Thetownend.com

No not sgt pepper but the maddest fucking day of my life, I know a few posters on here were there, never seen anything like it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRj2K0ulD8Q&NR=1

and why the tory party should be avoided at all costs.cunts.

God - that seems like yesterday.

There was a group from the Polytechnic of Wales student union who were near Westminster Bridge when the horses charged. One of the girls got her leg gashed open by a hoof.

I managed to jump out of the way of one charge by the horses by about 6 inches, fucking scary. For those that werent around the building on fire was the south african embassy.

I was only 4, I don't really remember much.

I wholeheartedly agree.

It could and possibly will happen again.

The reason why I will never vote tory ever, never forget.

Similar story, I was approaching my 1st birthday!

I was less than 4 weeks old. Ha

Yep, two months old. My Politics teacher at College was on the front page of the Mail apparently.

Very exciting.

Bring on the tories - nothing like a good riot :)

I'm going to find some pictures of mountains of rubbish on the street and dead bodies being stored in refrigerated vehicles in the late 70's to remind people to never vote labour. Or perhaps a graph showing the national debt and unemployment everytime labour get into power

Useless socialist cunts.

It always amuses me the way that the Tory supporters always bring up the old chestnut of
the Winter of Discontent.Yet they suffer a severe memory loss, when it comes to the last
Tory Government and Black Wednesday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IF_7BGdo0RE

... I remember the events on the news, but I was a kid.

I am certain the Tories are returning to power. Brace yourself folks.

Too many Britons fail to vote and it frustrates me, but that's different conversation all together.

i was -3!!  :-[

It will be utterly tragic if this Labour government is given another term to nation-wreck this country. Never ceases to amaze that even relying upon the most basic powers of observance people can't see the mess we're in. Labour scum. Britain's demise is almost complete, as the socialist bastards intended. By design, not by accident.

Don't remember it at all to be honest, I was only 8.

I was too busy with Thundercats, Mask and He-Man in those days.

I'm not going to get too far in to a political debate on here, but do you honestly believe British socialists "intend" to cause "Britain's demise"?  For what purpose?  What would they gain from this?  Use your head.

It's pretty difficult to take seriously someone that is so fucking clueless that they describe this, admittedly fucking useless, Labour administration as "socialist". I assume you're under 25 and have no access to a dictionary.

Who do you suggest arriba? They are all a bunch of robbing barstewards with only one thing on their minds "How to line their own pockets"

Oh dear - I am sure Tonga didnt want a 'my dad is bigger than your dad debate' to follow his post...

I loved the riots simply because it got rid of that witch Thatcher who thought she was untouchable...She never listened to reason - ever...... and eventually she paid the price!!

Overall im with STFCinBmouth.......they are all cunts and anybody who thinks any one party will make a difference is deluded!

Thatcher The Milk Snatcher!

Thatcher:criminalised mandela-worshipped Pinochet. Says it all.

The words 'there's no such thing as society' do it for me. The sodding bullshit phrase 'broken britain' is being bandied about by tories, but if it is broken, thatcher broke it.

I think lothar pretty much wrote off any chances of his political posts being taken seriously when the majority of them have warned us all of the dangers of "race-mixing". Still, can't be easy to post with a pillow case on your head, so credit where it's due :)

I must have missed those. Shame.

I agree

:)

if i thought they could win i'd probably go for the lib dems.as it's a two horse race,labour it is.

Do you "protestors" really ever think you'll change things? Oh dear  :(

erm yes. we stopped the poll tax and ousted thatcher.

Really? I think my high council tax begs to differ

you could go back to the poll tax then.

Sgt. Pepper told the band to play?

All a bit before my time this. Nothing really exciting seems to have happened since.

It's no different though arriba, is it? I hate politics TBH, but it makes me cringe that some people blame one party for bringing one "tax" in but don't berate another party for carrying something similar on.

Please remind me of the vast difference between the two? I'm all ears

poll tax made everyone pay the same amount,regardless of wealth and income.
great for the rich,not the rest of us.

And managed to push VAT up to 17.5% in the process which is still with us today.

My memories of the poll tax riots are slightly different. Everyone I knew either thought it was a fairer system, or just as an excellent opportunity to riot and avoid paying rather than actually being opposed to it.

So what's the difference with council tax? You could live in a "Band D" house and earn £60k a year or £15k and still pay the same. For me tax should be based on income. That's my thoughts on the subject. As I said before, I do not like politics.

I'm still not sure why its considered so unfair to be honest. Richer people use less council services. fact. Richer people already pay a lot more tax. fact.

Before anyone starts I'm not rich in the slightest.

And lets be honest here, the massive council tax rises under labour have just meant everyone pays more anyway. but thats based on house values in 1994 or whatever it is so thats fair.

I read recently how Thatcher opposed Catalytic converters in cars, saying it will increase the levels of c02, to levels unknown, and that instead of having Catalytic converters we should invest heavily in alternative fuels to prevent a possible future crisis.

She was chastised for these views and almost nobody believed a word the mad old bag said. History has proven her right. For the record i'm too young (31) to know anything of Thatcher, so have no idea what she was actually like, but do suspect i wouldn't ever be a Thatcherite. I just read that about catalytic converters and found it enlightening.

Going back to the riots though, I do wish our country wasn't turned into a namby-pamby apathetic waste of oxygen and actually had the balls to riot or even stand-up for ourselves these days.

I have no idea what poll-tax was, the impact it had or how much it hurt the populace, so perhaps i shouldn't even attempt to compare anything our current government have done with Thatcher, but i will. :)

I sincerely believe that some of the ludicrous taxation, law-creation and freedom-destruction mentality under Labour is worthy of riots, or at least some sort of mass protest. I imagine years ago, the streets would have been aflame with anger.

It seems to me that the trouble today is that no one seems to give a fuck anymore. Our bulldog spirit has been killed. We've been turned into weak people living in a padded protectionist society, seemingly only fueled by propaganda and rarely our own free thought. Apathy, jealousy and hatred seem to reign supreme.

Obviously i'm unlikely right; i don't read or watch the news and have no idea what any of the parties have to say. I believe they're all much of a muchness and i feel my vote is worthless. It's like the hoover salesman who at the end of his sale says, "So, what colour do you want? Red, yellow or blue?" Fuck the colour, who said i wanted a hoover?

Council tax seems to go up x % a year too, pity my wages don't. If your wages go up you pay more tax, fair enough.

Can you enlighten us?

The rich are less likely to use services paid for by taxes as

1) They frequently choose to use equivalent or better private services e.g. health (although private healthcare does leach on the NHS to an extent rarely fully acknowledged), private rather than state pensions etc
2) The better off (not just the rich) are proportionately less likely to use "safety net" services such as social services, unemployment/incapacity benefits etc.

Although in both categories there are compelling arguments that the rich/better off benefit from the less well off having access to at least the basic level of services provided by the state via taxation even if they do not use them themselves, through the largely intangible "societal good". Quite how well that balance works out I'll leave to TT and Lumps to fight out :)

that has little to do with council tax though.more your income-national insurance

Paul, you have just quoted the obvious though "Healthcare" blah,blah. Taxes also pay for the roads, public services etc. Tax as a percentage of income, I think, is the fairest contribution. I am not even talking about the higher tax bands.

Yeah, sorry, it was just an example. It's not a case I especially believe in, tbh, I was just trying to explain where that argument comes from - you could also throw defence into the mix as something we all benefit from (insofar as we do) in equal measure

According to Wikipedia:


I'd agree rich people use the services less yet pay more but that's how most taxation works anyway.

I know, to be fair it's a difficult thing to satisfy.....hence why I'm not keen on politics  :)

And to clarify my exact position on this "Oh, the rich pay more do they? Ah bless. Fuck em"

They already pay more by virtually everything they do - work, save, invest blah blah blah

I fail to see the logic in making them pay more for services they dont use.  increasing income tax would be fairer.

National insurance goes into the massive general taxation melting pot these days. Is not ring fenced for the NHS or welfare. Its a secondary income tax, nothing more.

do rich people not use the police force or get the bins collected?

Inheritence tax should be scrapped on estates below 1 million.

Why should the bastard governement get their hands on what in effect, is a gift to you.

We pay enough in National Insurance and Income tax already.

That is one reason I will be voting Conservative.

Who cares if it is a gift or not. You miss the point that the person leaving you the money has already paid tax on it! That's the fucking con.

Ok, you got the point across better than me but that is what I meant.

So, would you be happy if every time you went to a pub you had to pay 10 pounds a pint while some of forum members only had to pay 2 pounds a pint and others paid 15 pounds per pint - because beer prices were based upon income?

no

'White' Wednesday is always used as a stick to beat the Tories with, but it's worth remembering that it would have occurred who ever was in power, because it was the result of our disastrous membership of the ERM which was fully and enthusiastically supported by all the main parties. In fact Labour and the Lentil Munchers often criticized the Tories at the time (before we withdrew)for not joining sooner, including the current fuckwit Prime Minster (whose economic judgment as we all know is second to none)

Not in Toddy's world evidently. They clearly take their own refuse to the local recycling facility and live in areas where there is zero crime and therefore no need for the police.......

That's an outrageous slur. What do you think they have staff for?

If they're that rich, they use the police force to collect the bins. 

I didnt say they dont use services, i said they use less of them, which is true.

Also true that they don't use as much as 27% more of the police and bin men.

you what?

They get taxed 27% more if they're in the 50% bracket, and there's no way they use 27% more services. I'm, as usual, getting shit a bit arse about tit. I'm on your side Toddy. :)

Est. cost to the government of 'Black' Wednesday : £3.3bn

Est. cost to the governement of Gordon Brown's decision to sell a lot of gold at the bottom of the market : £6.6bn

Except that it is not an estimated 'cost to the government'. It is a loss to us, the taxpayers. The goverment does not own or have any money (well true to the power of ten after spunking away billions on failing banks etc).

Valid point TT.

Estimated by who? Political stats like this are useless without a source, as they're usually tainted or just downright made-up. The fact that one figure is conveniently exactly double the other makes this one especially stink like Grimsby in high June

Well said.

You made that up. Give me an authoratative source that Grimsby is particularly nasally obnoxious in June.

Actually the gold figure can be pretty accurately calculated. Here is a BBC story from 2008 that put the loss at $9bn:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2008/03/gold_and_gordon_brown.html

Of course that doesn't mean selling the gold when he did was necessarily the wrong thing to do, but you can't argue with the facts that if it hadn't been sold when it was and we sold it in 2008 instead we would have got an extra $9bn for it. Fact.

And another article from two weeks ago, putting it at £7bn and alleging a cover up of details surrounding the sale:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/gold/7511589/Explain-why-you-sold-Britains-gold-Gordon-Brown-told.html

You're right. It stinks all year round.

Case in point - the Telegraph article links to another Telegraph article saying the same sale lost us £5bn. So, £5bn, £7bn, $9bn? Who knows?

And neither article makes any allowance for the (obviously lesser) profits made on the bonds, currency etc they bought instead which reduces the loss (although I'm damn sure it would still be a loss) a fair bit. So they wave headline figures of "£5bn/£7bn/$9bn loss" around when that doesn't allow for the money made on the stuff bought with the gold money and the current value of those assets (if we've still got them) or the profits made when they were sold. Which could reduce the loss substantially. May even be a profit (I very much doubt it). Who knows? As neither article bothered to explore this angle, it makes me extremely suspicious that they're not so much aiming to inform me of the true picture as coming at the whole issue with a massive axe to grind and spinning the stats to suit.

I'm not disputing UK plc lost money on the gold deal - I don't know nearly enough about it and frankly don't have the time, energy or interest to find out. But my original point stands - there's usually an awful lot of shite behind politicos throwing "stats" into any debate and unsourced "estimates" like those in the post I was responding to can be trusted about as far as the politicos they derive from.

I'm not disagreeing but the gold sale was a bad example as all those figures come from news articles which explain the working out in detail along with the flaws and unknowns. But I think its safe to assume that Brown did lose a fortune as otherwise he'd be coming out saying how well he did with the sale. I reckon its also safe to assume we'll be hearing a lot more about this over the coming weeks, perfect ammo for the Tories to blow holes in Brown's management of the economy.

Well it wasn't my example - but as the OP quoted yet a different figure from the 3 different figures that were in the articles you cited, I'd say it makes point rather well
No they didn't as I pointed out above.

George Soros Wednesday is unlikely to be a larger loss or financial problem than Labour have been surely? Besides it's all irrelevant i suppose, they're all a bunch of thoroughly hateful dickheads with nothing of any relevance to say - as far as i'm concerned.

From the BBC article:


Sterling has lost 25% against the Euro and Yen since those investments were made, about the same against the Dollar.

The only reason they can't give the exact figures is because the Treasury have refused to release the relevant information. I wonder why that is? We should hear more soon though as they have to release it before the end of the month or they'll be in contempt of court.

Right so we didn't lose $9bn once the trans side is worked out. Or we may have done. Or it may have been a bit less. Or a lot less. He has no idea. Which is what I said.

EDIT: And I don't quite understand how I dragged myself into this. Right now the only figures/stats I actually give a shite about are the number of points we're likely to accumulate as opposed to Millwall, Leeds et al between now and May 8th and how much a second hand Fiesta's going to cost me.

But I still say the original "stats" (which is how I dragged myself into it, I remember now) are a crock of shit, probably worth about as much as the Yens or bonds or whatever the fuck it was Gordon bought instead of all that lovely nice shiney gold. Can we just leave it at that?

I found it down the back of my sofa.  I should be the leader.

A vote for donkey is a vote for common sense. And capacious sofas

You got dragged into this because you are obsessed with accuracy and the media misrepresentation of said facts. Unlike the Adver reporting on STFC. Oh...