Police recruitment.

[grassroots]

Boris has announced that there is to be a recruitment of 20,000 police officers, it will begin in September .

[The PNP]

Boris has announced that there is to be a recruitment of 20,000 police officers, it will begin in September .

Sounds like a plan, but how's he going to pay for them - and all the other expensive 'promises' he's made?

Either we're going to see taxes rise, or cuts to other departments to pay for it. Or...he'll have to borrow more. Fact is, if it wasn't for the repayments of interest on existing huge Govt debt, there'd be many more £££'s available in the first place!

[grassroots]

Sounds like a plan, but how's he going to pay for them - and all the other expensive 'promises' he's made?

Either we're going to see taxes rise, or cuts to other departments to pay for it. Or...he'll have to borrow more. Fact is, if it wasn't for the repayments of interest on existing huge Govt debt, there'd be many more £££'s available in the first place!

Well we can't go on the way we are , if we want a better country someone has to pay and that is the tax payer at All levels I'm afraid.

[birdbath]

Well we can't go on the way we are , if we want a better country someone has to pay and that is the tax payer at All levels I'm afraid.

About time everyone realised that.

As for the recruitment announcement, I can't be sure that Boris means that there will be 20 000 EXTRA officers in total at the end of this measure but the demands on training facilities will be huge.

[Toodles McGinty]

Shame the government cut them in the first place, really.

I'd be more impressed if he was raising the number to more than pre-2010 levels.

I'll be even more impressed if it actually happens. Here's hoping.

[silver fox]

Shame the government cut them in the first place, really.

I'd be more impressed if he was raising the number to more than pre-2010 levels.

I'll be even more impressed if it actually happens. Here's hoping.

Leaving aside the effects of the cuts in police officers, it's also pretty damn certain that maintaining the force will have been considerably less expensive than an emergency push to get numbers back up to strength.

One thing intrigues me, Labour mentions increased funding for just about anything and immediately the knives are out, the screeching regarding increased taxes and/or borrowing is deafening, a Tory PM starts promising to throw cash around like confetti, not a whisper, strange that.

[said]

Leaving aside the effects of the cuts in police officers, it's also pretty damn certain that maintaining the force will have been considerably less expensive than an emergency push to get numbers back up to strength.

One thing intrigues me, Labour mentions increased funding for just about anything and immediately the knives are out, the screeching regarding increased taxes and/or borrowing is deafening, a Tory PM starts promising to throw cash around like confetti, not a whisper, strange that.

Not really! Labour have a reputation for borrowing money. There are those Labour supporters who subscribe to the Labour Unions and feel obliged to support the Labour Party - but a great number of the other supporters are those who believe that life owes them, and they expect everything to be given free without having to work for it. Labour cannot afford to pay out more since it is the working classes who have to foot that bill to appease these supporters - just to keep voting for the Labour Party. Just look at the areas where most Labour placards appear - it speaks for itself. Many people believe that it was also one of the reasons why Labour, under Blair, first invited so many overseas people into the UK, sufficient to fill the city of Birmingham more than three times over - to increase the number of votes for that party.
The report also shows:
:: three in four new jobs created since 1997 have been accounted for by migrant workers
:: one in four children is born to a foreign mother
:: a third of future extra households will be due to immigration
:: half a million extra foreign-born children arrived at a primary school
:: the UK population could hit 90 million within two decades, largely driven by immigration
If you remember, the first immigrants were given Food vouchers, Free accommodation, prioritised health care and even money to purchase vehicles to get them to work. Who paid for that? Labour borrowed money for it - and the whole population is still paying for it!

On the other hand, if taxes are to be raised, this means that people will need to work harder to pay for what they want. But the additional Police Forces are required because of the Labour Party's free immigration policies. The crime figures from migration watch show that immigrant percentages per number, commit far more crimes than the indigenous people of the UK. Full Fact: "Taxpayers faced a bill of more than £140 million last year for criminals from other EU countries in British jails."

[Desert Region]

One thing intrigues me, Labour mentions increased funding for just about anything and immediately the knives are out, the screeching regarding increased taxes and/or borrowing is deafening, a Tory PM starts promising to throw cash around like confetti, not a whisper, strange that.

You don't listen to left-leaning news sources, then?


Do Boris Johnson's tax and spending plans add up?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49097133


The cost of Boris Johnson: pricing up the next PM's pledges

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/23/the-cost-of-boris-johnson-pricing-up-the-next-prime-minister-pledges


Thanks to Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt, the magic money tree is back – too bad they won't spend it wisely

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a8998546.html


MICHAEL WHITE: Impossible promises will come back to haunt Boris Johnson

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...ster-1-6179865


Nor listen to right-leaning news sources:


Boris looks sheepish over spending pledges that won't make the cut

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...unt-come-next/

[silver fox]

Not really! Labour have a reputation for borrowing money. There are those Labour supporters who subscribe to the Labour Unions and feel obliged to support the Labour Party - but a great number of the other supporters are those who believe that life owes them, and they expect everything to be given free without having to work for it. Labour cannot afford to pay out more since it is the working classes who have to foot that bill to appease these supporters - just to keep voting for the Labour Party. Just look at the areas where most Labour placards appear - it speaks for itself. Many people believe that it was also one of the reasons why Labour, under Blair, first invited so many overseas people into the UK, sufficient to fill the city of Birmingham more than three times over - to increase the number of votes for that party.
The report also shows:
:: three in four new jobs created since 1997 have been accounted for by migrant workers
:: one in four children is born to a foreign mother
:: a third of future extra households will be due to immigration
:: half a million extra foreign-born children arrived at a primary school
:: the UK population could hit 90 million within two decades, largely driven by immigration
If you remember, the first immigrants were given Food vouchers, Free accommodation, prioritised health care and even money to purchase vehicles to get them to work. Who paid for that? Labour borrowed money for it - and the whole population is still paying for it!

On the other hand, if taxes are to be raised, this means that people will need to work harder to pay for what they want. But the additional Police Forces are required because of the Labour Party's free immigration policies. The crime figures from migration watch show that immigrant percentages per number, commit far more crimes than the indigenous people of the UK. Full Fact: "Taxpayers faced a bill of more than £140 million last year for criminals from other EU countries in British jails."

Not again, even on this site alone it has been clearly shown that in fact the Cons have consistently borrowed and spent (wasted) much more than Labour, continue bleating right wing media rhetoric as you will, doesn't change facts.

[silver fox]

You don't listen to left-leaning news sources, then?


Do Boris Johnson's tax and spending plans add up?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49097133


The cost of Boris Johnson: pricing up the next PM's pledges

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/23/the-cost-of-boris-johnson-pricing-up-the-next-prime-minister-pledges


Thanks to Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt, the magic money tree is back – too bad they won't spend it wisely

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a8998546.html


MICHAEL WHITE: Impossible promises will come back to haunt Boris Johnson

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...ster-1-6179865


Nor listen to right-leaning news sources:


Boris looks sheepish over spending pledges that won't make the cut

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...unt-come-next/

Interesting you cite the BBC as left wing, sure the papers have a little go, but that's not what we hear discussed, or on sites like this, in fact a quick glance at the usual culprits reporting Johnson's first day in parliament as PM, thought I'd stepped into a parallel universe, their reports didn't look one little bit like the actual events and conversation.

[said]

Not again, even on this site alone it has been clearly shown that in fact the Cons have consistently borrowed and spent (wasted) much more than Labour, continue bleating right wing media rhetoric as you will, doesn't change facts.

[Desert Region]

Interesting you cite the BBC as left wing, sure the papers have a little go, but that's not what we hear discussed, or on sites like this, in fact a quick glance at the usual culprits reporting Johnson's first day in parliament as PM, thought I'd stepped into a parallel universe, their reports didn't look one little bit like the actual events and conversation.

Interesting that in my post #8, I disprove your contention in post #6 that there has not been "a whisper" about Boris Johnson's spending pledges (or his "promising to throw cash around like confetti," as you put it).

I did so by listing a series of articles from major news providers that indeed focus on that very topic! So now you are no longer oblivious to them.

But rather than give that due acknowledgement you instead first focus on the political leaning of the BBC, complain that there isn't much discussion of Boris's spending pledges on sites like this (), and then complain about the reporting accuracy re Johnson's first day in Parliament!

[silver fox]

Interesting that in my post #8, I disprove your contention in post #6 that there has not been "a whisper" about Boris Johnson's spending pledges (or his "promising to throw cash around like confetti," as you put it).

I did so by listing a series of articles from major news providers that indeed focus on that very topic! So now you are no longer oblivious to them.

But rather than give that due acknowledgement you instead first focus on the political leaning of the BBC, complain that there isn't much discussion of Boris's spending pledges on sites like this (), and then complain about the reporting accuracy re Johnson's first day in Parliament!

I said that some media certainly highlighted his spending promises, but not approaching the sort of ridicule that any Labour budgeting receives.

As far as media reporting goes, the front pages of the right wing media gave the impression that Boris had destroyed Corbyn, what I saw live was a load of verbals, but no substance, hardly some masterly performance sweeping all before him. Anyone can shout, point and wag fingers, make vague promises with no indication of how, sure I also accept that my distrust of Johnson is total and will remain so until or if he proves otherwise.

[Desert Region]

I said that some media certainly highlighted his spending promises, but not approaching the sort of ridicule that any Labour budgeting receives.

As far as media reporting goes, the front pages of the right wing media gave the impression that Boris had destroyed Corbyn, what I saw live was a load of verbals, but no substance, hardly some masterly performance sweeping all before him. Anyone can shout, point and wag fingers, make vague promises with no indication of how, sure I also accept that my distrust of Johnson is total and will remain so until or if he proves otherwise.

You stated that you found it "strange" that you hadn't heard "a whisper" about Boris's spending pledges. I then provided a host of links to articles from major news providers that had covered the very subject about which you had heard nothing. Yes, it is "strange" that you haven't heard anything.

Your fresh complaint or concern is that Boris's spending pledges haven't attracted the same amount of "ridicule" that "Labour budgeting receives." As you weren't even aware of there being articles in existence about Boris's spending pledges until I posted a selection yesterday, why do you believe you are in a position to know what amount of ridicule Boris's spending pledges have received? .

I think it was back on the 'Big Red Bus Lie' thread that you stated words to the effect that you were unaware of anything much regarding negative forecasts, gloom and inaccuracies of any consequence from the Remain side in the run-up to the EU Referendum, and that you could only remember positive Remain messages.

I've had a check, and on that thread you also stated the following:

My I just point out that we haven't left yet, the dire consequences were predicted as a result of leaving, NOT the result of the referendum,...

In posts #63 and ##67 of that thread, I disproved that memory and understanding.

[Hamble]

Interesting that in my post #8, I disprove your contention in post #6 that there has not been "a whisper" about Boris Johnson's spending pledges (or his "promising to throw cash around like confetti," as you put it).

I did so by listing a series of articles from major news providers that indeed focus on that very topic! So now you are no longer oblivious to them.

But rather than give that due acknowledgement you instead first focus on the political leaning of the BBC, complain that there isn't much discussion of Boris's spending pledges on sites like this (), and then complain about the reporting accuracy re Johnson's first day in Parliament!

I thought that was the plan Labour+public cash= confetti in a snow machine.