Arbtalk 2015 General Election Poll

[skyhuck]

Yes why are they not paying it back now the country's on the up

 

They are paying it back.

[Two Acres]

Think what you like mate. I have changed my "glasses" a few times over the years. ATM It's still fresh in the mind the mess the last Labour government left.

 

Wish I had kept off this thread. Politics is so divisive I normally keep my trap shut on the subject. Hornbeam anyone?

 

Please don't take any offence Woodworks, none intended. I just mean I don't think you're likely to change your opinion whatevers said, but then you'd probably say the same about me. As far as I'm concerned theres absolutely no problem with saying what we think, keeping traps shut is not at all healthy. I shouldn't have made the 'glasses' remark, apologies. I personally value a robust exchange of views with everybody taking care not to insult anyone else, thats gow I learn things and your input has been great

[Woodworks]

Please don't take any offence Woodworks, none intended. I just mean I don't think you're likely to change your opinion whatevers said, but then you'd probably say the same about me. As far as I'm concerned theres absolutely no problem with saying what we think, keeping traps shut is not at all healthy. I shouldn't have made the 'glasses' remark, apologies. I personally value a robust exchange of views with everybody taking care not to insult anyone else, thats gow I learn things and your input has been great

 

[geoff]

Please don't take any offence Woodworks, none intended. I just mean I don't think you're likely to change your opinion whatevers said, but then you'd probably say the same about me. As far as I'm concerned theres absolutely no problem with saying what we think, keeping traps shut is not at all healthy. I shouldn't have made the 'glasses' remark, apologies. I personally value a robust exchange of views with everybody taking care not to insult anyone else, thats gow I learn things and your input has been great

 

Respect to you sir.

[Two Acres]

 

Thank you Woodworks:thumbup:

[Mortimer Firewood]

They are paying it back.

 

Come on then Dave post one of your links let's have a look

[Two Acres]

Respect to you sir.

 

Thank you Geoff

 

I really believe that a fair and frank exchange of views is very healthy, if we can all speak with respect for each others ideas. Sometimes I have to carefully check what I've written, as I'm sure others do, because I don't think its always easy to do that on a forum. Posts can 'come across' badly at times if we're not careful.

 

Thanks all

[felixthelogchopper]

Please don't take any offence Woodworks, none intended. I just mean I don't think you're likely to change your opinion whatevers said, but then you'd probably say the same about me. As far as I'm concerned theres absolutely no problem with saying what we think, keeping traps shut is not at all healthy. I shouldn't have made the 'glasses' remark, apologies. I personally value a robust exchange of views with everybody taking care not to insult anyone else, thats gow I learn things and your input has been great

 

Well said. It's a shame people don't behave the same on other threads.

[Gnome]

Thank you Geoff

 

I really believe that a fair and frank exchange of views is very healthy, if we can all speak with respect for each others ideas. Sometimes I have to carefully check what I've written, as I'm sure others do, because I don't think its always easy to do that on a forum. Posts can 'come across' badly at times if we're not careful.

 

Thanks all

 

Yes some might appear like you have a big chip on your shoulder :lol::lol::lol: me not you!!!

[agg221]

I was thinking about this over the weekend as I pruned the apples. My problem is that I can't see a solution from any of them.

 

Politics in the 19th century was exclusively dominated by public school educated people from a privileged background. Government was something done 'to' the great unwashed masses, not on their behalf as elected representatives. Things moved on and the Conservative party of my youth (80s/90s) was run by bright people from fairly normal backgrounds - Maggie Thatcher was the daughter of a grocer, not sure what John Major's parents' occupations were but he went to a state Grammar School (and William Hague's background was pretty normal too). This lead to policies which were relevant. I didn't necessarily agree with them, but they genuinely sought to act on behalf of the general population - usually based on an aspirational ideology such as owning your own home, owning shares etc. Somehow, the party has reverted 150yrs to being dominated by highly privileged, privately wealthy people with public school backgrounds and no connection with normality.

 

I don't have a prejudice against the rich, or against public school education, but I do have a problem with people who promote through nepotism rather than ability, and who do not take steps to address the gaps in their understanding by ensuring that they take soundings from people who understand the impact of their policies which they will not otherwise comprehend. Otherwise it becomes the callous application of ideology with no thought as to the suffering caused, or worse still, causing harm deliberately.

 

Look at who this government has targeted. Bash the public sector - not just because it is top heavy (those losing their jobs are very rarely from the top end) but hit nurses, teachers, the police - ordinary front-line workers. Teachers have not had an inflation-matching pay rise since 2003 (yes, that's under Labour due to the pay settlement agreed by the Unions) but then hit them with pay freezes and refuse to comply with the law and value their pension pot because it would inconveniently reveal that there was not a gap, because they did not take a pensions holiday, unlike many in the private sector. Then use it as an excuse to put pension contributions up to a level which causes teachers to drop out of the scheme because having a pension is a luxury they can no longer afford, but still bang on about the fantastic pension scheme, the 'short hours and long holidays' and generally give them a good kicking. If teaching is such a fantastic, cushy number, why do more people not choose to do it, and why is the average time working as a teacher 1yr before they drop out and join the private sector? The same applies to bashing other, ordinary public sector employees. It is not their fault that they took jobs in the public sector - the jobs were advertised and they applied, yet they are now publicly castigated. Of course, if you and your friends have your children privately educated and can afford private healthcare, why does it matter to you what happens to public services?

 

Bash the unemployed and call them benefits scroungers. Who cares whether there are jobs they can actually apply for, or whether they are in reality unpaid carers for family members. If you have two children, childcare costs mean you typically need to earn £27k gross per annum before you are better off working but it is easier to criticise than to understand, and it makes a good target for the tabloids.

 

It is easier to hit people who are weak, and they are less likely to be your friends (and less likely to vote for you). It's called bullying, and it is the politics of contempt, inciting the mob against people who cannot defend themselves.

 

It is also not about the money, it's about the ideology and who might vote for you. Next target is the young. Parental responsibility ends at 18, but the plan is that no benefits will be paid to under 25s. Think about it, if your parents slung you out on your 18th birthday, could you instantly afford to rent somewhere to live? If not, how would you get a job if you couldn't get clean and look presentable, and had no address? But the young are less likely to vote, and certainly less likely to vote Conservative than pensioners, so lets not means-test the winter fuel allowance and let's give all pensioners index-linked pensions and a big rise (on the grounds that they are less able to increase their income - but how exactly is a nurse or teacher supposed to do this?)

 

I see 5 more years of this as a remit to ride roughshod over ordinary people, causing pain and suffering as a consequence of ideology, rather than applying pragmatism and compromise to minimise the impact. There is clearly a need to limit spending, but I believe the state should be a safety net, providing security for those who have no alternative. The Conservatives currently do not appear to have this sense of social responsibility.

 

Labour has this rather better, but unfortunately it also has a track record of poor economic performance, and it has Ed Milliband who I cannot see as Prime Minister.

 

The Lib Dems have, so far as I am concerned, done surprisingly well. Having met Vince Cable, I would say he is pretty strong economically, and so is Danny Alexander. They have also tempered some of the excessive Conservative ideology-based plans. However they will be remembered for the single issue of breaking their promise on tuition fees, which means they will be set back several decades.

 

The SNP is has made it quite clear it will be looking to achieve preferential treatment for Scotland. As such, it is not an appropriate party to form part of a national government (as the nation is currently defined) since it cannot rise above regional issues. The same goes for the other regional parties.

 

The Greens and UKIP are typical small parties, with ill thought-out policies which are collectively inconsistent and as such it is fortunate that they will not have an opportunity to put them into practice.

 

I rue the demise of Screaming Lord Such - the Monster Raving Loony Party is beginning to look like a worryingly viable option.

 

Alec