Labour's Don Thomas and Keith Morrell opposing cuts at Southampton City Council

Councillors Keith Morrell and Don Thomas, and Oaklands Swimming Pool.

Council leader Richard Williams

First published in Politics

TWO rebel Southampton councillors suspended from the ruling Labour party after opposing cuts to a popular swimming pool have formed their own political group.

Coxford councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell, dubbed the “Coxford two”, have today launched Labour Councillors Against The Cuts.

As reported in the Daily Echo earlier this week, the duo were suspended from the ruling party for three months after being put under investigation by local party whips when they voted against budget cuts to Oaklands Swimming Pool in Lordshill.

The new group is demanding that the city’s Labour administration immediately announces its refusal to do the Government’s “dirty work” of forcing through massive cuts in the public services.

Councillor Keith Morrell said: "We supported 100 per cent the workforce and Unions in their campaign to win back the pay stolen from them by the Tories.

"We will stand shoulder to shoulder with them against any further threats to their jobs and to public services"

Councillor Don Thomas added: “We support the unions’ view that council workers and the community should not be made to pay for a crisis they did not create.”

Council leader Richard Williams said it was “a great sadness” the councillors had quit when the future of Oaklands Pool was an “ongoing” issue.

He said while the whip had been withdrawn the councillors had still been able to attend meeting and “engage” in debate.

“It is a deep shame that the path they have chosen to follow will result in them having cut themselves off from policy influence within the Labour movement as whole, not just in the Labour Group in Southampton and the Labour Party nationally,” he said.

Deputy opposition Tory leader councillor Jeremy Moulton said: “Whilst local Conservative councillors are poles apart from Keith and Don, we do respect them because they have their views and their principles and they stick to them. It is a shame that the same can't be said for other Labour councillors.”

Comments (82)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:22pm Thu 11 Oct 12

chunky_lover says...

Slow news day.
Slow news day. chunky_lover
  • Score: 0

3:26pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Over the Edge says...

I love would love to hear and see Don and Keith singing ''You stick your flipping whip up your @rse'' to rest of the Labour party at the next council meeting
I love would love to hear and see Don and Keith singing ''You stick your flipping whip up your @rse'' to rest of the Labour party at the next council meeting Over the Edge
  • Score: 0

3:32pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Shoong says...

... and quickly vanish.

Gutsy move though.
... and quickly vanish. Gutsy move though. Shoong
  • Score: 0

3:33pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Might SS says...

I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then. Might SS
  • Score: 0

3:33pm Thu 11 Oct 12

On the inside says...

Good for them. All they have to do now is resign and stand at 'Independent Labour Councillors against the cuts and get re-elected.'

If they do that they are men of honour, which will be a new experience for at least one of them.

If they don't then they are just money grabbing leeches who have formed a 'group' simply so one of them can claim extra allowances for being a 'group' leader.

Let the voters decide.
Good for them. All they have to do now is resign and stand at 'Independent Labour Councillors against the cuts and get re-elected.' If they do that they are men of honour, which will be a new experience for at least one of them. If they don't then they are just money grabbing leeches who have formed a 'group' simply so one of them can claim extra allowances for being a 'group' leader. Let the voters decide. On the inside
  • Score: 0

3:47pm Thu 11 Oct 12

ToastyTea says...

The story about that poor lad Jamie beaten up and murdered is extremely sad and sickening, utter scum those in court for it.
The story about that poor lad Jamie beaten up and murdered is extremely sad and sickening, utter scum those in court for it. ToastyTea
  • Score: 0

4:06pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Over the Edge says...

Shoong wrote:
... and quickly vanish.

Gutsy move though.
Would be funny to see it happen, however I doubt it very much will
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: ... and quickly vanish. Gutsy move though.[/p][/quote]Would be funny to see it happen, however I doubt it very much will Over the Edge
  • Score: 0

4:27pm Thu 11 Oct 12

aldermoorboy says...

Ideas for saving money.
1/. Get rid of two new cabinet positions, Savings at least £22,000.
2/. Take two union men off the council pay role, savings £60,000 ?
3/. Reduce Labour councillors pay, to level the Tories and Liberals voluntarily took, savings £16,000
Total savings £98,000, there that took me 3 minutes.
Ideas for saving money. 1/. Get rid of two new cabinet positions, Savings at least £22,000. 2/. Take two union men off the council pay role, savings £60,000 ? 3/. Reduce Labour councillors pay, to level the Tories and Liberals voluntarily took, savings £16,000 Total savings £98,000, there that took me 3 minutes. aldermoorboy
  • Score: 0

4:31pm Thu 11 Oct 12

George4th says...

These two jokers are a prime example of the state of the Labour ruling Council! Who needs to watch a comedy program on TV when you have this bunch running our City?!
>
Can you now understand why the educated young and businesses do not want to be in Southampton?
These two jokers are a prime example of the state of the Labour ruling Council! Who needs to watch a comedy program on TV when you have this bunch running our City?! > Can you now understand why the educated young and businesses do not want to be in Southampton? George4th
  • Score: 1

4:51pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Independent Thought says...

The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?
The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3? Independent Thought
  • Score: 1

4:51pm Thu 11 Oct 12

southy says...

Might SS wrote:
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.
[quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.[/p][/quote]It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council. southy
  • Score: 0

4:52pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Linesman says...

Seeking popularity without responsibility.

They claim that they do not want the City Council to do the Government's dirty work, but do not state how they would deal with the result.

If they want the council to raise the council tax, central government will reduce the grant by the same amount that the council gains by raising the council tax.

I don't know when it is that they have to stand for re-election, but my betting is that they will have decided to 'return to the fold' by then, or join the LibDems.

Why?

Because they would want someone else to pay their election expenses, instead of it coming out of their own pockets.

For some, principles go out of the window when money is involved.
Seeking popularity without responsibility. They claim that they do not want the City Council to do the Government's dirty work, but do not state how they would deal with the result. If they want the council to raise the council tax, central government will reduce the grant by the same amount that the council gains by raising the council tax. I don't know when it is that they have to stand for re-election, but my betting is that they will have decided to 'return to the fold' by then, or join the LibDems. Why? Because they would want someone else to pay their election expenses, instead of it coming out of their own pockets. For some, principles go out of the window when money is involved. Linesman
  • Score: 0

5:08pm Thu 11 Oct 12

southy says...

Independent Thought wrote:
The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?
Lets wait and see how many Labour Councillors do join them, time will tell what happens next
[quote][p][bold]Independent Thought[/bold] wrote: The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?[/p][/quote]Lets wait and see how many Labour Councillors do join them, time will tell what happens next southy
  • Score: 0

5:18pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Lone Ranger. says...

southy wrote:
Independent Thought wrote:
The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?
Lets wait and see how many Labour Councillors do join them, time will tell what happens next
Well they didnt join the TUSC and thats against the cuts
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Independent Thought[/bold] wrote: The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?[/p][/quote]Lets wait and see how many Labour Councillors do join them, time will tell what happens next[/p][/quote]Well they didnt join the TUSC and thats against the cuts Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

5:22pm Thu 11 Oct 12

southy says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
southy wrote:
Independent Thought wrote:
The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?
Lets wait and see how many Labour Councillors do join them, time will tell what happens next
Well they didnt join the TUSC and thats against the cuts
The thing is that the TUSC will not put any body up to stand against them, and leaves a person free to stand else where.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Independent Thought[/bold] wrote: The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?[/p][/quote]Lets wait and see how many Labour Councillors do join them, time will tell what happens next[/p][/quote]Well they didnt join the TUSC and thats against the cuts[/p][/quote]The thing is that the TUSC will not put any body up to stand against them, and leaves a person free to stand else where. southy
  • Score: 0

5:36pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Nick Chaffey says...

Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition!
Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition! Nick Chaffey
  • Score: 0

5:47pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Over the Edge says...

Independent Thought wrote:
The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?
Oh the irony,,,,,,,Moving heaven and earth,,,,,living proof that talk is cheap,,,,,,,,,She bottled it, when the announcement to close the pool, was made until the threat of the whip being removed from her decided her principles (for which she elected on) didn't matter as much as her commitment to the Labour party.
[quote][p][bold]Independent Thought[/bold] wrote: The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?[/p][/quote]Oh the irony,,,,,,,Moving heaven and earth,,,,,living proof that talk is cheap,,,,,,,,,She bottled it, when the announcement to close the pool, was made until the threat of the whip being removed from her decided her principles (for which she elected on) didn't matter as much as her commitment to the Labour party. Over the Edge
  • Score: 0

5:51pm Thu 11 Oct 12

southy says...

Nick Chaffey wrote:
Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition!
Well said Nick
[quote][p][bold]Nick Chaffey[/bold] wrote: Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition![/p][/quote]Well said Nick southy
  • Score: 0

6:09pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Over the Edge says...

Independent Thought wrote:
The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?
Oh the irony,,,,,,,Moving heaven and earth,,,,,living proof that talk is cheap,,,,,,,,,She bottled it, when the announcement to close the pool, was made she supported these two, until the threat of the whip being removed from her decided her principles (for which she elected on) didn't matter as much as her commitment to the Labour party.
[quote][p][bold]Independent Thought[/bold] wrote: The big question is whether Councillor Sally Spicer will 'move heaven and earth' to join the Coxford 2, thereby making it the Coxford 3?[/p][/quote]Oh the irony,,,,,,,Moving heaven and earth,,,,,living proof that talk is cheap,,,,,,,,,She bottled it, when the announcement to close the pool, was made she supported these two, until the threat of the whip being removed from her decided her principles (for which she elected on) didn't matter as much as her commitment to the Labour party. Over the Edge
  • Score: 0

7:16pm Thu 11 Oct 12

HillsidePaul says...

southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.
Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again.

If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all.

Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.[/p][/quote]It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.[/p][/quote]Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again. If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all. Why do you get even the simplest things wrong. HillsidePaul
  • Score: 0

8:41pm Thu 11 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.
Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again.

If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all.

Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.
Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)
[quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.[/p][/quote]It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.[/p][/quote]Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again. If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all. Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.[/p][/quote]Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-) IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

8:43pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

Well done Don and Keith, having left NuLabour to stay socialist way back in 1996, I can assure you both have done the right thing.

Whatever happens at least you will be able to live with clean conscience, because you won't have to keep on making excuses for something you do not believe in, and will be spared from being forced to defend lies of Closet Conservatives who dominate NuLabour and are inspired by Tories like Disreali.

You can justify staying in office, because unlike rest of Dear Leader's poodles, who have not only betrayed Labour values but also impressions given to voters before elections, you will be standing for Labour values and defending those pledges.

From my own point of view it is great news, because I be able to talk with my old mate Don without constant worry of not even accidently asking something which could extract internal secret info of NuLabour Group....and probably Don also had to stay on guard while talking to old socialist mate like me.

Although I am not very optimist, but I believe that many other decent and honest people who are still torturing their Labour/ socialist conscience within Disreali inspired NuLabour will also follow Don and Keith.

No doubt I as their constituent like many others will keep on supporting our two principled councillors.

Finally my only worry is about how Don leaving NuLabour could have knock on effect on Alan Whitehead's vote. All because stupid handling of situation in Council by Milliband's local virtual Tory mob.
Well done Don and Keith, having left NuLabour to stay socialist way back in 1996, I can assure you both have done the right thing. Whatever happens at least you will be able to live with clean conscience, because you won't have to keep on making excuses for something you do not believe in, and will be spared from being forced to defend lies of Closet Conservatives who dominate NuLabour and are inspired by Tories like Disreali. You can justify staying in office, because unlike rest of Dear Leader's poodles, who have not only betrayed Labour values but also impressions given to voters before elections, you will be standing for Labour values and defending those pledges. From my own point of view it is great news, because I be able to talk with my old mate Don without constant worry of not even accidently asking something which could extract internal secret info of NuLabour Group....and probably Don also had to stay on guard while talking to old socialist mate like me. Although I am not very optimist, but I believe that many other decent and honest people who are still torturing their Labour/ socialist conscience within Disreali inspired NuLabour will also follow Don and Keith. No doubt I as their constituent like many others will keep on supporting our two principled councillors. Finally my only worry is about how Don leaving NuLabour could have knock on effect on Alan Whitehead's vote. All because stupid handling of situation in Council by Milliband's local virtual Tory mob. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

9:04pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.
Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again.

If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all.

Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.
Because he is Southy!!!

He does lots of good work but then loves destroying it.
[quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.[/p][/quote]It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.[/p][/quote]Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again. If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all. Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.[/p][/quote]Because he is Southy!!! He does lots of good work but then loves destroying it. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

9:22pm Thu 11 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Well look's like they've taken a lot of you in doesn't it?
Against the cuts?
Why not Change alliance & give the TUSC their first councillors?
Why doesn't the council call for fresh elections for those wards & put up rival Labour candidates?
If these men want to show any credibility they've blown it.
To say no to cuts is a joke to put forward ways to sustain financially the Oaklands Pool would be right as I've done.
To say NO to pay cuts but have they said No to 200 temp job losses & 100 permanent job losses?
Do they know the full extent of the Labour cut's & job losses to come in the budget?
Step aside say you're not with the main Labour Party vote with the Labour Party but vote against a few things where they're vote won't make any difference but look we stuck up for you were for the people so vote for us?
Then they re-join the main Labour party job done.
To prove me wrong the council should call for fresh elections in their wards & they should agree to fight it or this is rubbish
Well look's like they've taken a lot of you in doesn't it? Against the cuts? Why not Change alliance & give the TUSC their first councillors? Why doesn't the council call for fresh elections for those wards & put up rival Labour candidates? If these men want to show any credibility they've blown it. To say no to cuts is a joke to put forward ways to sustain financially the Oaklands Pool would be right as I've done. To say NO to pay cuts but have they said No to 200 temp job losses & 100 permanent job losses? Do they know the full extent of the Labour cut's & job losses to come in the budget? Step aside say you're not with the main Labour Party vote with the Labour Party but vote against a few things where they're vote won't make any difference but look we stuck up for you were for the people so vote for us? Then they re-join the main Labour party job done. To prove me wrong the council should call for fresh elections in their wards & they should agree to fight it or this is rubbish loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:22pm Thu 11 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Well look's like they've taken a lot of you in doesn't it?
Against the cuts?
Why not Change alliance & give the TUSC their first councillors?
Why doesn't the council call for fresh elections for those wards & put up rival Labour candidates?
If these men want to show any credibility they've blown it.
To say no to cuts is a joke to put forward ways to sustain financially the Oaklands Pool would be right as I've done.
To say NO to pay cuts but have they said No to 200 temp job losses & 100 permanent job losses?
Do they know the full extent of the Labour cut's & job losses to come in the budget?
Step aside say you're not with the main Labour Party vote with the Labour Party but vote against a few things where they're vote won't make any difference but look we stuck up for you were for the people so vote for us?
Then they re-join the main Labour party job done.
To prove me wrong the council should call for fresh elections in their wards & they should agree to fight it or this is rubbish
Well look's like they've taken a lot of you in doesn't it? Against the cuts? Why not Change alliance & give the TUSC their first councillors? Why doesn't the council call for fresh elections for those wards & put up rival Labour candidates? If these men want to show any credibility they've blown it. To say no to cuts is a joke to put forward ways to sustain financially the Oaklands Pool would be right as I've done. To say NO to pay cuts but have they said No to 200 temp job losses & 100 permanent job losses? Do they know the full extent of the Labour cut's & job losses to come in the budget? Step aside say you're not with the main Labour Party vote with the Labour Party but vote against a few things where they're vote won't make any difference but look we stuck up for you were for the people so vote for us? Then they re-join the main Labour party job done. To prove me wrong the council should call for fresh elections in their wards & they should agree to fight it or this is rubbish loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:23pm Thu 11 Oct 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

They could call themselves Noo Noo Labour but that sucks.
They could call themselves Noo Noo Labour but that sucks. OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

9:29pm Thu 11 Oct 12

loosehead says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
They could call themselves Noo Noo Labour but that sucks.
I think it's a sham & a way for Labour to keep these seats
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: They could call themselves Noo Noo Labour but that sucks.[/p][/quote]I think it's a sham & a way for Labour to keep these seats loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:29pm Thu 11 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

I do wish the Echo would change the photo, it's like looking at a retirement home.
I do wish the Echo would change the photo, it's like looking at a retirement home. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:30pm Thu 11 Oct 12

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
I do wish the Echo would change the photo, it's like looking at a retirement home.
Ironlady exactly how do these idiots think we'll cut the National debt?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: I do wish the Echo would change the photo, it's like looking at a retirement home.[/p][/quote]Ironlady exactly how do these idiots think we'll cut the National debt? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:40pm Thu 11 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
I do wish the Echo would change the photo, it's like looking at a retirement home.
Ironlady exactly how do these idiots think we'll cut the National debt?
They are not concerned about National debt, they are just interested in supporting the Unions..............


"We will stand shoulder to shoulder with them against any further threats to their jobs and to public services"

The problem with the elder Councillors is that they are out of touch with the modern day world.

Computers and Robots have taken many workers jobs, Council workers included, we have to adapt and move forward.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: I do wish the Echo would change the photo, it's like looking at a retirement home.[/p][/quote]Ironlady exactly how do these idiots think we'll cut the National debt?[/p][/quote]They are not concerned about National debt, they are just interested in supporting the Unions.............. "We will stand shoulder to shoulder with them against any further threats to their jobs and to public services" The problem with the elder Councillors is that they are out of touch with the modern day world. Computers and Robots have taken many workers jobs, Council workers included, we have to adapt and move forward. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

10:09pm Thu 11 Oct 12

mrblunt says...

I do not support any political party but, having worked with Don Thomas over the years, even before he was a Councillor.
I can honestly say his whole outlook and actions are for the beneft of his constituents and not self fullfilling.
It is a pleasure to see a man stand up for his principles even though I don't always agree with him.
I do not support any political party but, having worked with Don Thomas over the years, even before he was a Councillor. I can honestly say his whole outlook and actions are for the beneft of his constituents and not self fullfilling. It is a pleasure to see a man stand up for his principles even though I don't always agree with him. mrblunt
  • Score: 0

10:23pm Thu 11 Oct 12

southy says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.
Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again.

If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all.

Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.
Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)
Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in.
The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different,
MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.[/p][/quote]It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.[/p][/quote]Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again. If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all. Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.[/p][/quote]Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)[/p][/quote]Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in. The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different, MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward southy
  • Score: 0

10:29pm Thu 11 Oct 12

southy says...

News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York. southy
  • Score: 0

10:30pm Thu 11 Oct 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

loosehead wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
They could call themselves Noo Noo Labour but that sucks.
I think it's a sham & a way for Labour to keep these seats
I can't see that working, but who knows what people think these days.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: They could call themselves Noo Noo Labour but that sucks.[/p][/quote]I think it's a sham & a way for Labour to keep these seats[/p][/quote]I can't see that working, but who knows what people think these days. OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

10:33pm Thu 11 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton? IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

10:59pm Thu 11 Oct 12

southy says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism southy
  • Score: 0

11:05pm Thu 11 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

11:30pm Thu 11 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

11:58pm Thu 11 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
If you gave the poor the money that you suggest they'd spend it on fags and booze, this is why they're poor. They have no incentive in life to better themselves and find a decent job or education.

Life is about choice, we control what we want to achieve, not the Government. People moan about Bankers, but you could be one too if you work for it.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]If you gave the poor the money that you suggest they'd spend it on fags and booze, this is why they're poor. They have no incentive in life to better themselves and find a decent job or education. Life is about choice, we control what we want to achieve, not the Government. People moan about Bankers, but you could be one too if you work for it. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

12:00am Fri 12 Oct 12

HillsidePaul says...

southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.
Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again.

If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all.

Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.
Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)
Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in.
The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different,
MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward
Wrong again halfwit. all Councillors are elected for a four year term. If they resign or die within six months of that term ending then the returning officer may (but does not have to) rule that the public interest, due to the costs involved, is best served by waiting the few months until other elections are being held.

In other circumstances voters in the ward (usually prompted by a political party) may demand an election be held. I can't remember the exact number but it is small, I think under ten. See that Southy I didn't know a small fact so I admitted it rather than making it up. You should try it sometime.

This is all academic anyway becuse neither of them have resigned, and whilst I think one of then has some principal's the other will cling on to his allowances as long as possible.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.[/p][/quote]It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.[/p][/quote]Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again. If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all. Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.[/p][/quote]Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)[/p][/quote]Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in. The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different, MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward[/p][/quote]Wrong again halfwit. all Councillors are elected for a four year term. If they resign or die within six months of that term ending then the returning officer may (but does not have to) rule that the public interest, due to the costs involved, is best served by waiting the few months until other elections are being held. In other circumstances voters in the ward (usually prompted by a political party) may demand an election be held. I can't remember the exact number but it is small, I think under ten. See that Southy I didn't know a small fact so I admitted it rather than making it up. You should try it sometime. This is all academic anyway becuse neither of them have resigned, and whilst I think one of then has some principal's the other will cling on to his allowances as long as possible. HillsidePaul
  • Score: 0

12:42am Fri 12 Oct 12

freefinker says...

HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.
Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again.

If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all.

Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.
Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)
Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in.
The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different,
MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward
Wrong again halfwit. all Councillors are elected for a four year term. If they resign or die within six months of that term ending then the returning officer may (but does not have to) rule that the public interest, due to the costs involved, is best served by waiting the few months until other elections are being held.

In other circumstances voters in the ward (usually prompted by a political party) may demand an election be held. I can't remember the exact number but it is small, I think under ten. See that Southy I didn't know a small fact so I admitted it rather than making it up. You should try it sometime.

This is all academic anyway becuse neither of them have resigned, and whilst I think one of then has some principal's the other will cling on to his allowances as long as possible.
.. it's only two electors needed.

southy is, of course, wrong, wrong and wrong again.

See this article: -

http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/news/84
85344.New_party__was
ting__money_in_calli
ng_a_by_election_in_
Poole/
[quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.[/p][/quote]It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.[/p][/quote]Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again. If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all. Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.[/p][/quote]Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)[/p][/quote]Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in. The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different, MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward[/p][/quote]Wrong again halfwit. all Councillors are elected for a four year term. If they resign or die within six months of that term ending then the returning officer may (but does not have to) rule that the public interest, due to the costs involved, is best served by waiting the few months until other elections are being held. In other circumstances voters in the ward (usually prompted by a political party) may demand an election be held. I can't remember the exact number but it is small, I think under ten. See that Southy I didn't know a small fact so I admitted it rather than making it up. You should try it sometime. This is all academic anyway becuse neither of them have resigned, and whilst I think one of then has some principal's the other will cling on to his allowances as long as possible.[/p][/quote].. it's only two electors needed. southy is, of course, wrong, wrong and wrong again. See this article: - http://www.bournemou thecho.co.uk/news/84 85344.New_party__was ting__money_in_calli ng_a_by_election_in_ Poole/ freefinker
  • Score: 0

12:47am Fri 12 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

Actually, Southy is correct! It is the entire world population that is incorrect, all the time.
Actually, Southy is correct! It is the entire world population that is incorrect, all the time. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

12:55am Fri 12 Oct 12

FoysCornerBoy says...

I look forward to the new group's alternative budget for the Council. Back in the day socialist Councillors would refuse to set a budget that might 'break the poor' even if this meant 'breaking the law'. I admire the honesty of those who adopt such a principled position but where exactly do Keith and Don stand on this question?
I look forward to the new group's alternative budget for the Council. Back in the day socialist Councillors would refuse to set a budget that might 'break the poor' even if this meant 'breaking the law'. I admire the honesty of those who adopt such a principled position but where exactly do Keith and Don stand on this question? FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 0

1:28am Fri 12 Oct 12

southy says...

HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.
Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again.

If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all.

Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.
Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)
Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in.
The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different,
MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward
Wrong again halfwit. all Councillors are elected for a four year term. If they resign or die within six months of that term ending then the returning officer may (but does not have to) rule that the public interest, due to the costs involved, is best served by waiting the few months until other elections are being held.

In other circumstances voters in the ward (usually prompted by a political party) may demand an election be held. I can't remember the exact number but it is small, I think under ten. See that Southy I didn't know a small fact so I admitted it rather than making it up. You should try it sometime.

This is all academic anyway becuse neither of them have resigned, and whilst I think one of then has some principal's the other will cling on to his allowances as long as possible.
One seat was vacant for over a year the second seat was only vancant a short while before the four weeks before an election, that is what happened on the other side of the Itchen, 2 wards was short off councillors.
The 10 figure (people signatures) your quoting is the requirements for a person to be able to put theres selfs forward to stand in a council election. It as nothing to do with forcing a by-election, you can not force a by-election unless all 3 councillors seats are vacant in one ward. and the people have no one to represent them.
So what happened here is that the 2 Councillors stayed as Councillors to carry on representing the people of there ward, If they had resigned from the council then the Labour controlled council could hold back up to the day when the 4 year term is up, and hope the people will forget them and they would have less of a chance to get elelcted in. This way they stay and keep the good work up, giving them a greater chance to be relected when the 4 year term of office is up.
And like you tried to point out many councils only have 2 councillors to each ward, but Southampton has 3 left over from the days when we use to have representation in Hampshire Council also ( I beleive Paramjit use to be a Hampshire councillor), the idea behide 2 councillors to each ward was that you had one experence councillor and one learning the ropes for each ward.
[quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.[/p][/quote]It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.[/p][/quote]Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again. If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all. Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.[/p][/quote]Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)[/p][/quote]Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in. The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different, MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward[/p][/quote]Wrong again halfwit. all Councillors are elected for a four year term. If they resign or die within six months of that term ending then the returning officer may (but does not have to) rule that the public interest, due to the costs involved, is best served by waiting the few months until other elections are being held. In other circumstances voters in the ward (usually prompted by a political party) may demand an election be held. I can't remember the exact number but it is small, I think under ten. See that Southy I didn't know a small fact so I admitted it rather than making it up. You should try it sometime. This is all academic anyway becuse neither of them have resigned, and whilst I think one of then has some principal's the other will cling on to his allowances as long as possible.[/p][/quote]One seat was vacant for over a year the second seat was only vancant a short while before the four weeks before an election, that is what happened on the other side of the Itchen, 2 wards was short off councillors. The 10 figure (people signatures) your quoting is the requirements for a person to be able to put theres selfs forward to stand in a council election. It as nothing to do with forcing a by-election, you can not force a by-election unless all 3 councillors seats are vacant in one ward. and the people have no one to represent them. So what happened here is that the 2 Councillors stayed as Councillors to carry on representing the people of there ward, If they had resigned from the council then the Labour controlled council could hold back up to the day when the 4 year term is up, and hope the people will forget them and they would have less of a chance to get elelcted in. This way they stay and keep the good work up, giving them a greater chance to be relected when the 4 year term of office is up. And like you tried to point out many councils only have 2 councillors to each ward, but Southampton has 3 left over from the days when we use to have representation in Hampshire Council also ( I beleive Paramjit use to be a Hampshire councillor), the idea behide 2 councillors to each ward was that you had one experence councillor and one learning the ropes for each ward. southy
  • Score: 0

1:40am Fri 12 Oct 12

southy says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
I look forward to the new group's alternative budget for the Council. Back in the day socialist Councillors would refuse to set a budget that might 'break the poor' even if this meant 'breaking the law'. I admire the honesty of those who adopt such a principled position but where exactly do Keith and Don stand on this question?
Socialist Councillors never broke the law, they used the law to there advantage.
But what is a law, a law can only work after its been tested in a court, its when in court you find out if a law is workable or not with out conniving other laws.

Its like these anti-union laws they never been tested in court, and when they do get tested in court you will find out that in reality they can not be enforced, 1/ is that there is laws that protects people rights, 2/ is when people turn on that law in mass and make it unenforcable.
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: I look forward to the new group's alternative budget for the Council. Back in the day socialist Councillors would refuse to set a budget that might 'break the poor' even if this meant 'breaking the law'. I admire the honesty of those who adopt such a principled position but where exactly do Keith and Don stand on this question?[/p][/quote]Socialist Councillors never broke the law, they used the law to there advantage. But what is a law, a law can only work after its been tested in a court, its when in court you find out if a law is workable or not with out conniving other laws. Its like these anti-union laws they never been tested in court, and when they do get tested in court you will find out that in reality they can not be enforced, 1/ is that there is laws that protects people rights, 2/ is when people turn on that law in mass and make it unenforcable. southy
  • Score: 0

1:53am Fri 12 Oct 12

southy says...

freefinker before you post again, come round to my place I have a the paper work from the electrol office giving the rules and conditions that a councillor must follow, and what happens should your seat become vacant before the 4 year term office ended.
The returning officer job ends on the day of the results (which is normally the day after polling day but not all ways), unless there is a question of cheating, misconduct, ect that would or might cause a different out come in the result.
freefinker before you post again, come round to my place I have a the paper work from the electrol office giving the rules and conditions that a councillor must follow, and what happens should your seat become vacant before the 4 year term office ended. The returning officer job ends on the day of the results (which is normally the day after polling day but not all ways), unless there is a question of cheating, misconduct, ect that would or might cause a different out come in the result. southy
  • Score: 0

2:00am Fri 12 Oct 12

SotonGreen says...

Don Thomas has done more flips than an Olympic gymnast. Why the idiots in Southampton Labour selected him again as a candidate is beyond me. He has done precisely this kind of thing before.
Don Thomas has done more flips than an Olympic gymnast. Why the idiots in Southampton Labour selected him again as a candidate is beyond me. He has done precisely this kind of thing before. SotonGreen
  • Score: 0

6:50am Fri 12 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want? loosehead
  • Score: 0

8:54am Fri 12 Oct 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Actually, Southy is correct! It is the entire world population that is incorrect, all the time.
.. and don't forget that includes your good self, there have been many times that I would have liked to agree with you and LH, but sadly that would mean we would have all been wrong, thus leaving Southy in the right.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Actually, Southy is correct! It is the entire world population that is incorrect, all the time.[/p][/quote].. and don't forget that includes your good self, there have been many times that I would have liked to agree with you and LH, but sadly that would mean we would have all been wrong, thus leaving Southy in the right. OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

8:56am Fri 12 Oct 12

southy says...

SotonGreen wrote:
Don Thomas has done more flips than an Olympic gymnast. Why the idiots in Southampton Labour selected him again as a candidate is beyond me. He has done precisely this kind of thing before.
Not a lot of choice, Don and Keith done a very good job up there in that ward, take a look at the election results history for that ward, they turned it around and made it a Labour Strong hold.
[quote][p][bold]SotonGreen[/bold] wrote: Don Thomas has done more flips than an Olympic gymnast. Why the idiots in Southampton Labour selected him again as a candidate is beyond me. He has done precisely this kind of thing before.[/p][/quote]Not a lot of choice, Don and Keith done a very good job up there in that ward, take a look at the election results history for that ward, they turned it around and made it a Labour Strong hold. southy
  • Score: 0

9:10am Fri 12 Oct 12

southy says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Actually, Southy is correct! It is the entire world population that is incorrect, all the time.
.. and don't forget that includes your good self, there have been many times that I would have liked to agree with you and LH, but sadly that would mean we would have all been wrong, thus leaving Southy in the right.
Osprey, time as all ways proven me right, the last one was about the the numbers of signatures needed in petitions to get a hearing in the Council, when people like LH and IL and even Paramjit and number of others said I was wrong and it turns I was right as Paramjit found out the last time we was down the civic center and came up to me and siad he owes me a drink.
So I not to worried about the likes of them and there very poor attempt to try and Politically assassinations because it all ways comes back and bites there butt.
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Actually, Southy is correct! It is the entire world population that is incorrect, all the time.[/p][/quote].. and don't forget that includes your good self, there have been many times that I would have liked to agree with you and LH, but sadly that would mean we would have all been wrong, thus leaving Southy in the right.[/p][/quote]Osprey, time as all ways proven me right, the last one was about the the numbers of signatures needed in petitions to get a hearing in the Council, when people like LH and IL and even Paramjit and number of others said I was wrong and it turns I was right as Paramjit found out the last time we was down the civic center and came up to me and siad he owes me a drink. So I not to worried about the likes of them and there very poor attempt to try and Politically assassinations because it all ways comes back and bites there butt. southy
  • Score: 0

9:17am Fri 12 Oct 12

southy says...

loosehead go and read the books about Liverpool, that Labour Council won very big concessions for Liverpool from the Goverment they endded up getting an extra £64 million from the Tory (it happen when Thatcher was in power not when the Labour was in power) government to build council homes and other things creating mass number of jobs, they was the first ones to show there was weakness in Thatcher government just a shame that all other councils did not follow suit, it would of bought down Thatcher a lot earlier.
loosehead go and read the books about Liverpool, that Labour Council won very big concessions for Liverpool from the Goverment they endded up getting an extra £64 million from the Tory (it happen when Thatcher was in power not when the Labour was in power) government to build council homes and other things creating mass number of jobs, they was the first ones to show there was weakness in Thatcher government just a shame that all other councils did not follow suit, it would of bought down Thatcher a lot earlier. southy
  • Score: 0

9:29am Fri 12 Oct 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker before you post again, come round to my place I have a the paper work from the electrol office giving the rules and conditions that a councillor must follow, and what happens should your seat become vacant before the 4 year term office ended.
The returning officer job ends on the day of the results (which is normally the day after polling day but not all ways), unless there is a question of cheating, misconduct, ect that would or might cause a different out come in the result.
.. you obviously didn't read the link I posted, so here it is: -

Bournemouth Echo 30 October 2010: -

"An irresponsible waste of money at the worst possible time – that’s the angry response to the calling of a costly by-election in Poole.

"The irate reaction came after a new political party, Poole People, forced a by-election in the Poole Town ward, after a vacancy caused by the death of council leader Brian Leverett.

"It takes two residents of the ward to call for a by-election, which the council is then legally required to hold, at a cost approaching £20,000. This will be the second Poole by-election this year.

"And with an election of the entire council next May, whoever wins the by-election on December 2 will only hold the seat for five months.

"Neither the Conservatives nor the Liberal Democrats rushed to the polls, believing the two sitting councillors could cope with the constituency work."

Please note this is a multi-member ward of a unitary authority.

Now tell me how this differs from Southampton?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: freefinker before you post again, come round to my place I have a the paper work from the electrol office giving the rules and conditions that a councillor must follow, and what happens should your seat become vacant before the 4 year term office ended. The returning officer job ends on the day of the results (which is normally the day after polling day but not all ways), unless there is a question of cheating, misconduct, ect that would or might cause a different out come in the result.[/p][/quote].. you obviously didn't read the link I posted, so here it is: - Bournemouth Echo 30 October 2010: - "An irresponsible waste of money at the worst possible time – that’s the angry response to the calling of a costly by-election in Poole. "The irate reaction came after a new political party, Poole People, forced a by-election in the Poole Town ward, after a vacancy caused by the death of council leader Brian Leverett. "It takes two residents of the ward to call for a by-election, which the council is then legally required to hold, at a cost approaching £20,000. This will be the second Poole by-election this year. "And with an election of the entire council next May, whoever wins the by-election on December 2 will only hold the seat for five months. "Neither the Conservatives nor the Liberal Democrats rushed to the polls, believing the two sitting councillors could cope with the constituency work." Please note this is a multi-member ward of a unitary authority. Now tell me how this differs from Southampton? freefinker
  • Score: 0

9:38am Fri 12 Oct 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
I look forward to the new group's alternative budget for the Council. Back in the day socialist Councillors would refuse to set a budget that might 'break the poor' even if this meant 'breaking the law'. I admire the honesty of those who adopt such a principled position but where exactly do Keith and Don stand on this question?
Socialist Councillors never broke the law, they used the law to there advantage.
But what is a law, a law can only work after its been tested in a court, its when in court you find out if a law is workable or not with out conniving other laws.

Its like these anti-union laws they never been tested in court, and when they do get tested in court you will find out that in reality they can not be enforced, 1/ is that there is laws that protects people rights, 2/ is when people turn on that law in mass and make it unenforcable.
.. oh, NEVER broke the law, I see!!

Now tell us about the law-breaking and subsequent 1973 surcharging of socialist Clay Cross councillors.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: I look forward to the new group's alternative budget for the Council. Back in the day socialist Councillors would refuse to set a budget that might 'break the poor' even if this meant 'breaking the law'. I admire the honesty of those who adopt such a principled position but where exactly do Keith and Don stand on this question?[/p][/quote]Socialist Councillors never broke the law, they used the law to there advantage. But what is a law, a law can only work after its been tested in a court, its when in court you find out if a law is workable or not with out conniving other laws. Its like these anti-union laws they never been tested in court, and when they do get tested in court you will find out that in reality they can not be enforced, 1/ is that there is laws that protects people rights, 2/ is when people turn on that law in mass and make it unenforcable.[/p][/quote].. oh, NEVER broke the law, I see!! Now tell us about the law-breaking and subsequent 1973 surcharging of socialist Clay Cross councillors. freefinker
  • Score: 0

10:31am Fri 12 Oct 12

HillsidePaul says...

southy wrote:
HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.
Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again.

If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all.

Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.
Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)
Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in.
The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different,
MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward
Wrong again halfwit. all Councillors are elected for a four year term. If they resign or die within six months of that term ending then the returning officer may (but does not have to) rule that the public interest, due to the costs involved, is best served by waiting the few months until other elections are being held.

In other circumstances voters in the ward (usually prompted by a political party) may demand an election be held. I can't remember the exact number but it is small, I think under ten. See that Southy I didn't know a small fact so I admitted it rather than making it up. You should try it sometime.

This is all academic anyway becuse neither of them have resigned, and whilst I think one of then has some principal's the other will cling on to his allowances as long as possible.
One seat was vacant for over a year the second seat was only vancant a short while before the four weeks before an election, that is what happened on the other side of the Itchen, 2 wards was short off councillors.
The 10 figure (people signatures) your quoting is the requirements for a person to be able to put theres selfs forward to stand in a council election. It as nothing to do with forcing a by-election, you can not force a by-election unless all 3 councillors seats are vacant in one ward. and the people have no one to represent them.
So what happened here is that the 2 Councillors stayed as Councillors to carry on representing the people of there ward, If they had resigned from the council then the Labour controlled council could hold back up to the day when the 4 year term is up, and hope the people will forget them and they would have less of a chance to get elelcted in. This way they stay and keep the good work up, giving them a greater chance to be relected when the 4 year term of office is up.
And like you tried to point out many councils only have 2 councillors to each ward, but Southampton has 3 left over from the days when we use to have representation in Hampshire Council also ( I beleive Paramjit use to be a Hampshire councillor), the idea behide 2 councillors to each ward was that you had one experence councillor and one learning the ropes for each ward.
There is so much garbage in this post I don't know where to start.

Some Councils have three Cllrs per ward, some two, some one. Some even have a mix of all three.

The Cllr is elected in their own right. their is no link in electoral terms to each other. The story you have made up about the voters having no power to call a by election if any of the other Cllrs are still in office is your own deluded fantasy.

Try and think it through, say a ward has two Cllrs, one Labour, one Tory. The Labour one dies and it changes the balance of power on the Council. According to you the voters have no right to demand a by election becuse they still have one Cllrs even though he's a Tory and the one that died was Labour (and don't forget that some Councils only have elections once every four years). Are you so deluded as to think that could really be true.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.[/p][/quote]It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.[/p][/quote]Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again. If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all. Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.[/p][/quote]Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)[/p][/quote]Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in. The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different, MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward[/p][/quote]Wrong again halfwit. all Councillors are elected for a four year term. If they resign or die within six months of that term ending then the returning officer may (but does not have to) rule that the public interest, due to the costs involved, is best served by waiting the few months until other elections are being held. In other circumstances voters in the ward (usually prompted by a political party) may demand an election be held. I can't remember the exact number but it is small, I think under ten. See that Southy I didn't know a small fact so I admitted it rather than making it up. You should try it sometime. This is all academic anyway becuse neither of them have resigned, and whilst I think one of then has some principal's the other will cling on to his allowances as long as possible.[/p][/quote]One seat was vacant for over a year the second seat was only vancant a short while before the four weeks before an election, that is what happened on the other side of the Itchen, 2 wards was short off councillors. The 10 figure (people signatures) your quoting is the requirements for a person to be able to put theres selfs forward to stand in a council election. It as nothing to do with forcing a by-election, you can not force a by-election unless all 3 councillors seats are vacant in one ward. and the people have no one to represent them. So what happened here is that the 2 Councillors stayed as Councillors to carry on representing the people of there ward, If they had resigned from the council then the Labour controlled council could hold back up to the day when the 4 year term is up, and hope the people will forget them and they would have less of a chance to get elelcted in. This way they stay and keep the good work up, giving them a greater chance to be relected when the 4 year term of office is up. And like you tried to point out many councils only have 2 councillors to each ward, but Southampton has 3 left over from the days when we use to have representation in Hampshire Council also ( I beleive Paramjit use to be a Hampshire councillor), the idea behide 2 councillors to each ward was that you had one experence councillor and one learning the ropes for each ward.[/p][/quote]There is so much garbage in this post I don't know where to start. Some Councils have three Cllrs per ward, some two, some one. Some even have a mix of all three. The Cllr is elected in their own right. their is no link in electoral terms to each other. The story you have made up about the voters having no power to call a by election if any of the other Cllrs are still in office is your own deluded fantasy. Try and think it through, say a ward has two Cllrs, one Labour, one Tory. The Labour one dies and it changes the balance of power on the Council. According to you the voters have no right to demand a by election becuse they still have one Cllrs even though he's a Tory and the one that died was Labour (and don't forget that some Councils only have elections once every four years). Are you so deluded as to think that could really be true. HillsidePaul
  • Score: 0

11:51am Fri 12 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

southy wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Actually, Southy is correct! It is the entire world population that is incorrect, all the time.
.. and don't forget that includes your good self, there have been many times that I would have liked to agree with you and LH, but sadly that would mean we would have all been wrong, thus leaving Southy in the right.
Osprey, time as all ways proven me right, the last one was about the the numbers of signatures needed in petitions to get a hearing in the Council, when people like LH and IL and even Paramjit and number of others said I was wrong and it turns I was right as Paramjit found out the last time we was down the civic center and came up to me and siad he owes me a drink.
So I not to worried about the likes of them and there very poor attempt to try and Politically assassinations because it all ways comes back and bites there butt.
Southy, if you want to keep on being silly then it is your right, which I respect, but please engage socialist part of your brain before making a stupid comment involving me.

I am suggesting to engage your socialist part of your double personality because I believe socialists should always tell the truth in public and should not lie or fib.

But by the look of it due your addiction of playing 'know it all Charlie' I suppose you can't help frequently distorting the fact and sometimes even posting out right LIES.

YES I offered to buy you a drink when we met because I had promised that to you in open to public forum of this site. BUT it was not because I had made up some fiction, (Which your good self tend to do disturbingly too often) or you'd proven me wrong.

FACT is that on this site for a change you'd replied with bit of common sense to somebody's comment, so I had posted my reply saying I will buy you a drink.....

It does not give me any pleasure in telling a supposedly socialist in public forum that other side of his personality is a LIAR, but unfortunately you have pushed your luck bit too far and left me no other choice.

For some reason I still believe that deep down in you there is a decent socialist, BUT at the same time there also is something very seriously wrong (in the head?) Knowingly or unwittingly you seem to enjoy coming across as 'Jack of all trades but master of none clown' thus hurting the very cause you pretend to believe in.

As in this case, when two councillors deserve your support because they have very bravely and rightly put their political future on line for something you and your Socialist Party often talk about, rather than standing shoulder to shoulder with them in solidarity, as usual, you have opted for keep on hijacking this thread for your own silly full of fiction ego.

Perhaps with friends like you both Don and Keith could do with even Dear Leader Williams!!!
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Actually, Southy is correct! It is the entire world population that is incorrect, all the time.[/p][/quote].. and don't forget that includes your good self, there have been many times that I would have liked to agree with you and LH, but sadly that would mean we would have all been wrong, thus leaving Southy in the right.[/p][/quote]Osprey, time as all ways proven me right, the last one was about the the numbers of signatures needed in petitions to get a hearing in the Council, when people like LH and IL and even Paramjit and number of others said I was wrong and it turns I was right as Paramjit found out the last time we was down the civic center and came up to me and siad he owes me a drink. So I not to worried about the likes of them and there very poor attempt to try and Politically assassinations because it all ways comes back and bites there butt.[/p][/quote]Southy, if you want to keep on being silly then it is your right, which I respect, but please engage socialist part of your brain before making a stupid comment involving me. I am suggesting to engage your socialist part of your double personality because I believe socialists should always tell the truth in public and should not lie or fib. But by the look of it due your addiction of playing 'know it all Charlie' I suppose you can't help frequently distorting the fact and sometimes even posting out right LIES. YES I offered to buy you a drink when we met because I had promised that to you in open to public forum of this site. BUT it was not because I had made up some fiction, (Which your good self tend to do disturbingly too often) or you'd proven me wrong. FACT is that on this site for a change you'd replied with bit of common sense to somebody's comment, so I had posted my reply saying I will buy you a drink..... It does not give me any pleasure in telling a supposedly socialist in public forum that other side of his personality is a LIAR, but unfortunately you have pushed your luck bit too far and left me no other choice. For some reason I still believe that deep down in you there is a decent socialist, BUT at the same time there also is something very seriously wrong (in the head?) Knowingly or unwittingly you seem to enjoy coming across as 'Jack of all trades but master of none clown' thus hurting the very cause you pretend to believe in. As in this case, when two councillors deserve your support because they have very bravely and rightly put their political future on line for something you and your Socialist Party often talk about, rather than standing shoulder to shoulder with them in solidarity, as usual, you have opted for keep on hijacking this thread for your own silly full of fiction ego. Perhaps with friends like you both Don and Keith could do with even Dear Leader Williams!!! Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

12:08pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
HillsidePaul wrote:
southy wrote:
Might SS wrote:
I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.
It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.
Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again.

If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all.

Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.
Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)
Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in.
The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different,
MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward
Wrong again halfwit. all Councillors are elected for a four year term. If they resign or die within six months of that term ending then the returning officer may (but does not have to) rule that the public interest, due to the costs involved, is best served by waiting the few months until other elections are being held.

In other circumstances voters in the ward (usually prompted by a political party) may demand an election be held. I can't remember the exact number but it is small, I think under ten. See that Southy I didn't know a small fact so I admitted it rather than making it up. You should try it sometime.

This is all academic anyway becuse neither of them have resigned, and whilst I think one of then has some principal's the other will cling on to his allowances as long as possible.
One seat was vacant for over a year the second seat was only vancant a short while before the four weeks before an election, that is what happened on the other side of the Itchen, 2 wards was short off councillors.
The 10 figure (people signatures) your quoting is the requirements for a person to be able to put theres selfs forward to stand in a council election. It as nothing to do with forcing a by-election, you can not force a by-election unless all 3 councillors seats are vacant in one ward. and the people have no one to represent them.
So what happened here is that the 2 Councillors stayed as Councillors to carry on representing the people of there ward, If they had resigned from the council then the Labour controlled council could hold back up to the day when the 4 year term is up, and hope the people will forget them and they would have less of a chance to get elelcted in. This way they stay and keep the good work up, giving them a greater chance to be relected when the 4 year term of office is up.
And like you tried to point out many councils only have 2 councillors to each ward, but Southampton has 3 left over from the days when we use to have representation in Hampshire Council also ( I beleive Paramjit use to be a Hampshire councillor), the idea behide 2 councillors to each ward was that you had one experence councillor and one learning the ropes for each ward.
There is so much garbage in this post I don't know where to start.

Some Councils have three Cllrs per ward, some two, some one. Some even have a mix of all three.

The Cllr is elected in their own right. their is no link in electoral terms to each other. The story you have made up about the voters having no power to call a by election if any of the other Cllrs are still in office is your own deluded fantasy.

Try and think it through, say a ward has two Cllrs, one Labour, one Tory. The Labour one dies and it changes the balance of power on the Council. According to you the voters have no right to demand a by election becuse they still have one Cllrs even though he's a Tory and the one that died was Labour (and don't forget that some Councils only have elections once every four years). Are you so deluded as to think that could really be true.
Hillside Paul, you trying your best to get some common sense into Southy's full of fiction head stands even less than a baboon appreciating somebody playing violin to to bloody stupid thing!!!

I think we should have a chat with Nick Chaffey and convince him that best thing for Socialist Party is to plant Southy in NuLabour, because he can make bigger **** ups than Dear Leader and his Deputy the Controller put together.
[quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HillsidePaul[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Might SS[/bold] wrote: I voted for them as they stood for Labour - I presume that as they have principles they will resign as Councillors and will stand in a by election then. No thought not. Not that principled then.[/p][/quote]It don't work like that, if they resign from being councillors then the ruling council body as in this case its Labour can leave the seats empty till the term of office would normally run out,Labour can afford to leave those seats empty there majority would still control the council.[/p][/quote]Well done Southy, talking utter Bo%&@cks again. If a seat becomes vacant through death or resignation then voters in the ward concerned can request an election be held. It is NOT in the gift of one party at all. Why do you get even the simplest things wrong.[/p][/quote]Southy isn't wrong, he'll be along soon to explain, in the meantime do your own research ;-)[/p][/quote]Your right I not wrong, this is Council not House of lords, There was a case here in Southampton ward a vacant council seat was left empty till the Elections in May, thinking about it there was 2 wards that had more than one councillor elelcted in. The rules for MEP and MP and Councillors are different, MEP can select another person to replace a missing MEP, Vacant MP seat then there is a by-election, Vacant Councillor seat can be left empty till an end of the run, because each ward is represented by more than 1 councillor, what councils normally do is wait till the local elections comes around again, then put up the vacant seat but they do not have to they can wait till it is due to come up again, The requirement is that each ward is to have at lest one Councillor representing that ward[/p][/quote]Wrong again halfwit. all Councillors are elected for a four year term. If they resign or die within six months of that term ending then the returning officer may (but does not have to) rule that the public interest, due to the costs involved, is best served by waiting the few months until other elections are being held. In other circumstances voters in the ward (usually prompted by a political party) may demand an election be held. I can't remember the exact number but it is small, I think under ten. See that Southy I didn't know a small fact so I admitted it rather than making it up. You should try it sometime. This is all academic anyway becuse neither of them have resigned, and whilst I think one of then has some principal's the other will cling on to his allowances as long as possible.[/p][/quote]One seat was vacant for over a year the second seat was only vancant a short while before the four weeks before an election, that is what happened on the other side of the Itchen, 2 wards was short off councillors. The 10 figure (people signatures) your quoting is the requirements for a person to be able to put theres selfs forward to stand in a council election. It as nothing to do with forcing a by-election, you can not force a by-election unless all 3 councillors seats are vacant in one ward. and the people have no one to represent them. So what happened here is that the 2 Councillors stayed as Councillors to carry on representing the people of there ward, If they had resigned from the council then the Labour controlled council could hold back up to the day when the 4 year term is up, and hope the people will forget them and they would have less of a chance to get elelcted in. This way they stay and keep the good work up, giving them a greater chance to be relected when the 4 year term of office is up. And like you tried to point out many councils only have 2 councillors to each ward, but Southampton has 3 left over from the days when we use to have representation in Hampshire Council also ( I beleive Paramjit use to be a Hampshire councillor), the idea behide 2 councillors to each ward was that you had one experence councillor and one learning the ropes for each ward.[/p][/quote]There is so much garbage in this post I don't know where to start. Some Councils have three Cllrs per ward, some two, some one. Some even have a mix of all three. The Cllr is elected in their own right. their is no link in electoral terms to each other. The story you have made up about the voters having no power to call a by election if any of the other Cllrs are still in office is your own deluded fantasy. Try and think it through, say a ward has two Cllrs, one Labour, one Tory. The Labour one dies and it changes the balance of power on the Council. According to you the voters have no right to demand a by election becuse they still have one Cllrs even though he's a Tory and the one that died was Labour (and don't forget that some Councils only have elections once every four years). Are you so deluded as to think that could really be true.[/p][/quote]Hillside Paul, you trying your best to get some common sense into Southy's full of fiction head stands even less than a baboon appreciating somebody playing violin to to bloody stupid thing!!! I think we should have a chat with Nick Chaffey and convince him that best thing for Socialist Party is to plant Southy in NuLabour, because he can make bigger **** ups than Dear Leader and his Deputy the Controller put together. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

12:20pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

SotonGreen wrote:
Don Thomas has done more flips than an Olympic gymnast. Why the idiots in Southampton Labour selected him again as a candidate is beyond me. He has done precisely this kind of thing before.
SotonGreen, I am disappointed to read your remark about Don Thomas. I have known him for few decades both as fellow socialist and as a friend. Strangely since leaving NuLabour also as a political opponent.

With what I and many others know about Don, I do not think the baseless sectarian mud you have tried to throw around is going to stick upon him.

By behaving like this all you will achieve is put some of us who have sympathy with Greens off.
[quote][p][bold]SotonGreen[/bold] wrote: Don Thomas has done more flips than an Olympic gymnast. Why the idiots in Southampton Labour selected him again as a candidate is beyond me. He has done precisely this kind of thing before.[/p][/quote]SotonGreen, I am disappointed to read your remark about Don Thomas. I have known him for few decades both as fellow socialist and as a friend. Strangely since leaving NuLabour also as a political opponent. With what I and many others know about Don, I do not think the baseless sectarian mud you have tried to throw around is going to stick upon him. By behaving like this all you will achieve is put some of us who have sympathy with Greens off. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

12:24pm Fri 12 Oct 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Actually, Southy is correct! It is the entire world population that is incorrect, all the time.
.. and don't forget that includes your good self, there have been many times that I would have liked to agree with you and LH, but sadly that would mean we would have all been wrong, thus leaving Southy in the right.
Osprey, time as all ways proven me right, the last one was about the the numbers of signatures needed in petitions to get a hearing in the Council, when people like LH and IL and even Paramjit and number of others said I was wrong and it turns I was right as Paramjit found out the last time we was down the civic center and came up to me and siad he owes me a drink.
So I not to worried about the likes of them and there very poor attempt to try and Politically assassinations because it all ways comes back and bites there butt.
.. so, "time as all ways proven me right"?

You mean, like: -

section 4 of planning.
Brain cells can be repaired or replace by the body natural system.
Council tax – goes to central government and only small amount comes back to local authority.
Pearl-bordered Fritillary is not native.
The Meadow Fritillary is seen all along the south coast.
Rahit Maryada is a person.
Sikh is a language.
Brown Dwarf stars are comets.
Oxygen can become CO2 without adding carbon.
“You burn some thing it takes air, and that air will change to co2”.
“This country is Christian Atheist mainly. some do not realise the subsection to Atheist, like you can get Hebrew Atheist, Hindu Atheist, Muslim Atheist and so on”.
Moon causes earthquakes.
Dredging Southampton Water causes landslips in Weston.
The Tree Sparrow is the Dunnock.
You’ve seen Rock Sparrows in the UK.
Sulphur is the biggest cause of cancer.
Atmospheric CO2 less now than 100 years ago.
Sea races.
63% of Northern Ireland population are under age of 18.
Tax free ISA’s are taxed.
The Earth wobble.
The Keeling curve is caused by volcanism.

Just a small selection of all the times I have recorded you to be wrong, not right.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Actually, Southy is correct! It is the entire world population that is incorrect, all the time.[/p][/quote].. and don't forget that includes your good self, there have been many times that I would have liked to agree with you and LH, but sadly that would mean we would have all been wrong, thus leaving Southy in the right.[/p][/quote]Osprey, time as all ways proven me right, the last one was about the the numbers of signatures needed in petitions to get a hearing in the Council, when people like LH and IL and even Paramjit and number of others said I was wrong and it turns I was right as Paramjit found out the last time we was down the civic center and came up to me and siad he owes me a drink. So I not to worried about the likes of them and there very poor attempt to try and Politically assassinations because it all ways comes back and bites there butt.[/p][/quote].. so, "time as all ways proven me right"? You mean, like: - section 4 of planning. Brain cells can be repaired or replace by the body natural system. Council tax – goes to central government and only small amount comes back to local authority. Pearl-bordered Fritillary is not native. The Meadow Fritillary is seen all along the south coast. Rahit Maryada is a person. Sikh is a language. Brown Dwarf stars are comets. Oxygen can become CO2 without adding carbon. “You burn some thing it takes air, and that air will change to co2”. “This country is Christian Atheist mainly. some do not realise the subsection to Atheist, like you can get Hebrew Atheist, Hindu Atheist, Muslim Atheist and so on”. Moon causes earthquakes. Dredging Southampton Water causes landslips in Weston. The Tree Sparrow is the Dunnock. You’ve seen Rock Sparrows in the UK. Sulphur is the biggest cause of cancer. Atmospheric CO2 less now than 100 years ago. Sea races. 63% of Northern Ireland population are under age of 18. Tax free ISA’s are taxed. The Earth wobble. The Keeling curve is caused by volcanism. Just a small selection of all the times I have recorded you to be wrong, not right. freefinker
  • Score: 0

12:49pm Fri 12 Oct 12

waltons11 says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
If you gave the poor the money that you suggest they'd spend it on fags and booze, this is why they're poor. They have no incentive in life to better themselves and find a decent job or education. Life is about choice, we control what we want to achieve, not the Government. People moan about Bankers, but you could be one too if you work for it.
IL that is rather a sweeping statement against the poor. I think I am poor but I do not smoke or drink and my husband and I both work, we are both intelligent people, but like a lot of others we have had some hard knocks, and the recession and cuts etc. do have an effect on our lives. BTW we do have collect any benefits either and if we want something we save jolly hard for it like a lot of people. Please do not be so quick to make a judgement.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]If you gave the poor the money that you suggest they'd spend it on fags and booze, this is why they're poor. They have no incentive in life to better themselves and find a decent job or education. Life is about choice, we control what we want to achieve, not the Government. People moan about Bankers, but you could be one too if you work for it.[/p][/quote]IL that is rather a sweeping statement against the poor. I think I am poor but I do not smoke or drink and my husband and I both work, we are both intelligent people, but like a lot of others we have had some hard knocks, and the recession and cuts etc. do have an effect on our lives. BTW we do have collect any benefits either and if we want something we save jolly hard for it like a lot of people. Please do not be so quick to make a judgement. waltons11
  • Score: 0

2:15pm Fri 12 Oct 12

orderoutofchaos says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
If you gave the poor the money that you suggest they'd spend it on fags and booze, this is why they're poor. They have no incentive in life to better themselves and find a decent job or education. Life is about choice, we control what we want to achieve, not the Government. People moan about Bankers, but you could be one too if you work for it.
Hmmm social cleansing and eugenics?

Pretty sure they had the same idea in Nazi Germany.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]If you gave the poor the money that you suggest they'd spend it on fags and booze, this is why they're poor. They have no incentive in life to better themselves and find a decent job or education. Life is about choice, we control what we want to achieve, not the Government. People moan about Bankers, but you could be one too if you work for it.[/p][/quote]Hmmm social cleansing and eugenics? Pretty sure they had the same idea in Nazi Germany. orderoutofchaos
  • Score: 0

2:29pm Fri 12 Oct 12

lisa whitemore says...

Nick Chaffey wrote:
Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition!
Good Luck to them Both and fairplay for remembering something this current labour council has seriously Forgotten......... to respect their supporters and help the public,not slag them or lie to the either!!
[quote][p][bold]Nick Chaffey[/bold] wrote: Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition![/p][/quote]Good Luck to them Both and fairplay for remembering something this current labour council has seriously Forgotten......... to respect their supporters and help the public,not slag them or lie to the either!! lisa whitemore
  • Score: 0

3:09pm Fri 12 Oct 12

loosehead says...

lisa whitemore wrote:
Nick Chaffey wrote:
Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition!
Good Luck to them Both and fairplay for remembering something this current labour council has seriously Forgotten......... to respect their supporters and help the public,not slag them or lie to the either!!
wait until the next elections before making that statement.
Closed a Swimming pool which the local Labour Party knew would lose them votes & very likely these seats.
two so called real Labour councillors do exactly what most people vote them in to do.
but why form a new so called Labour against the cuts when there's already a party called the TUSC?
Come the next election & surprisingly these two will rejoin the main Labour Party maybe using the can't afford it reason.
this is a planned & orchestrated lie by Labour to hold on to these seats
[quote][p][bold]lisa whitemore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nick Chaffey[/bold] wrote: Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition![/p][/quote]Good Luck to them Both and fairplay for remembering something this current labour council has seriously Forgotten......... to respect their supporters and help the public,not slag them or lie to the either!![/p][/quote]wait until the next elections before making that statement. Closed a Swimming pool which the local Labour Party knew would lose them votes & very likely these seats. two so called real Labour councillors do exactly what most people vote them in to do. but why form a new so called Labour against the cuts when there's already a party called the TUSC? Come the next election & surprisingly these two will rejoin the main Labour Party maybe using the can't afford it reason. this is a planned & orchestrated lie by Labour to hold on to these seats loosehead
  • Score: 0

5:16pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

loosehead wrote:
lisa whitemore wrote:
Nick Chaffey wrote:
Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition!
Good Luck to them Both and fairplay for remembering something this current labour council has seriously Forgotten......... to respect their supporters and help the public,not slag them or lie to the either!!
wait until the next elections before making that statement.
Closed a Swimming pool which the local Labour Party knew would lose them votes & very likely these seats.
two so called real Labour councillors do exactly what most people vote them in to do.
but why form a new so called Labour against the cuts when there's already a party called the TUSC?
Come the next election & surprisingly these two will rejoin the main Labour Party maybe using the can't afford it reason.
this is a planned & orchestrated lie by Labour to hold on to these seats
Loosehead, your enormous desire to promote Tories and make opponents look bad seem to be taking hold of your objective thinking. Please try to slow down.

How can you predict with certainty that Don and Keith will do what you are trying to malign them with?

How much do you know about Don whom you keep on attacking?

Even some of your Tories who have dealt with Don will tell you that he is one of the most decent and honest people around, that is why most people hold him in very high regard, which also include his opponents and even by the member of the Party with which he has run into problems, because he stood by his principles.

So for the sake of your own respect please put that bag pipe down and start behaving like a sports man. Or am I expecting too much from a former rugby player?
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lisa whitemore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nick Chaffey[/bold] wrote: Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition![/p][/quote]Good Luck to them Both and fairplay for remembering something this current labour council has seriously Forgotten......... to respect their supporters and help the public,not slag them or lie to the either!![/p][/quote]wait until the next elections before making that statement. Closed a Swimming pool which the local Labour Party knew would lose them votes & very likely these seats. two so called real Labour councillors do exactly what most people vote them in to do. but why form a new so called Labour against the cuts when there's already a party called the TUSC? Come the next election & surprisingly these two will rejoin the main Labour Party maybe using the can't afford it reason. this is a planned & orchestrated lie by Labour to hold on to these seats[/p][/quote]Loosehead, your enormous desire to promote Tories and make opponents look bad seem to be taking hold of your objective thinking. Please try to slow down. How can you predict with certainty that Don and Keith will do what you are trying to malign them with? How much do you know about Don whom you keep on attacking? Even some of your Tories who have dealt with Don will tell you that he is one of the most decent and honest people around, that is why most people hold him in very high regard, which also include his opponents and even by the member of the Party with which he has run into problems, because he stood by his principles. So for the sake of your own respect please put that bag pipe down and start behaving like a sports man. Or am I expecting too much from a former rugby player? Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

6:06pm Fri 12 Oct 12

captainintrepid says...

Here is a question to all the people who have criticised the move made by councillors Thomas and Morrell; are you happy that your only realistic choice that is presented to people during local elections is one of the big three parties? Only 30% of (registered) voters cast their ballot at the last coucil election, which tells its own story. Today we see the potential for a new local party with local roots, not some PR operation run by identikit posh boys in swanky London offices.
Here is a question to all the people who have criticised the move made by councillors Thomas and Morrell; are you happy that your only realistic choice that is presented to people during local elections is one of the big three parties? Only 30% of (registered) voters cast their ballot at the last coucil election, which tells its own story. Today we see the potential for a new local party with local roots, not some PR operation run by identikit posh boys in swanky London offices. captainintrepid
  • Score: 0

9:13pm Fri 12 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
loosehead wrote:
lisa whitemore wrote:
Nick Chaffey wrote:
Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition!
Good Luck to them Both and fairplay for remembering something this current labour council has seriously Forgotten......... to respect their supporters and help the public,not slag them or lie to the either!!
wait until the next elections before making that statement.
Closed a Swimming pool which the local Labour Party knew would lose them votes & very likely these seats.
two so called real Labour councillors do exactly what most people vote them in to do.
but why form a new so called Labour against the cuts when there's already a party called the TUSC?
Come the next election & surprisingly these two will rejoin the main Labour Party maybe using the can't afford it reason.
this is a planned & orchestrated lie by Labour to hold on to these seats
Loosehead, your enormous desire to promote Tories and make opponents look bad seem to be taking hold of your objective thinking. Please try to slow down.

How can you predict with certainty that Don and Keith will do what you are trying to malign them with?

How much do you know about Don whom you keep on attacking?

Even some of your Tories who have dealt with Don will tell you that he is one of the most decent and honest people around, that is why most people hold him in very high regard, which also include his opponents and even by the member of the Party with which he has run into problems, because he stood by his principles.

So for the sake of your own respect please put that bag pipe down and start behaving like a sports man. Or am I expecting too much from a former rugby player?
Paramjit I comment on an idiot who made a statement about the Helicopter landing pad on 5Acres being the youth's playground>
When he must have known it wasn't & it's actually a cricket pitch & the yobs who were trying to prevent the helicopter from landing weren't even born when helicopters started landing there.
Or the idiot who went on about the forgotten Lordshill & how we lacked bus services?
Paramjit why haven't they gone over to the TUSC or to break it down Trade Unions & Socialists Against Cuts?
Surely that's exactly what they say they're standing for now isn't it?
They had to know what was in this council's budget for next year & sorry but it look's like rats deserting a sinking ship to me.
To change my opinion get them to resign their seats ?
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lisa whitemore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nick Chaffey[/bold] wrote: Good on you both. A voice against the cuts will be a welcome alternative to the self-serving pro austerity agenda served up by Tories, Lib dems and shamefully Labour. Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer. Full support from Southampton Socialist Party and the Trade Unionists & Socialist Coalition![/p][/quote]Good Luck to them Both and fairplay for remembering something this current labour council has seriously Forgotten......... to respect their supporters and help the public,not slag them or lie to the either!![/p][/quote]wait until the next elections before making that statement. Closed a Swimming pool which the local Labour Party knew would lose them votes & very likely these seats. two so called real Labour councillors do exactly what most people vote them in to do. but why form a new so called Labour against the cuts when there's already a party called the TUSC? Come the next election & surprisingly these two will rejoin the main Labour Party maybe using the can't afford it reason. this is a planned & orchestrated lie by Labour to hold on to these seats[/p][/quote]Loosehead, your enormous desire to promote Tories and make opponents look bad seem to be taking hold of your objective thinking. Please try to slow down. How can you predict with certainty that Don and Keith will do what you are trying to malign them with? How much do you know about Don whom you keep on attacking? Even some of your Tories who have dealt with Don will tell you that he is one of the most decent and honest people around, that is why most people hold him in very high regard, which also include his opponents and even by the member of the Party with which he has run into problems, because he stood by his principles. So for the sake of your own respect please put that bag pipe down and start behaving like a sports man. Or am I expecting too much from a former rugby player?[/p][/quote]Paramjit I comment on an idiot who made a statement about the Helicopter landing pad on 5Acres being the youth's playground> When he must have known it wasn't & it's actually a cricket pitch & the yobs who were trying to prevent the helicopter from landing weren't even born when helicopters started landing there. Or the idiot who went on about the forgotten Lordshill & how we lacked bus services? Paramjit why haven't they gone over to the TUSC or to break it down Trade Unions & Socialists Against Cuts? Surely that's exactly what they say they're standing for now isn't it? They had to know what was in this council's budget for next year & sorry but it look's like rats deserting a sinking ship to me. To change my opinion get them to resign their seats ? loosehead
  • Score: 0

1:48am Sat 13 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
If you gave the poor the money that you suggest they'd spend it on fags and booze, this is why they're poor. They have no incentive in life to better themselves and find a decent job or education.

Life is about choice, we control what we want to achieve, not the Government. People moan about Bankers, but you could be one too if you work for it.
Some poor people do work hard enough, some work harder, doesn't mean they'll get a job as a banker, they could still end up poor and not all people smoke or drink, I have very little money, yet I don't drink, partly because I can't afford it but also because I'm not really a drinking person, I may enjoy 1 or 2 on the rare occasion but that's about it, so please apologize for the snobbish, upturned nose comment you made.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]If you gave the poor the money that you suggest they'd spend it on fags and booze, this is why they're poor. They have no incentive in life to better themselves and find a decent job or education. Life is about choice, we control what we want to achieve, not the Government. People moan about Bankers, but you could be one too if you work for it.[/p][/quote]Some poor people do work hard enough, some work harder, doesn't mean they'll get a job as a banker, they could still end up poor and not all people smoke or drink, I have very little money, yet I don't drink, partly because I can't afford it but also because I'm not really a drinking person, I may enjoy 1 or 2 on the rare occasion but that's about it, so please apologize for the snobbish, upturned nose comment you made. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

2:07am Sat 13 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?[/p][/quote]Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

1:39pm Sat 13 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.
Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?[/p][/quote]Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.[/p][/quote]Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality loosehead
  • Score: 0

8:43pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.
Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality
No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?[/p][/quote]Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.[/p][/quote]Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality[/p][/quote]No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

9:43pm Sat 13 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.
Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality
No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.
Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be.
But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive.
If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go?
Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?[/p][/quote]Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.[/p][/quote]Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality[/p][/quote]No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.[/p][/quote]Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be. But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive. If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go? Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:51am Sun 14 Oct 12

southy says...

loosehead wrote.
Paramjit why haven't they gone over to the TUSC or to break it down Trade Unions & Socialists Against Cuts?

Small correction Loose "TUSC" stands for
"Trade Unionist & Socialist Coalition."

Against cuts is just a small part of the term of office manifest.

All so Ginger_cyclist wrote
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation

That is correct how is any business going to survive if people have no money to spend, and its some thing that I have been pointing out to you and others why cuts do not work.

And Greece is in a mess because off the cuts made there, just it came faster to them than it would us, they are a poor nation with a small poor economy to run, so when people lost there jobs it effected them right away.
loosehead wrote. Paramjit why haven't they gone over to the TUSC or to break it down Trade Unions & Socialists Against Cuts? Small correction Loose "TUSC" stands for "Trade Unionist & Socialist Coalition." Against cuts is just a small part of the term of office manifest. All so Ginger_cyclist wrote Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation That is correct how is any business going to survive if people have no money to spend, and its some thing that I have been pointing out to you and others why cuts do not work. And Greece is in a mess because off the cuts made there, just it came faster to them than it would us, they are a poor nation with a small poor economy to run, so when people lost there jobs it effected them right away. southy
  • Score: 0

1:02am Sun 14 Oct 12

southy says...

What you right wingers are trying to do is discreaded the 2 councillors in there actions, and why is not going to work because these 2 guys are way to popular and it has you right wingers scared, and it scares you even more that information is getting out on the streets and not on the web, and people are starting to see what Right wing Economics and Political Policy really means to the ordinary person on the street and are slowly starting to reject Capitalism and slowly turning to Socialism and that scares you Capitalist supporters because it will mean an end to your greed.
What you right wingers are trying to do is discreaded the 2 councillors in there actions, and why is not going to work because these 2 guys are way to popular and it has you right wingers scared, and it scares you even more that information is getting out on the streets and not on the web, and people are starting to see what Right wing Economics and Political Policy really means to the ordinary person on the street and are slowly starting to reject Capitalism and slowly turning to Socialism and that scares you Capitalist supporters because it will mean an end to your greed. southy
  • Score: 0

6:45am Sun 14 Oct 12

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
What you right wingers are trying to do is discreaded the 2 councillors in there actions, and why is not going to work because these 2 guys are way to popular and it has you right wingers scared, and it scares you even more that information is getting out on the streets and not on the web, and people are starting to see what Right wing Economics and Political Policy really means to the ordinary person on the street and are slowly starting to reject Capitalism and slowly turning to Socialism and that scares you Capitalist supporters because it will mean an end to your greed.
You ought to get your priorities right.
Do you want to see the TUSC improve in elections? if so you should be attacking Labour policies as this is the only place where you might gain votes.
Thomas & Morrel are now standing as Labour against the cuts which will take votes from you so how can you support them?
What happens after being re-elected they switch back to Labour?
Are you going to kiss their bottoms?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: What you right wingers are trying to do is discreaded the 2 councillors in there actions, and why is not going to work because these 2 guys are way to popular and it has you right wingers scared, and it scares you even more that information is getting out on the streets and not on the web, and people are starting to see what Right wing Economics and Political Policy really means to the ordinary person on the street and are slowly starting to reject Capitalism and slowly turning to Socialism and that scares you Capitalist supporters because it will mean an end to your greed.[/p][/quote]You ought to get your priorities right. Do you want to see the TUSC improve in elections? if so you should be attacking Labour policies as this is the only place where you might gain votes. Thomas & Morrel are now standing as Labour against the cuts which will take votes from you so how can you support them? What happens after being re-elected they switch back to Labour? Are you going to kiss their bottoms? loosehead
  • Score: 0

2:10pm Sun 14 Oct 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
loosehead wrote.
Paramjit why haven't they gone over to the TUSC or to break it down Trade Unions & Socialists Against Cuts?

Small correction Loose "TUSC" stands for
"Trade Unionist & Socialist Coalition."

Against cuts is just a small part of the term of office manifest.

All so Ginger_cyclist wrote
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation

That is correct how is any business going to survive if people have no money to spend, and its some thing that I have been pointing out to you and others why cuts do not work.

And Greece is in a mess because off the cuts made there, just it came faster to them than it would us, they are a poor nation with a small poor economy to run, so when people lost there jobs it effected them right away.
While I agree TUSC is Trade Unionist & Socialist Coalition you and your fellow travellers actually stood for election in Southampton under the title of "Trade Unionists and Socialists Against Cuts"

Greece is in an awful mess because it was living above its means for a long while, all on credit. The ‘reasons’ you give are the results of this foolishness, not the cause. And if your lot had their way the same thing would be happening here. But then that’s what you Trot’s ferment – social disorder in the hope that ‘the revolution’ is just around the corner. Dream on.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: loosehead wrote. Paramjit why haven't they gone over to the TUSC or to break it down Trade Unions & Socialists Against Cuts? Small correction Loose "TUSC" stands for "Trade Unionist & Socialist Coalition." Against cuts is just a small part of the term of office manifest. All so Ginger_cyclist wrote Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation That is correct how is any business going to survive if people have no money to spend, and its some thing that I have been pointing out to you and others why cuts do not work. And Greece is in a mess because off the cuts made there, just it came faster to them than it would us, they are a poor nation with a small poor economy to run, so when people lost there jobs it effected them right away.[/p][/quote]While I agree TUSC is Trade Unionist & Socialist Coalition you and your fellow travellers actually stood for election in Southampton under the title of "Trade Unionists and Socialists Against Cuts" Greece is in an awful mess because it was living above its means for a long while, all on credit. The ‘reasons’ you give are the results of this foolishness, not the cause. And if your lot had their way the same thing would be happening here. But then that’s what you Trot’s ferment – social disorder in the hope that ‘the revolution’ is just around the corner. Dream on. freefinker
  • Score: 0

2:48pm Sun 14 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.
Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality
No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.
Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be.
But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive.
If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go?
Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU
They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?[/p][/quote]Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.[/p][/quote]Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality[/p][/quote]No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.[/p][/quote]Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be. But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive. If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go? Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU[/p][/quote]They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

2:52pm Sun 14 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.
Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality
No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.
Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be.
But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive.
If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go?
Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU
They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.
I can no longer talk to idiots that think we can ignore the deficit & carry on living above our means. So Goodbye & I hope you & Southy enjoy the cloud cuckoo land your living on
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?[/p][/quote]Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.[/p][/quote]Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality[/p][/quote]No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.[/p][/quote]Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be. But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive. If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go? Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU[/p][/quote]They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.[/p][/quote]I can no longer talk to idiots that think we can ignore the deficit & carry on living above our means. So Goodbye & I hope you & Southy enjoy the cloud cuckoo land your living on loosehead
  • Score: 0

7:52pm Sun 14 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.
Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality
No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.
Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be.
But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive.
If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go?
Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU
They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.
I can no longer talk to idiots that think we can ignore the deficit & carry on living above our means. So Goodbye & I hope you & Southy enjoy the cloud cuckoo land your living on
All the government needs to do is spend money to keep small businesses running and to encourage new businesses to start up and start producing goods because I remembered something, what country bought all of the debt that the US had? It was China, why? Because their economy is booming, why? Because they produce something stupid like 70 to 80% of the worlds goods, having a low export rate and a high import rate is what's killing the economy, production brings wealth and with it it brings jobs, so all we have to do, is to copy China and start exporting as much as or more than we import, so there still is a need to spend but at the same time, capital needs to reset, during the time that takes, it would be wise to reopen factories that were closed down, start producing, this is why China's economy isn't stalling, it's growing stronger and each day it gets closer to overtaking our economy.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?[/p][/quote]Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.[/p][/quote]Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality[/p][/quote]No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.[/p][/quote]Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be. But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive. If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go? Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU[/p][/quote]They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.[/p][/quote]I can no longer talk to idiots that think we can ignore the deficit & carry on living above our means. So Goodbye & I hope you & Southy enjoy the cloud cuckoo land your living on[/p][/quote]All the government needs to do is spend money to keep small businesses running and to encourage new businesses to start up and start producing goods because I remembered something, what country bought all of the debt that the US had? It was China, why? Because their economy is booming, why? Because they produce something stupid like 70 to 80% of the worlds goods, having a low export rate and a high import rate is what's killing the economy, production brings wealth and with it it brings jobs, so all we have to do, is to copy China and start exporting as much as or more than we import, so there still is a need to spend but at the same time, capital needs to reset, during the time that takes, it would be wise to reopen factories that were closed down, start producing, this is why China's economy isn't stalling, it's growing stronger and each day it gets closer to overtaking our economy. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

9:56pm Sun 14 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.
Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality
No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.
Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be.
But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive.
If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go?
Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU
They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.
I can no longer talk to idiots that think we can ignore the deficit & carry on living above our means. So Goodbye & I hope you & Southy enjoy the cloud cuckoo land your living on
All the government needs to do is spend money to keep small businesses running and to encourage new businesses to start up and start producing goods because I remembered something, what country bought all of the debt that the US had? It was China, why? Because their economy is booming, why? Because they produce something stupid like 70 to 80% of the worlds goods, having a low export rate and a high import rate is what's killing the economy, production brings wealth and with it it brings jobs, so all we have to do, is to copy China and start exporting as much as or more than we import, so there still is a need to spend but at the same time, capital needs to reset, during the time that takes, it would be wise to reopen factories that were closed down, start producing, this is why China's economy isn't stalling, it's growing stronger and each day it gets closer to overtaking our economy.
They've set up a bank for precisely that reason.
When Labour bought out big chunks of the banks to save them they left them in total control so no government can force them into lending to small companies at favourable rates
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?[/p][/quote]Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.[/p][/quote]Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality[/p][/quote]No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.[/p][/quote]Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be. But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive. If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go? Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU[/p][/quote]They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.[/p][/quote]I can no longer talk to idiots that think we can ignore the deficit & carry on living above our means. So Goodbye & I hope you & Southy enjoy the cloud cuckoo land your living on[/p][/quote]All the government needs to do is spend money to keep small businesses running and to encourage new businesses to start up and start producing goods because I remembered something, what country bought all of the debt that the US had? It was China, why? Because their economy is booming, why? Because they produce something stupid like 70 to 80% of the worlds goods, having a low export rate and a high import rate is what's killing the economy, production brings wealth and with it it brings jobs, so all we have to do, is to copy China and start exporting as much as or more than we import, so there still is a need to spend but at the same time, capital needs to reset, during the time that takes, it would be wise to reopen factories that were closed down, start producing, this is why China's economy isn't stalling, it's growing stronger and each day it gets closer to overtaking our economy.[/p][/quote]They've set up a bank for precisely that reason. When Labour bought out big chunks of the banks to save them they left them in total control so no government can force them into lending to small companies at favourable rates loosehead
  • Score: 0

10:23pm Sun 14 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.
Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality
No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.
Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be.
But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive.
If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go?
Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU
They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.
I can no longer talk to idiots that think we can ignore the deficit & carry on living above our means. So Goodbye & I hope you & Southy enjoy the cloud cuckoo land your living on
All the government needs to do is spend money to keep small businesses running and to encourage new businesses to start up and start producing goods because I remembered something, what country bought all of the debt that the US had? It was China, why? Because their economy is booming, why? Because they produce something stupid like 70 to 80% of the worlds goods, having a low export rate and a high import rate is what's killing the economy, production brings wealth and with it it brings jobs, so all we have to do, is to copy China and start exporting as much as or more than we import, so there still is a need to spend but at the same time, capital needs to reset, during the time that takes, it would be wise to reopen factories that were closed down, start producing, this is why China's economy isn't stalling, it's growing stronger and each day it gets closer to overtaking our economy.
They've set up a bank for precisely that reason.
When Labour bought out big chunks of the banks to save them they left them in total control so no government can force them into lending to small companies at favourable rates
Funny thing is that they should be lending to small companies and people trying to set up a business, the problem is we as a nation along with the euro zone and US, have grown too comfortable with having poor countries make everything for us, it's time we stop, have a look at what they do differently to us to find out why their economies are growing, though I could tell you straight away, it's because they make everything for us, in reality it's just legal slavery of whole countries.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?[/p][/quote]Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.[/p][/quote]Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality[/p][/quote]No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.[/p][/quote]Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be. But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive. If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go? Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU[/p][/quote]They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.[/p][/quote]I can no longer talk to idiots that think we can ignore the deficit & carry on living above our means. So Goodbye & I hope you & Southy enjoy the cloud cuckoo land your living on[/p][/quote]All the government needs to do is spend money to keep small businesses running and to encourage new businesses to start up and start producing goods because I remembered something, what country bought all of the debt that the US had? It was China, why? Because their economy is booming, why? Because they produce something stupid like 70 to 80% of the worlds goods, having a low export rate and a high import rate is what's killing the economy, production brings wealth and with it it brings jobs, so all we have to do, is to copy China and start exporting as much as or more than we import, so there still is a need to spend but at the same time, capital needs to reset, during the time that takes, it would be wise to reopen factories that were closed down, start producing, this is why China's economy isn't stalling, it's growing stronger and each day it gets closer to overtaking our economy.[/p][/quote]They've set up a bank for precisely that reason. When Labour bought out big chunks of the banks to save them they left them in total control so no government can force them into lending to small companies at favourable rates[/p][/quote]Funny thing is that they should be lending to small companies and people trying to set up a business, the problem is we as a nation along with the euro zone and US, have grown too comfortable with having poor countries make everything for us, it's time we stop, have a look at what they do differently to us to find out why their economies are growing, though I could tell you straight away, it's because they make everything for us, in reality it's just legal slavery of whole countries. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

7:10am Mon 15 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.
Is York in Southampton?
I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism
Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.
A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.
Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet?
Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite.
They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members.
N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states.
the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life.
Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts.
We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job.
Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?
Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.
Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality
No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.
Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be.
But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive.
If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go?
Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU
They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.
I can no longer talk to idiots that think we can ignore the deficit & carry on living above our means. So Goodbye & I hope you & Southy enjoy the cloud cuckoo land your living on
All the government needs to do is spend money to keep small businesses running and to encourage new businesses to start up and start producing goods because I remembered something, what country bought all of the debt that the US had? It was China, why? Because their economy is booming, why? Because they produce something stupid like 70 to 80% of the worlds goods, having a low export rate and a high import rate is what's killing the economy, production brings wealth and with it it brings jobs, so all we have to do, is to copy China and start exporting as much as or more than we import, so there still is a need to spend but at the same time, capital needs to reset, during the time that takes, it would be wise to reopen factories that were closed down, start producing, this is why China's economy isn't stalling, it's growing stronger and each day it gets closer to overtaking our economy.
They've set up a bank for precisely that reason.
When Labour bought out big chunks of the banks to save them they left them in total control so no government can force them into lending to small companies at favourable rates
Funny thing is that they should be lending to small companies and people trying to set up a business, the problem is we as a nation along with the euro zone and US, have grown too comfortable with having poor countries make everything for us, it's time we stop, have a look at what they do differently to us to find out why their economies are growing, though I could tell you straight away, it's because they make everything for us, in reality it's just legal slavery of whole countries.
I know Newsflash! Pull out of the EU the EU we never joined ( joined the EEC} & use the £14billion we'd save to lend to small companies ?
Sounds a great idea to me how about you?
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: News came intonight about another Councillor leaving the Labour Party in York.[/p][/quote]Is York in Southampton?[/p][/quote]I think you know the answer to that, but its an indication that the Labour Party is falling apart and there support for Capitalism[/p][/quote]Has it ever been together? You'll be telling us next that TUSC have all the solutions for an overnight fix, where all the unemployed will suddenly share the wealth of the rich.[/p][/quote]A more likely scenario than the unemployed suddenly sharing the wealth of the, ahem... rich(stuck up pigs more like) overnight, would be robin hood showing up at the doors of the poor and needy to give them £1,000,000 for each household, still can't see it happening though.[/p][/quote]Wow! dreamland have you woken up yet? Socialist states that our friend Southy wants to be in have the ruling elite. They're not called capitalists or aristocrats or the rich but they're called Party Members. N Korea has them China, Russia,Cuba & all Socialist states. the poor of Korea queue for food the PARTY have parties & live the life. Thomas & morrel & Southy live in a dream world if they think we don't need to make cuts. We might not like it but as with the council workers a 2% going up to 5.5% with a job was better than the alternative of no job. Liverpool council was once a left of the left council & it spent so much by raising the council tax the then Labour Government had to step in & run the city themselves is that what these three want?[/p][/quote]Actually what the economy needs for it to pick up again is for people to spend, less spending means less money for businesses, that causes inflation which in turn causes less spending and it all started when oil prices started to skyrocket as people spent less on other stuff just to keep motor vehicles on the road, then there's the borrowing figures, less people borrowing because banks feel that people won't be able to pay back the borrowed amount because of prices on things inflating which in turn cause banks to start collapsing financially and losing everyone's money which then also affects house prices, as less is being borrowed, less people are buying houses which also causes house prices to fall, so no, cuts really aren't the answer, an increase in spending ended the last depression and it will end this one.[/p][/quote]Ginger I backed you on Cycling but to say no to cuts shows your out of touch with reality[/p][/quote]No, I'm more in touch with it than people realise, just look at the facts and you'll see.[/p][/quote]Take a look at Greece. A country where the Government didn't want to anger the people so tried to soldier on with minor cuts now look at it because it never cut deep enough in the beginning it's very nearly a failed state & if it wasn't for Germany it would be. But now the cuts have to be so harsh what are government is doing is childs play compared to what Greece have to do to survive. If They don't & Germany has had enough that's it for Greece is that the way you Thomas,Morrel & southy want us to go? Don't get me wrong I'd love to see the breaking up of the EU[/p][/quote]They're in that mess, as Southy says, is because of all their cuts, there's parts of Canada that have no money at all, living off of scraps because the Canadian government did the same as Greece are doing now back in the last depression but they never got loans from other countries, so many thousands of people suffered, just like what's going on in Greece right now and what's starting to happen here.[/p][/quote]I can no longer talk to idiots that think we can ignore the deficit & carry on living above our means. So Goodbye & I hope you & Southy enjoy the cloud cuckoo land your living on[/p][/quote]All the government needs to do is spend money to keep small businesses running and to encourage new businesses to start up and start producing goods because I remembered something, what country bought all of the debt that the US had? It was China, why? Because their economy is booming, why? Because they produce something stupid like 70 to 80% of the worlds goods, having a low export rate and a high import rate is what's killing the economy, production brings wealth and with it it brings jobs, so all we have to do, is to copy China and start exporting as much as or more than we import, so there still is a need to spend but at the same time, capital needs to reset, during the time that takes, it would be wise to reopen factories that were closed down, start producing, this is why China's economy isn't stalling, it's growing stronger and each day it gets closer to overtaking our economy.[/p][/quote]They've set up a bank for precisely that reason. When Labour bought out big chunks of the banks to save them they left them in total control so no government can force them into lending to small companies at favourable rates[/p][/quote]Funny thing is that they should be lending to small companies and people trying to set up a business, the problem is we as a nation along with the euro zone and US, have grown too comfortable with having poor countries make everything for us, it's time we stop, have a look at what they do differently to us to find out why their economies are growing, though I could tell you straight away, it's because they make everything for us, in reality it's just legal slavery of whole countries.[/p][/quote]I know Newsflash! Pull out of the EU the EU we never joined ( joined the EEC} & use the £14billion we'd save to lend to small companies ? Sounds a great idea to me how about you? loosehead
  • Score: 0

11:47pm Tue 16 Oct 12

honestscott says...

I don't believe it! Two labour councillors with principles no wonder they left and formed their own political group ,sadly principles and labour councillors are no longer compatible .
I don't believe it! Two labour councillors with principles no wonder they left and formed their own political group ,sadly principles and labour councillors are no longer compatible . honestscott
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree