threegee

It baffles me why trade unions want our country in an alliance that was established by ex-nazi industrialists in order to keep wages down. That is basically what the EU "freedom of movement" rules are all about. Surely it's self evident that unlimited immigration drives down wages and causes unemployment amongst indigenous peoples? It's pretty simple supply and demand economics - though in this instance fear (of losing your job) comes into it too. Of course this really bites at the bottom of the job ladder. The top looks after its own. Before New Labour the left was adamantly opposed to the EU, and the EU agenda was driven by Tory people like the appalling Ted Heath to pander to unenlightened Tory industrialists. Then, along came Teflon Tony. How could the unions possibly fall for New Labour's uncontrolled immigration-led agenda at a time the EU was just gearing up to shackle in low wage Eastern European economies? Does not compute! Either the present day unions are run by turkeys voting for Christmas, or there is a hidden agenda. One thing is for sure: they are not looking after low paid worker's interests, always the very essence of trade unionism. Pull the ladder up because I'm all-right Jack! And... you are all venerate the late Tony Ben and his staunch socialist principals: Yet, you vote for a party now going in entirely the opposite direction, simply because there's still a red rosette on the package! I think there is a term for this irrational behaviour in the marketing industry, and it might not be complimentary.

We'd all be broke without the oil revenues, and Gordo wouldn't have been able to pledge the future revenues either. But, they are no longer what they were, and getting less by the month. Not just the production levels, but the oil price is rapidly falling too. http://www.bbc.com/news/business-29594761 Salmond is very lucky he lost, because if the price falls go on an independent Scotland would be sunk far earlier than any of the economists predicted even a few weeks ago. Tony, tell me what a government ever started that was economic? They used to be pretty good at (mis)appropriating assets developed by entrepreneurs, but did they ever produce any wealth themselves? I'd agree with you though that council houses were sold too cheaply, and the money from the sales should have been reinvested in replacing a percentage of them. But, don't lay the blame entirely at MT's door; Tony Blair had over a decade to start building council houses, and his council house building fell from a low level to absolutely nothing.

No 600MB not 600Mb! Mb means megabits, and MB means megabytes, they are frequently confused, but the distinction is very important. As that small kid will tell you there are 8 bits in a Byte, so 8Mb is 1MB. The M must be upper-case, else you are saying milli (one thousandth) not Mega (one million). You are probably about right for iPlayer on average. I'd guess that the "standard" version of TV programs is 300-400MB an hour and the High Definition version about double that. Average iPlayer radio usage is 20 to 25MB an hour, though you can select different bitrates on most programs that fall outside that range. Otherwise, all good technical advice, and I'm humbled by the depth of knowledge displayed.

Nonsense, you are being very astute! It is about selling though - selling OUR town to the world. One day we might just have a Bedlington.co.uk Charter - do you want to write it?

I concede that she became very out of touch in the final term. I think ten years should be enough for anyone; so maybe a two-term limit wouldn't be a bad thing no matter how popular you are? Looks like the Daily Mail of all rags has finally jumped onto the bandwagon. Might cause Miliband to choke on his bacon in the morning. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2789592/nigel-farage-did-win-don-t-play-fools.html?offset=500&max=100&jumpTo=comment-65964353#comment-65964353 I think Labour are likely to draft in some senior helpers for Miliband to try to make him look a tiny bit more competent. They've employed Obama's spin doctor (Axelrod?) at some huge fee, and he'll be trying to earn it. Maybe he's making them take the bacon sarnie test right now? Where was he when Miliband wrote (and partly delivered) that speech?

What worries me Tony is that I've recently been skimming Karl Marx and finding some of the logic compelling! Particularly the bits about how wages are driven down. My real concern is the neo-Nazis who control the EU (as at core is UKIP's). So, by that token, you've got hold of entirely the wrong end of the stick. Tell me how you feel about the EU? Good, bad, don't care? Keith: We are talking history there, and can talk ourselves into a corner. The only reason I get involved in arguments over MT is to illustrate to casual visitors (particularly youngsters who've never been exposed to it) that there's an alternative view. Actually, it remains the view of at least half the country (and probably quite a few other members who are wise enough to keep their mouths shut): remember that MT got some thumping majorities, and only lost power by being deposed by her own cabinet. There is no way I'm going to convince you or anyone else here of her motives. But, as she saw it, they were most certainly for the benefit of the entire country. It's history; we are where we are, and we are talking about the future now. We can easily agree to disagree on the past.

Not a banker Tony, a metals trader - just a glorified scrap yard dealer! He's had a real job, unlike the vast majority of our current MP's. See what BBC anchor Andrew Marr says, even though he has to hedge it around a bit to get it past the thought police at the Beeb: http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/520671/Tony-Blair-Number-10-Downing-Street-Andrew-Marr On MT, well... we are British, not followers of some Middle East religion, so we can cheerfully agree to disagree and celebrate the difference. I'm sure we'd both have rather different views if we'd been on the other side of the fence at the time. It's history now, and what matters is the future and our kids future. I think we are all pretty much looking at the future from the same perspective now.

According to the most recent poll 25% of the public disagree with that, and are figuring on actually doing something about it. Old Labour supporters can sit on their backsides and reminisce, or actively do something. My take on this is that we are at one of those major inflection points in history. I believe that both Labour and the Tories have outrun their usefulness to society. They have both morphed into top-down marketing organisations bent on their own advancement. Principles and ideology went out of the window long ago - the whole process is now pure self-serving pretence. They even buy into their own mutual propaganda (about the EU being essential to us, etc.), and are both largely staffed with people with no real world experience. Their job is - and always will be - selling their right to that job. Yes, I know, apart from the inflection point thing there's little there that no one hadn't already worked out for themselves. So... it's time for everyone with a grain of sense to stop moaning and do something. That something is to temporarily bury all differences of opinion and unite to force change. I'd vote for The Arthur Scargill Party if he promised his Stalinist agenda was a thing of the past; promised to preserve democracy; and he had a credible chance of forcing his way into the Westminster hen house. There is now only one way to that change. The LD's shot themselves in the foot, and, as a top-down organisation (utterly wedded to the biggest top-down organisation of them all) was never going to force change anyway. But, many people thought it was worth a try. The present coalition government was just a portent. Have another look at that UKIP link and see if there isn't anything you couldn't temporarily swallow in order to permanently get us out of this straitjacket. Now, you are going to say, yes, I can live with that; yes, I actually support that; that's wrong, but maybe it will change when they see the error of their ways. But but but... the real killer is that you are going to convince yourself that they don't really mean it, are duplicitous, and won't carry out their policies anyway. Well, it simply doesn't matter if they will or wont, because in a few more years the system will have had that long overdue shock, and democracy will be working again! The Oxford PPE courses will be rewritten to de-emphasise focus-group led government, and warn of the "dangers" to the system of communications no longer being the hands of the ruling elites, etc etc. Tory and Labour may not (and probably won't) disappear, because there may be mileage in the brand names (especially if you stick New in front of them - oh, no, that's been done! ) but they will be radically different, and really listen. My answer to your duplicitous point would be that we have a bottom-up organisation that won't tolerate that - something we haven't had for a very long time. And, if that happens, UKIP will factionalise and split - such is real democracy. The message for the average disinterested-in-politics voter is: You now have a once-(well maybe twice, but we can't yet be sure)-in-a-lifetime chance to shock the system into major change - don't waste it! And, even more importantly, don't oppose the change everyone needs by mindless tribal voting for parties that have come to the end of their natural lives. The new world may be uncertain and quite messy, but it will be truly democratic, and, a lot more open and honest.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2789512/record-poll-surge-gives-ukip-25-survey-hand-farage-astonishing-128-mps-puts-ed-miliband-new-low.html#ixzz3FsumNqIe Only 128 MPs! I'm sure we can do far better than that.

The establishment dinosaurs aren't going down quietly Willy! A really nasty piece of goods is Grant Shapps. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/28/tory-whips-threat-possible-defectors-ukip-conference Amazing how in the Tory Party you go from belle of the ball to "serial liar" ugly sister in ten seconds flat. And, great chunks of the media owe allegiance to the system too. You haven't really seen the depths they will go to yet. Heywood and Middleton was over the unburied body of Jim Dobbin, but Labour can still learn many lessons from the present day Tory party. Labour and the Tories will readily do back room deals to try to maintain the status quo.

Seems to me those two girls had more basic common sense than the people who vote tribally for a rosette. They'd at least identified a real common cause. No one now questions that a "mere woman" can handle the highest public office in the land, and by extension any other.

Actually Sym the Tory guy was sort of rational in his responses. Yeah, he did trot out the party line about we need to have a renegotiation of EU treaties first, and a lot of the interview was devoted to off-topic goading him into saying if/when he was going to defect to UKIP (accompanied by cut-away shots to sickly sarcastic smiles from mouthy fat lady in red), but there was nothing that you could pin down to being straight out of the newthink manual. On the medical thing, I think you've been reading the Guardian again. Nigel was at pains to say that all he wants is Australian/Canadian type immigration health checks. It costs £300K for a full course of AIDS treatment; are we intending to write a cheque for everyone who turns up at Dover with a story of how their own government won't treat them? Maggie: I sort of agree with you, but I think the disenchantment with Westminster is particularly severe with traditional left-leaning people like you. It's easy to see why as you feel you've no longer anywhere to go. I'd urge you to talk to some of the local UKIP people. Before you dismiss the suggestion consider that many of them are from the same background as you, and at root have the same sorts of values. It's a bottom-up organisation which can accommodate differences of opinion on how to get there, and it's one where you really can influence your representatives. Over the past couple of years policies definitely have moved leftward, and as more old-labour voters join that can only continue. Even if you only take up common cause to burst the Westminster bubble you will have achieved something worthwhile. I think that many traditional Labour voters are already doing this (some maybe subconsciously), and many ex-Tory voters now don't give a damn if Miliband gets elected or not because there's no real difference, and he will rapidly hang himself anyway. There's also an increasing chance that neither Cameron or Miliband will ever happen, as both parties are receiving the shock they have long deserved.

I knew they would, after all they created most of the problem. Answering questions tonight about concerns, from within her own party, that Labour now needs to offer something to control immigration shadow attorney general Emily Thornberry MP thought for a second then inspirationally offered that the EU should look into - no, I'm not making this up - counting immigrants better! A surprised Newsnight's Emily Maitlis asked the obvious: how on earth... no no, says our budding senior law officer, this will help to better plan for the immigrant flows! Further pressed on what Labour would do she interjected "...no no what they are talking about is their jobs being taken and them being undercut and what I'm saying is that UKIP does not have the answer to that.. ..it seems to me that one of the things we have to do is make sure there is a level playing field and people [immigrants] get proper worker's rights." So, once again the Labour front bench is in total denial about a major problem facing their own electorate. The current interview strategy is to move off any awkward subject by saying ..when talking to people the conversation quickly moves on to [insert diversionary topic].. thus completely avoiding the actual issue. This is championship level chicanery, and the responses are so uniform and predictable that Labour must at least have a manual, if not run a full course, to teach too-hot-to-handle issue avoidance.

So how do you propose to remove them, or is it OK to just moan about it?

Thanks for the heads-up Tony. I've answered you on that thread now.

To associate the good people of Clacton with the BNP is a slur and not worth of you Tony. Remember this was a solid Labour seat until new focus-group driven Labour took to the stage. Also remember that immigrants are supporting and joining UKIP, working for the party and even offering themselves as candidates. UKIP isn't anti-immigrant, it's anti uncontrolled immigration. How do you explain that Labour only held on by a whisker in Middleton, one of the safest Labour seats in the country? And they needed skulduggery even to manage those 600 votes. Only 300 more Labour switchers and that would be it for Miliband's cosy career (which is slated to end up in a Blair-like EU ambassador role, trousering millions more of people's money for doing precisely nowt!). The smooth operators who control New Labour won't face up to the social problems they have created. Miliband "forgets" to mention immigration in a hour-plus long speech. He also "forgets" the weasel words he wrote about the deficit Gordon Brown created. Then he doesn't even mention the EU, because he has no intention of doing anything about that either. People want government that faces up to issues, not sweeps them under the carpet. A government that listens. None of the establishment parties have been listening for a very long time.

Suddenly there are no longer any safe seats for the establishment parties: A few more days campaigning would have done it in Heywood, but so keen was Labour to stifle debate that they defied convention and fixed the election before their MP was even decently buried! Their candidate was so shaken she was completely stumped for her well rehearsed focus-group words.

The man has a point. Must be slipping didn't recognise a couple of those techno-terms.

Hey, you really have been reading the UKIP manifesto! Countering cross border pricing by multinationals is something neither Labour or the Tories have ever wanted to get to grips with. That's where the real mega tax loss is. Soak the rich might be popular in loony-left circles, but there aren't that many of them; they vote with their feet; and they produce private sector jobs. Any economist will tell you that we are presently pushing our luck at present top rate tax levels, and further increases will surely be counter-productive. In fact a slight reduction in higher tax levels would produce more revenue. That doesn't square with the narrative of the jealousy and envy peddlers in Labour. But Balls is under no illusions, even if he allows his party to float the pretence of an intention to soak the rich. Basic dishonesty and contempt for their voter's intelligence is Labour's stock in trade. Of course public sector workers pay taxes, but where does the money they use to service those taxes come from in the first instance? Only the private sector workers generate real wealth. I'm not arguing that we don't need a public sector, and certainly not that public sector workers shouldn't be paid fairly. But having half the economy in the public sector is clearly unsustainable and the chief reason our national debt is spiralling. It's a point that is accepted by all political parties, even if they'd rather not talk about it, or detail its implications for what they will really do when in government.

Standing logic on its head in the good old tried and tested way eh Sym! You don't need to look too far to find Nazis, so there's no need to invent them from decent British folk who've had enough of the Westminster snake-oil merchants. Instead of trying to apply the usual substitute-for-though left wing labels why not tell us exactly what is wrong with UKIP policies? You know, what it really says that you genuinely take issue with, and not what you'd like it to say to suit those tribal prejudices. Cherry pick as much as you like, and ignore everything and anything you might agree with. Ummm.. Waiting! Want to find Nazis? It's long, but you might actually learn something: Oh, and there's an instructive speech from a Jewish lady - who's family perished in Nazi concentration camps - explaining exactly why she joined UKIP, and why the loony-left completely p* her off for being so dumb-arsed stupid. But, I will spare you that.

http://www.ukip.org/policies_for_people I particularly like: – UKIP will abolish the Department of Energy and Climate Change and scrap green subsidies. – UKIP will abolish the Department for Culture Media and Sport. Jobs for the boys (and girls) if ever there were, and a good starting position for the very necessary reduction in public sector spending that any government will have to face up to after the GE. What is Labour going to cut? We should be told! The lack of transparency of the three establishment parties is telling. £17,000,000,000 a year savings through leaving the EU and targeting foreign aid only where it will do good (and not try to buy political influence). When you hear a politico arguing "BUT, that will mean a loss of influence" then run; he's not talking about what is good for the UK, he's talking about what - in his dream world - is good only for the political classes!

Remind me, are these the people who get 8% more than the equivalent private sector wages; have near guaranteed jobs and pensions; who's jobs had grown under Labour to a staggering 50% of our economy; and who's wages are paid by taxes on non-government employees? I think they should all be made to sit through the current episode of Panorama to see how many private sector employees are struggling to even put food on the table! Honest, decent, people who - if they work longer hours - have three quarters of their meagre extra earnings taken off them! One thing is for sure: whichever party gets in at the GE there will be a huge re-balancing, and then the public sector lot really will have an issue! There's now £44,000,000,000 of savings needed just to stop the debt getting even greater, and Balls has promised to be fiscally responsible this time around. This spells huge job cuts, OR bringing public sector wages into line with the private sector. Enjoy your strike NCC employees - reality is just around the corner!

Yup, Fourgee had to go all the way to China to get hardware like that! It's particularly good a Peking in the dark (and spotting Chinese meals). He had to sail through a load of junk though, to find the right Wong.

Maybe we can promote "Cap the Red Light Jumper" for local members? Rules: Snap a vehicle with both wheels between the rows of studs when both lights are on red and he little man is green. Setting up someone to press the button is an automatic disqualification. Red vehicles score double.Joking, of course. I think.

Oh dear! Well... there are plenty of ex-pats who will be able to play here anyway. You licence payers will just have to play tiddlywinks! We could of course be naughty and rig a proxy for members only, but it might be almost as easy to produce our own version.