The Post General Election Thread

[Ell-ano]

Exactly. Stay classy.

to be fair half of the country didn't vote for the Tories so it's not hard to see why people are upset. Especially when the newly 'elected' government will make the people who suffer most suffer even more.

Erm, no they didn't. Half of those who VOTED didn't vote for the Conservatives. One third of the country didn't bother to vote at all.

Granted, but if they didn't vote they didn't vote for conservative did they ;) but the voting system is flawed in that only just over half of those who voted got what they wanted.

 

[hilts]

In a word, yes. This election will effect peoples lives, and not only that the people who suffer the most. They need to let the government know that they won't be ignored, otherwise new laws will be passed that will harm the most needy most. This, at least, sets the precedent that should the Tories pass a ridiculous law, people wont stand idly by and let it happen. This government is there to represent everyone in the country, not just the well off.

some people on here amaze me. People saying 'just the well off' etc. as if everyone who voted Conservative is well off. If some City fans were found guilty of racism would you accuse all of City's fan base to be equally racist?

I never said that, the Tories will benefit those well off, further privatising the NHS doesn't help the common man on the street, it helps those who can invest in a new private health care system (the well off). Creating 'jobs' through zero hour contracts and dodgy apprenticeships doesn't help those who are unemployed but it gives companies a cheaper work force and gives them more profit. Allowing the super rich to avoid tax and buy property in London as an investment only serves to increase their own wealth. You tell me how I will benefit from a new Torie government, the rich will become richer and the poor poorer

The injustice of it all is just too much to bear

 

[Metal Biker]

to be fair half of the country didn't vote for the Tories so it's not hard to see why people are upset. Especially when the newly 'elected' government will make the people who suffer most suffer even more.

Erm, no they didn't. Half of those who VOTED didn't vote for the Conservatives. One third of the country didn't bother to vote at all.

Granted, but if they didn't vote they didn't vote for conservative did they ;) but the voting system is flawed in that only just over half of those who voted got what they wanted.

If you didn't vote, you don't deserve a say. You may well be pissed off, but the chance to change things was in their hands and they didn't bother to do anything about it, so their apparent 'objections', if they have any, are moot.

 

[CityStu]

In a word, yes. This election will effect peoples lives, and not only that the people who suffer the most. They need to let the government know that they won't be ignored, otherwise new laws will be passed that will harm the most needy most. This, at least, sets the precedent that should the Tories pass a ridiculous law, people wont stand idly by and let it happen. This government is there to represent everyone in the country, not just the well off.

some people on here amaze me. People saying 'just the well off' etc. as if everyone who voted Conservative is well off. If some City fans were found guilty of racism would you accuse all of City's fan base to be equally racist?

I never said that, the Tories will benefit those well off, further privatising the NHS doesn't help the common man on the street, it helps those who can invest in a new private health care system (the well off). Creating 'jobs' through zero hour contracts and dodgy apprenticeships doesn't help those who are unemployed but it gives companies a cheaper work force and gives them more profit. Allowing the super rich to avoid tax and buy property in London as an investment only serves to increase their own wealth. You tell me how I will benefit from a new Torie government, the rich will become richer and the poor poorer

In breaking the population down to those though, you've completely skirted over the normal, working people that make up 80-90% of the people. I believe that majority subscribe to the Tory promise to eliminate the deficit, which will enable future investment in public services. But borrowing to invest in those public services absolutely isn't in our best interests.

Plus, the NHS isn't going to be privatised and the Tories had actually pledged to put more money into it than Labour had. I'd also suggest that a ZHC (or more) is better than being unemployed. If nothing else, it's something to show prospective full time employers that you haven't just been sat on your arse out of work.

 

[OB1]

Obviously when I said "town" I wasn't referring to the geographical designation of it but the idea of "places"

You are the man that likes specificity, what are places? Do you mean settlements or just cobbled streets?

Literally just places. I was making a bit of an emotional argument and lost specificity in stuff that I said. Obviously this is my fault regarding my lack of accurateness rather than a lack of accuracy in the argument presented.

:-)

I'm not going to get into this from a party political angle and, frankly, the Pep thread calls but, in short, I do think investment and incentives are needed to get businesses to move into disadvantaged areas. Easier said than done.

 

[Ducado]

Love it. The left are suggesting a sun reporter vandalised it. Lol. When the Tories lose an election they rebuild and come back. Labour supporters try and remove a legitimate government. Scrotes

I doubt any of them are Labour supporters to be fair

 

[Ell-ano]

some people on here amaze me. People saying 'just the well off' etc. as if everyone who voted Conservative is well off. If some City fans were found guilty of racism would you accuse all of City's fan base to be equally racist?

I never said that, the Tories will benefit those well off, further privatising the NHS doesn't help the common man on the street, it helps those who can invest in a new private health care system (the well off). Creating 'jobs' through zero hour contracts and dodgy apprenticeships doesn't help those who are unemployed but it gives companies a cheaper work force and gives them more profit. Allowing the super rich to avoid tax and buy property in London as an investment only serves to increase their own wealth. You tell me how I will benefit from a new Torie government, the rich will become richer and the poor poorer

In breaking the population down to those though, you've completely skirted over the normal, working people that make up 80-90% of the people. I believe that majority subscribe to the Tory promise to eliminate the deficit, which will enable future investment in public services. But borrowing to invest in those public services absolutely isn't in our best interests.

Plus, the NHS isn't going to be privatised and the Tories had actually pledged to put more money into it than Labour had. I'd also suggest that a ZHC (or more) is better than being unemployed. If nothing else, it's something to show prospective full time employers that you haven't just been sat on your arse out of work.

You may be right, but it wasn't a real majority, only just over 1 in every 2 have agreed to Tory promises, the rest didn't. And maybe it will work, maybe it wont, only time will tell. And ZHC is better than sitting on your arse, but the fact is if you have a ZHC some people lose their benefits because they have a 'job', so why work for less than you were getting when you were sat on your arse? Especially when your not guaranteed the hours you need to pay the rent or buy the food.

 

[Ducado]

You are the man that likes specificity, what are places? Do you mean settlements or just cobbled streets?

Literally just places. I was making a bit of an emotional argument and lost specificity in stuff that I said. Obviously this is my fault regarding my lack of accurateness rather than a lack of accuracy in the argument presented.

:-)

I'm not going to get into this from a party political angle and, frankly, the Pep thread calls but, in short, I do think investment and incentives are needed to get businesses to move into disadvantaged areas. Easier said than done.

100% spot on the tax system could be used, I once read a brilliant report that basically said that some areas should be made into mini Singapore's it would be cheaper than pouring millions of pounds into benefits and initiatives that never seem to work, the report highlighted Hull saying that despite a good position and infrastructure and millions poured in it still suffers from high unemployment and deprivation

 

[malg]

Love it. The left are suggesting a sun reporter vandalised it. Lol. When the Tories lose an election they rebuild and come back. Labour supporters try and remove a legitimate government. Scrotes

I doubt any of them are Labour supporters to be fair

Green, or SWP?

 

[CityStu]

I never said that, the Tories will benefit those well off, further privatising the NHS doesn't help the common man on the street, it helps those who can invest in a new private health care system (the well off). Creating 'jobs' through zero hour contracts and dodgy apprenticeships doesn't help those who are unemployed but it gives companies a cheaper work force and gives them more profit. Allowing the super rich to avoid tax and buy property in London as an investment only serves to increase their own wealth. You tell me how I will benefit from a new Torie government, the rich will become richer and the poor poorer

In breaking the population down to those though, you've completely skirted over the normal, working people that make up 80-90% of the people. I believe that majority subscribe to the Tory promise to eliminate the deficit, which will enable future investment in public services. But borrowing to invest in those public services absolutely isn't in our best interests.

Plus, the NHS isn't going to be privatised and the Tories had actually pledged to put more money into it than Labour had. I'd also suggest that a ZHC (or more) is better than being unemployed. If nothing else, it's something to show prospective full time employers that you haven't just been sat on your arse out of work.

You may be right, but it wasn't a real majority, only just over 1 in every 2 have agreed to Tory promises, the rest didn't. And maybe it will work, maybe it wont, only time will tell. And ZHC is better than sitting on your arse, but the fact is if you have a ZHC some people lose their benefits because they have a 'job', so why work for less than you were getting when you were sat on your arse? Especially when your not guaranteed the hours you need to pay the rent or buy the food.

Surely that is a real majority? If you'd wanted PR instead then you'd have a much righter Tory and UKIP coalition right now.

My counter to that would be that people shouldn't be able to get more from benefits than they could in any employment. But the action to take would be to cut the benefit, not remove a valid form of employment.

Besides, only 2% of jobs created have been ZHCs and very few people are affected by them. Many people who use them like them as they don't want anything more than casual work.