doing things for people. It is not compulsory for State organisations to be inefficient, over-manned, expensive and seemingly welded to archaic practices and behaviours. It is not compulsory, it just happens almost automatically.

Yes, people in the bottom sector turn to their peers for mutual support rather than the State. Has anyone considered that they are right, and their critics are wrong.

The new relationship should consist of The State doing less and less for us, and taking less of our money to do it with. We should be allowed to retain as much of our income as possible, and allowed to make our own decisions as to what to do with it. If we make bad choices, we should be allowed to suffer the consequences of our actions. The state should provide assistance of only the most basic kind to those who have no other options.

16~ Biscuit eater – You are sounding like a Thatcherite! The lady said, “Equality of Opportunity, (But not of result!) Well done.

You ask what should be done about the children of the workshy if they have any! Discouraging them from having any should be a high priority. Not offering to pay for them in advance of their conception would be a good first step.
Testing the waters 10:35pm on 31 Jul 2008 197# I think you missed the irony in your own comment.

UK Parliamentary term, five years

Three elections

1997 to 2001 FOUR YEARS
2001 to 2005 FOUR YEARS

But now apparently it is wrong to call for an election early, when Labour are doing badly!
Odd that!

Here's why there should be an election. Because in 2005, Tony Blair said that he would serve a full term if Labour were re-elected.

That became an election promise, which he very soon broke.

The people of the UK got a new Labour PM that they were told they wouldn't get.

Now we are possibly going to end up with yet another Labour PM within the same term. DO you see the difficulty. Three leaders in three years, when we were promised one.

That is why there should be an election.
Yawning gap 3:44pm on 29 Jul 2008 “40. At 3:12pm on 29 Jul 2008, frglee wrote:
I must be about the only person who quite likes Gordon Brown. He strikes me as intelligent, decent, honest, hardworking with a good heart. Sadly he is not desperately photogenic, humourous or too good with the media. Maybe people want PM's with a slick PR operation these days?

People are so fickle...one minute he is the best Chancellor of the Exchequer ever,with 10 years uninterrupted growth in the UK,the next he is 'washed up' because of international events such as subprime and energy and food prices going crazy. As if they were caused by him!!!.”

Yes, I think you are the only person who still likes Gordon Mc Clown.

As someone who has never felt anything but profound contempt and hatred for either him or his nefarious predecessor, can I offer you the other side of the coin.

You say that “one minute he is the best Chancellor of the Exchequer ever, the next he is 'washed up'.”

Your error here is the assumption that he was ever any good as Chancellor.
He took over an economy in good shape which was running a surplus, but which is now hideously in deficit.

Taxation has doubled while productivity is down. Poverty and inequality has increased while standards in health and education have fallen hugely.

By any reasonable indicator, Gordon Mc Clown’s handling of the economy has been poor. He has overseen the flinging of money at many projects, such as the NHS, but to no apparent results.

The only reason that he appears to have been proficient as a Chancellor is because, to put it bluntly, he has lied to us. The productivity has been fudged, the Unemployment figures have been fudged, the inflation rate has been fudged and the borrowing figures have been hugely fudged via the medium of P.F.I. The PM has had the unmitigated gall to criticise banks for ‘off balance sheet activities,’ but that is exactly how UK PLC has been run for years.

If he had done a decent job as chancellor over 10 years, the current international situation would have less power to hurt us as a country. We would be more secure, have greater reserves, less benefit dependency, a smaller state payroll to maintain and flexibility to trim sails and survive.

If the UK were a person it should be someone with no debts other than perhaps a small mortgage, lots of savings and a secure job.

Thanks to Gordon, the house is mortgaged to the hilt, with a couple of secured loans on top and the credit cards and loans are maxed out. The wages are gone the day after payday, there’s no food in the house and we’ve even robbed the kid’s piggy banks.

Yes, the international problems are not his fault, but our lack of preparedness is down to him and no-one else.
Yawning gap 3:26pm on 29 Jul 2008 "16. At 2:09pm on 29 Jul 2008, Brownedov wrote:
Re #5 stumo-
"Become Labour leader now and chances are you'll be looking for a new job in 2 years."

So what's different if "Duff" Gordon stays? At least you might improve your pension and severance pay."

Don't forget your Milton chaps,
As the Devil said, before being cast into the pit "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven."
Sore political heads 3:40pm on 25 Jul 2008 Nick,

Serious question,

If Gordo goes, and the Labour have their third leader in a single term of govenrment, surely the case for an immediate election would be unarguable.

The problem is of course, that the Labour party are, as I understand it, flat broke, and couldn't afford to fight an election.

What then?
Britain has a drink problem 3:31pm on 22 Jul 2008 In my life there have been times when I drank more than I do now, but these days I usualy drink 10-12 units a week at most.

From that perspective, I would be very upset if Labour decided to interfere in the way that is suggested here.

If they are so keep on personal responsibility, why don't they encourage people to develop some? Telling people what to do will not enforce that.

Whatever they do will not benefit British pubs, which will be a shame. I like pubs. I like spending time in them. Good pubs are rarer and rarer these days, and this will not help.

I just wish Labour would go and sort out the economy or something. Leave pubs alone.
Oops 1:44pm on 22 Jul 2008 30. At 1:28pm on 22 Jul 2008, Dickydoughnut wrote:
No, Nick, it's not "you can watch Evan Davis and I" it's "you can watch Evan Davis and ME". You wouldn't say "you can watch I", would you?

Complain about this comment
Oops 10:58am on 22 Jul 2008 Are you on tomorrow? I must listen. I have given up on the usual mob. Far too smug!
Politics v economics 4:31pm on 21 Jul 2008 Why do people endlessly throw red herrings into this discussion?

Yes, there are people wo are genuinely unable to work, and measures like this are not about them. There are other people, many other people, whose only problem is state sponsored lazyness.

These people should not be tolerated. The fact that they system currently does is a disgrace. If these proposals make a dent in this chronic waste, all the better.

This process does not need to be subjective either. There are various assesment indexes that can give assesments of disability / incapacity on a percentage basis that are wholly objective.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

UglyJohn