You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Also you need to think, can you really see Edd 'William Pitt the Younger' Milliband as PM? Merkel would eat him for breakfast and we'd be a laughing stock.
If you know British history from something other than Blackadder, Pitt the Younger was a pretty good PM (and a Tory): reduced national debt, reduced corruption, outmanouvered France and Spain, reduced the constraints on Irish Catholics to bind them to the Union, reduced use of press gangs, was modest in personal affairs...
If that is the way GO looks after his so-called friends then who needs enemies. Look which segment of the population has seen the biggest hit to income, then think about the bank levy - continued to the extent that we have two major banks discussing relocation.
having missed the opportunity for proportional representation AND the chance to offload Scotland...
I still broadly back the tories for the next term in government.
locally however, safest seat imaginable, i personally wont vote for them, bunch of greedy self serving *****, the torys wont do anything for me as i aint got a pot to piss in.
my politics lies somewhere between libdem (2nd) and green (nowhere), both of which have policies i agree with, but neither the complete package.
I wont vote labour, despite my grandparents turning in their graves - maybe in the future the labour party will re-emerge, but till then. out.
the most important thing i can really do is bolster the non-ukip vote for the area.
At least Tory boy has had a series of actual, useful jobs. Never been in politics before, ties to the local economy in more ways than one (he's farming stock, studied agriculture and forestry, served in the forces) and generally is a visible, well-liked individual...
[img] 
[/img]
Rather!
It's weird that you say "actual, useful" jobs because usually what people who are saying that are trying to do is sneer at social workers and legal aid lawyers and the like. But the examples of jobs you gave were being a hereditary farmer and military person - in other words, a government job and a job heavily subsidised by the government. That's not very capitalist!
Who exactly are we talking about?
There is no way I would vote Tory here. Our Con MP is a total joke, he likes cutting ribbons and grinning in his tweeds. Yesterday his pitiful flyer came through the door with a picture compilation of his local achievements last term. The best he came up with in 5 years was sending some guy to the Euro Tri Champs, who came 15th.
Our Labour candidate was MP previously and tirelessly worked for the constituency in a very positive, sensible way. Safeguarding essential services, working with business etc. He was also one of the first to speak out against Blair and the War.
anyone on here voting tory. why?
Why do you want to know? Have you found out what you wanted to?
Yes, FWIW.
1: Tactically, against a strong UKCRAP presence in the Mole Valley.
2: It's the economy,stupid.
I should have been a bit more clear - these are not my views but how he is generally perceived.
flip flopping at its finest, the edinburgh defence as it was renamed
Mods at it again I see...
Odd that you can't discuss issues of import to everyone on the planet without censorship
Je Suis Charlie n whatnot...
Try again, worst they can do is ban me, (again)
Be interesting to see just how long term the tory economic plan is:
After all, [url= http://www.nationaldebtclock.co.uk/ ]National debt is over £1.5 Trillion and continuing to increase
[/url]
An inevitable outcome of the current economic system:
[url= 
:large]Or put more simply[/url]:
Bankers: Sorry, we've lost all your money
Us: What are you going to do about it?
Bankers: Nothing, you'll have to give us more money
Us: Where are we supposed to get that from?
Bankers: You'll have to borrow it
Us: Who the f*ck is going to lend us that sort of money?
Bankers: We will
Us: But you said you lost all the money
Bankers: We did, but you're gonna give some more, so we'll lend you that(True Story)
On top of that, we have the swift decline of the environment, in no small part due to the arms industry:
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/06/whats-the-environmental-impact-of-modern-war ]Environmental impact of modern war[/url]
The wars that profit the arms industry also happen to make some people very upset and create further wars and terrorism...
The same arms industry benefits the bankers, many of those who own the media and quite a few of the politicians themselves.
Of course, it sucks having to worry about these things and we could just pretend it doesn't happen, as that's a lot easier than facing up to problems, but if we don't do something about it, it might be a bit late for our kids and grandkids.
Will your vote change that?
Not if you vote for any of the traditional parties and the same old bullsh*t
Discussion would be fine, jhj. It's just that you don't discuss, you just blurt rubbish all over the screen and then turn a deaf ear to anyone who points out your obvious nonsense in preparation for more blurts.
No one has discussed the points raised (then deleted by mods) Woppit, so turning a deaf ear is the only option...
JHJ, given that you earlier post seemed in conflict with
Legally anything you write on our forum is deemed to have been ‘published’ by Gofar Enterprises Ltd. That’s why we sometimes have to remove posts that could cause us potential legal problems.
I would suggest that the mods were being very sensible.
Seems to me that a tory vote is a frank and honest admission that you have no concern for people who for whatever reason find themselves dependent on the govt in some way. For those of us with jobs/careers/houses/cars/fancy mountain bikes it doesn't make much difference, we can stand on our own two feet. For those who are on benefits, rely on state help to care for relatives or themselves, those who have slipped through the net of the jobs market, kids who don't have well-off parents to fund them through higher education, the homeless, those in need of medical help, basically anyone who needs a govt provided service to help them with the basic necessities of life, then a tory govt will be a disaster. And for those of you voting for this, at least you're being honest about not giving a sh*t about it. Hopefully you won't find yourself in a similar situation one day.
@jj the national debt is continuing to rise as bringing the Labour created deficit under control has been very difficult not least as we had a recession, that's the whole point of remarks like "fixing the roof when the sun is shining". Under Labour the deficit grew from 50bn to 100bn during the good years when it should have been falling. Remember Blair inherited a budget surplus from John major.
Discussion would be fine, jhj. It's just that you don't discuss, you just blurt rubbish all over the screen and then turn a deaf ear to anyone who points out your obvious nonsense in preparation for more blurts.
The irony oh the irony 🙄
Seems to me that a tory vote is a frank and honest admission that you have no concern for people who for whatever reason find themselves dependent on the govt in some way
@daz I see things totally differently, without a strong economy you cannot have a welfare state at all, that's the grave danger of financial mismanagement. See my post on the other thread, the Tories have spent half a trillion (£550bn) on welfare during their 5 years in coalition government. That's hardly "no concern" is it ?
Seems to me that a tory vote is a frank and honest admission that you have no concern for people who for whatever reason find themselves dependent on the govt in some way. For those of us with jobs/careers/houses/cars/fancy mountain bikes it doesn't make much difference, we can stand on our own two feet. For those who are on benefits, rely on state help to care for relatives or themselves, those who have slipped through the net of the jobs market, kids who don't have well-off parents to fund them through higher education, the homeless, those in need of medical help, basically anyone who needs a govt provided service to help them with the basic necessities of life, then a tory govt will be a disaster. And for those of you voting for this, at least you're being honest about not giving a sh*t about it. Hopefully you won't find yourself in a similar situation one day.
So is your view that cases like the one below, albeit an outlier do not merit any reform of welfare or tightening of the rules? Even if it takes thousands of families paying tax to fund each case like this?
Looking after their friends ?
The Tories massively increased stamp duty and closed the glaring loophole Labour left re offshore owenership. They increased VAT, the rich pay much more VAT. The decrease in top rate tax from 50+2 to 47+2 IMO actually lead to more tax being collected. They increased the tax take from non-doms.
Seems to me that a tory vote is a frank and honest admission that you have no concern for people who for whatever reason find themselves dependent on the govt in some way.
Clearly not true, as some people will feel that the best way to help people is too grow the economy, provide more jobs, and hence, increase the total tax take. Where as destroying the economy is no way to help anyone.
My earlier post has not been deleted...
I'd be only too happy to see David Cameron in court on the matter~ for some reason, he seems a bit reticent to raise any legal action concerning his prior knowledge of organized Child Abuse involving the intelligence services, the Arms Industry and South Africa.
Regardless, this isn't just about the Conservative Party, as Tony Blair has amply proved, the Labour Party aren't much better.
GCHQ/NSA didn't just appear overnight and Con-Lib-Lab are all complicit in hiding it from the public, just as they are with abuse of vulnerable children by very powerful people, over several decades...
If that and bailing the banks out sit right with you, then by all means vote for whichever of those parties has best pandered to your insecurities...
So is your view that cases like the one below, [b]albeit an outlier[/b] do not merit any reform of welfare or tightening of the rules?
Exactly, it's an outlier. The welfare state will never be perfect, there will always be anomalies at the edges where some people benefit disproportionately, but past and recent history has shown that reforms to tackle these have resulted in far more people who really need help suffering through no fault of their own. I'd support any reforms to tackle anomalies as long as it ensured that it didn't impact others. The reality though is that the tories have an agenda to reduce the welfare state irrespective of the impact on those who need it, and these anomalous cases are used to support this agenda.
I'll be doing what you're meant to be doing at elections, and voting on local issues.
In a traditional Tory stronghold it's ironic that UKIP and Green are neck and neck at the moment.
For that reason alone, I'll be voting Green.
the most important thing i can really do is bolster the non-ukip vote for the area.
snap.
Rochester and Strood is my home constituency. All the other parties are nowhere in what is usually a Con-Lab marginal, but now likely to be a Con-Kipper marginal.
I'll be voting Tory for the simple reason that any new government initially takes a considerable amount of time working out how to effect even the most simple of changes. Instability is not what the country / economy needs at the moment.
[quote=ernie_lynch ]As someone who wouldn't normally vote Conservative I'm in bit of a dilemma because of the great joy two royal births under the Tories has brought the nation. In contrast under Labour we had the tragic death of a Princess which brought unprecedented misery of modern times to the UK.
Sorry, I'm a bit late to this, but don't forget that Labour also killed off the Queen Mum (god bless her).
I'll be doing what you're meant to be doing at elections, and voting on local issues.
Very noble of you Binners, unfortunately posted in the wrong thread as the tories here will be voting with their pockets, and **** everyone and everything else.
How do the rich pay more VAT???
It is a regressive tax come on Jambalya you can do better than that.
Everyone supporting the coalition has read [url= http://www.dontbea****ingidiot.uk/ ]this sweary angry yet accurate report on their time in office[/url], right?
The Tories massively increased stamp duty and closed the glaring loophole Labour left re offshore owenership. They increased VAT, the rich pay much more VAT. The decrease in top rate tax from 50+2 to 47+2 IMO actually lead to more tax being collected. They increased the tax take from non-doms.
Scrub that you should present on Fox news ...they love this sort of impartial fact based analysis of current affairs
The poorest 20% of UK households spend a higher proportion of their disposable income on VAT than the richest 20%, the Office for National Statistics said.....This latest piece of research reinforces what is widely perceived to be the fundamental inequality at the heart of VAT: the poorer pay more of it relative to their incomes than the wealthy," said David Breger of HW Fisher & Company chartered accountants.
"It's clear that the Government needs to reconsider the full effect of VAT, which is inherently regressive."
For clarity this was BEFORE the Tory increase in VAT they promised not to do
As I said Fox news would love your ability to "deliver the facts 100 % accurately whilst never being proved wrong
oh and afterwards
Official figures show that the least well off households have been coughing up 36.6% of their income to the Treasury.But the wealthiest have been paying less – 35.5%.
The Office for National Statistics, which released the report, partly blamed the tax scandal on millionaire Mr Osborne’s controversial decision to raise VAT to 20% in January 2011....the ONS report confirmed it yesterday when it said indirect taxes like VAT “increase inequality”. .
The rich do pay more as they have more to spend unfortunately the poor pay a greater % and have a greater burden of the VAT budget
Our Tory candidate is a local lad who is now a Westminster Councillor while working for a PR firm whose main clients are getting private firms into the NHS. He previously worked for a right-wing think tank, did an internship with a Tea Party Republican and a year with Oliver Letwin. Even at 16, his nickname was Tory Boy. He even sounds like George Osborne, which is an achievement for someone born and raised in Darlington. He's also given some spectacularly stupid answers to questions at hustings, and is largely abandoned by (what's left of) the local party.
In 2020 he'll be parachuted into a safe Tory seat somewhere, so some of you may get to meet him.
Clearly not true, as some people will feel that the best way to help people is too grow the economy, provide more jobs, and hence, increase the total tax take. Where as destroying the economy is no way to help anyone.
It's nothing to do with the economy. The differences between labour and tory are so small on economic policy that it will have no measurable effect. The main difference between them is one of a willingness to support those at the bottom who need support to stand on their own two feet. The tories would gladly cast them all aside if they thought it wouldn't result in mass civil unrest and a completely divided society at war with itself (the US, South Africa etc are good examples). Labour, for all their faults, at least make an effort to redress the balance, albeit rather inefficiently.
They increased VAT, the rich pay much more VAT.
I missed that first time round. Brilliant.
They increased VAT, the rich pay much more VAT.
Because they buy more stuff. Of course, poor people pay more tax as a percentage of their income for such non-essentials as clothes and fuel.
robowns - MemberYes - I work for a bank in central London, enough said really.
Indeed it does - self interested parasite more interested in the contents of your own pocket than the welfare of others. Tory it'll be then.
It is interesting that people post on here about how nasty the Tory party is. Yet, if you look through this thread and the countless others the real nastiness seems to come from those against the Tory party.
I did a postal vote and didn't vote Tory.
the real nastiness seems to come from those against the Tory party
Science innit?
For every action, there's an equal and opposite reaction. The Tory's have been responsible for doing some really, really, nasty, malicious and vindictive stuff to a lot of people. Thats why they provoke such passionate, venomous hatred in large parts of the population. Because they thoroughly deserve it. You reap what you sow, and all that....
IMHO the real nastiness is taxing the poor more, using bedroom taxes and sanctions whilst going after the disabledthe real nastiness seems to come from those against the Tory party
Much worse than a lack of respect as shown on here
the real nastiness seems to come from those against the Tory party
I guess it comes from the despairing weariness and realisation of just how self-centred and narrow-minded an awful lot of people can be. What rankles the most is that most of them try to justify it through spurious logic of tough-love and 'unfairness' against 'hard working people' rather than just admitting that they don't give a sh*t.
No. They have destroyed British Policing, ruined my pension and are making me work longer to get it! That is reason enough alone for me not to and I used to vote Tory.
Not got time to read the whole thread but this
they seem to be doing an okay job with getting the economy back on track and at least are talking some sense on the economy, i.e. live within our means, not borrowing recklessly
is quite revealing. You could just have easily said 'the economy is recovering [i]in spite[/i] of the Tory government, even though they've been under-investing.
To know the difference requires a lot of in-depth knowledge on the economy, I think. Do you have it? Or are you just responding to spin with typical human confirmation bias?
I suspect that 99% or more of the electorate are doing the latter. Probably me included. At least I'm looking for answers though rather than accepting the ones given to me.
IMHO the real nastiness is taxing the poor more, using bedroom taxes and sanctions whilst going after the disabled
This. The tories would make me better off financially, but I could never ever vote for a party that is so plainly vindictive.
How do the rich pay more VAT???It is a regressive tax come on Jambalya you can do better than that.
@Pigface, because they spend much more overall and on items which have VAT levied on them. There is no VAT on food (in the UK unlike France, Germany etc), lower rated on gas and electricity. VAT is a very important tax as it raises money from consumption and is paid by visitors too.
ruined my pension
@thorpie, Gordon Brown reduced my pension by 25% by removing the tax relief on dividends.
because they spend much more overall and on items which have VAT levied on them
Buy-to-let properties?
Because they thoroughly deserve it. You reap what you sow, and all that....
@binners that applies to Labour in the period 1997 to 2010, they managed the economy terribly and far from helping the "working man" / poor they created a burden which had to me met by everyone. As I said the biggest disservice you can do for those reliant on welfare is to ruin the economy. Look at what's happening in Greece, the country cannot borrow any more money so the economy cannot run as it used to to the detriment of the ordinary man/woman. Labour built an economy reliant on debt.
Buy-to-let properties?
stamp duty, vat on improvements/rennovations, income tax on rent, capital gains tax on sale. BTW the vast majority of people I know who would be classified as rich on STW have very little to zero investment property other than the home they live in.
No.
Why? So many reasons, but Michael Gove will suffice.
and the tories have fixed that jamby?
Jerremy Hunt is still signing off on PPI deals- he knows labour are to scared to criticise
and the tories have tried every trick they can to keep the housing bubble growing
im sure they are doing wonders on the national debt, while household and student debt soars
Labour in the period 1997 to 2010, they managed the economy terribly
Groundhog day again! 16 years of uninterrupted economic growth, most of that time in surplus, national debt below 40% of GDP, unemployment at record lows. Bloody terrible!
and far from helping the "working man" / poor they created a burden which had to me met by everyone.
That burden was a result of the financial crisis and the recession it caused, not investment in schools and hospitals. But of course you know that, but still continue with the idiotic national credit card rubbish.
Indeed it does - self interested parasite more interested in the contents of your own pocket than the welfare of others. Tory it'll be then.
Why would I put the interests of people I don't know/will never meet over my own?
Having grown up in a fairly rough area, I know all too well how benefits are spent - on people who can't be bothered to work because it is easier to just have 3 kids.
@dazh - the charts of the deficit would show the Labour legacy was a massive deficit and the period in surplus was very short. The national debt started to spiral out of control under Labour due to the growing deficit and reliance on borrowing
@kimbers, no they haven't fixed that totally but they are the road to doing so as opposed to Labour who would have made things far worse had they won in 2010 and who will do so again if they are in power from 2015
Apprecaite I will respond to posts but this was a thread about why people will vote Tory so it's more interesting to hear from those posters as to why they are doing so than a debate about how non-Tory supporters cannot understand the rationale.
@binners that applies to Labour in the period 1997 to 2010, they managed the economy terribly and far from helping the "working man" / poor they created a burden which had to me met by everyone.
Sorry Jammy old boy. You really just don't get it, do you? This isn't about the consequences of economics. We understand that. Globalisation destroying heavy industry... blah, blah, blah.....
This is about the casual malice of intention within the Tory party. And a complete lack of empathy with the people who have genuinely suffered as a result of their policies. If you look at things purely through facts and figures then you'll never understand the visceral loathing felt by many towards the conservative party. But then that a very Tory attitude. An accusation that they (rightfully IMHO) have levelled at them... that they know the price of everything, and the value of nothing.
People (again rightly) feel a general sense of disappointment towards nu labour, or a feeling of contempt towards blair. Both very different emotions from blind hatred. The Tories rightfully receive that in large parts of the country for very good reason. Because large amounts of people detect a true malice and nasty, uncaring vindictiveness in the behaviour of the tory party, which looking at the effect their recent policies have had on disabled people, for example, is difficult to argue with.
most of that time in surplus
That's not correct is it. 13 of 16 periods in deficit (not counting the gold sell off)
national debt below 40% of GDP
Public sector up to 75% by the time they'd finished.
unemployment at record lows
It's lower now isn't it?
Why would I put the interests of people I don't know/will never meet over my own?
Because it's the fair thing to do and since I realise you won't care about that, because it's probably actually in your own self interest longer term but I suspect there's not much point explaining that either.
Voting conservative (or labour actually since they're clearly not interested in much other than getting into and staying in power by promising whatever they need to) would be in my self interest. They certainly won't be getting my vote. I can cope with some waste and piss-taking by scroungers (particularly as the actual cost is pretty low in relation to what else our money goes on) if it means that the poorest and most disadvantaged aren't actually living in poverty.
I was pretty shocked (given that he's a hippie at heart) to hear that my Dad was going to vote conservative though. Not because he likes them but because he reckons they're the least bad - all the other parties only know how to spend and not how to balance the books. I get the argument but I just don't reckon he's right.
Because it's the fair thing to do and since I realise you won't care about that
I spent years studying whilst working full time to get a half-decent job, if others can't be bothered to do the same then that is their problem.
Understand both my initial, and this statement, are sweeping generalisations and are to be taken with a pinch of salt.
I don't disagree with help for those who need it, however I have seen overwhelming evidence that this is not how most of it is spent.
Having grown up in a fairly rough area, I know all too well how benefits are spent - on people who can't be bothered to work because it is easier to just have 3 kids.
It's true, I grew up in an area like that and recognise what you're talking about. I was lucky and got out as even though there was a tory govt at the time, there was still a consensus that the govt should support people through subsidised higher education and other things that helped. The difference now is that those people are given no help and are blamed for all the ills of society, and rather than simply jumping on the bandwagon, I'd rather question whose fault it is that many people now think their best option in life is to drop a few sprogs and live a life on benefits?
Unemployment graph here, I'll leave others to make their own conclusions:
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10604117 ]Graph1[/url]
Currently after Germany we have the lowest levels of unemployment in Europe.
Is this not a silly question on here? 😆
Unemployment graph here, I'll leave others to make their own conclusions:
I'm not arguing against that, just that the established orthodoxy that the tories are good at managing the economy, and labour bad is a myth. There's no real difference between them as far as I can see and certainly isn't a reason on whether to vote for one or the other.
I'm not having Miliband leading the country
Not sure which of the other less rubbish parties I'm going to vote for yet
I don't disagree with help for those who need it, however I have seen overwhelming evidence that this is not how most of it is spent.
I agree. If we had been less helpful to the banking sector, we wouldn't be in this sorry mess.
I don't disagree with help for those who need it, however I have seen overwhelming evidence that this is not how most of it is spent.
Have you hell.
You've seen some benefit scroungers. You've no idea of the actual statistics have you?
Having grown up in a fairly rough area, I know all too well how benefits are spent - on people who can't be bothered to work because it is easier to just have 3 kids.
Far more goes on deserving cases than non-deserving ones. This isn't even controversial. And it should be fairly obvious that cutting benefits to those who need it because other people are abusing the system is pretty shitty.
What rankles the most is that most of them try to justify it through spurious logic of tough-love and 'unfairness' against 'hard working people' rather than just admitting that they don't give a sh*t.
Really? I thought the main reason is that they say Miliband is ugly.
My priority is to my family, and despite the fact that there are other people in the country who need money, I will vote for whoever I think will enable me to provide best for them. I don't work in the public sector or claim benefits, I'm not poor, but I'm a looong way from rich (and have no desire to be); long enough not to be able to afford to vote to the detriment of teamW out of some feeling of benevolence.
I just want someone who wont rock the boat too much, a coalition of opposites or a change every term so it limits the opportunity for any party to FUBAR the UK (although I'm sure some would try given the chance). For this reason, I quite like the lib dems but I fear their ship has sailed.
I'm not poor, but I'm a looong way from rich
You earn (I'm guessing) more than the median income in one of the richest countries in the world.
You're rich.
My postal vote is Tory. Mainly because I want one of the two big parties to win a proper majority so they tale full responsibility for their decisions. Labour won't make much of a showing in my constituency so Tory it is.
You're rich.
Well that means Labour want to **** me into oblivion. The choice is becoming easier.
My priority is to my family, and despite the fact that there are other people in the country who need money, I will vote for whoever I think will enable me to provide best for them.
Mine too. However, if I'm well off enough, a few quid a month won't make a difference and is going to a good cause. If I'm poor enough for a few quid a month to matter, then I should be the receipient of the money rather than the donor.
I realise that I'm not any more important than other people, and since I do okay I'll vote to help those who need it.
Well that means Labour want to **** me into oblivion.
Don't be stupid. Inflammatory rhetoric does no-one any favours.
Well that means Labour want to **** me into oblivion. The choice is becoming easier.
I've lived most of my adult life under a labour government and earning reasonably, and still appear to be ok. But then I'm not tempted to lapse into ridiculous hyperbole.
My priority is to my family, and despite the fact that there are other people in the country who need money, I will vote for whoever I think will enable me to provide best for them.
So why is voting for your family's interests separate to voting for everyone's interests? There's tons of research out there that says more equal societies are more happy societies. By reducing poverty and hopelessness, everyone benefits. or would you rather live in a society like the US or South Africa with gated communities, private security guards, severely mentally ill people and beggars on the streets, people unable to afford basic healthcare etc?
Don't be stupid.
Steady.
Inflammatory rhetoric does no-one any favours.
There's LOADS of far more "Inflammatory rhetoric" on here than I'd manage in 4 pages of posts!
there was still a consensus that the govt should support people through subsidised higher education and other things that helped
You should vote Tory then, more poor go to University now than in the past, more to do to get them to better universities but progress.
Despite fears that the introduction of tuition fees would discourage less wealthy students to apply, the figures show that the poorest young people are now over 10% more likely to go to university than they were last year and a third more likely than five years ago.
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/dec/19/lower-income-students-university-tuition-fees-ucas-admissions-poorer-families ]Guardian article[/url]
That Gove what a tosser, let's post a picture of pob or a cartoon of him trying to shoot down an aeroplane.
a million more pupils are now at schools rated good or outstanding. This title cherishes education. Such success cannot be ignored.
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/editorials/in-defence-of-liberal-democracy-10224221.html ]Independent editorial[/url]
Could not vote for the Tories. Most of the parties have come out with stuff I find disagreeable but the Tories are the only ones to make me shout obscenities at the radio.
Complete failure to give the slightest crap about the UK housing bubble and increasingly bonkers schemes to prop it, protecting their vested interests whilst damaging the UK's competitiveness.
But then I'm not tempted to lapse into ridiculous hyperbole.
There is plenty on here, that's for sure.
You should vote Tory then, more poor go to University now than in the past, more to do to get them to better universities but progress.
Yes, their tuition fees policy was so badly thought-out, that it has had the opposite effect of what was intended.
Even if I was solely motivated by my own personal wealth, I wouldn't vote Tory. They inherited a weak recovery from Labour, then snuffed it out with over aggressive austerity for two years. They reverted back to Labours slower deficit reduction plan, which gave us very weak growth. To make things look better we had a minor housing bubble inflicted upon us (debt fuelled boom) which was then snuffed out by hints at interest rate rises from the BoE and we're now back to very weak growth for this quarter. They're also offering more aggressive cuts for two years which I fully expect to push us back into recession.
I'd hardly call that best with the economy. GO's one success was from switching from a Tory financial plan to a Labour one. Oh the ironing....
As for rebalancing the economy away from housing debt fuelled bubbles, not one iota of progress!
Edit: just seen [url= http://www.dontbea****ingidiot.uk ]it[/url] on the previous page.
[s]@Pigface, because they spend much more overall and on items which have VAT levied on them. There is no VAT on food (in the UK unlike France, Germany etc), lower rated on gas and electricity. VAT is a very important tax as it raises money from consumption and is paid by visitors too[/s] Because I ignore what the actual facts and the published research states about what % of their income they spend on VAT and just waffle on instead.
FTFY - all the research agrees on it being regressive. There is no way it can be both regressive and the rich pay more. They poay sa lower % of their income on VAT its a fact you can argue with Facts if you like but its pretty foolish
I'd hardly call that best with the economy. GO's one success was from switching from a Tory financial plan to a Labour one. Oh the ironing...
THIS they missed all their targets - blaming the Eurozone iirc then did what Labour planned then declared themselves brilliant and some folk swallowed it
There's LOADS of far more "Inflammatory rhetoric" on here than I'd manage in 4 pages of posts!
Aye, it's not just you! It's everyone.. more's the pity.
everyone want to earn their money, inflate it at an unbelieveable rate through property, pass all of it to their children, draw a full and liveable state pension and live out their days being cared for by 'government' money. There is more than a generation of it and nobody is gonna derail that train
its not sustainable, but there doesnt appear to be a single person who can/will change it.