Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 776   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Let's Get Political!  (Read 1406875 times)
Peter Venkman
Clem is a rising tide that lifts all boats.

Offline Offline

Posts: 42847


Back Off Man, I’m A Scientist.



« Reply #45 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 11:14:01 »

I can never understand it when people say that they'd never vote Tory but they'll vote Ukip. They're led and bankrolled by former Tories, their 2 MPs are former Tories and a fair chunk of their prominent members are former Tories. 
Exactly this.

I will never ever vote Tory and UKIP are just a xenophibic Tory led party.

I am between Labour and Liberal but the Libs lost a lot of supporters for being a soft touch in the coalition and Labour are led by several idiots not just the leader.

I live in one of the strongest Liberal seats in the country so not actually much point in voting as David Laws got 55% of the vote last time and is a shoe in no matter what in the next election too.

But pretty much all of the parties are lying wankers anyway who are only in it for their own personal gain and with me being on very low income none of them will benefit me whatsoever.

What this country needs is a new party that will benefit the low paid and not just the high paid, one who taxes companies fairly and if you earn massive amounts of money then you have to pay your dues and have no loopholes to save paying taxes, and one that looks after the young/infirm/elderly but get the idle long term work shy people into work by creating employment and giving a living wage to the low paid possibly by taxing the very highest earners (£500k per year) at a higher rate.

It won't happen in my lifetime and I don't expect many people on here to agree with me either.
Logged

Why Worry, Each One Of Us Is Carrying An Unlicensed Nuclear Accelerator On His Back.
inept and tiresome

Offline Offline

Posts: 508




Ignore
« Reply #46 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 11:16:55 »

You don't have to do a lot of research into UKIP to see they're not into helping the working class and currently sit on the right of the Tories. Its for the other parties to explain why they've allowed a right wing party to gain this kind of popularity so quickly. (also people who in the past who have shouted racist at the first opportunity when immigration was raised)
As immigrations effects on the lower wage is my personal concern, then UKIP is mine and other old style Labour voters obvious short term answer.
Providing UKIP didn't win an outright election. Then I really would be in the shit. As I will if the Tories get in.
Logged
inept and tiresome

Offline Offline

Posts: 508




Ignore
« Reply #47 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 11:19:10 »

Exactly this.

I will never ever vote Tory and UKIP are just a xenophibic Tory led party.

I am between Labour and Liberal but the Libs lost a lot of supporters for being a soft touch in the coalition and Labour are led by several idiots not just the leader.

I live in one of the strongest Liberal seats in the country so not actually much point in voting as David Laws got 55% of the vote last time and is a shoe in no matter what in the next election too.

But pretty much all of the parties are lying wankers anyway who are only in it for their own personal gain and with me being on very low income none of them will benefit me whatsoever.

What this country needs is a new party that will benefit the low paid and not just the high paid, one who taxes companies fairly and if you earn massive amounts of money then you have to pay your dues and have no loopholes to save paying taxes, and one that looks after the young/infirm/elderly but get the idle long term work shy people into work by creating employment and giving a living wage to the low paid possibly by taxing the very highest earners (£500k per year) at a higher rate.

It won't happen in my lifetime and I don't expect many people on here to agree with me either.
I'd agree with most of this. Sounds like we should move to Sweden.
Logged
janaage
People's Front of Alba

Offline Offline

Posts: 14825





Ignore
« Reply #48 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 11:22:33 »

In the sense that Labour would just go on a spending spree again, I agree. But to say that the Tories have been "running" the economy is nonsense - it's been more by luck than judgement.

Simply put I have more faith in the current chancellor's tactics than any other potential chancellor.
Logged
Red Frog
Not a Dave

Offline Offline

Posts: 7345


Pondlife




Ignore
« Reply #49 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 11:28:13 »

You don't have to do a lot of research into UKIP to see they're not into helping the working class and currently sit on the right of the Tories. Its for the other parties to explain why they've allowed a right wing party to gain this kind of popularity so quickly. (also people who in the past who have shouted racist at the first opportunity when immigration was raised)
As immigrations effects on the lower wage is my personal concern, then UKIP is mine and other old style Labour voters obvious short term answer.
Providing UKIP didn't win an outright election. Then I really would be in the shit. As I will if the Tories get in.

After an uncharacteristically promising start, you appear to have painted yourself back into your corner.

To pick up on PV's post, I think David Laws is very able, and would go some way to rebuilding the Lib Dems' credibility as their new leader. And in answer to Janaage, I think Danny Alexander and Vince Cable could be trusted with the economy - they've had a very positive moderating influence on their respective departments over the past four years.

Won't happen though.
Logged

Tout ce que je sais de plus sūr ą propos de la moralité et des obligations des hommes, c'est au football que je le dois. - Albert Camus
Nemo
Shit Bacon

Online Online

Posts: 14791





Ignore
« Reply #50 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 11:29:46 »

After an uncharacteristically promising start, you appear to have painted yourself back into your corner.

To pick up on PV's post, I think David Laws is very able, and would go some way to rebuilding the Lib Dems' credibility as their new leader. And in answer to Janaage, I think Danny Alexander and Vince Cable could be trusted with the economy - they've had a very positive moderating influence on their respective departments over the past four years.

Won't happen though.

The usually admirable Cable was pretty much squarely responsible for selling off the Post Office well below value though. Badly advised he may have been, but that's a pretty obvious fuck up.
Logged
kerry red

« Reply #51 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 11:34:27 »

I'm afraid human nature will never change, so whether we are talking about governments or virtually any other organisation it is run, primarily, for those within it.

Life is full of fraudulent, corrupt 'leaders and followers' and getting rid of one only to be replaced by another corrupt, fraudulent organisation is hardly democracy in my view.
Logged
Ardiles

Offline Offline

Posts: 11290


Stirlingshire Reds




Ignore
« Reply #52 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 12:21:16 »

I'd agree with most of this. Sounds like we should move to Sweden.

Badly timed comment.  Sweden has plenty of problems of its own.  It's currently in political limbo because the new government couldn't get its budget (which would authorise tax increases) approved by parliament.  So another election has been called...just months after the last one.  The liberal Swedish tax & spend consensus of the 1990s is starting to look very strained.
Logged
Red Frog
Not a Dave

Offline Offline

Posts: 7345


Pondlife




Ignore
« Reply #53 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 12:32:33 »

The usually admirable Cable was pretty much squarely responsible for selling off the Post Office well below value though. Badly advised he may have been, but that's a pretty obvious fuck up.

I think that was heavily overplayed by the media actually. The report said that it estimated between another £120-180m (and not only the £180m figure the media quoted) could have been made by raising the initial offer price by up to 30p. Share value has stabilised at under 2/3rds of its peak after issue, which has undermined a lot of earlier criticism.

In overall terms, this is actually a pretty minor adjustment with the benefit of hindsight on what was a complex projection. For instance, a bigger loss would have been made if the government had chosen to retain 25% rather than 30% of the shares. The more interesting conclusion was that there should be a change to the rules to allow a revaluing of the share price later in the offer process.

This report on the BBC site is a lot more balanced than their (and others) media coverage was yesterday. On this more detailed reading, Cable comes out of this much better:
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30527392

Quote
Lord Myners was keen to stress that pricing a share sale is a difficult process. Speaking on BBC Breakfast, he said it was a "complicated transaction" and that "if any money had been left on the table it was pretty small".

Quote
"For the avoidance of doubt, we do not believe that a price anywhere near the levels seen in the aftermarket could have been achieved at listing."

Quote
In his report, Lord Myners said the privatisation, which raised a total of £2bn, was handled "with considerable professionalism"
« Last Edit: Friday, December 19, 2014, 12:34:24 by Red Frog » Logged

Tout ce que je sais de plus sūr ą propos de la moralité et des obligations des hommes, c'est au football que je le dois. - Albert Camus
@mwooly63

Offline Offline

Posts: 3377





Ignore
« Reply #54 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 15:07:41 »

The usually admirable Cable was pretty much squarely responsible for selling off the Post Office well below value though. Badly advised he may have been, but that's a pretty obvious fuck up.

He didn't sell the post office
He sold Royal Mail

2 separate entities, Post Office is still wholly owned by the government and split from RM around 5 years ago.
Though some areas are still linked re pensions

Carry on  Grin
Logged
wiggy
Whippet fancying, T-shirt flogging cunt

Offline Offline

Posts: 2612


Whippet Fancier




Ignore
« Reply #55 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 17:54:16 »

A love a bit of political debate

Logged

Thank [insert deity of choice] for beer and peanuts
Ticker45

Offline Offline

Posts: 603





Ignore
« Reply #56 on: Friday, December 19, 2014, 18:11:49 »

I'm afraid human nature will never change, so whether we are talking about governments or virtually any other organisation it is run, primarily, for those within it.

Life is full of fraudulent, corrupt 'leaders and followers' and getting rid of one only to be replaced by another corrupt, fraudulent organisation is hardly democracy in my view.

This, and it could be the Monster Raving Looney party supposedly running the country but the real power as always lies with the long serving Civil Servants in Whitehall and always has. As a friend of mine likes to say, the old Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister shows on BBC were not comedies, but forerunners of reality TV.
Logged

Yesterday is history, tomorrow is unknown but today could be a whole lot better.
Levi lapper

« Reply #57 on: Saturday, December 20, 2014, 03:20:46 »

Civil servants don't write policy though do they. It's multiple-national companies that run the world now not politicians IMHO
Logged
adje

Online Online

Posts: 10323





Ignore
« Reply #58 on: Saturday, December 20, 2014, 14:06:53 »

In my opinion the biggest single issue is the health service,unfortunately for the majority of people it's immigration which to me is pretty much bottom of the list.

Logged

quot;Molten memories splashing down
 upon the rooves of Swindon Town"
Ardiles

Offline Offline

Posts: 11290


Stirlingshire Reds




Ignore
« Reply #59 on: Saturday, December 20, 2014, 14:28:26 »

At a time when public services, public utilities and public infrastructure (transport, in particular) are as stretched as they are, surely having a population policy is absolutely vital?  And by extension, having a workable net migration policy is, therefore, also vital?  For far too long, the political class in this country has sought to close down discussion/debate with accusations of racism towards those who raise the subject.

A few of the political parties are only just starting to wake up to this.  But instead of setting the agenda/debate, they have been dragged kicking & screaming to it by an electorate that's way ahead of them.

Population is the elephant in the room.  If population is going to increase to 70 million in the next decade or two, then let's be honest about where all the new schools, houses, railway lines, motorways and supermarkets are going to be built.  Or do we just look the other way and leave the next generation to work it out for themselves?  It's disingenuous and dishonest.

Of course immigration will continue, and so it should.  Isolating ourselves from the outside world would be pointless and futile.  I just think it's becoming increasingly obvious that net migration needs to be controlled and not left to chance and market forces.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 776   Go Up
Print
Jump to: