The only thing that I do know is that Ed Balls sure didn't.





The truth is there IS a paradigm shift taking place in politics and the economy. It's been underway since Nixon abolished the gold standard. American doomsday preppers (rightfully) take a lot of stick over their constant warnings that America is about to be invaded by "The New World Order" with NATO troops at the vanguard (presumably parachuting into towns like something out of the film, "Red Dawn"icon_wink.gif.

But over the last two decades there has been significant progress toward what both George H.W. Bush and most recently Lord Rothschild openly admit as such.

As mentioned earlier - big business simply HATES state government. It is the one force with sufficient power and resources to place constraints on corporate expansion.

To prevent anything like what happened in the wake of the Great Depression when Franklin D. Roosevelt practically forced the giants of American industry to heel, the major banks and corporations have worked together (along with "business friendly" US presidents such as Reagan, Bush I & II, Clinton & Obama) to institute a global infrastructure of "trade agreements" (such as GATT, WTO, NAFTA and now TPP), each of which has further undermined and hollowed out the powers and freedoms of state government.

This is the reason nothing seems to change, no matter who we vote for.

Eventually the British government will end up something like today's GP. Thirty years ago the family GP wielded all manner of power and responsibility. Most GP surgeries boasted a host of supplementary services which a patient could access and GPs themselves were free to undertake pretty much anything up to and beyond minor surgical procedures.

Nowadays the family GP functions as no more than a facilitator (with the cheery reassurance that "you'll be fine"icon_wink.gif. Someone who kicks your problem upstairs to the relevant department in some hospital somewhere. As for his freedoms - about the only things a modern GP can do is lance a boil and syringe ears.

This is the future we face. A future in which we will retain [inational identity[/i. But [iself-determination[/i will amount to little more than a rhetorical admission that we possess such.

Of course - all the above is entirely provisional on infinite energy reserves. Should we suddenly find ourselves at the business end of "peak energy" then everything will become very complicated very quickly.

So he voted with the govt 90% of the time.



Our Tory ex-MP took our side against the local council when we campaigned against the introduction of charges for travel to remote special schools for post 16 year old disabled children but he didn't exactly stick the boot in and really go for it. Just paid lip service to our concerns really.

It's easy to appear to have principles. The odd bit of rebellion here or there but until MP's such as yours[i actually resign the whip[/i the cynic in me says they are just playing a game.

To resign the whip is basically to break completely free of your party and stand as an independent, you'll certainly have to do that at the next election if you do.

There is nothing to say that my MP does not agree with his party and votes with them of his own accord, thats fine too, but banning the whip system would bring a whole new freedom to all votes and mean that a proposal would have to be pretty sound and reasonable in order to gain a majority - in the coming months we face all sorts of untold legislation and changes to rules and regulations that will be steamrollered through parliament by simple and crude bullying of Tory MPs - that is not a true democracy.

I remember when Shaun Woodward paid us a visit at work a couple of years ago. Owing to the fact that he once set foot in Northern Ireland his visit required reconnoitring by two members of Special Branch! They went through the list of employees, wanting to know their backgrounds, how long they'd been at the company etc.

Two weeks later he rolled up (late) with SIX BODYGUARDS - all of which were clearly and very visibly armed. I quipped that I thought Roman Abramovich had arrived and received daggers from the regional manager.



God knows how much his (presumably) lifetime protection detail costs. I'm not convinced he demands one, anyway. IMO, if you're going to stick your neck out politically then you should be brave enough to deal with the consequences - personally.

A couple of weeks later I was talking to one of our customers who runs a major engineering company which refits maritime equipment. He was telling us about George Osborne living in his constituency where HS2 is about to cut the district in two. Apparently, Osborne brought down the wrath of the locals after he flogged his house before the decision was officially announced. He then failed to turn up for the town meeting discussing the project.

It's always dangerous to look back thinking things were better. But at least MPs 50 years ago made some attempt at PUBLIC SERVICE. Alec Douglas-Hume turned down a top job in the city to become Prime Minister because he felt he owed a debt of public service. These lot today would consider him a fool.

Sajid Javid left his £3m a year job to become an MP.

I am sure there literally hundreds of other MP's who have been, and could be earning more, in the private sector before becoming an MP.

How do you earn that type of money if you aren't:

Ripping people off.
Charging too much.
Not paying the rest a fair salary.
Winning the lottery annually
Receiving "bonuses" which again is another way that the first 2 points apply.

I don't know, but I do know that "trickle down" doesn't work, Food banks are on the increase, there are too many people incapable of doing the jobs that industry is crying out for because you need to be able to think and develop and the current educational system basically discourage such radical thoughts. Add that most businesses see "training" as dead money and if they do train others will poach , yet if £3m a year is available to some, it seems to me that perhaps the whole system is quite a bit wonky.

Ah well

We live in interesting times.

I guess that you aren't earning £3M pa yourself, then?

what about being particularly good at what you do. If David Hockney were earning 3m a year how would he fit into your categorisation? Same goes for Rory McIlroy

More complete b0ll0cks from the very envious Leaguefan

To become an MP ... and DO WHAT?

Serve the British public or serve himself and members of his class?

I mean, he sure [iseems [/ilike he's on our side - what with him deciding to cut £10bn of "Red Tape From Small Businesses". Who could possibly be against[i free money[/i? Makes you wonder why no one bothered to do it decades of go. Makes you wonder what he means by "Red Tape" - and whether any of his personal interests are affected by this policy.

This is a guy who worked for Deutsche bank. Which means, like his colleagues across the pond, he's been parachuted in to protect the interests of the banking community.



Oh ... the [ihumanity![/i

I'll leave it to Peter O'Borne's superb [url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/Triumph-Political-Class-Peter-Oborne/dp/141652665XThe Triumph of the Political Class[/url (and subsequent) to administer a much-needed antidote to your perception of (and faith in) members of Parliament.

Just before he became Tory leader David Cameron opened our office in Witney. He didn't have security, instead he oozed through the front door, his motion lubricated by the oiliest Lord Mayor you could possibley imagine. He (the Mayor, not Cameron) said to me, while quaffing the free champagne, "if there is anything you need just let me know" while actually nudging me and winking. Straight out of Monty Python.

I also had the misfortune to run into Rees Mogg the Friday morning after the election - 5am at Bath University. The Scotsman I was with decided to share his views with him about leaving the EU. I don't think I could have managed much more than a c***, w*******, J**z faced t***. So elected to remain silent. Where are terrorists when you need them eh?

Again I ask

Of what and whom Am I supposed to envious of?

You didn't answer before and I doubt if you can this time either.

Your attacks are always on those who you deem to be in a priveledged position. Regardless of how clever they are, how hard they may have worked or how much they may have sacrificed to achieve you resent that they earn what they do. Even rugby you think the likes of Keighley should get an equal share of the Sky money despite contributing nothing to generate it. Yours is the rhetoric of envy.

Now just once answer my point about Hockney and McIlroy and your ill concieved meritoracy of earnings

Quite right Sal. He must be a member of the Green Party (as in green with envy)

They use exactly the same tools and techniques most often associated with confidence tricksters (making someone feel "special" or an "insider" is as old as the hills - and still works). Which is what they are, really.

It was F. Scott Fitzgerald who once said, [i"An artist is someone who can hold two opposing viewpoints and still remain fully functional". [/i

But even Fitzgerald would have been left open-mouthed at the likes of Tony Blair, who really was the master of the craft. He could hold four different conversations in the same room - each of which fundamentally opposes the other three - and speak with flawless conviction. And he likely believed in all four standpoints - at once.

Cameron is Blair's spiritual progeny. And he's good, too. But he's still a long way short of the Master. Roman Polanski was extremely close to the mark when he made that film, [iThe Ghost Writer[/i.

It's interesting to contrast Blair and Cameron with political operators who are closer to the more traditional "Cult of Personality" school of leadership - the best example being Boris Johnson. Both he and those around him have been very clever in crafting his style and behaviour sufficiently close to Churchill for people to make the connection (seemingly on their own). He likes to project this image of spontaneity. But there's nothing spontaneous about the guy. His image is finely managed (very few people are even aware he's a bloody Yank!). If ever a Tory was being groomed for No. 10, Boris is he. He's done his time giving oral to big business as Mayor and he can expect plenty of benefactors when he throws his hat into the ring.

Boris is the political equivalent of Joey Essex. Successfully forging a career on the back of pretending to be the village idiot but the joke really is on us. There are plenty who are still suckered in by the 'bumbling buffoon' Boris as portrayed by the right wing press, but underneath that scruffy hair and cheeky chappy demeanour is a scheming, ruthless mercenary.

Funny that he twice got a majority for the Mayors job from all those metro savy lefty Labour Londoners. Who are the real buffoons then.

Is this a [irhetorical[/i rhetorical question.

As a certain Jeremy Paxman once repeated several times ANSWERTHE QUESTION !

Define how I have , in your words "attacked" anyone?

Where, in any comment, statement or query has it been stated there is resentment?

And to clarify, of what or whom am I still supposed to be envious of?

You seem to have, IMO , the idea that money, things and the concept of status are the most important part of life. I could be wrong but somehow, based on your postings and the risible chuntering of Lord Elpers and AJW I doubt it.

Last I looked, neither Hockney or McIlroy were looking to foist their (or more precisely, their masters') ideological beliefs on the population of the UK

never said they were so i am unsure what your point is?

are you suggesting the comments are untrue about the SL monies?

Just for once answer my point about Hockney or McIlroy

I don't see the relevance of any of this to what I originally posted and to be honest couldn't care less.

It's obvious that what I posted and what you read got lost somewhere.

You assumed one thing, thought something else was said and then went off about something else.

Revisit the original post and apply it to anyone, and that seems to cause you a problem.

Well it's your problem, if you want to make it, such, how you deal with it isn't of much interest to me, nor should I imagine anyone else, but then again don't you learn something new every day

I'm still waiting to find out what or whom I am envious of. You made the statement so please answer, if you can, although I doubt very much you will be able to.

I simply wondered why you introduced the straw men

just answer the question its pretty simple really. Something - despite 3 subsequent posts - have failed to address. Your views that nobody can earn huge money unless they are ripping somebody off is petty jealously. I agree there needs to be a more even spread of wealth but there still needs to opportunity for the talented to max out.

This article pretty much sums up how I see things as regards our wonderful Cameron / Osborne economic miracle: www.standard.co.uk/business/mark ... 76913.html

This article pretty much sums up how I see things as regards our wonderful Cameron / Osborne economic miracle: www.standard.co.uk/business/mark ... 76913.html