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.
Chippy_boy said:
Would you disagree?

(You won't often find me defending a Labour government, so make the most of it!)
Click to expand...

disagree that it's a sad statement? or disagree about letting them crash/bailing out?

if the latter, it's probably only the principled-without-reason who would wholeheartedly claim that letting the banks fail was the right thing to do. I was extremely displeased with that situation (and had my rants about letting them go under, and fuck them etc etc.) but in reality it was an impossible situation.

Another side to this is the laws in place that allowed that to come about and the subsequent insurance markets that have arisen, creating more false wealth on top of what is already a pretty dodgy financial system. I dont think the government has learnt at all, and i dont think it wants to. Anyway, your original point, i think on balance the banks should have been bailed out.
 
domalino said:
I know quite a few people, including my parents who would flat out refuse to vote labour because of Diane Abbott. I know that's anecdotal but she is an absolutely appalling human being and getting rid of her is only going to help, just don't know why they waited so long.
Click to expand...
She's not been replaced he's just got someone to cover for the period of her "illness".
 
pirate said:
reduction in support to the disabled, reduction the social care for the elderly, artificially reducing the money to those out of work by making it not viable to claim in many cases, increase in VAT which disproportionally affects the poor, tax credits not keeping pace with inflation, loss of housing benefits for the 18-25 year olds, the bedroom tax, etc etc etc

the less well off pay marginally less in direct taxes but have lost much more in indirect taxes and loss of benefits
And it is true the better off have been favoured.
I have and its wrong.

those earning even more than me (i suppose I am middle/middle class) have been favoured even more and thats wrong as well
Click to expand...

I hear you mate, and I don't seek to defend absolutely everything. I've been very critical of May in particular as you will have seen.

But all the things you cite are government spending reductions. That's what they are. A government spending too much and receiving too little, needs to cut its spending and boost its income. It does that by raising taxes and by making cuts.

It is of course unavoidable that cuts you describe are felt more by people who receive such benefits. But you cannot cut *nothing*, so what would you have them cut? More police cuts? Deeper NHS cuts? Seriously what would you have them cut MORE, in order to maintain the benefits you describe.

On the other side of the coin, taxes have been increased with more and more people paying 40% on part of their incomes. The reduction in the top rate from 50% to 45% may sound unsavoury (it does) but it actually raises MORE tax and therefore helps. Perhaps the Tories should not have cut it simply because doing so looks bad, I accept that. But cutting it did raise more money.
 
Gabriel said:
Saving the banks was necessary, but so too was greater and more stringent regulation of what they did thenceforward.
Would be surprised if we're not discussing this again further down the line, alas.
Click to expand...

OK but why have all the CEO's not been given 10 years in prison?
 
jonmcity said:
OK but why have all the CEO's not been given 10 years in prison?
Click to expand...

Have they done anything illegal? I really don't know.

Surely you are not advocating inventing new laws and retrospectively punishing people for laws that did not exist at the time? Or perhaps just not bothering with laws at all, and simply sending people you don't like to prison?

I am sure that as a sensible person, you would suggest neither. If people broke the law, I am sure they will have been investigated and prosecuted.
 
What's all this about about Mavis now prepared to tear up human rights?
The Tory manifesto said that we would continue to abide by rulings of the ECHR and after Manchester there was no mention of changes to human rights legislation.
What's going on Jeff?
 
Prediction time:

Tories will win, number of seats immaterial.

May: Gone within a year.
Scotland: Gone in five Years.
Northern Ireland: gone in five to ten years.

fifteen years from now England and Wales start formal negotiations to join the EU.
 
False accounting, declaring profits that did not exist to investors is illegal.

False accounting fraud happens when company assets are overstated or liabilities are understated in order to make a business appear financially stronger than it really is.
 
jonmcity said:
The ability of Ms Abbott had nothing to do with her race, nor was it ever suggested so on here.
Click to expand...

I know that fella just a gentle reminder to some who berated posters for being racist. I presume these posters will soon be along to continue their support of her
 
Len Rum said:
What's all this about about Mavis now prepared to tear up human rights?
The Tory manifesto said that we would continue to abide by rulings of the ECHR and after Manchester there was no mention of changes to human rights legislation.
What's going on Jeff?
Click to expand...

After Manchester she said we would never bow down to people who wanted to take away "our Western values of freedom, democracy and human rights"

After London "If human rights laws stop us... we will change those laws so we can do it."

You couldn't make it up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top