Three weeks until the election

[blackshoe]

What will England do when the NHS consumes 110% of the budget?

[PassedOut]

What will England do when the NHS consumes 110% of the budget?

What should they do?

[helene_t]

What will England do when the NHS consumes 110% of the budget?

Increase the budget obviously. Maybe do some creative accounting so that taxpayers pay directly to NHS rather than through taxes. Makes no difference except that you can increase the NHS budget without technically increasing taxes.

[Cyberyeti]

Unless they screw up badly, the Conservatives are likely to be in power for a while. Why ? Well Labour gerrymandered the 2010 election so they couldn't lose, then were so bad they did. Reverse the Con/Lab shares of the popular vote and Labour would have had a substantial (3 figure IIRC) majority, the Tories didn't have any majority. The Libdems voted down the Tory attempt to fix this as a tit-for-tat over one of their policies the Tories couldn't get through their right wing, so it wasn't fixed for this election. Rest assured it will be for the next.

 

Labour's problem was that the only people who really wanted Ed as leader were the unions, some of which are very left wing and cause the labour party the same problem as the rabid wing of the Republicans cause them. Anybody they elect as leader finds it very difficult to get enough votes from more centrist voters to get elected.

[akwoo]

I think the most likely result on the EU referendum is that a small majority will vote in favor of staying in the EU, but most Conservative constituencies (and perhaps even England as a whole) will vote for leaving.

 

If that result happens, I don't see how the Conservative party survives as a party.

[Vampyr]

I think the most likely result on the EU referendum is that a small majority will vote in favor of staying in the EU, but most Conservative constituencies (and perhaps even England as a whole) will vote for leaving.

 

If that result happens, I don't see how the Conservative party survives as a party.

 

Why?

[mike777]

Unless they screw up badly, the Conservatives are likely to be in power for a while. Why ? Well Labour gerrymandered the 2010 election so they couldn't lose, then were so bad they did. Reverse the Con/Lab shares of the popular vote and Labour would have had a substantial (3 figure IIRC) majority, the Tories didn't have any majority. The Libdems voted down the Tory attempt to fix this as a tit-for-tat over one of their policies the Tories couldn't get through their right wing, so it wasn't fixed for this election. Rest assured it will be for the next.

 

Labour's problem was that the only people who really wanted Ed as leader were the unions, some of which are very left wing and cause the labour party the same problem as the rabid wing of the Republicans cause them. Anybody they elect as leader finds it very difficult to get enough votes from more centrist voters to get elected.

 

As far as I can tell the labor union chiefs run the labour party. In other words you need their blessing and full backing to head the party. Makes sense given the name of the party.

 

Perhaps once Scotland leaves the UK and Parliament the unions can regain their power with the Scottish party out of it.

 

btw in the UK are teachers and other public employees unionized in the UK? Here in the USA they are a growing power and voting block.

[akwoo]

Why?

 

If the leadership takes a pro-EU line, a lot of MPs will then defect to the UKIP, and even if they don't, all those anti-EU constituencies will vote UKIP in the next election. A lot of folks voted Conservative rather than UKIP because they were afraid of splitting the vote and giving the seat to the LibDems or Labour, and the local Conservative candidate might very well be personally for leaving the EU. Once it's clear the constituency is 60% for leaving the EU, those concerns go away.

 

If the leadership takes an anti-EU line, either the pro-EU MPs will split off into a new party, or the LibDems capture the pro-EU suburban middle class vote.

 

Basically, once a referendum happens and people know just how pro/anti-EU their constituency is, it becomes impossible for a party to sit on both sides of the fence.

 

Losing a referendum was very good for the SNP, and losing an EU referendum will be similarly good for anti-EU forces. The only question is which party will represent them.

[mike777]

again I put forth the issue of public/govt unions.

 

 

I(f they( govt unions) can combine with tHe Holy HHS....ok

 

 

You must understand the UK has close to zero military outside of that can be sustained

YOu must understand the worldwide ignores.

 

ZI totally agree there is the myth

[Vampyr]

As far as I can tell the labor union chiefs run the labour party. In other words you need their blessing and full backing to head the party. Makes sense given the name of the party.

 

Perhaps once Scotland leaves the UK and Parliament the unions can regain their power with the Scottish party out of it.

 

Well maybe but I don't know how Labour can survive without Scotland.

[mike777]

Well maybe but I don't know how Labour can survive without Scotland.

 

Unions

 

If allowed in the UK...public unions.

TEACHERS, GOVT EMP...ALL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.....EVEN HOLY GRAIL OF HEALTH CARE

BTW SOME COUNTRIES MILITARY IS UNION.

 

iN ANY EVENT... think of a job..any job and make it a union.

pro bridge players

[PassedOut]

Unions

 

If allowed in the UK...public unions.

TEACHERS, GOVT EMP...ALL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.....EVEN HOLY GRAIL OF HEALTH CARE

BTW SOME COUNTRIES MILITARY IS UNION.

 

iN ANY EVENT... think of a job..any job and make it a union.

pro bridge players

Not sure what your point is here. Maybe that unions have "skin in the game?"

[kenberg]

Despite the risks in trying to find parallels in different events, I got to thinking about the Scottish move toward separation and the promised attempts at renegotiation and perhaps withdrawal of the UK from the EU. In a column this morning, Anne Applebaum suggested that Americans could think of the threatened Scottish withdrawl in terms of Texas withdrawing form the US. An imperfect analogy but yes, maybe useful.

 

I guess that I don't take Texas secession as a serious possibility but when it comes up I have an inclination to say "So if you want to go, go." I haven't seen this reaction much discussed but surely there must be some in London who feel that way toward the Scots, and some in Europe who feel that way toward the UK. Cameron has promised to re-negotiate the terms of EU membership and then put it to a vote. This can sound a lot like "Here is a list of things that you can do for us, and if you agree to do them then maybe we will stick around, and maybe we won't".

 

I like stability. Partly I think a core of stability is a necessity for effective change, but also I just like it regardless of arguments for it or against it. Of course, stability does not trump everything. So I am sincere in wishing everyone involved the best of luck in working this out, but I think that there comes a point after which Humpty-Dumpty cannot be put together again.

 

Best wishes from over here.

[Vampyr]

Unions

 

If allowed in the UK...public unions.

TEACHERS, GOVT EMP...ALL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.....EVEN HOLY GRAIL OF HEALTH CARE

BTW SOME COUNTRIES MILITARY IS UNION.

 

iN ANY EVENT... think of a job..any job and make it a union.

pro bridge players

 

All the unions are already part of the Labour Party. And pretty much all the jobs that can be unionised already are. So there is no scope for improvement there.

[Vampyr]

<stuff about leaving the EU>

 

I am pretty sure is is going to happen, and I wouldn't be surprised if it is earlier than 2017. The UK has been told that it must take tens of thousands of migrants crossing the Mediterranean, and presumably cannot simply take them and then send them home. For many British this will be the last straw.

[kenberg]

I am pretty sure is is going to happen, and I wouldn't be surprised if it is earlier than 2017. The UK has been told that it must take tens of thousands of migrants crossing the Mediterranean, and presumably cannot simply take them and then send them home. For many British this will be the last straw.

 

I understand the point. I don't know enough to say whether I agree that your prediction is likely, but I can see how this could be a very serious issue.

[Winstonm]

As far as I can tell the labor union chiefs run the labour party. In other words you need their blessing and full backing to head the party. Makes sense given the name of the party.

 

Perhaps once Scotland leaves the UK and Parliament the unions can regain their power with the Scottish party out of it.

 

btw in the UK are teachers and other public employees unionized in the UK? Here in the USA they are a growing power and voting block.

 

Do your windmills ever fight back?

 

Unions are not growing.

 

 

 

In 2014, the union membership rate--the percent of wage and salary workers who were

members of unions--was 11.1 percent, down 0.2 percentage point from 2013, the U.S.

Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of wage and salary workers

belonging to unions, at 14.6 million, was little different from 2013. In 1983, the

first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate

was 20.1 percent, and there were 17.7 million union workers.

[Vampyr]

Do your windmills ever fight back?

 

Unions are not growing.

 

US unions are not, as far as I know, involved in the Labour Party.

[Winstonm]

US unions are not, as far as I know, involved in the Labour Party.

 

The reply was to this:

 

btw in the UK are teachers and other public employees unionized in the UK? Here in the USA they are a growing power and voting block

[PeterAlan]

The UK has been told that it must take tens of thousands of migrants crossing the Mediterranean, and presumably cannot simply take them and then send them home. For many British this will be the last straw.

This won't be accepted - it is (at the moment) no more than a controversial proposal, opposed by many states other than the UK, it is covered by one of the UK's opt-outs, and in the current UK climate it has no chance.

[Trinidad]

The UK has been told that it must take tens of thousands of migrants crossing the Mediterranean

Talking about nice use of a passive sentence...

 

Just out of curiosity: By whom has the UK been told?

 

By Nigel Farage?

 

Rik

[Vampyr]

Talking about nice use of a passive sentence...

 

Just out of curiosity: By whom has the UK been told?

 

By Nigel Farage?

 

Rik

 

By the EU, obviously.

 

EDIT: Nigel Farage is not even in Parliament; what power do you imagine he has in the UK?

[Vampyr]

This won't be accepted - it is (at the moment) no more than a controversial proposal, opposed by many states other than the UK, it is covered by one of the UK's opt-outs, and in the current UK climate it has no chance.

 

According to the article, if this measure is passed the EU wiould have ways to potentially circumvent the opt-out, although it seems very unlikely that they would try, given that this would virtually guarantee a UK exit from the union.

[Trinidad]

By the EU, obviously.

Oh, since when can the EU speak? I asked who told the UK this? What person was it? Or was it a majority in European parliament? The council of prime ministers? A European commissioner perhaps? Which one?

 

EDIT: Nigel Farage is not even in Parliament; what power do you imagine he has in the UK?

He has the power to tell the UK a lot of nonsense, e.g. that the UK has to accept tens of thousands of immigrants from across the Mediterranean.

 

Rik

[Vampyr]

Oh, since when can the EU speak? I asked who told the UK this? What person was it? Or was it a majority in European parliament? The council of prime ministers? A European commissioner perhaps? Which one?

 

OK, Jean-Claude Junker is the name. You could have looked this up too.