Is Ed Miliband going to lose the next election for Labour?

[Stan Tamudo]

So his speech was thin on policy and the delegates at the conference still don't know what Labour would do if they got in and yet he received two standing ovations from the 'sheep' !! You've got to laugh !!!

 

I think they hold up boards telling them to clap.

 

:hihi:

 

I'll bet someone sends you a PM asking you to do a smiley post.

[mossdog]

Have to say that the Labour conference reminds me of watching a school play!............also the lad in charge means well but has a long.............long........way to go!....as for Balls,well it's all in the name.

[Stan Tamudo]

Have to say that the Labour conference reminds me of watching a school play!............also the lad in charge means well but has a long.............long........way to go!....as for Balls,well it's all in the name.

 

Well you would say that, wouldn't you?

[gnvqsos]

Have to say that the Labour conference reminds me of watching a school play!............also the lad in charge means well but has a long.............long........way to go!....as for Balls,well it's all in the name.

 

Balls are invaluable for many sports,reducing friction on cars;dogs defacate-as you say its all in the name:rolleyes:

[Expat owl]

I'll bet someone sends you a PM asking you to do a smiley post.

 

Going by your posting history, you'll be one of those clapping when the boards go up !!!!! Bah, Bah, Bah !!!

[L00b]

Building houses for poor,50 pc tax on top earners,Vocational bacc-look up the rest for yourself lazybones:hihi:

Wanting to set up a vocational baccalaureat is nothing new, and certainly not the preserve of Labour. I've forgotten how many EU countries have been doing this for -positively- decades, France and Germany first.

 

Building houses for the poor. Mmmm, sounds sexy, very Keynesian. Only, they haven't got the money yet (as pointed out earlier), so a policy based on vapourware revenue from telcos (which will presumably be 'excused' from a very substantial part of their tax liabilities again). Looks, walks and sounds like a let's-do-it-again property-bubble-propping policy. Someone please tell them.

 

50% tax on top earners. Mmm. Been over that one time and again, especially since Hollande started 'equivalent' fiscal policies a few months ago (since it's Labour's turn again in France these days). Current net result is all-time record unemployment figures, record company closures and startup rate in freefall (Hollande's new 60% tax on capital transfers for entrepreneurs has something to do with this, methinks ) and record emigration applications for Canada (Québec of course) in the past 3 months.

 

So, erm...what's left?

[gnvqsos]

Wanting to set up a vocational baccalaureat is nothing new, and certainly not the preserve of Labour. I've forgotten how many EU countries have been doing this for -positively- decades, France and Germany first.

 

Building houses for the poor. Mmmm, sounds sexy, very Keynesian. Only, they haven't got the money yet (as pointed out earlier), so a policy based on vapourware revenue from telcos (which will presumably be 'excused' from a very substantial part of their tax liabilities again). Looks, walks and sounds like a let's-do-it-again property-bubble-propping policy. Someone please tell them.

 

50% tax on top earners. Mmm. Been over that one time and again, especially since Hollande started 'equivalent' fiscal policies a few months ago (since it's Labour's turn again in France these days). Current net result is all-time record unemployment figures, record company closures and startup rate in freefall (Hollande's new 60% tax on capital transfers for entrepreneurs has something to do with this, methinks ) and record emigration applications for Canada (Québec of course) in the past 3 months.

 

So, erm...what's left?

thanks for fleshing out the details and for your qualified support-cheers( can I call you comrade?)

[L00b]

thanks for fleshing out the details and for your qualified support-cheers( can I call you comrade?)

You can't, and I don't support you, or anyone else for that matter

 

But I do enjoy analysing ongoing and proposed policies (of all parties) under a cold, rational, pragmatic approach.

 

So far, bar a few occasional successes here and there for the Coalition Tories (not particularly spectacular ones, so completely escaped the red tops most on here appear to favour, and few on here will even be aware of them, but important cornerstones for the ongoing recovery), it's been really poor. Even then, these successes are nothing more than what's been tried (and worked) elsewhere, so little merit or attaboys there - these could have been obtained by Labour 10 years ago or longer, had they bothered.

 

Labour have been holding their (alleged) policy cards to their chests for so long, most commentators have since given up waiting for them. I don't think we need to comment on their past policies too much - like all Gvts, some have been good, some have been bad, and many fall somewhere in-between. There's been some corkers, admittedly, but nothing e.g. Mitterand had not already tried (and failed, for the exact same reasons, therefore entirely predictably) in France 20 years prior, or Ahern in Ireland 10 years prior.

 

UKIP are conspicuous by their ongoing mutism and absence from the limelight.

 

But hey and all that. I can't vote in the UK (for MPs, that is), so you'll understand if I'm not particularly bothered, nor supportive, and would usually tell a politician or his/her party supporter/activist to go forth and procreate very vigorously (which I have done on several occasions, and really rather enjoy, disturbingly...or not )

[Stan Tamudo]

Going by your posting history, you'll be one of those clapping when the boards go up !!!!! Bah, Bah, Bah !!!

 

At least my posting history is under one username.

[gnvqsos]

You can't, and I don't support you, or anyone else for that matter

 

But I do enjoy analysing ongoing and proposed policies (of all parties) under a cold, rational, pragmatic approach.

 

So far, bar a few occasional successes here and there for the Coalition Tories (not particularly spectacular ones, so completely escaped the red tops most on here appear to favour, and few on here will even be aware of them, but important cornerstones for the ongoing recovery), it's been really poor. Even then, these successes are nothing more than what's been tried (and worked) elsewhere, so little merit or attaboys there - these could have been obtained by Labour 10 years ago or longer.

 

Labour have been holding their (alleged) policy cards to their chests for so long, most commentators have since given up waiting for them. I don't think we need to comment on their past policies too much - like all Gvts, some have been good, some have been bad, and many fall somewhere in-between. There's been some corkers, admittedly, but nothing Mitterand had not already tried (and failed, for the exact same reasons, therefore entirely predictably) in France 20 years prior.

 

UKIP are conspicuous by their ongoing mutism and absence from the limelight.

 

I think an elementary study of philosophy will show how pragmatism and rationalism are diametric opposites-so how do you combine these in your analysis?