In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note.
Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon.
All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting.
On January 02 2014 19:05 KwarK wrote: The will of the people has never before featured in British military initiatives. Those powers were always wielded by the PM on behalf of Her Majesty. This is new and confusing ground for the British constitution as the Foreign Office has always known the will of the Cabinet and been able to act accordingly.
To some extent this is true in many democracies. But to basically come out and openly support the government's right to act against to will of the public seems like political suicide.
And convincing parliament is a significantly lower bar than convincing the public at large anyway.
Labour pretty much did exactly that in 2003 and were somehow voted in again next election
Well, they lied about it and then lied about lying about it. They didn't go out and say:
"This whole thing with democracy is getting really inconvenient, and stops us from doing what we want to do."
Not saying one is morally better than the other but I thought in politics you were supposed to be subtle about ignoring your voters' opinions.
On January 02 2014 19:05 KwarK wrote: The will of the people has never before featured in British military initiatives. Those powers were always wielded by the PM on behalf of Her Majesty. This is new and confusing ground for the British constitution as the Foreign Office has always known the will of the Cabinet and been able to act accordingly.
To some extent this is true in many democracies. But to basically come out and openly support the government's right to act against to will of the public seems like political suicide.
And convincing parliament is a significantly lower bar than convincing the public at large anyway.
Labour pretty much did exactly that in 2003 and were somehow voted in again next election
Well, they lied about it and then lied about lying about it. They didn't go out and say:
"This whole thing with democracy is getting really inconvenient, and stops us from doing what we want to do."
Not saying one is morally better than the other but I thought in politics you were supposed to be subtle about ignoring your voters' opinions.
It was no secret that the vast majority of the public was vehemently against the war in Iraq, I remember the mass demonstrations, the government went ahead and did it anyway though, it wasn't very subtle at all.
The huge difficulty David Cameron will have winning a majority at the next election has been laid bare by a new poll published today, which reveals more than a third of those who voted Conservative in 2010 would not do so again were an election held tomorrow.
The figures, which will worry Tory MPs, show that the 37% of one time Tory voters that have abandoned the party far outweigh the 6% of voters who have been attracted from other parties. Considering the Cameron failed to win a majority in 2010, he can not afford to lose votes to other parties if he wants to govern without the Lib Dems.
The poll was conducted by Lord Ashcroft, a former deputy chairman of the Conservatives, as part of his 'Project Blueprint: Phase 4' research into how the party can win the next election.
According to the survey around half of the voters that have abandoned the party said they would vote Ukip in an election tomorrow.
Less than one in five defectors have switched to Labour or the Liberal Democrats. One third say they do not know how they will vote.
And only 3% of voters who did not for Tory in 2010 and would not do so tomorrow would consider doing so in the future.
On January 02 2014 19:05 KwarK wrote: The will of the people has never before featured in British military initiatives. Those powers were always wielded by the PM on behalf of Her Majesty. This is new and confusing ground for the British constitution as the Foreign Office has always known the will of the Cabinet and been able to act accordingly.
To some extent this is true in many democracies. But to basically come out and openly support the government's right to act against to will of the public seems like political suicide.
And convincing parliament is a significantly lower bar than convincing the public at large anyway.
Labour pretty much did exactly that in 2003 and were somehow voted in again next election
Well, they lied about it and then lied about lying about it. They didn't go out and say:
"This whole thing with democracy is getting really inconvenient, and stops us from doing what we want to do."
Not saying one is morally better than the other but I thought in politics you were supposed to be subtle about ignoring your voters' opinions.
It was no secret that the vast majority of the public was vehemently against the war in Iraq, I remember the mass demonstrations, the government went ahead and did it anyway though, it wasn't very subtle at all.
Interesting, I always thought it was almost evenly split, with many believing Colin Powel's tale about WMDs. But I was looking at some polls from 2003 and it was more like 25% approve, 60% oppose.
The huge difficulty David Cameron will have winning a majority at the next election has been laid bare by a new poll published today, which reveals more than a third of those who voted Conservative in 2010 would not do so again were an election held tomorrow.
The figures, which will worry Tory MPs, show that the 37% of one time Tory voters that have abandoned the party far outweigh the 6% of voters who have been attracted from other parties. Considering the Cameron failed to win a majority in 2010, he can not afford to lose votes to other parties if he wants to govern without the Lib Dems.
The poll was conducted by Lord Ashcroft, a former deputy chairman of the Conservatives, as part of his 'Project Blueprint: Phase 4' research into how the party can win the next election.
According to the survey around half of the voters that have abandoned the party said they would vote Ukip in an election tomorrow.
Less than one in five defectors have switched to Labour or the Liberal Democrats. One third say they do not know how they will vote.
And only 3% of voters who did not for Tory in 2010 and would not do so tomorrow would consider doing so in the future.
French president Francois Hollande has been branded "failing", eccentric" and "rather undignified" by Tory MPs after the French embassy complained about London's City A.M. newspaper editor Allister Heath branding their economy a "failed socialist experiment".
In response to Heath's attack, the French embassy issued a rebuttal titled "10 accounts on which City A.M. has got it wrong on France", dismissing his "ideological mix of prejudice and error” and mocking the National Health Service as “ailing” and suffering from ”years of under-investment”.
However, Tory MPs have hit back hard, with some even ridiculing Hollande for his rumoured affair with actress Julie Gayet, over which he is set to face questions today in his first official press conference of 2014. One of the President's bodyguards was reportedly snapped taking croissants to the apartment in which Hollande may have been staying with Gayet.
Speaking to the Huffington Post UK, Brooks Newmark, Tory member of the influential Commons Treasury Committee, said: "Francois Hollande seems to manage his country's financial affairs as well as his personal affairs."
"Money is no object in this relief effort," according to David Cameron, who has promised to provide support for the beleaguered communities affected by the floods. Speaking on Tuesday evening, the prime minister, who had returned to London following a two-day tour of the England's flood-hit areas, warned that the recovery would be a "long haul", but promised, "Whatever money is needed for it will be spent".
The prime minster chaired a meeting of the Government's emergency committee Cobra in Whitehall to assess the latest situation on Tuesday evening, and will chair a new Cabinet committee on Thursday, which was set up to oversee the recovery.
Sixteen severe flood warnings remain in place, along with more than 100 flood warnings and more than 200 flood alerts, and with the rainfall set to continue, Cameron has cancelled his planned trip to the Middle East to personally take charge of the relief operation.
"There is absolutely no sign of this threat abating, and with further rain and strong winds forecast throughout the week, things may get worse before they get better," said Cameron, a warning echoing an earlier statement by the Environment Agency (EA), which said that the rising level of the Thames was likely to cause more disruption, with the ancient river already responsible for the flooding of 800 homes in Windsor and Maidenhead.
Plans for a "power of recall" for MPs who have committed "serious wrongdoing" have been abandoned following a dispute between the Tories and Lib Dems.
Lib Dem Party President Tim Farron said the "modest" plan was blocked by the prime minister David Cameron.
But Tory MP Zac Goldsmith said he was "disgusted" by the Lib Dems' actions.
The Independent reported that the plans would not be included in May's Queen's Speech, the last chance for them to become law before the 2015 election.
The idea, which was proposed in response to the public anger about the 2009 parliamentary expenses scandal, was included in both the Conservatives' and Lib Dems' last general election manifestos.
In their 2010 Coalition Agreement, both parties promised "early legislation" to allow voters to force a by-election "where an MP is found to have engaged in serious wrongdoing".
(Reuters) - The savings of the European Union's 500 million citizens could be used to fund long-term investments to boost the economy and help plug the gap left by banks since the financial crisis, an EU document says.
The EU is looking for ways to wean the 28-country bloc from its heavy reliance on bank financing and find other means of funding small companies, infrastructure projects and other investment.
"The economic and financial crisis has impaired the ability of the financial sector to channel funds to the real economy, in particular long-term investment," said the document, seen by Reuters.
The Commission will ask the bloc's insurance watchdog in the second half of this year for advice on a possible draft law "to mobilize more personal pension savings for long-term financing", the document said.
Source What implications does this have? Aren't personal pension funds already geared towards long-term investment?
(Reuters) - The savings of the European Union's 500 million citizens could be used to fund long-term investments to boost the economy and help plug the gap left by banks since the financial crisis, an EU document says.
The EU is looking for ways to wean the 28-country bloc from its heavy reliance on bank financing and find other means of funding small companies, infrastructure projects and other investment.
"The economic and financial crisis has impaired the ability of the financial sector to channel funds to the real economy, in particular long-term investment," said the document, seen by Reuters.
The Commission will ask the bloc's insurance watchdog in the second half of this year for advice on a possible draft law "to mobilize more personal pension savings for long-term financing", the document said.
Source What implications does this have? Aren't personal pension funds already geared towards long-term investment?
That the Road to Serfdom turned out to be pretty damn accurate... although my perverse side says most of those with those with these personal savings voted for the spending that has put governments in this position where they feel the need to consider confiscating private savings to prop up their balance sheets, so if this happens they'll get what they deserve.
No posts about the Scottish independence vote? It's got the politicians pretty riled up at least. You'd think the world was going to end if Scotland dipped out from the UK. (And hell maybe it will)
(Reuters) - The savings of the European Union's 500 million citizens could be used to fund long-term investments to boost the economy and help plug the gap left by banks since the financial crisis, an EU document says.
The EU is looking for ways to wean the 28-country bloc from its heavy reliance on bank financing and find other means of funding small companies, infrastructure projects and other investment.
"The economic and financial crisis has impaired the ability of the financial sector to channel funds to the real economy, in particular long-term investment," said the document, seen by Reuters.
The Commission will ask the bloc's insurance watchdog in the second half of this year for advice on a possible draft law "to mobilize more personal pension savings for long-term financing", the document said.
Source What implications does this have? Aren't personal pension funds already geared towards long-term investment?
That the Road to Serfdom turned out to be pretty damn accurate... although my perverse side says most of those with those with these personal savings voted for the spending that has put governments in this position where they feel the need to consider confiscating private savings to prop up their balance sheets, so if this happens they'll get what they deserve.
No posts about the Scottish independence vote? It's got the politicians pretty riled up at least. You'd think the world was going to end if Scotland dipped out from the UK. (And hell maybe it will)
Yes, going after people's private bank accounts because you couldn't balance a spreadsheet if your life depended on it is stealing. You already tax them but it's not enough, so why not just dip into their bank accounts who cares that history shows that once the government starts taking something it rarely if ever stops, who cares that there is the principle in modern Western government that you get your money through taxation and not confiscation... Is there absolutely nothing that the State doesn't have the right to take for its own uses? I thought we were living in 2014 and not 1214. The King demanding a new "gift" of a kind he hasn't demanded before because he spends like a drunken sailor is an era of history I thought we'd left... shit like this is why the barons got together and made John sign the Magna Carta at Runnymede.
Nick Clegg has fuelled speculation that he is positioning for coalition with Labour next year by saying he believes Ed Miliband's party has "changed".
But Ed Miliband has indicated he's not interested in the pairing, stating: "What I'm looking for is a majority Labour government."
Hinting at his desire for a deal with Labour, the Deputy Prime Minister also criticised the Tories for lurching to the right, accusing his current partners in government of becoming "much more ideological" since 2010.
Ben Gummer, a Conservative backbencher and the MP for Ipswich, will be bringing forward a 10-minute rule bill in the Commons on Tuesday in which he will propose to change the name of National Insurance contributions to "Earnings Tax".
Ben Gummer has been pushing for more transparency in the tax system. According to his office, a change of name would "make the contributions clearer."
"National Insurance resembles an insurance policy less and less. Renaming it a tax would make it more honest in what it is, just another form of tax."
Mr Gummer hopes this could be the first step to merging Income Tax and National Insurance. "Both essentially tax the same thing," Mr Gummer told The Independent.
"Dividing them complicates things; it complicates things for companies, it complicates things for the Treasury, and it makes it more opaque to the taxpayers."
Here he is introducing the bill, using the ten minute rule: (sorry UK viewers only, i don't think there's a youtube link)
On February 18 2014 04:54 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yes, going after people's private bank accounts because you couldn't balance a spreadsheet if your life depended on it is stealing. You already tax them but it's not enough, so why not just dip into their bank accounts who cares that history shows that once the government starts taking something it rarely if ever stops, who cares that there is the principle in modern Western government that you get your money through taxation and not confiscation... Is there absolutely nothing that the State doesn't have the right to take for its own uses? I thought we were living in 2014 and not 1214. The King demanding a new "gift" of a kind he hasn't demanded before because he spends like a drunken sailor is an era of history I thought we'd left... shit like this is why the barons got together and made John sign the Magna Carta at Runnymede.
Except that current state of affairs is exactly the result of democracy. There is no king and the whole society is at least partially responsible for the spending. Not even talking about the fact that as always you are pulling stuff out of your ass. Or do you have actually any specific proposals on how do they want to achieve the goals they stated. Because there are myriad ways they can try to achieve them without confiscating anything. But your ideological bias is hard to overcome so I understand that you cannot see what you don't want to see.
David Cameron has said that he remains "profoundly shocked" after one of his closest aides was arrested on suspicion of offences relating to child pornography.
Patrick Rock was arrested last month after police examined computers in No 10 Downing Street.
Number 10 has said he was arrested last month "a few hours" after Mr Cameron's office informed police of suspicions about his conduct.
Mr Rock, 62, resigned as a policy adviser to the Prime Minister following his arrest.
Speaking in Coventry after making a speech on the economy, Mr Cameron said: "Obviously when I heard these allegations I was profoundly shocked and I remain profoundly shocked today."
EPT
