DutchEnery

Something strange happening in UK society – the BBC being accused of being biased. NOOOOH, please not another accusation! Not Auntie BBC? Yet it is funny but I have been getting hot under the collar for a while. It is the fact that the BBC seems to have become aggressive in its reporting. Ms Maitliss in particular. But there are others. When you look at the news we can see Mr Corbyn being portrayed as Saint Corbyn, smiling, waving the microphone. So, yes thanks BBC you’re doing a grand job. There is however a nasty side to all this – I am an avid history addict and it is rather disconcerting to note that all these things have happened before. The propaganda, the appearances of a political leader at large rallies, selected public adulation, exposure by the media. When, you ask? In the early thirties, in Germany. Now, we know how all that ended. I am not bothered about proper politics, leaders have to have media exposure, and yes a strong opposition is paramount. But here we see

Ah, election over, austerity over. Problem is, what exactly IS austerity? We hear a lot about balancing the books and yes, that seems to make sense. Sense at least for ordinary people like myself. I certainly try not to spend more than I bring into the home budget! Is that making sense? Austerity meant mostly cutting public spending by the government in the name of ‘balancing the books’. Admirable in one way but very problematic in other ways. But governments are on a different level. For a start they control the issue of money. That is to say the amount of money that is in circulation. They can and do print more. Called quantitative easing. We noted this action when billions were spent to bail-out the failing banks. So national economics is not quite the same as home economics. So, was the Labour party wrong in calling for billions to be spent on so-called public projects such as nationalising the railways, and possible other industries, water, power etc. Dropping university

I always enjoy election campaigns and listening to all the interesting promises candidates, especially the party leaders, make. The first thing that is important to remember is they are promises, not actual intentions to incorporate into policy. The second thing is the finance details or rather lack of it, are widely inaccurate or simply based on approximations about present standards. Meaning they have no idea of how these promises will possibly be worked out. I suspect we will hear that after the election these promises were well liked ideas and hopefully would be carried out but that at the present time and in the uncertainty of the political world, they are not affordable. In other words, no change. Although Mr Corbyn is gaining ground, possibly because of his appearances in strong Labour areas only and filmed by pro-Labour BBC newscasters his ideas are basically and completely unaffordable. Even if he had the intention of actually carrying them out! I just cannot believe

I am an avid watcher of political programs, especially now with a General Election looming.From time to time I can assure you these programs are worthwhile watching as they are comparable if not better than Live at the Apollo (a comedy program worthy of the name). You will see well dressed, well-fed people in tuxedos or evening dresses spouting all sorts of rubbish. Reality just being circumcised and mudslinging the norm. Now I don’t mind the mudslinging I can do a bit of that myself. But when I hear Jeremy Corbyn’s ideas of how to put things ‘right’, his inability to add up, I begin to wonder of how much of his ideas will actually be carried out if he was elected as PM? I am sorry but can the UK actually afford him? We already have a £1.7 trillion debt hanging around our necks and by all accounts this could reach £2.5 trillion by 2025. Don’t make a mistake, Theresa May also has to borrow at least till 2020 if elected as PM. This country needs to wake up fast, we need to take hold