2010 General Election: The Cable Forum Exit Poll

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

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

Gord was a curious old/new Labour hybrid. Statist instincts, but reformed enough to realise that bribing the middle classes, rather than the working class, was the means to remaining in power. He has put countless thousands of them on the public payroll, and he has hooked the lot of us on a nasty form of crystal meth called Tax Credits.

It's insane that the state should be subsidising households with an income of £50,000. Of course, they have been doing so for so many years that those households have made long-term budgetary decisions based around that cash.

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

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

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

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

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

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

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.

Agreed

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Chris

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

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football and to keep its' income consistent rather than it having gobs of money thrown at it under one government then withdrawn by another to balance the books.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

Harperson is on the BBC right now, spinning for her life. Get with the programme Hattie, you LOST!

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by yesman

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

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

That appears to have disappeared from the page and been replaced by this:

1200: Downing Street sources say the phone call between Mr Brown and Mr Clegg, lasting less than 40 minutes, concentrated on "process", reports the BBC's Iain Watson. Mr Clegg ran through the procedures for his discussions with the Conservatives and the call was described as amicable. There was no discussion of Mr Brown's personal position, or any call from Mr Clegg for the prime minister to resign.

EDIT: Ah there it is, it's back, out of order slightly though.

Dimbleby: Brown has been crushed, surely he must stand down?
Harperson: That's putting the cart before the horse, blah blah blah, deny, twist, spin

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Julian

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

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

---------- Post added at 12:31 ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy J

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

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.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

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

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

[nomadking]

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.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

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

No, do read the rest of my comments.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

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

Rather different from what we have now in that a government can't just throw money at the NHS in a 'spend now, publish blurb to get votes now, pay later' arrangement. Strictly ring fenced and PAYG with exceptions for exceptional periods such as the present economic crisis, deficits incurred during these times to be repaid as soon as feasible, as decided by a non-partisan body.

---------- Post added at 12:45 ---------- Previous post was at 12:40 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

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.

Not if they were elected based on PR.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

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.

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.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

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.

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 Ignitionnet

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

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

---------- Post added at 12:55 ---------- Previous post was at 12:53 ----------

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

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.

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

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

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

How is ring fencing NHS funding from general taxation and running the NHS on a PAYG basis pretty much what we have now?

I think I'll stop pursuing this one given it doesn't seem to be working. I thought I was being clear, evidently not.

---------- Post added at 12:58 ---------- Previous post was at 12:55 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy J

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

Doesn't change that it isn't democratic, isn't representative of the will of the people and is a vestige of things gratefully left behind.