Avoiding cliches like the plague

I'm watching Question Time. Here's another one:

Mickey Mouse degrees

Long-term economic plan
The Great British People
Strong and stable
Get the NHS back on its feet

To be fair, you should include an alternative phrase that can replace the soundbite. It's easy to criticise but what would you say instead?

I'm not a politician 😁

This one pisses me off bigtime:-

Hard working families

What about hard working single people??

Stop the boats
Legal and illegal routes
Economic migrants
Asylum seekers
Safe countries

Yeah right.

Going forward
Knuckle down
Roll up our sleeves
Put Britain first
Valuing our farmers
building homes for the future
Sustainable policies
Building a legacy
Transformation politics

Sickening isn't it?

I'm afraid that it isn't cliches that are preventing critical thinking, it is, as I have predicted many times, a refusal to let go of the entirely unfounded belief that the nation's finances are exactly the same as a household or company's finances.

Just as at the last GE, posters are not judging party policies on their merit, on how they will benefit the nation, but on their 'affordability'. Affordability is a secondary consideration in a country which issues its own currency and which is not indebted to other countries or dependent on another currency.
The more pertinent question to be asked is 'Do we have the resources, or potential resources, available to carry out this policy?'
Britain has produced some of the world's most respected and influential economists. One of which was Keynes, whose insights drove the post WW2 creation of the NHS and expansion of the public services from which many of us have benefitted.

The Keynes observation which we should be keeping in mind is "Anything we can actually do, we can afford"

P.S Some posters need to understand the difference between a cliche and normal nouns and phrases...🤔

I agree with the posts on here, but not yours MaizieD . Which I think we have discussed before.

fancythat

I agree with the posts on here, but not yours MaizieD . Which I think we have discussed before.

What don't you agree with?

Is it 'off topic' and in the wrong place?
Do you want to debate economics with me?
Do you think that terms such as 'asylum seekers', 'sustainable policies' and 'safe countries' are cliches?

Or are you just trying to stop debate?

I don’t agree with Maizie either, but she won’t be surprised by that. I’m not an economist, but I understand that we (the country) borrow money, and therefore that money has to be paid back, plus interest.
Maybe that’s simplistic but that’s what I understand.

If we simply print more money, it tends to lead to inflation. I don’t know why, but again, it’s what I understand.

MaizieD

fancythat

I agree with the posts on here, but not yours MaizieD . Which I think we have discussed before.

What don't you agree with?

Is it 'off topic' and in the wrong place?
Do you want to debate economics with me?
Do you think that terms such as 'asylum seekers', 'sustainable policies' and 'safe countries' are cliches?

Or are you just trying to stop debate?

I especially dont agree with your, it is not like a household's finance bit.
Which I am pretty sure we went into some detail about, about 2 months ago.

I hate repteating myself. I bore myself!

I wil try and find the link to the thread later today.

www.gransnet.com/forums/news_and_politics/a1331622-The-Uk-Government-balancing-its-financial-books

But is there a distinction between cliches and hackneyed phrases? Many of these are ‘everyday’ (another one?) management speak. Not special to politics,

maddyone

If we simply print more money, it tends to lead to inflation. I don’t know why, but again, it’s what I understand.

I have tried very hard over the years to present the actual research evidence behind what I say. I Don't know how anyone can 'understand' anything without actually investigating the evidence for it.

At least a third of what is popularly known as the 'national debt' (some £900billion) is money created by the government at various times to get the country out of economic trouble, the global financial crisis (without the government money many people would have found their bank account empty), when the £ lost value after the vote to leave the EU and the huge amounts of money created to cover the covid pandemic. None of which led to any inflation and which we are NOT 'repaying' via our taxes.

Additionally, all money that banks hand out as loans, such as mortgages, are money created by the bank under licence from the government. The Bank of England has published an explanation of this, which I have linked to many times...

This is all evidence based fact.

Anyway, folk can go on 'believing' whatever they like, however untrue it might be. I just think it's a shame that voting decisions based on party policies are made on the basis of a myth, not on the value of those policies to the country as a whole.

I disagree with MaizieD on many (most) political issues, but not on this.

The U.K.’s finances should not be compared to a household budget, or that of any business.

This is a falsehood continually repeated by all parties and a fair few political commentators. It is just an excuse not to invest in the Country, it’s population and its infrastructure.

I’m beginning to understand this concept (finally). Thank you MaizieD. Obviously the politicians (all stripes) are happy to keep us confused.com

Please let's not allow this to become another discussion of economic models? By all means start a thread about those, Maisie, but this one was started to discuss the cliches used by politicians to position the Overton Window, and/or to control the vocabulary used to discuss important issues in the lead up to the election.

I understand that it can be frustrating when people don't share your outlook on something that matters to you, but an adherence to one particular theoretical perspective shouldn't be able to dominate threads on different subjects. I also understand that in your opinion debate is being controlled by those who see Economics in terms of a household budget and who use language in keeping with that point of view, so there is some crossover with the purpose of the thread, but whereas that is a good example of how language matters, it is not without its own controversy as others have entirely different and equally strongly-held viewpoints.

Chestnut, I'm not sure how people can substitute other definitions for concepts which are deliberately vague and meaningless. I don't know what 'the economy will fall off a cliff' means, or what 'the NHS is on its knees' means to the person who is saying it. I know that after the Truss/Kwarteng budget the pound fell, interest rates rose and the Band of England had to step in to protect pension funds, and that it is increasingly difficult to get an appointment with a GP, that operations are routinely cancelled and that ambulances take ages to arrive. Whether that is the same as the meaning that was intended or not is impossible to tell. Some would say that the NHS suffers from top heavy management and is 'on its knees' as a result, or that the economy would 'fall off a cliff' if money were spent on social care and free education for all.

maddyone

If we simply print more money, it tends to lead to inflation. I don’t know why, but again, it’s what I understand.

If you don't know why, how can you understand?

I think that political commentators and politicians use cliches/sound bites due to their opinion that the electorate has dumbed down

Many folks nowadays get their news from internet sources, X etc and will not/cannot be bothered to read manifestos or long articles. Hence a cliche will suffice.

maddyone

I don’t agree with Maizie either, but she won’t be surprised by that. I’m not an economist, but I understand that we (the country) borrow money, and therefore that money has to be paid back, plus interest.
Maybe that’s simplistic but that’s what I understand.

We have been over this argument so many times. Govts have borrowed money -it gets paid back and then the govt borrows again. Usually for wars and the UK has participated in several since the end of the 17thC but also for crises like covid.

Many of the lenders to the govt are ordinary people - through premium bonds, National Savings and Treasury stocks. Those people are deriving an income from those loans.

I agree GG13 a quick scroll through their phones is about as much as (many of) those under 50 want to engage with politics.

GrannyGravy13

I think that political commentators and politicians use cliches/sound bites due to their opinion that the electorate has dumbed down

Many folks nowadays get their news from internet sources, X etc and will not/cannot be bothered to read manifestos or long articles. Hence a cliche will suffice.

I agree, and also think that the use of such phrases results in 'dumbing down'. My heart sinks when I hear phrases like the ones I highlighted repeated as though they have a precise meaning, when they have none at all, and I'm sure I'm as guilty as anyone else of using at least some of them. It's lazy and reductive, which suits the agenda of politicians (of all stripes), but it's easier than thinking about how to express what we really want to say.

Keir Starmer repeats ‘chaos and division’ so man times just now in Glasgow. Oh and ‘turn the page’.

It gets irritating. Almost as bad as Theresa May’s annoying ‘Nothing has changed!’