Originally Posted by SlackDad (Post 35016479)

Politicians. Lies? Now there's a thought.

And for the record, I didn't vote Conservative because I'm old enough to remember Thatcher and just in case by some strange anomaly that isn't enough, the Tories will only ever put the needs of the privileged first.

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35016532)

Well NC is trying his tongue on DC backside
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Pol...orm_Government

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35016480)

I'm sorry but I don't mean to offend, but only a small number have a genuine problem with these hours, and thats why there is a postal vote.

Originally Posted by saabmania2 (Post 35016531)

that's fine, i also remember the thatcher years ;)
i wasn't trying to find out if, why or what people voted for, but as i have been doing lots of work in my area and alot of people have been put off voting Conservative (although Conservative won here) due to the tax credit acusations and just wondered if it had affected the way people voted in other areas

Originally Posted by Will21st (Post 35016564)

I feel that a Con/LibDem government could be a very good thing,if the parties can work out a deal both sides can leave with,politically.
Conservatives for the hopefully tough cuts and repelling of the state to get the economy going again,and the Libs for civil rights and maybe some other progressive social policies.

Dunno,I just have a good feeling about this :) (In 13 years we'll see how it went :p: )

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35016566)

I think this could be the start of a beautiful friendship......

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35015946)

That's wrong Matt - that is a Labour hold - Labour so far have not gained any seats.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016393)

Going pure PR doesn't appeal though. A hybrid FPTP / PR would be ideal though I've no idea how that'd work :D

Originally Posted by saabmania2 (Post 35016471)

i'd like to ask how many people decided not to vote conservative after the lies labour told about losing the tax credits system, i've spokern to loads of people in my area and they quite a few said they didn't vote conservative due to the tax credits (being cut :()
of course it wasn't true unless you earn't 45k or above, but that didn't stop labour spouting rubbish and frightening the public

just interested to see how much this affected different areas

Originally Posted by Kent Brockman

I, for one, welcome our old Etonian overlords

Originally Posted by Hiroki (Post 35016574)

*Holds hands high in the air* that was my number one reason.

We don't claim for them in my house as I make enough money from work and various other ways so I am able to support my gf & son but a lot of my friends were **** scared about loosing the tax credits (child tax credits) as they depended on them and thought they would be plunged into poverty if they lost them and I felt bad for that reason and wondered what the **** I would do in that situation.

Never knew that it would only affect people who earnt 45k or over :dunce:

**** :mad:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016606)

You'd actually be better off under either Tory or Lib Dem taxation and tax credit plans than Labour - you believed the scare stories, and got blagged :)

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016606)

Worse than that, it was actually only going to be removed for those who have household incomes over 50k, tapered at a lower level than that, but removing it from those who need it was never on the agenda from either Tories or Lib Dems.

You'd actually be better off under either Tory or Lib Dem taxation and tax credit plans than Labour - you believed the scare stories, and got blagged :)

Originally Posted by Matt D (Post 35016573)

Something like this?

FPTP mixed with PR - http://www.conservativeelectoralrefo...AddMemVote.htm

Interesting site. Seems some Tories do like the idea of electoral reform!

Lots of info on other methods, including AV+ & STV.

http://www.conservativeelectoralrefo...ndex-Home.html

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016606)

Worse than that, it was actually only going to be removed for those who have household incomes over 50k, tapered at a lower level than that, but removing it from those who need it was never on the agenda from either Tories or Lib Dems.

You'd actually be better off under either Tory or Lib Dem taxation and tax credit plans than Labour - you believed the scare stories, and got blagged :)

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016616)

I had a thought actually, this would be a great opportunity to get shot of the House of Lords. Replace it with a PR-elected upper house of say 100 members who would have the power to reject legislation and send it back to the Commons for amendment.

This would be done alongside resolving the constituency imbalances that currently exist in the FPTP system.

Wonder if that would appeal? Would resolve two issues in one, an elected second house and that house having PR so being representative.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35016622)

I don't know if any one has posted this yet, but:

BNP loses all 12 seats in Barking and Dagenham council

Well done to the good people of Barking And Dagenham.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016616)

I had a thought actually, this would be a great opportunity to get shot of the House of Lords. Replace it with a PR-elected upper house of say 100 members who would have the power to reject legislation and send it back to the Commons for amendment.

This would be done alongside resolving the constituency imbalances that currently exist in the FPTP system.

Wonder if that would appeal? Would resolve two issues in one, an elected second house and that house having PR so being representative.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35016663)

With their lack of success in the elections, are the British Nazi Party now a defunct organisation? Have they now been consigned to being a weird fringe party, something akin to the Monster Raving Loonies (with no intended disrespect to the MRLP)?

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35016663)

With their lack of success in the elections, are the Labour Party now a defunct organisation? Have they now been consigned to being a weird fringe party, something akin to the Monster Raving Loonies (with no intended disrespect to the MRLP)?

Originally Posted by Zee (Post 35016755)

I voted labour as i love the way they are so open for multi-cultural britain, they love to help families, they work hard on helping poorer families. i would never vote conservatives for the reason alone that they intend to ban the full islamic veil.

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35016673)

Why? The present House of Lords have done sterling work in watering down some of the more extreme ideas from this government.

Originally Posted by Zee (Post 35016755)

I voted labour as i love the way they are so open for multi-cultural britain,

Originally Posted by Zee (Post 35016755)

they love to help families, they work hard on helping poorer families.

Originally Posted by Zee (Post 35016755)

i would never vote conservatives for the reason alone that they intend to ban the full islamic veil.

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 35016800)

Uh huh. That would have nothing to do with most immigrat voters being more likely to vote labour so throwing open the doors makes it more likely they get returned to power.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle6898174.ece



Yep. It's good that after 13 years of labour the gap between rich and poor isn't wider than ever. :rolleyes:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8481534.stm





Eh? :confused:

Can't remember seeing that anywhere.

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 35016800)

Uh huh. That would have nothing to do with most immigrat voters being more likely to vote labour so throwing open the doors makes it more likely they get returned to power.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle6898174.ece



Yep. It's good that after 13 years of labour the gap between rich and poor isn't wider than ever. :rolleyes:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8481534.stm





Eh? :confused:

Can't remember seeing that anywhere.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016841)

It is interesting to note that one Labour voter has found out in this thread his big reason for voting Labour was actually not true and scaremongering, it would appear Zee has also been mislead though I have my doubts this actually matters given his POV as an immigrant. Labour's attempts to force Britain to become multi-cultural have been an unmitigated disaster causing incredible issues locally due to overwhelming strain on public services, poor levels of integration, again due to the numbers involved.

Originally Posted by Zee (Post 35016755)

I voted labour as i love the way they are so open for multi-cultural britain

Originally Posted by Zee (Post 35016755)

they love to help families, they work hard on helping poorer families.

Originally Posted by Zee (Post 35016755)

i would never vote conservatives for the reason alone that they intend to ban the full islamic veil.

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35016846)

I'm Labour but I'm not new Labour.I never was.I was Old Labour and I still am.

<snip>

What goes around comes around..especially in politics.;)

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016848)

Now I feel up to answering this a bit more.



No they aren't 'open' to it they've rammed it down our throats and even themselves admit they made mistakes being so open hence the belated attempts to fix it through a points system.



Any reasonable human being wants to help poorer families this is nothing exceptional. The problems are two fold though: throwing money at poorer families and making them better off not working doesn't help them get themselves out of poverty it just encourages them to live off the state. Government should be incentivising work and, yes, punishing those who choose not to work and want to make a living off of other people's money. Giving people a sense of entitlement without contribution as imho Labour have just makes people less likely to seek work and leads to other social issues not least of which is a general lack of character among the underclass Labour have bred.

Issue two is that someone has to pay for this social security. It's not fair and not right for people who are working hard, paying their taxes and contributing to see others living in financially better circumstances without lifting a finger. Few things lead to friction much better than people going to work, getting their P60 at the end of the year showing how much tax they just paid, counting how little money they have left after they've paid all their bills and reading stories of people who don't work for no apparent or genuine reason clearly having more disposable income than them. This is only good for a group that are 'traditionally' Labour supporters, it's extremely bad for society generally



Not the case.

Looking back on the previous 13 years with some hindsight Labour have spent an awful lot of the taxpayer's money on appealing to their core vote and indeed have been horribly partisan in many ways with how they've run the country. They've attempted to fix this partisanship not by modifying their own policies but by trying to modify the country through unprecedented levels of immigration, unprecedented levels of governmental advertising and through authoritarian legislation.

Again - nothing I can say will change your thoughts and I've no intention of trying to. If you benefited from Labour then great, the UK, however, most certainly did not - your tax bill will be confirming this shortly.

---------- Post added at 10:18 ---------- Previous post was at 10:15 ----------



You couldn't be much more diametrically opposed to me :)

I can assure you though that there is no way unless hell freezes over that the UK will go anywhere near the Old Labour model of society again. Brown tried it and oh, look, we're in a ton of debt again. On the upside for those who weren't enjoying the enhanced welfare or public sector money that Brown spent it should at least be a reminder for another generation that socialism and big government is a bad idea in a cosmopolitan, capitalist economy.

Old Labour is obsolete. The world is too competitive and too small now for a country that relies on international business as heavily as ours to move to the level of taxation required to support the size of government Old Labour would want. A large proportion of the population are also a tad too libertarian despite Labour's attempts to import those of a more socialist mindset ;)

I am actually feeling quite excited at the prospect of Liberal Conservatism. I just hope they can get their issues resolved and do it right. If they can it should bury Labour, of either flavour, for decades :D

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35016853)

Brown was in no way old Labour...:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Zee (Post 35016755)

I voted labour as i love the way they are so open for multi-cultural britain, they love to help families, they work hard on helping poorer families. i would never vote conservatives for the reason alone that they intend to ban the full islamic veil.

Originally Posted by Hiroki (Post 35016574)

*Holds hands high in the air* that was my number one reason.

We don't claim for them in my house as I make enough money from work and various other ways so I am able to support my gf & son but a lot of my friends were **** scared about loosing the tax credits (child tax credits) as they depended on them and thought they would be plunged into poverty if they lost them and I felt bad for that reason and wondered what the **** I would do in that situation.

Never knew that it would only affect people who earnt 45k or over :dunce:

**** :mad:

Originally Posted by yesman (Post 35016905)

It seems Gordon is getting a bit tetchy......
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/liveevent/

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016875)

Exactly - he was only a shadow of it and was quite harmful enough :D

EDIT: As I said though, if you are 'Old Labour' you and I struggle to be more diametrically opposed in our views. Mine consist of nasty things like:

Ring fencing the NHS and paying for it through compulsory health insurance not general taxation.

Previous salary based unemployment insurance which tapers off after a period and is again ring fenced from general taxation.

Rolling back of Lisbon and the UK leaving the EU and negotiating bilateral agreements for free trade and free movement in a similar manner to Switzerland.

Removal of the Lords and replacement with a proportionally elected second house.

Devolving powers to more local levels, with the UK ideally following the model of the United States or Canada. This already happens with devolved powers but I'd like to see England separated into provinces / administrative areas also.

Originally Posted by yesman (Post 35016905)

It seems Gordon is getting a bit tetchy......



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/liveevent/

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35016925)

Sounds like at least a 7.5 on the Nokia scale. :erm: Good good good, give Clegg a taste of what it's like to share an office with you Gordon, that should kill any fading chance of a Lib/Lab pact stone dead.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016875)

Exactly - he was only a shadow of it and was quite harmful enough :D

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35016919)

Who is going to pay the compulsory health insurance for the unemployed and incapacitated?

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35016622)

I don't know if any one has posted this yet, but:

BNP loses all 12 seats in Barking and Dagenham council

Well done to the good people of Barking And Dagenham.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35016930)

Not so sure about that - it could be regressive. How would you implement it?

Originally Posted by yesman (Post 35016905)

It seems Gordon is getting a bit tetchy......

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/liveevent/

Originally Posted by Julian (Post 35016706)

I'd have to agree with you there!!! :)

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35016673)

Why? The present House of Lords have done sterling work in watering down some of the more extreme ideas from this government.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016933)

The employed - it's a single payer insurance system not a personal one.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35016955)

Right...so, you mean as in the one we have now?

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016936)

A compulsory and progressive premium for health care purposes. Kinda how National Insurance is supposed to be.

The point is to ring fence both the income and outgoings of the health service to avoid it being used as a political football and to keep its' income consistent rather than it having gobs of money thrown at it under one government then withdrawn by another to balance the books.

This keeps it at a medium level and avoids any sharp adjustments in funding as such adjustments would be rather easily apparent to tax payers while at the moment it can be hidden to an extent through borrowing :)

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35016956)

An elected House of Lords would simply rubber stamp anything that came their way. After all, they would match the House of Commons in electoral make-up.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35016946)

I think the point is that he members of such a house is not representative of the electorate. They are appointed by the government of the day and we have no say on who sits there.

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35016960)

The only way it will ever work is to make sure that all parties are represented in a balanced manner.Never going to happen with an elected house.So in all I prefer an ad hoc manner in which new peers are arranged by whom ever is in power at the time which does change every few elections.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016933)

The employed - it's a single payer insurance system not a personal one.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35016961)

Err no. We live in a democracy. It's nothing to do with all parties being represented it's to do with the electorate being represented in a balanced manner, which PR accomplishes.

The House of Lords is a vestige of past times which needs to go imho.

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35016962)

I have read all your comments and it still seem pretty much what we have now..just another form of terminology.

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35016962)

Well until we have PR it's the only system we have.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35016946)

It is extremely bad form to manipulate someone post on a quote

Originally Posted by RizzyKing (Post 35016988)

Had a chat with my daughter this morning and found out that her teachers at college were spreading all sorts of scare stories about the torys telling all the students that the torys as soon as they got in were going to take away ema and stop all free bus travel for school kids in the whole country. This has made me very very angry as surely there are rules against teachers\tutors politicising their students during class time when they should be teaching them the subject they are paid too.

There seems to have been a lot of lying scare stories and like saab i am wondering how many people fell for it hook line and sinker without bothering to check any facts. Seems to me this election has not been a great episode for our country apart from the completely underhanded way lies have been spread the polling station situation also stinks to high hell. Only plus point is that i don't think any coalition is going to last long so we will all get the chance to vote again soon.

Originally Posted by RizzyKing (Post 35016988)

Had a chat with my daughter this morning and found out that her teachers at college were spreading all sorts of scare stories about the torys telling all the students that the torys as soon as they got in were going to take away ema and stop all free bus travel for school kids in the whole country. This has made me very very angry as surely there are rules against teachers\tutors politicising their students during class time when they should be teaching them the subject they are paid too.

There seems to have been a lot of lying scare stories and like saab i am wondering how many people fell for it hook line and sinker without bothering to check any facts. Seems to me this election has not been a great episode for our country apart from the completely underhanded way lies have been spread the polling station situation also stinks to high hell. Only plus point is that i don't think any coalition is going to last long so we will all get the chance to vote again soon.

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35016974)

Sometimes a https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...010/05/162.jpg really tells a thousand words... ;)

Originally Posted by punky (Post 35017027)

There are protests out outside Nick Clegg's offices. WTF is that about?

---------- Post added at 15:20 ---------- Previous post was at 15:17 ----------

They are young, unwashed students so they are definitely Lib Dem supporters.

Originally Posted by Julian (Post 35016985)

Oh dear, sense of humour gone since your boyfriend's party got crushed at the polls? :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35017031)

we could end up with another general election fairly soon

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35016939)

Surely deferred success? It is new liebour after all.:D

Originally Posted by richard1960 (Post 35017036)

What does it say for dave that even with all the above he could not get enough of a majority to govern on his own with a wide open goal.

Originally Posted by richard1960 (Post 35017036)

What does it say for dave that even with all the above he could not get enough of a majority to govern on his own with a wide open goal.

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35017038)

Yes, their vote achieved negative growth... :D

---------- Post added at 15:40 ---------- Previous post was at 15:36 ----------



Perhaps one of the things it also says something about the disproportionate power of the Scottish vote because in England Brown took much more of a hammering.

Originally Posted by richard1960 (Post 35017043)

The above is a fair enough point to make but in the council elections in london Labour were ahead of the national trend with seats being gained.

Originally Posted by richard1960 (Post 35017043)

Perhaps the tories need to appeal more to people in scotland just like blair did for many "middle england " voters in the south east of england

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35017042)

It says the Dark Lord's cynical disinformation worked looking at this thread. The lies on tax credits and other things were quite effective.

What does it say about the past 13 years under Labour that the only viable way to fight a campaign was with half-truths and outright lies?

You do realise that if Labour had achieved the share of the vote to Tories had they would have had a quite significant majority?

What does it say about Labour that the only thing that prevented the Tory majority was that the present election system is biased towards Labour?

Disappointing from the Conservative point of view, however I'm hoping that LibCon can get it together and ensure that Labour don't get to trash the economy ever again. Last two times they've been in power they've done a sterling job of doing just that.

All well and good wittering on about public services, the bit that Labour tend to forget is that these have to be paid for at some point and the more people government are employing the lower the tax revenues from private sector, but hey minor issue.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35017048)

Immigrant vote hitting the spot.



Not going to happen, all too many Scots are still obsessed with Thatcher and consider Labour a cash cow, especially given the strong Scottish influence in the Labour party.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35016899)

http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/a...i_1039891a.jpg



Linky

:LOL:

Originally Posted by RizzyKing (Post 35017085)

Thanks for the reply Maggy i was waiting for your response as you would know for sure the position :).

Originally Posted by punky (Post 35017109)

Surely that's the problem? Teachers are paid to teach the curriculm not raise issues and try and dress it up as neutrality?

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35017080)

BBC man said he'd never seen placards with pie charts on them before. :D

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35016388)

The Liberals have formed governments too, and they can again if they work harder. FPTP does not prevent that.

Originally Posted by Stuart C (Post 35017161)

In theory, no, it does not.

In practice, however, it does. The problem with FPTP is there are a lot of areas that are staunch labour or tory strongholds. As such, people living in those areas who wish to vote for other parties (such as myself) often get the feeling their vote doesn't count.

Another reason with FPTP doesn't work is that it allows sparsely populated areas (such as rural constituencies) to have the same influence as densely populated areas. How is this fair? It means a small village with 100 residents can have the same influence on the election as a large London Borough (which might have 200,000 residents).

The problem the Liberals have is not so much attracting voters (they actually attract as many voters as Labour), more that the voters they attract tend to be more spread out.

Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35017130)

Well he should go to Wigan then.:D

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35017250)

i heard on the news today that one of the big concerns with PR is that hung parliaments will become more common were as with FPTP they are very rare do others agree with this ?

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 35017253)

I'd imagine it would make hung parliaments almost a certainty. The other issue I can see is that MP's would be selected from lists rather than by constituency which would make it harder to kick out useless ones.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35017250)

i heard on the news today that one of the big concerns with PR is that hung parliaments will become more common were as with FPTP they are very rare do others agree with this ?

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35017290)

Just look at what Labour did to our civil liberties. .

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35017310)

Why doesn't Clegg put the question to the party membership? Surely that would be more democratic than just him and a few select senior MPs making the decisions.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35017310)

Why doesn't Clegg put the question to the party membership? Surely that would be more democratic than just him and a few select senior MPs making the decisions.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35017310)

Why doesn't Clegg put the question to the party membership? Surely that would be more democratic than just him and a few select senior MPs making the decisions.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35017310)

Why doesn't Clegg put the question to the party membership? Surely that would be more democratic than just him and a few select senior MPs making the decisions.

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35016906)

Did you ever think of checking? All you had to do was google "Tory Tax Credit Policy" and you would get 81k plus results, and even the first one, from the Daily Hate, states
If you were deceived by G Brown, you have to admit you were partially to blame by believing anything any politician said without checking....;)