Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by jape)
    It's disappointing that, when told he can't leave derelict his foremost responsibility as head of HM Government, the Prime Minister feels the need to mope. I'll support this no matter who ends up paying for it, and eventually cooler heads will come into office and ensure that our national security can be adequately sustained and funded.
    Increasing spending in any department by £14 billion without knowing what you're going to spend it on is not the act of a 'cooler head'. The government is committed to sustainably funded defence.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Connor27)
    Hear, hear!

    The traitorous left all hate our veterans and would gladly have the heros that fight for this country do so with poor, underfunded equipment and resources.

    In fact, the Deputy Prime Minister openly supports a terrorist organisation that illegally murdered British soldiers.
    Hear hear
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Connor27)

    In fact, the Deputy Prime Minister openly supports a terrorist organisation that illegally murdered British soldiers.
    Really?!?
    Is he the equivalent of IRA Corbyn?
    Is it the IRA he supports?
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Connor27)
    Hear, hear!

    The traitorous left all hate our veterans and would gladly have the heros that fight for this country do so with poor, underfunded equipment and resources.

    In fact, the Deputy Prime Minister openly supports a terrorist organisation that illegally murdered British soldiers.
    Oh yeah, that must be why under my leadership the TSR Labour Party passed a bill (at the cost of hundreds of millions of pounds) to fund degree-level qualifications and apprenticeships for everyone serving in the Armed Forces (ensuring they'd be well equipped for civilian life) as well as providing psychiatric help to all serving. It must also be why I personally wrote a bill giving veterans priority on the social housing waiting list. It is also worth noting that the last two governments both raised soldier's pay and that there is literrally nothing upon which to base the assertion that this government would do anything to worsen conditions for the military. That is the difference between action and virtue signalling.

    Also, I wonder if it counts as unparliamentary language to accuse long-serving members of the Commons of being 'traitorous'? Perhaps - given what I have just said - it falls under lying to Parliament. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Also, I wonder if it counts as unparliamentary language to accuse long-serving members of the Commons of being 'traitorous'? Perhaps - given what I have just said - it falls under lying to Parliament. :rolleyes:
    Traitor is unparliamentary language.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Increasing spending in any department by £14 billion without knowing what you're going to spend it on is not the act of a 'cooler head'. The government is committed to sustainably funded defence.
    Research is a thing, you know?
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Research is a thing, you know?
    It's not the government's job to cost the semi-formed Libertarian Party's agenda or do research for their policies. :rolleyes:
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by fleky6910)
    Jammy Duel I'm sure he's done his fiscal multiplier calculations.
    TheDefiniteArticle am I right? Please share your figures
    What if fiscal multipliers do not exist?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    It's not the government's job to cost the semi-formed Libertarian Party's agenda or do research for their policies. :rolleyes:
    No, it's your job to run departments, or not run them as the case may be, which requires you to research the current state, and what you can do to expand them, if you wish to expand them, or reduce their scope, if you wish to reduce their scope. I expect you're doing your research into how to reduce the UK to a regional power so you can fund an ever expanding state.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    It's not the government's job to cost the semi-formed Libertarian Party's agenda or do research for their policies. :rolleyes:
    I've got to admit that your on fire tonight
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    What if fiscal multipliers do not exist?
    Well then........
    Keynesian economics is pretty much discredited!
    Are you an economics student? Whats your view on keynesian economics?
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    No, it's your job to run departments, or not run them as the case may be, which requires you to research the current state, and what you can do to expand them, if you wish to expand them, or reduce their scope, if you wish to reduce their scope. I expect you're doing your research into how to reduce the UK to a regional power so you can fund an ever expanding state.
    I have no intention to see the UK diminished in its ability to exert influence around the world. And your absolutist rhetoric is not as effective as it might sound in your head. The UK will not be reduced to a 'regional power' simply because the government doesn't drain the taxpayer's coffers every time a right-winger runs along with dreams of world domination in their eyes and some moving speech about military might.

    To be honest I thought this was the kind of petition/motion that you would openly and happily mock. The idea that billions and billions extra funding (I again assume that the author's meant 3% of GDP as they reference NATO) is needed for 'welfare' and 'quality of equipment' is laughable.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by fleky6910)
    I've got to admit that your on fire tonight
    I thank the honourable gentleman for the kind remark. :hat2:
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by fleky6910)
    Well then........
    Keynesian economics is pretty much discredited!
    Are you an economics student? Whats your view on keynesian economics?
    Keynesian economics is not based on empirical research, it is based on the short-term economy, and assumes a positive fiscal multiplier exists when a negative fiscal multiplier could exist. Keynesian economics does not work well in the real-world but it works well for liberals because it fits their dreams for an expansionist government: that is expected when it is based on implausible assumptions.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    I thought you Libertarians were against intervention.

    Aye.

    I support more than doubling the size of our air and naval forces to match if not beat post Soviet Russian numbers.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    We should not pay unless other NATO members contribute their fair share.
    Offline

    18
    Nay, I understand, and personally agree with, the requirement of 2% GDP spending on Defence but I do not see the need to boost this to 3%. I also query the statement of Iran being a threat - I would consider the United States to be more of a threat to world peace, down to Trump, than them.
    • Aston Villa FC Supporter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Aston Villa FC Supporter
    Aye
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    Nay. NATO is important, but we're very unlikely to leave, and we spend enough on defence as a whole. If we want more to be spent on conventional weapons, we should scrap Trident.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    Completely and utterly Nay. We're already the 5th Largest Military Spender and we have no need to spend even more on NATO. Our biggest threat is not other nations, but terrorists that have no nation, and an increase in spending for a conventional military is not going to protect us from this threat.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 11, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.