The Politics Thread

[TANGODANCER]

Number three - ok, this was a bad one... obviously nobody doubts that we're the junior partner in general, but to make that mistake about 1940, even if we understand the context that he was trying to ingratiate himself to his diplomatic hosts... well it's not ideal, put it that way. Nobody really believes it springs from a fundamental ignorance of the history though, do they?

Politicians are mathematicians, not historians. History is the last four years. Ancient history goes back as far as Margaret Thatcher.

no - they are not.

Okay, make that accountants.

[thebish]

Number three - ok, this was a bad one... obviously nobody doubts that we're the junior partner in general, but to make that mistake about 1940, even if we understand the context that he was trying to ingratiate himself to his diplomatic hosts... well it's not ideal, put it that way. Nobody really believes it springs from a fundamental ignorance of the history though, do they?

Politicians are mathematicians, not historians. History is the last four years. Ancient history goes back as far as Margaret Thatcher.

no - they are not.

Okay, make that accountants.

no - not accountants either!

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Number three - ok, this was a bad one... obviously nobody doubts that we're the junior partner in general, but to make that mistake about 1940, even if we understand the context that he was trying to ingratiate himself to his diplomatic hosts... well it's not ideal, put it that way. Nobody really believes it springs from a fundamental ignorance of the history though, do they?

Politicians are mathematicians, not historians. History is the last four years. Ancient history goes back as far as Margaret Thatcher.

no - they are not.

Okay, make that accountants.

I think the point Bish is making, is that our politicians tend not to be anything as respectable as mathematicians, or accountants, or economists.... they're usually just career 'politicians'.

We are actually very unsual in the world in that we are emphatically not a technocracy.

Perhaps the odd thing is that we have ever achieved anything at all under this system!

[Hoboh]

Ermm not much. Because we weren't in a recession and thats a fact.

Chances are we're about to plunge back into one.

When Labour left power we weren't in a recession. They'd pulled us out of one.
I'd have thought that was fairly simple.

The Tories are now through their slash and burn policies are in danger of dragging us back down into one, and potentially further down the line into a depression.

You mean they bailed the banks out! All the folk out of or about to be out of work in the private sector and companies going bust are Browns work and don't forget Brown was to slash civil servents also!!!
Short sighted leftie!!!!!!!

[TANGODANCER]

Number three - ok, this was a bad one... obviously nobody doubts that we're the junior partner in general, but to make that mistake about 1940, even if we understand the context that he was trying to ingratiate himself to his diplomatic hosts... well it's not ideal, put it that way. Nobody really believes it springs from a fundamental ignorance of the history though, do they?

Politicians are mathematicians, not historians. History is the last four years. Ancient history goes back as far as Margaret Thatcher.

no - they are not.

Okay, make that accountants.

I think the point Bish is making, is that our politicians tend not to be anything as respectable as mathematicians, or accountants, or economists.... they're usually just career 'politicians'.!

So, let me see, all this talk of recessions is actually a history lesson and not all about money, banks, spending and finance, and we have no mathmeticians and accountants running things? ? Damn, got it wrong again. We're really in the shxt now.

[BWFC_Insane]

Ermm not much. Because we weren't in a recession and thats a fact.

Chances are we're about to plunge back into one.

When Labour left power we weren't in a recession. They'd pulled us out of one.
I'd have thought that was fairly simple.

The Tories are now through their slash and burn policies are in danger of dragging us back down into one, and potentially further down the line into a depression.

You mean they bailed the banks out! All the folk out of or about to be out of work in the private sector and companies going bust are Browns work and don't forget Brown was to slash civil servents also!!!
Short sighted leftie!!!!!!!

Eh? Brown was going to make controlled and careful cuts that balanced growth of the economy alongside reducing the deficit. Labour tried to make sure we had economic growth and that we we clear of the danger of a "double dip" before trying to cut too much to quickly.

The Tories are foresaking the economy and growth and employment to reduce the deficit. The problem being that without the growth and with rising unemployment you end up back in a recession that can easily spiral into depression.

I don't care about what happened in the past. I care about the path we're being lead down now. If you agree with it then fine. Say so.

But I'll remind you in a few years to see how you're feeling then!

[Raven]

Ermm not much. Because we weren't in a recession and thats a fact.

Chances are we're about to plunge back into one.

When Labour left power we weren't in a recession. They'd pulled us out of one.
I'd have thought that was fairly simple.

The Tories are now through their slash and burn policies are in danger of dragging us back down into one, and potentially further down the line into a depression.

You mean they bailed the banks out! All the folk out of or about to be out of work in the private sector and companies going bust are Browns work and don't forget Brown was to slash civil servents also!!!
Short sighted leftie!!!!!!!

Eh? Brown was going to make controlled and careful cuts that balanced growth of the economy alongside reducing the deficit. Labour tried to make sure we had economic growth and that we we clear of the danger of a "double dip" before trying to cut too much to quickly.

The Tories are foresaking the economy and growth and employment to reduce the deficit. The problem being that without the growth and with rising unemployment you end up back in a recession that can easily spiral into depression.

I don't care about what happened in the past. I care about the path we're being lead down now. If you agree with it then fine. Say so.

But I'll remind you in a few years to see how you're feeling then!

Nothing new there then!

[Hoboh]

Ermm not much. Because we weren't in a recession and thats a fact.

Chances are we're about to plunge back into one.

When Labour left power we weren't in a recession. They'd pulled us out of one.
I'd have thought that was fairly simple.

The Tories are now through their slash and burn policies are in danger of dragging us back down into one, and potentially further down the line into a depression.

You mean they bailed the banks out! All the folk out of or about to be out of work in the private sector and companies going bust are Browns work and don't forget Brown was to slash civil servents also!!!
Short sighted leftie!!!!!!!

Eh? Brown was going to make controlled and careful cuts that balanced growth of the economy alongside reducing the deficit. Labour tried to make sure we had economic growth and that we we clear of the danger of a "double dip" before trying to cut too much to quickly.

The Tories are foresaking the economy and growth and employment to reduce the deficit. The problem being that without the growth and with rising unemployment you end up back in a recession that can easily spiral into depression.

I don't care about what happened in the past. I care about the path we're being lead down now. If you agree with it then fine. Say so.
But I'll remind you in a few years to see how you're feeling then!

You didn't vote for me so why should I tell you what should happen?

[Worthy4England]

Politicians are mathematicians, not historians. History is the last four years. Ancient history goes back as far as Margaret Thatcher.

no - they are not.

Okay, make that accountants.

I think the point Bish is making, is that our politicians tend not to be anything as respectable as mathematicians, or accountants, or economists.... they're usually just career 'politicians'.!

So, let me see, all this talk of recessions is actually a history lesson and not all about money, banks, spending and finance, and we have no mathmeticians and accountants running things? ? Damn, got it wrong again. We're really in the shxt now.

We do have accountants and mathematicians doing the sums. These are a different set of people than the ones that talk about the sums in the House of Commons. They're Civil Servants not politicians. That's not to say the odd politician here and there hasn't had some background in mathematics or accountancy...

[TANGODANCER]

We do have accountants and mathematicians doing the sums. These are a different set of people than the ones that talk about the sums in the House of Commons. They're Civil Servants not politicians. That's not to say the odd politician here and there hasn't had some background in mathematics or accountancy...

The whole point I was making Worthy is that everything is motivated by numbers. Always has been, always will be. A mere detail of history (like Cameron's boob about WWII) is irrelevant in the grand scheme of government. I have my doubts as to whether a lot of our leaders could actually name eight English monarchs.

[Worthy4England]

We do have accountants and mathematicians doing the sums. These are a different set of people than the ones that talk about the sums in the House of Commons. They're Civil Servants not politicians. That's not to say the odd politician here and there hasn't had some background in mathematics or accountancy...

The whole point I was making Worthy is that everything is motivated by numbers. Always has been, always will be. A mere detail of history (like Cameron's boob about WWII) is irrelevant in the grand scheme of government. I have my doubts as to whether a lot of our leaders could actually name eight English monarchs.

Need to be tougher than that TD. Even some of our MP's would recognise that if we got as far as Henry VIII, there must be 8 Henry's in total.

[TANGODANCER]

We do have accountants and mathematicians doing the sums. These are a different set of people than the ones that talk about the sums in the House of Commons. They're Civil Servants not politicians. That's not to say the odd politician here and there hasn't had some background in mathematics or accountancy...

The whole point I was making Worthy is that everything is motivated by numbers. Always has been, always will be. A mere detail of history (like Cameron's boob about WWII) is irrelevant in the grand scheme of government. I have my doubts as to whether a lot of our leaders could actually name eight English monarchs.

Need to be tougher than that TD. Even some of our MP's would recognise that if we got as far as Henry VIII, there must be 8 Henry's in total.

Erm....quite.

[thebish]

Politicians are mathematicians, not historians. History is the last four years. Ancient history goes back as far as Margaret Thatcher.

no - they are not.

Okay, make that accountants.

I think the point Bish is making, is that our politicians tend not to be anything as respectable as mathematicians, or accountants, or economists.... they're usually just career 'politicians'.!

So, let me see, all this talk of recessions is actually a history lesson and not all about money, banks, spending and finance, and we have no mathmeticians and accountants running things? ? Damn, got it wrong again. We're really in the shxt now.

what we are talking about is irrelavant and has no bearing on the training/previous professions of politicians.

one or two may have done maths degrees - a few may have done accountancy training - but my guess is that the VAST majority are neither accountants nor (by any stretch of the imagination) - mathematicians.

The Prime Minister (for example) did a degree in Philosophy, Politics and Economics and worked in the Meeja (Carlton) - not an accountant or a mathematician

Michael Gove studied English at Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford University and was then a journalist - not an accountant or a mathematician

George Osborne (chancellor) got a 2:1 in Modern History and then went on to run a firm of fabric and wallpapers designers - not an accountant or a mathematician

need I go on?

[TANGODANCER]

no - they are not.

Okay, make that accountants.

I think the point Bish is making, is that our politicians tend not to be anything as respectable as mathematicians, or accountants, or economists.... they're usually just career 'politicians'.!

So, let me see, all this talk of recessions is actually a history lesson and not all about money, banks, spending and finance, and we have no mathmeticians and accountants running things? ? Damn, got it wrong again. We're really in the shxt now.

what we are talking about is irrelavant and has no bearing on the training/previous professions of politicians.

one or two may have done maths degrees - a few may have done accountancy training - but my guess is that the VAST majority are neither accountants nor (by any stretch of the imagination) - mathematicians.

The Prime Minister (for example) did a degree in Philosophy, Politics and Economics and worked in the Meeja (Carlton) - not an accountant or a mathematician

Michael Gove studied English at Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford University and was then a journalist - not an accountant or a mathematician

George Osborne (chancellor) got a 2:1 in Modern History and then went on to run a firm of fabric and wallpapers designers - not an accountant or a mathematician

need I go on?

Completely missing (or ignoring) the overall point (as usual), as you wish.

[thebish]

Okay, make that accountants.

I think the point Bish is making, is that our politicians tend not to be anything as respectable as mathematicians, or accountants, or economists.... they're usually just career 'politicians'.!

So, let me see, all this talk of recessions is actually a history lesson and not all about money, banks, spending and finance, and we have no mathmeticians and accountants running things? ? Damn, got it wrong again. We're really in the shxt now.

what we are talking about is irrelavant and has no bearing on the training/previous professions of politicians.

one or two may have done maths degrees - a few may have done accountancy training - but my guess is that the VAST majority are neither accountants nor (by any stretch of the imagination) - mathematicians.

The Prime Minister (for example) did a degree in Philosophy, Politics and Economics and worked in the Meeja (Carlton) - not an accountant or a mathematician

Michael Gove studied English at Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford University and was then a journalist - not an accountant or a mathematician

George Osborne (chancellor) got a 2:1 in Modern History and then went on to run a firm of fabric and wallpapers designers - not an accountant or a mathematician

need I go on?

Completely missing (or ignoring) the overall point (as usual), as you wish.

you made three points..

1. politicians are not historians (wrong - some of them are - George Osborne is - Winston Churchill was)

2. politicians are mathematicians - wrong.

3. politicians are accountants - wrong.

did I miss one?

[Bruce Rioja]

Eh? Brown was going to make controlled and careful cuts that balanced growth of the economy alongside reducing the deficit!

That's what he said he was going to do. However, given his record nobody believed him (except you, clearly )

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I thought I remembered Portillio making the point about our not being a technocracy somewhere, and have just found it.

5mins 50secs in, in the unlikely event of anyone being interested!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ4VB9rx3Qo

[TANGODANCER]

You made three points..

1. politicians are not historians (wrong - some of them are - George Osborne is - Winston Churchill was)

2. politicians are mathematicians - wrong.

3. politicians are accountants - wrong.

did I miss one?

What you seem to have missed in your desire to prove points is very simple: David Cameron made a historical boob, Mummy commented on it, Tango stated Politicians are more interested in figures and money than history (he foolishly used mathematicians and accountants as his words to make his point) . Bish pounced on it. End.

[thebish]

What you seem to have missed in your desire to prove points is very simple: David Cameron made a historical boob, Mummy commented on it, Tango stated Politicians are more interested in figures and money than history (he foolishly used mathematicians and accountants as his words to make his point) . Bish pounced on it. End.

I don't think politicians are more interested in figures and money than history. They are a mixed bag - and have as diverse a range of interests as the members of this Forum (if you exclude hobo - as his interests would spoil the sample!)

and Cameron's boob was nowt to do with an interest in money or figures - it was interest in licking Obama's arse....

is Tango now speaking in the third person?

[TANGODANCER]

What you seem to have missed in your desire to prove points is very simple: David Cameron made a historical boob, Mummy commented on it, Tango stated Politicians are more interested in figures and money than history (he foolishly used mathematicians and accountants as his words to make his point) . Bish pounced on it. End.

I don't think politicians are more interested in figures and money than history. They are a mixed bag - and have as diverse a range of interests as the members of this Forum (if you exclude hobo - as his interests would spoil the sample!)

and Cameron's boob was nowt to do with an interest in money or figures - it was interest in licking Obama's arse....

is Tango now speaking in the third person?

I'll have a word with him. He gets a bit carried away at times.