2015 post UK election discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

ToffeeDoug said:
It preserves the status quo and hinders innovation and new thinking, it is innately small c conservative. Who else in the world uses it?



Similarly, the Conservatives love FPTP because it tends to keep them in power or forces the Labour to become their liberal wing. Will they ever change the electoral system of their own volution? Of course not.
Click to expand...

And nor would Labour, they have also been against a different voting system, and indeed when we all voted on it we all rejected it as well.......
 
peteblue said:
And nor would Labour, they have also been against a different voting system, and indeed when we all voted on it we all rejected it as well.......
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right. The thing that's changed is the sense of national identity that the Scots have reached & it seems to me that this is something that has changed the game.
 

the esk said:
For me, the left and left of centre are doing themselves and the country a huge disservice not adequately explaining why it’s important to look after the needy, the poor, the sick and underprivileged and importantly the benefit of investing resources in the least economically active sectors of society.

We have to make comfortable, relatively prosperous people understand that by raising the living standards of the poorest, and attending to their needs they benefit too.

How do they benefit? Well improved living standards amongst the poorest boost economic activity enormously, creating more jobs and investment opportunities as economic activities increase.

Secondly there’s the opportunity to reduce costs in the future. Investment in the poorest now whilst adding to debt today saves a huge amount of costs tomorrow through reduced health and social care costs in the future.

There are many who claim that building up debt today is unfair on tomorrow’s generation who has to pay it off. Well how fair is it to build a growing sector of society whose problems will cost much more in future years not only financially but in human and social terms too? Surely it is better to address today’s problems today than leave them for another generation.

We as a nation are faced with a choice. Invest now in the poorest or face ever growing bills in the future which can only create bigger problems in years to come.

The problem is addressed by creating a capital programme designed to lift the poorest up, designed to provide opportunity where little exists today. If it is seen as a capital investment programme rather than a debit item in the country’s budget then we will see a change of attitude. It means working in partnership with large employers (typically multi-national, but British firms too) to boost economic activity in the most needed areas. It means training those who want to be entrepreneurs and providing capital and grants to start businesses.

Wealthy people should not fear investment by Government in a country’s greatest assets – its people. Nor should they fear participating in that investment programme through their taxes because investment today reduces tomorrow’s burden and provides opportunities for all.
Click to expand...
This is on the face it a good idea however and this is the right's issue with that policy.

Governments aren't very good at picking winners in business so much of the money would be wasted plus it leaves it open for abuse and the grants would go to companies with the best connections to government not the ones most deserving and likely to make a profit and be self sustainable.

Their view is that the people bases places to pick the winners are rich people who have already done well in business and by lowering taxes you allow them to keep the money to then invest rather than taking it off them so a beuracrat can invest.

The problem at the moment is too much of that money flows into the markets because it offers a safer and larger return on investment.

Both approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. I would prefer to see both tax breaks and grants afforded to companies that invest in poorer areas who also provide apprenticeships to train people not more bloody call centers.
 
peteblue said:
Give up everything they believe in......
Click to expand...

.....the ultimate triumph of Capitalism. The relinquishing of workers' rights. The acceptance that children deserve to be victims of their parents' past circumstances. The idea that the Company is more important than the Person who works for it. The notion that the pursuit of profit is intrinsically right and good. The notion of Social Justice being subordinate to economic gain.

Hmmm.

- It seems a lot to ask.
 
Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian said:
Someone thats going to be important to the opposition now is Clegg because he can expose some of the things that went on in the last 5 years, can there be an opposition coalition ? I know that all of the other parties are the opposition but can he be in a shadow cabinet ?


For those that are obviously in support of the tories and what the are about to implement (cos you are the ones who are obviously doing alright at the moment).........

How much would you say you'd need to be earning if you were in my position i.e. a family with 3 kids in it ?
You can maybe base it on what you live off or base it on the minimum you think you could get by on, I'll let you know honestly if I am able to hit on that kind of income at all based on what I've seen whilst looking for a new job.
Click to expand...
This is a very, very interesting post.

I can't say how much I'd need to be earning if I had a family with three children, because I don't have three children. I can say that as a very recently-married man my wife and I have talked about having children in the future, and we've agreed that we need to save up a bit more first. We live in the southeast and gross about £50k pa between us. Obviously the drop in income that comes when the wife goes on maternity leave is a major concern.
 

1966efc said:
You're absolutely right. The thing that's changed is the sense of national identity that the Scots have reached & it seems to me that this is something that has changed the game.
Click to expand...

They have always had it but now they have politicians in Sturgeon and the other weasel who can milk it......
 
daylightrobber said:
Judge him however you want fella. Those that know him will tell you what a brilliant mind he has.
Click to expand...

He may well be an intelligent man, but I think you might be talking him up a little bit more than he deserves.

As for him losing 'to fear' - I think that might be my favourite quote of the election for when it comes to denial. If the shadow chancellor can't convince his own constituents that his plan is better than the other fellas, he's lost to sheer incompetence, not fear.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top