Snap General Election called

[Banquo]

"The Conservative Party is threatening to review Channel 4’s public service broadcasting obligations after the broadcaster replaced Boris Johnson with an ice sculpture at Thursday night’s election debate.

In a dramatic escalation of the war of words between the Tories and Channel 4 that will likely provoke outcry, a Conservative source told BuzzFeed News that if they win the coming election they will reassess the channel’s public service broadcasting licence."

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/bo ... channel-4s

Idiots

[Mikey Brown]

Seems a bit too on the nose to even comment on the right’s view on censorship/freedom of speech here.

[Sandydragon]

Japan’s work culture is very different to ours. Also, working hard with the incentive of a four day week becoming permanent, is different to the incentive when a four day week is just the norm.
As Banquo points out, in public facing industries where cutting the service you provide to a four day week is an impossibility it would soon get very expensive, either to hire extra staff or pay people to stick to five day week. I believe someone has already done the sums for the NHS and it’s tens of billions a year. However, I’d imagine schools would just go to a four day week. This would probably include slightly longer days, which would suit working parents.
If it can be made to work then great, but I’m sceptical.

last thing kids need is longer days at school tbh, and 4 day school week with 5 day a week working parents is a bit of a child care mare. I've had a look at the manifesto and no thought is present about how all this might work, save being funded through productivity and no loss of earnings. Its a lovely idea at this point.

I haven't looked at the manifesto, but surely the simplest implementation is to give employees the right by law to work 4 days a week if they wish. That's how it works here in the Netherlands and many do work just 4 days per week (often 4 x 9 hrs), especially if they have kids.

https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observa ... lexibility

Which is fine if the employer doesn’t have to cover staff over five or more days per week. This sounds ideal in theory but as demonstrated with the NHS debate, it looks like Labour haven’t thought it through properly. Some employers could manage this, others could not.

And labours policy demanded a reduction in total working hours, not compressing full time into four days.

[Mellsblue]

"The Conservative Party is threatening to review Channel 4’s public service broadcasting obligations after the broadcaster replaced Boris Johnson with an ice sculpture at Thursday night’s election debate.

In a dramatic escalation of the war of words between the Tories and Channel 4 that will likely provoke outcry, a Conservative source told BuzzFeed News that if they win the coming election they will reassess the channel’s public service broadcasting licence."

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/bo ... channel-4s

Idiots

Yep. Ridiculous. Dangerous, in fact. It was just as ridiculous to side step the debate. The Conservatives actually have a pretty good ‘green’ record whilst in govt. Boris is living with the lady who drove a lot of it so wouldn’t have had to look too far for some prep. It’s an own goal, followed by an even bigger own goal.
Though, I suppose those on here who constantly bang on about the BBC and the written press all being bias against Labour will have some sympathy with Tories facing a bias C4.......

[Banquo]

last thing kids need is longer days at school tbh, and 4 day school week with 5 day a week working parents is a bit of a child care mare. I've had a look at the manifesto and no thought is present about how all this might work, save being funded through productivity and no loss of earnings. Its a lovely idea at this point.

I haven't looked at the manifesto, but surely the simplest implementation is to give employees the right by law to work 4 days a week if they wish. That's how it works here in the Netherlands and many do work just 4 days per week (often 4 x 9 hrs), especially if they have kids.

https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observa ... lexibility

Which is fine if the employer doesn’t have to cover staff over five or more days per week. This sounds ideal in theory but as demonstrated with the NHS debate, it looks like Labour haven’t thought it through properly. Some employers could manage this, others could not.

And labours policy demanded a reduction in total working hours, not compressing full time into four days.

Well yes, manifesto says 32 hour weeks, rather than 4 day weeks. It talks about enforcement but not about practicality and states it will be funded by ‘productivity’. I’m sure everyone would jump at that if it cost them nothing personally. Not sure how the productivity paradigm would work in many parts of the workplace tho.

[Banquo]

"The Conservative Party is threatening to review Channel 4’s public service broadcasting obligations after the broadcaster replaced Boris Johnson with an ice sculpture at Thursday night’s election debate.

In a dramatic escalation of the war of words between the Tories and Channel 4 that will likely provoke outcry, a Conservative source told BuzzFeed News that if they win the coming election they will reassess the channel’s public service broadcasting licence."

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/bo ... channel-4s

Idiots

Yep. Ridiculous. Dangerous, in fact. It was just as ridiculous to side step the debate. The Conservatives actually have a pretty good ‘green’ record whilst in govt. Boris is living with the lady who drove a lot of it so wouldn’t have had to look too far for some prep. It’s an own goal, followed by an even bigger own goal.
Though, I suppose those on here who constantly bang on about the BBC and the written press all being bias against Labour will have some sympathy with Tories facing a bias C4.......

Yep stupid to duck it with a defensible record, double stupid to send Gove and then double down. Trying to avoid being attacked by everyone else I suppose, but both pathetic and ill judged. His advisors seem as poor as Mays.

[Puja]

Idiots

Yep. Ridiculous. Dangerous, in fact. It was just as ridiculous to side step the debate. The Conservatives actually have a pretty good ‘green’ record whilst in govt. Boris is living with the lady who drove a lot of it so wouldn’t have had to look too far for some prep. It’s an own goal, followed by an even bigger own goal.
Though, I suppose those on here who constantly bang on about the BBC and the written press all being bias against Labour will have some sympathy with Tories facing a bias C4.......

Yep stupid to duck it with a defensible record, double stupid to send Gove and then double down. Trying to avoid being attacked by everyone else I suppose, but both pathetic and ill judged. His advisors seem as poor as Mays.

I don't know. Why stand up there and be shot at (and there's a lot of ammo - fracking, subsidies for oil and gas, cancelling renewable plans like the tidal barrage, removing funding for solar and win) when he so far appears to be getting away with it. He's dodging the Neil interview as well and it doesn't appear to be hurting him.

Plus, sending Gove to them strikes me more as worse punishment than reviewing their licence

Puja

[Banquo]

Yep. Ridiculous. Dangerous, in fact. It was just as ridiculous to side step the debate. The Conservatives actually have a pretty good ‘green’ record whilst in govt. Boris is living with the lady who drove a lot of it so wouldn’t have had to look too far for some prep. It’s an own goal, followed by an even bigger own goal.
Though, I suppose those on here who constantly bang on about the BBC and the written press all being bias against Labour will have some sympathy with Tories facing a bias C4.......

Yep stupid to duck it with a defensible record, double stupid to send Gove and then double down. Trying to avoid being attacked by everyone else I suppose, but both pathetic and ill judged. His advisors seem as poor as Mays.

I don't know. Why stand up there and be shot at (and there's a lot of ammo - fracking, subsidies for oil and gas, cancelling renewable plans like the tidal barrage, removing funding for solar and win) when he so far appears to be getting away with it. He's dodging the Neil interview as well and it doesn't appear to be hurting him.

Puja

Oh I get the risk and reward piece, can almost see the logic. But it’s a very bad look, and I think cumulatively he will cop it.

[Mellsblue]

Idiots

Yep. Ridiculous. Dangerous, in fact. It was just as ridiculous to side step the debate. The Conservatives actually have a pretty good ‘green’ record whilst in govt. Boris is living with the lady who drove a lot of it so wouldn’t have had to look too far for some prep. It’s an own goal, followed by an even bigger own goal.
Though, I suppose those on here who constantly bang on about the BBC and the written press all being bias against Labour will have some sympathy with Tories facing a bias C4.......

Yep stupid to duck it with a defensible record, double stupid to send Gove and then double down. Trying to avoid being attacked by everyone else I suppose, but both pathetic and ill judged. His advisors seem as poor as Mays.

I do have some sympathy with the idea to send Gove. We don’t have a President, we have an executive. Gove was SoS at DEFRA so is probably more qualified than Johnson to debate on the subject.
I have to admit that I just don’t like the debates so may be bias. Perhaps, if we are to have topic/policy specific debate, bringing in those who have held or would hold the portfolio would be a good idea.

This little climb down from the editor of C4 news did amuse me, though. If only due to irony that it’s something almost straight from the Conservatives GE 2019 social media strategy playbook.

[Sandydragon]

Seems a bit too on the nose to even comment on the right’s view on censorship/freedom of speech here.

That would be a disgrace, it’s not on even to threaten a review based on that. The Conservatives were given an opportunity to attend but chose not to.

[Digby]

Until they’re not.
Markets tend not to like lending to heavily indebted govts with a history of renationalising sectors. Even if Labour do keep the international markets on side, it only takes a crisis not of your making to send all your plans up in smoke. Ask Brown. He’d ended boom and bust until he hadn’t.

Borrowing costs are low because there has been a huge decrease in the supply of sovereign debt assets in the market due to all the quantitative easing. The bank of England owns about 25% of government debt so the gov is not as in debt as is generally made out.

The GFC was not caused by Brown, it was born in the US by badly rated mortgage derivatives and the housing bubble popping. It was not caused by too much borrowing here. That's a brainless narrative that only someone who is regurgitating Tory lies would push.

I know why borrowing costs are low. I also know, given the history of the world economy, that it is highly unlikely it will always be that way.

Where did I say it was Brown's fault? I literally said "it only takes a crisis not of your own making" and then used the 'credit crunch' as an example of it under mining Brown's economic plan through no fault of his own.

Also the housing crisis of 2008 might not have been caused here, but there is too much borrowing here, and none of the parties have any policies designed to reduce our use of credit in the economy. And since 2008 the banks have simply been finding new ways to seek new business (lending money) rather than trying to cut the amount of money being lent, so things are only getting worse, imo

[Banquo]

Yep. Ridiculous. Dangerous, in fact. It was just as ridiculous to side step the debate. The Conservatives actually have a pretty good ‘green’ record whilst in govt. Boris is living with the lady who drove a lot of it so wouldn’t have had to look too far for some prep. It’s an own goal, followed by an even bigger own goal.
Though, I suppose those on here who constantly bang on about the BBC and the written press all being bias against Labour will have some sympathy with Tories facing a bias C4.......

Yep stupid to duck it with a defensible record, double stupid to send Gove and then double down. Trying to avoid being attacked by everyone else I suppose, but both pathetic and ill judged. His advisors seem as poor as Mays.

I do have some sympathy with the idea to send Gove. We don’t have a President, we have an executive. Gove was SoS at DEFRA so is probably more qualified than Johnson to debate on the subject.
I have to admit that I just don’t like the debates so may be bias. Perhaps, if we are to have topic/policy specific debate, bringing in those who have held or would hold the portfolio would be a good idea.

This little climb down from the editor of C4 news did amuse me, though. If only due to irony that it’s something almost straight from the Conservatives GE 2019 social media strategy playbook.

That’s a bit naughty by C4, but funny. I hate the debates, but they have become part of the currency.

[Digby]

Seems a bit too on the nose to even comment on the right’s view on censorship/freedom of speech here.

That would be a disgrace, it’s not on even to threaten a review based on that. The Conservatives were given an opportunity to attend but chose not to.

Tbf, it's not the Conservative threatening a review, it's one unattributed member of the party who was likely (if unjustifiably) very cross in the moment. That said I suspect the Tories wouldn't mind inflicting a bit of pain on both the BBC and Channel 4 for being the pinko lefty bastards they are, which is a little unfair even before Labour would perhaps like to inflict a little pain for the BBC and Channel 4 being neoliberal capitalist pig dogs.

Bigger picture the ill considered comments we have from yesterday I don't take too seriously, however I am a little worried about the Tory view for the media market going forwards, and I probably would be worried by Labour's (or Militant's) too but haven't heard them talk about it.

[Mellsblue]

Yep. Ridiculous. Dangerous, in fact. It was just as ridiculous to side step the debate. The Conservatives actually have a pretty good ‘green’ record whilst in govt. Boris is living with the lady who drove a lot of it so wouldn’t have had to look too far for some prep. It’s an own goal, followed by an even bigger own goal.
Though, I suppose those on here who constantly bang on about the BBC and the written press all being bias against Labour will have some sympathy with Tories facing a bias C4.......

Yep stupid to duck it with a defensible record, double stupid to send Gove and then double down. Trying to avoid being attacked by everyone else I suppose, but both pathetic and ill judged. His advisors seem as poor as Mays.

I don't know. Why stand up there and be shot at (and there's a lot of ammo - fracking, subsidies for oil and gas, cancelling renewable plans like the tidal barrage, removing funding for solar and win) when he so far appears to be getting away with it. He's dodging the Neil interview as well and it doesn't appear to be hurting him.

Plus, sending Gove to them strikes me more as worse punishment than reviewing their licence

Puja

Fracking had incredibly stringent limitations set out on it. So stringent that earth tremors less than a lorry going past your house has closed down a site in Lancs, and may have closes down the industry full stop. Coal use has plummeted under successive Tory governments. I can’t personally defend the decision over the tidal barrage but the crusties tell me it will kill sea creatures. Now the infrastructure for wind power is virtually in place, subsidies, ie you pay more on your elec bill, aren’t really needed. An off shore wind field on the Lincolnshire coast was built using existing infrastructure at less/same/similar (can’t remember exactly) cost as the one it’s adjacent to has put onshore infrastructure in place already. On shore wind farms only serve to make the rich richer, Ive heard, so well done the Conservatives for looking after the many not the few. Removing subsidies for solar panels hasn’t really affected the market, from the little that I know, it’s just the providers aren’t making quite so much profit. PV was also mostly the preserve of the middle classes, unless you had a forward thinking local council, so see argument about on shore wind farms.

[Mellsblue]

Borrowing costs are low because there has been a huge decrease in the supply of sovereign debt assets in the market due to all the quantitative easing. The bank of England owns about 25% of government debt so the gov is not as in debt as is generally made out.

The GFC was not caused by Brown, it was born in the US by badly rated mortgage derivatives and the housing bubble popping. It was not caused by too much borrowing here. That's a brainless narrative that only someone who is regurgitating Tory lies would push.

I know why borrowing costs are low. I also know, given the history of the world economy, that it is highly unlikely it will always be that way.

Where did I say it was Brown's fault? I literally said "it only takes a crisis not of your own making" and then used the 'credit crunch' as an example of it under mining Brown's economic plan through no fault of his own.

Also the housing crisis of 2008 might not have been caused here, but there is too much borrowing here, and none of the parties have any policies designed to reduce our use of credit in the economy. And since 2008 the banks have simply been finding new ways to seek new business (lending money) rather than trying to cut the amount of money being lent, so things are only getting worse, imo

Agreed.

[Digby]

One other thought, Channel 4 have dug themselves a little bit of a hole by saying they must have the leaders of the parties when, as we're heading into a Westminster election, Nicola Sturgeon isn't the party leader. Now it's justifiable to allow the wriggle room that she's the party leader, but if you're going to allow that it's starting to look a less comfortable fit that you will not allow Gove who'd speak much more assuredly about the environment than Boris.

Actually I do wonder if the problem for Boris is he was given some briefing papers to study, intended to do the debate, and never actually got around to studying his briefing papers and had to cancel before he looked a bigger prat than expected - which is exactly the sort of lazy approach I imagine Boris will deliver over and over

[Digby]

I know why borrowing costs are low. I also know, given the history of the world economy, that it is highly unlikely it will always be that way.

Where did I say it was Brown's fault? I literally said "it only takes a crisis not of your own making" and then used the 'credit crunch' as an example of it under mining Brown's economic plan through no fault of his own.

Also the housing crisis of 2008 might not have been caused here, but there is too much borrowing here, and none of the parties have any policies designed to reduce our use of credit in the economy. And since 2008 the banks have simply been finding new ways to seek new business (lending money) rather than trying to cut the amount of money being lent, so things are only getting worse, imo

Agreed.

That is not welcome here, go back to quoting yourself Rowan!

[Mellsblue]

Also the housing crisis of 2008 might not have been caused here, but there is too much borrowing here, and none of the parties have any policies designed to reduce our use of credit in the economy. And since 2008 the banks have simply been finding new ways to seek new business (lending money) rather than trying to cut the amount of money being lent, so things are only getting worse, imo

Agreed.

That is not welcome here, go back to quoting yourself Rowan!

Kiss me if I’m wrong but this is all the fault of western imperialism.

[Which Tyler]

Actually I do wonder if the problem for Boris is he was given some briefing papers to study, intended to do the debate, and never actually got around to studying his briefing papers and had to cancel before he looked a bigger prat than expected - which is exactly the sort of lazy approach I imagine Boris will deliver over and over

Surely he declined too long ago for it to be that.
He declined because he couldn't just shout "get brexshit done" on loop, and because "only Corbyn is a realistic challenger, so the rest don't deserve to debate me"

[Stom]

Yep stupid to duck it with a defensible record, double stupid to send Gove and then double down. Trying to avoid being attacked by everyone else I suppose, but both pathetic and ill judged. His advisors seem as poor as Mays.

I don't know. Why stand up there and be shot at (and there's a lot of ammo - fracking, subsidies for oil and gas, cancelling renewable plans like the tidal barrage, removing funding for solar and win) when he so far appears to be getting away with it. He's dodging the Neil interview as well and it doesn't appear to be hurting him.

Puja

Oh I get the risk and reward piece, can almost see the logic. But it’s a very bad look, and I think cumulatively he will cop it.

Why?

He's not going after traditional Tory voters. The electoral landscape has changed.

He's following the path trod by Trump, Orban, Bolsonaro, Duterte, Erdogan, Putin...

Education has been dumbed down for decades, while the people who can afford it nearly always choose private education.

Jobs have been removed without any thought for what might replace them. Then migrants have been shipped in to work on jobs the British worker doesn't want to/can't afford to work. Contracts that allow that kind of work are enshrined into law.

Meanwhile, those same migrants the government created with the contract work situation are pilloried and demonised as the great invading force.


C4 news is not watched by anyone Boris wants to vote for him. He's not targeting them. He's targeting Scott from Rotherham, who has nothing and has been tricked into believing that conmen like Boris want what's best for him simply because they'll get rid of the migrants who steal the jobs they cannot do. Jobs that were created by the government's inaction over below living wage jobs.

Meanwhile, Labour sit there espousing political fucking theory and wonder why those same little men are not voting for them!

They're insane.

And then the Lib Dems come out with the utter nonsense they have come out with.

I just give up with the sheer stupidity of all the parties who are not right wingers. The Tories and the Brexit party are the only parties who actually have a plan, ffs! and they're the only ones who know how to talk to their target market.

No wonder they're on course to remove the UK from the EU, disintegrate the Union, and jump into bed with the most inequal, ridiculous country in the world, a country that has slavery in all but name, slavery against mainly young black men, who are paid at most a pittance to produce an insane proportion of goods.

A country whose national health organisation gives advice out SPONSORED by cereal companies, sugary drink companies, and so on.

It's a fucking disgrace and the only way to prevent it is to stay in the EU.

[Banquo]

I don't know. Why stand up there and be shot at (and there's a lot of ammo - fracking, subsidies for oil and gas, cancelling renewable plans like the tidal barrage, removing funding for solar and win) when he so far appears to be getting away with it. He's dodging the Neil interview as well and it doesn't appear to be hurting him.

Puja

Oh I get the risk and reward piece, can almost see the logic. But it’s a very bad look, and I think cumulatively he will cop it.

Why?

He's not going after traditional Tory voters. The electoral landscape has changed.

He's following the path trod by Trump, Orban, Bolsonaro, Duterte, Erdogan, Putin...

Education has been dumbed down for decades, while the people who can afford it nearly always choose private education.

Jobs have been removed without any thought for what might replace them. Then migrants have been shipped in to work on jobs the British worker doesn't want to/can't afford to work. Contracts that allow that kind of work are enshrined into law.

Meanwhile, those same migrants the government created with the contract work situation are pilloried and demonised as the great invading force.


C4 news is not watched by anyone Boris wants to vote for him. He's not targeting them. He's targeting Scott from Rotherham, who has nothing and has been tricked into believing that conmen like Boris want what's best for him simply because they'll get rid of the migrants who steal the jobs they cannot do. Jobs that were created by the government's inaction over below living wage jobs.

Meanwhile, Labour sit there espousing political fucking theory and wonder why those same little men are not voting for them!

They're insane.

And then the Lib Dems come out with the utter nonsense they have come out with.

I just give up with the sheer stupidity of all the parties who are not right wingers. The Tories and the Brexit party are the only parties who actually have a plan, ffs! and they're the only ones who know how to talk to their target market.

No wonder they're on course to remove the UK from the EU, disintegrate the Union, and jump into bed with the most inequal, ridiculous country in the world, a country that has slavery in all but name, slavery against mainly young black men, who are paid at most a pittance to produce an insane proportion of goods.

A country whose national health organisation gives advice out SPONSORED by cereal companies, sugary drink companies, and so on.

It's a fucking disgrace and the only way to prevent it is to stay in the EU.

Triggered he is

But I do share your angst, never been so wound up about an election before. The quality of debate is so poor.

[Stom]

Oh I get the risk and reward piece, can almost see the logic. But it’s a very bad look, and I think cumulatively he will cop it.

Why?

He's not going after traditional Tory voters. The electoral landscape has changed.

He's following the path trod by Trump, Orban, Bolsonaro, Duterte, Erdogan, Putin...

Education has been dumbed down for decades, while the people who can afford it nearly always choose private education.

Jobs have been removed without any thought for what might replace them. Then migrants have been shipped in to work on jobs the British worker doesn't want to/can't afford to work. Contracts that allow that kind of work are enshrined into law.

Meanwhile, those same migrants the government created with the contract work situation are pilloried and demonised as the great invading force.


C4 news is not watched by anyone Boris wants to vote for him. He's not targeting them. He's targeting Scott from Rotherham, who has nothing and has been tricked into believing that conmen like Boris want what's best for him simply because they'll get rid of the migrants who steal the jobs they cannot do. Jobs that were created by the government's inaction over below living wage jobs.

Meanwhile, Labour sit there espousing political fucking theory and wonder why those same little men are not voting for them!

They're insane.

And then the Lib Dems come out with the utter nonsense they have come out with.

I just give up with the sheer stupidity of all the parties who are not right wingers. The Tories and the Brexit party are the only parties who actually have a plan, ffs! and they're the only ones who know how to talk to their target market.

No wonder they're on course to remove the UK from the EU, disintegrate the Union, and jump into bed with the most inequal, ridiculous country in the world, a country that has slavery in all but name, slavery against mainly young black men, who are paid at most a pittance to produce an insane proportion of goods.

A country whose national health organisation gives advice out SPONSORED by cereal companies, sugary drink companies, and so on.

It's a fucking disgrace and the only way to prevent it is to stay in the EU.

Triggered he is

But I do share your angst, never been so wound up about an election before. The quality of debate is so poor.

Yeah, sorry, I'm a bit pissed off.

[Which Tyler]

But I do share your angst, never been so wound up about an election before. The quality of debate is so poor.

Now THAT is something I'm sure we can all agree on!

[Banquo]

But I do share your angst, never been so wound up about an election before. The quality of debate is so poor.

Now THAT is something I'm sure we can all agree on!

fckin desperate state we are in. and pretty much all on the back of something that hardly anyone gave two fcks about 5 years ago.

[Mellsblue]

But I do share your angst, never been so wound up about an election before. The quality of debate is so poor.

Now THAT is something I'm sure we can all agree on!

fckin desperate state we are in. and pretty much all on the back of something that hardly anyone gave two fcks about 5 years ago.

Poor people north of Leicester?