General Election June 8th

Who will you vote for at the General Election?

  • Conservatives

    Votes: 189 28.8%
  • Labour

    Votes: 366 55.8%
  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 37 5.6%
  • SNP

    Votes: 8 1.2%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 23 3.5%
  • Other

    Votes: 33 5.0%

  • Total voters
    656
Status
Not open for further replies.
*ahem* I've tried to advocate a boycott of that particular rag on several occasions. Also, it hasn't been a political paper in any way, shape or form since the 70s.
'Rag' is an apt description, however, the Mirror has always been a staunch Labour advocate and still is.
Nothing wrong with that, or the Guardian, my point is that it's tedious in the extreme when people assume
everyone's political views are solely based on these sources.
 
I'm getting 28.8% against 28.6% EU average (Social Protection spending) but a higher than average spend on social protection per capita (which is more important). Far less? You'll need to provide your sources please. Mine are here:

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Social_protection_statistics

I'm also not sure why are measuring against the EU rather than say New Zealand or the US (other than the fact you know France and Scandinavia bump the EU up).

It's not meaningless in the remotest seeing as we are speaking about the UK only. One would imagine that spending was slashed by the Tories on the NHS and Education from reading this thread. When when look and see that the Tories are spending the same percentage now as Labour did ten years ago on the two then it ends that argument and the EU doesn't need bringing into it.

Come on Colin, try not to compare apples with lego.
The original post was about Health and you've provided figures for benefits. Here's my source for the shortfall in health spending: https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/blog/2...nding-compare-health-spending-internationally
 
Can't vote for Labour under Corbyn and could never bring myself to vote Tory, which leaves the Greens and the Libdems in reality, with the latter almost certainly securing my (wasted) vote.

It's a sorry time for politics in this country.
Seems like pretty sorry times everywhere
 
Workfare, my next door neighbours daughter could only get a 4 hour a week contract in a retail shop about a year ago, so was still claiming job seekersey allowance, because she was on JSA she was sent on "workfare" and placed in the shop she had her 4 hours per week contract.
Add the hours she was working between her contracted (paid) hours and her workfare (unpaid) hours & dividing it into her total weekly income and she was getting about £2.20 per hour.
Can you justify this?



Though the 100 people getting the £35,000 per annum will be spending most of that in the local economy, paying VAT on their purchases, keeping shops and suppliers open and employing staff and keeping the chain moving, whereas the CEO would be more likely to have it hidden in an offshore account, or buying a bigger villa abroad, with little if any further gain to the regional economy (& that's before getting into the discussion of is it better to help one person massively or many people moderately).

But regardless, the CEO is responsible for a company that might employ thousands of people. Why shouldn't he be allowed to buy a villa or whatever else? If you won the lottery, should we impose 90% tax because you clearly don't deserve it?

How do you know the CEO is not spending his money here, buying a house here, running a business propping up thousands of jobs? The CEO of my last company sat 10 desks away and was a top bloke who did more than enough to invest in staff and run the company best. Who am I to say he should pay more tax, not buy his villa etc?

I don't tell people not earning a lot whether they should be allowed to buy TV's they can barely afford, have pets, have children etc? Maybe if we are prepared to tell executives what they can and can't do maybe we should be doing the same to poor people who could be poor because they are making poor choices?
 
I'm 55 have worked in Defence for 30+ years and I would back nuclear disarmament tomorrow. It is a gross waste of taxpayers money!
I'm afraid that you and the other half dozen or so who believe in unilateral disarmament may have some
difficulty using Jezza as a conduit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.