Uk 2010 elections

s.a.f

Senior Member
Reaction score
67
Bald Dave said:
I have to disagree. I think people are better off now (working class people) than they was under the tories. Like i said before many people have short memories of the destruction the tories did to this country. I agree there is alot of spongers but there are also lots of people that want to work for a decent wage. Labour brought in the minimum wage to stop the rich from exploiting the working classes. Would you want to work for £2 an hour? Under the tories people was working there asses off for £2 an hour.

Lets wait and see what happens and i will be the first to say i told you so.

LOL!!
When were people working for £2 an hour Dave? 1974? When the minimum wage was introduced I was a teenage student working in a supermarket and already was earning more than it. You make it sound like Britain was full of 3rd world sweat shops.
I remeber when Labour came to power aswell back when people could afford to get on the property Ladder and had pensions that were worth something so they could retire.
Now after 13 yrs of Labour - Wars/Recession what have we got? a broken down society and a loss of the British way of Life. The Banks have collapsed and everyone is up to their eyeballs in debt! Crime is up punishment is down and our companies are worthless by comparison to what they were.
The only people being exploited now are the people who pay taxes.
And as for the working man you clearly dont know what your on about since we have been swamped with mass immigration benifits and decent pay has gone out of the window for workers at the lower end of the scale since employers know that they can get foriegners to work for much less pay and worse conditions than British people will put up with. Exactly how old were you when we last had a conservative government?

I'm sure things will seem to get worse but simply because we have to bring this all to a haklt and take some drastic measures to reign in the economy that has been spiralling for years with no one at the helm.
 

somone uk

Experienced Member
Reaction score
6
Hoppi said:
somone uk said:
Hoppi said:
The Greens got a constituency yaaayyyy! Go Greens! ^_^

That really made the whole election for me! I was really happy about that :)
:agree:

I wish i was able to vote green but my constituency lacked a candidate

good man :punk:

Shame about no candidate though.. become one :woot: lol
lol i think if we get PR we'll have a green mp anyway (since PR would merge constituencies)

anyhow since people are debating the working mans party i'll say green is the working mans party, renationalising the rails, raising the minimum wage and investing in massive housing projects which include refurbishing houses and paying for this by introducing the robin hood tax which would essentially tax the banks for the problem that they are responsible for causing
 

Slartibartfast

Senior Member
Reaction score
2
Leaving aside Green Party policies in general, and also who should carry the can for the banking crisis (saying 'the banks' hugely simplifies the issue) and whether or not a 'Robin Hood' tax on financial transactions is economically advantageous in the long run, one absolutely crucial aspect is the global nature of any such tax: the need to encompass all significant financial hubs to prevent trade shifting from taxed to untaxed locations. Which makes the real question: will Europe, the U.S., Japan, China, etc. ever agree to impose this levy?
 

Slartibartfast

Senior Member
Reaction score
2
somone uk said:
... but i can't see a coalition with lib dems and tory being productive because they do have too many contradicting policies, i can imagine them being undeceive and argumentative all the time.
I certainly can't imagine it lasting a full Parliament, but perhaps any deal will be for, say, 2 years, and then both sides re-evaluate the situation. That would push any election beyond our current economic malaise and allow for some reform, though likely not PR, to the voting system.

somone uk said:
don't get me wrong i don't really support labour i just see them as the lesser of the 2 evils but you have to admit a recession is not an appropriate time to propose a tax cut that benifits the very rich
Do you mean inheritance tax? This really shouldn't be anything more than a long-term aspiration for the Tories. As unfair as it can be on a double taxation basis, there are so many more productive areas for cuts to be made: boosting private-sector job creation & incentivising work by lifting those on low wages out of the tax system.

somone uk said:
but i do oppose alot of labours solutions to the recession, i oppose the scrappage scheme, the vat cuts (if anything raise VAT, cut lower end income tax)
VAT would be my first choice to increase - putting it to 20% would pull in up to £10 billion a year. I'd be torn between using the cash to cut bottom-end taxes (for years I've supported a higher personal tax threshold), the burden on business, or to make quite a hefty dent in our deficit.

somone uk said:
as far as the deficit mind you most of that was buying out the banks and as a northerner living on the breadline all i can see that has done is safeguarded shareholders, given CEOs their golden parashoots , customers being no better off (FSCS) and over 50% GDP debt breaking browns very own "fiscal rules"
Bailout didn't do much for Lloyds/HBOS/RBS shareholders. Even now shares are only a fraction of pre-crisis levels - although the Govt. is showing a small profit on the stakes it bought. The other money 'spent' bailing out the banks was in loan guarantees, no actual handing over of cash if memory serves. Financial crisis certainly caused a big chunk of our deficit, but by what it did to the wider economy rather than money handed over to the banks. If only Brown hadn't squandered the 'good years', our Nation's balance sheet would've coped with the recession far easier.

Slarti
 

somone uk

Experienced Member
Reaction score
6
Slartibartfast said:
will Europe, the U.S., Japan, China, etc. ever agree to impose this levy?
merkal and sarkosy supports the levy though it might be easily avoided without spain and america
not sure about japan or china though
though with china i am sure it might be a bit tricky because if i am not mistaken most Chinese banking is done in hong kong and the economy of hong kong in a way relies on it being a tax haven so that might be a difficult one
 

The Gardener

Senior Member
Reaction score
25
Slartibartfast said:
Which makes the real question: will Europe, the U.S., Japan, China, etc. ever agree to impose this levy?
If TSHTF, I think they would. But I don't think that the Caymans, Macau, et al will ever go along with it.

They could apply this tax to most transactions, but the oligarchs will find a way or domicile that will exempt them, just as they have always done. So, I think it'll be a failure at worst, and another middle class tax scheme at best (as if the middle class can afford to pay any more taxes.)

Out of curiosity, regarding a Conservative/Lib Dem coaliation, isn't the Lib Dem party an offshoot of the old Liberal party? Liberal meaning "Liberal" capital L, classic Liberalism... free trade, low taxes, social libertarianism, etc? Does today's Lib Dem party retain any remnants of these values? If so, might they have some common ground in certain areas?
 

Slartibartfast

Senior Member
Reaction score
2
The Lib Dems are an odd bunch. On the one hand campaign against the UK's 'democratic deficit' and the power exerted by 'faceless bureaucrats' over the wishes of local residents, both laudable issues, but then remain wedded to the great faceless, unaccountable EU beast whose upper echelons are unelected.

I've just never understood their position on Europe - they still state that it's in Britain's long-term interest to join the Euro - and I'd dearly love a Lib Dem voter (or anyone else) to explain it to me.

Taxes, hmm... they run that very political 'fairer taxes' spiel: cutting tax for the lowest earners whilst coming after big business and the very rich who "treat tax as if it is optional", all good populist stuff, but the idea that you can hike the income tax starting threshold 50% higher by "cutting reliefs and closing tax loopholes that benefit the wealthiest" is pure fantasy. Right up there with all three Parties' pledges to seal off a large portion of our deficit with efficiency savings. The middle class always pays.

Worryingly they wish to tax capital at the same rate as income, which presumably means 40% plus at the top end. Because they're not ideologically a low-tax Party, just low taxes for those who deserve it - the economic impact of high taxation never comes up (though not even the Tories can be bothered to explain this any more).

I don't know. I'm sure Clegg & Cameron would be able to find common ground on taxation, public services, increased financial regulation and the like. The Tory hierachy is sadly a pretty woolly bunch on such matters....
 

Slartibartfast

Senior Member
Reaction score
2
Seems overly generous.


Gard, hadn't heard the one about the D Mark; been engrossed by election and the FTSE's gyrations. Imminent Euro abandonment doesn't sound likely after having just agreed to that massive bail-out, even if Germans are pissed at how deep into their pockets the EU's greedy hand is being plunged. Still think the Euro is doomed in the long run - unless there's a fiscal union in the offing.


Aussie, who wouldn't want this man as Labour leader?

SNN2304A-384_593961a.jpg


Not so sure they'll pick the banana wielding D. Miliband as leader; my gut instinct is for Ed Balls. But will their next leader hang around long enough to contest a general election? Labour has a good track record of infighting whilst in opposition, and perhaps a candidate not seen as either a Blairite (Miliband) or a Browny (Balls) will eventually rise to the top: Andy Burnham (ex-Secretary of State for Health) is one possibility.

Slarti
 

HughJass

Senior Member
Reaction score
3
Slartibartfast said:
my gut instinct is for Ed Balls.

I still can't believe that isn't some sort stage/screen name.


I'd say that alone rules him out as a serious challenger for PM
 

somone uk

Experienced Member
Reaction score
6
Slartibartfast said:
hahhahaha ed balls
happy0008.gif

does he pass that surname to his kids :p
</immature>

idk what it is about david miliband but he seems to lack personality it's like having a robot MP
though i would definitely vote for him if i could have his head of hair though
 

Slartibartfast

Senior Member
Reaction score
2
Yep, great hair but D. Miliband has a corrupted personality file, and yet his brother seems perfectly normal. For a politician.

I can't believe the two of you are mocking poor Mr. Balls.... Okay then, onto baby name suggestions: Seymour and Abel spring to mind.
 

Bald Dave

Established Member
Reaction score
2
s.a.f said:
[quote="Bald Dave":3utweuxm]
I have to disagree. I think people are better off now (working class people) than they was under the tories. Like i said before many people have short memories of the destruction the tories did to this country. I agree there is alot of spongers but there are also lots of people that want to work for a decent wage. Labour brought in the minimum wage to stop the rich from exploiting the working classes. Would you want to work for £2 an hour? Under the tories people was working there asses off for £2 an hour.

Lets wait and see what happens and i will be the first to say i told you so.

LOL!!
When were people working for £2 an hour Dave? 1974? When the minimum wage was introduced I was a teenage student working in a supermarket and already was earning more than it. You make it sound like Britain was full of 3rd world sweat shops.
I remeber when Labour came to power aswell back when people could afford to get on the property Ladder and had pensions that were worth something so they could retire.
Now after 13 yrs of Labour - Wars/Recession what have we got? a broken down society and a loss of the British way of Life. The Banks have collapsed and everyone is up to their eyeballs in debt! Crime is up punishment is down and our companies are worthless by comparison to what they were.
The only people being exploited now are the people who pay taxes.
And as for the working man you clearly dont know what your on about since we have been swamped with mass immigration benifits and decent pay has gone out of the window for workers at the lower end of the scale since employers know that they can get foriegners to work for much less pay and worse conditions than British people will put up with. Exactly how old were you when we last had a conservative government?

I'm sure things will seem to get worse but simply because we have to bring this all to a haklt and take some drastic measures to reign in the economy that has been spiralling for years with no one at the helm.[/quote:3utweuxm]

Well my mum worked as a school cleaner during the early nineties and she was getting £2 an hour. The minimum wage is now £5.80 which is still low but it shows that big companies can't exploit workers like cleaners and pay them peanuts.

You cannot blame Labour for the world's economic callapse as i bet my *** that we would be in even bigger sh*t if the tories were in power. Do you remember the boom and bust of the 1980s?

The tories wanted us to go to war as well so again if the tories were in power we would have still have gone to war. Do you remember the Falkland's war of 1982 that Thatcher took us into? It was the most pointless war in history. How the hell could we benefit from a few tiny islands.

In the 80s there was a estimated 13 million unemployed and its not even near to that figure under Labour. Thatcher closed the mines, privitised nearly everything and basically f*cked this country up. The only people who benefited was the rich and well off.

I was born in 1981 so I lived under the tories for 16 years and i might have only been a youngster but I remember my parents struggling to make ends meet. My mum would have to clean neighbours houses for £20 a day just so we had enough money to buy food and electricity. I might have only been a child but I could tell things were bad. Then when Labour got into power things deffinitely improved and i can honestly say i am alot better off now then i ever was under the tories. Also I have never sponged off the government and i've had a job since leaving school so not all Labour voters are spongers!

Like it or not but Labour are certainly the lesser of the 2 evils and people will see this in the next few years :(
 

Bald Dave

Established Member
Reaction score
2
So the Lib Dems have joined forces with Tories just so they can be in government. The Lib Dems got lesser seats in this election than they did in the last election and making them realise that this is only way they can get into government. They have basically given up everything that they stand for and i bet the Lib Dem Voters are livid that the Lib Dems have "sold their souls" just for a bit of power!

In a way im glad that Cameron and Clegg are working together because once they f*ck up then Labour will get in power again and people will always know that the Tories and the Lib Dems are sh*t and the only party worth voting for is Labour. So enjoy the short ride lads :)
 

s.a.f

Senior Member
Reaction score
67
Bald Dave said:
So the Lib Dems have joined forces with Tories just so they can be in government. The Lib Dems got lesser seats in this election than they did in the last election and making them realise that this is only way they can get into government. They have basically given up everything that they stand for and i bet the Lib Dem Voters are livid that the Lib Dems have "sold their souls" just for a bit of power!

In a way im glad that Cameron and Clegg are working together because once they f*ck up then Labour will get in power again and people will always know that the Tories and the Lib Dems are sh*t and the only party worth voting for is Labour. So enjoy the short ride lads :)


Your last paragraph was exactly what happend under the Labour terms they came in promising so much but in the end all they were out for was themselves it just took a second term before it became evident.

This just about sums up their time in office up completly:
http://www.news.com.au/world/former-tre ... 5867979304

On the other hand Camerons first act in Government has been to freeze his future pay increase. :whistle:
 

The Gardener

Senior Member
Reaction score
25
aussieavodart said:
Slartibartfast said:
my gut instinct is for Ed Balls.
I still can't believe that isn't some sort stage/screen name.
I'd say that alone rules him out as a serious challenger for PM
I disagree. That's a great name for a PM.

I wish I could be the PM and be named Ed Balls. In the closing of all of my correspondence I would drop the title and honorifics and just end them with "Balls".

Dear Cristina,
Move a ship within 30 miles of the Falklands, and you'll regret it. Again.

Balls

Dear Mahmoud,
Pull that stunt again and I'll fvck you. Have a nice day.

Balls

Mister Trichet,
How do you like me now, b**ch?

Balls
 
Top