Quote:
Originally Posted by tweetiepooh
How is that different from any party? It's just the the [1] differs on who gets the money. And the (senior) civil service stay there and keep their jobs and pensions whoever.
The last thing we want though is a national PR system when we would never get rid of the (left of) centre groups as being the least unpopular.
If people looked at their candidates and voted for the best there we may have a better chance but too many will vote along party lines regardless, get a muppet and we get a parliament of muppets. (Small 'm' the Muppets are talented entertainers.)
The reason the Tory/Labour swaps "worked" in the past was that the Tories built up the chests then Labour came in a spent it and then the Tories...
I can image all sorts of plans from Labour that would adversely affect me and my family, one biggie would be removal of charity status from religious groups forgetting that many of those groups also provide for communities external to their "religious" affairs. VAT on books is always popping up from Labour groups. But it's not the collection of the money, it's how it is spent and simply throwing money at the NHS or any other large group never works unless you are one of those employed to work out how to spend it.
|
It is as if you have not lived through the last 13 years
You seriously think the Labour Party sponsors/donors/voter base has the same level of wealth as the Tory one? If you do, you really do need to think again.
You seem to favour the status quo i.e. a right of centre executive striving to achieve a low tax, small state utopia designed to maximise the profits of private enterprise at the expense of the wider population. Look around you and consider the state of the nation's infrastructure and ask yourself if you want 5 more years of this. Then add the divisive culture wars, etc. for good measure.