ChatterBank1 min ago
What's Wrong With The Meeja....?
48 Answers
https:/
..why should the incumbent apologise for the activities of a predecessor? All this apologise yada yada yada balearics is getting out of hand.
..why should the incumbent apologise for the activities of a predecessor? All this apologise yada yada yada balearics is getting out of hand.
Answers
I'm another who was anti-
22:27 Tue 15th Nov 2022
To be fair, that was Johonson Roy, Sunak just had to pay like other countries did. Disgraceful though.
Personally I dont think there was anything inherently wrong with what Truss/Kwartang proposed. Just the money markets (Sunaks mates) decided they cant make money on a long term growth economy so decided to mash her. OK, could have been implemented better but the underlying was good.
Now we are going to tax until the pips squeak which will suppress growth.
Personally I dont think there was anything inherently wrong with what Truss/Kwartang proposed. Just the money markets (Sunaks mates) decided they cant make money on a long term growth economy so decided to mash her. OK, could have been implemented better but the underlying was good.
Now we are going to tax until the pips squeak which will suppress growth.
We had to do furlough the alternative was a thousands of firms going bust, millions with no money and no means to pay the bills, economic Armageddon that would have been a lot more expensive that Furlough. Still economic illiterati like roy spout their BS without ever offering an alternative. What else cold we have done? Even Labour broadly supported it.
This piece by The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster explains why we had to have a lockdown much better than I could. Dont forget, Tora, it's written by a member of the party you're an acolyte of.
https:/
https:/
roy; "Clearly you are the economic illiterate fool if you believe Truss is responsible for the mess we are in. " - whos said that? This post is about Sunak refusing to apologise for Liz Truss. You then decided to spout irrelevant (to that) BS. I then addressed your assertion that furlough was some deliberate folly rather than necessary given that we had lockdown. So basically roy you tried to derail the thread got your April handed to you and didn't like it. Care to salvage an ounce respect by telling as all what the alternative to Furlough is? (given that we DID have lockdown)
//Whether or not we should have locked down is another interesting discussion but given that we did then furlough was a must.//
Quite right tora. You can't confine people to home so that they cannot earn a living unless you are going to replace their earnings in some way. However, as you say, whether there should have been a lockdown is another matter entirely.
//The NHS is on it's last legs as it is. Can you imagine what state it would be in if there hadn't been a lockdown?//
No I couldn't, Zacs. That doesn't matter. What does matter is that neither could anybody else (either now or at the time it was implemented). That includes the people who took the decision to implement it and those who advised them.
It is now becoming abudantly clear that the "cure" is turning out to be far worse than the disease (as many counselled at the time). There is the financial fallout as mentioned above, which will take a generation or more to settle, as well as the healthcare consequences which will also run for many, many years. It is doubtful that the NHS in its current form will ever recover from it.
It's still not be explained why the UK's pandemic action plan (which did not involve lockdowns or furlough, was approved by the WHO and which had been in place for 20 years) was summarily ditched in the ten days or so prior to the first lockdown. It probably never will. If there are any apologies to be made, it is by the politicians and their advisors who made that decision because as far as I can see, it was never justified.
//This piece by The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster explains why we had to have a lockdown much better than I could.//
As far as I can see, Zacs, that piece referred to "Lockdown 2" (5th November 2020). The die was cast by Lockdown 1 in March. Once the Rubicon had been crossed it was a simple matter to justify further restrictions. The alarming thing is that the summary withdrawal of people's rights to go about their business was achieved so easily.
Quite right tora. You can't confine people to home so that they cannot earn a living unless you are going to replace their earnings in some way. However, as you say, whether there should have been a lockdown is another matter entirely.
//The NHS is on it's last legs as it is. Can you imagine what state it would be in if there hadn't been a lockdown?//
No I couldn't, Zacs. That doesn't matter. What does matter is that neither could anybody else (either now or at the time it was implemented). That includes the people who took the decision to implement it and those who advised them.
It is now becoming abudantly clear that the "cure" is turning out to be far worse than the disease (as many counselled at the time). There is the financial fallout as mentioned above, which will take a generation or more to settle, as well as the healthcare consequences which will also run for many, many years. It is doubtful that the NHS in its current form will ever recover from it.
It's still not be explained why the UK's pandemic action plan (which did not involve lockdowns or furlough, was approved by the WHO and which had been in place for 20 years) was summarily ditched in the ten days or so prior to the first lockdown. It probably never will. If there are any apologies to be made, it is by the politicians and their advisors who made that decision because as far as I can see, it was never justified.
//This piece by The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster explains why we had to have a lockdown much better than I could.//
As far as I can see, Zacs, that piece referred to "Lockdown 2" (5th November 2020). The die was cast by Lockdown 1 in March. Once the Rubicon had been crossed it was a simple matter to justify further restrictions. The alarming thing is that the summary withdrawal of people's rights to go about their business was achieved so easily.
sunak has no reason to apologise as he actually warned of the consequences of "trussonomics" and was proven in the event to be right...
he is still a tory and should like all tories be held accountable for hos party's record of harm but in fairness to him i think he did about everything he could to stop the mini-budget from happening
he is still a tory and should like all tories be held accountable for hos party's record of harm but in fairness to him i think he did about everything he could to stop the mini-budget from happening
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.