Poll: 2nd Leaders debate - Live tonight at 8pm on BBC news and SKY news

Who will you vote for?

  • Labour

    Votes: 50 9.0%

  • Conservatives

    Votes: 245 43.9%

  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 227 40.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 36 6.5%
  • Total voters
    558
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
stockhausen said:
Reducing the yawning gap between the rich and the poor needs to be achieved by increasing the wealth of the poor and reducing the wealth of the rich - redistribution which can sensibly and justly be achieved by means of IHT. Pretending that I or anyone else suggests otherwise is just a thoroughly dishonest form of denial.
Click to expand...

How would you suggest it is reformed to acheive this?.
 
stockhausen said:
This is a canard that has been put forward by Thatcher and her ilk. Can you point out anywhere that I have said that "everyone should be dragged down to the lowest economic denominator", anywhere :confused:

No, I thought not.
Click to expand...

Your simple views on economic issues perfectly illustrate it.

Reducing the yawning gap between the rich and the poor needs to be achieved by increasing the wealth of the poor and reducing the wealth of the rich - redistribution which can sensibly and justly be achieved by means of IHT. Pretending that I or anyone else suggests otherwise is just a thoroughly dishonest form of denial.
Click to expand...

You advocate policies that would strip hard working people of the wealth they have earnt to redistribate to those who didn't work hard. IHT is the worst form of tax - assets at death have been taxed countless times already. Their is no real impediment for anyone not to work hard and make something of their lives, your ideas merely perpetuate the idea that those who are downtrodden have their lot in life to be worse off and discourage hard work and endeavour.

What God given right do the poor have to the assets of the hard working? None at all. I could possibly consider it appropriate if you advocated this only on the truly rich but you advocate it on all who have made, or who simply suffer from the poor luck of living where prices are higher. You'd be lucky to find many in my area who don't meet IHT requirements and I can guarantee you most are not rich in the slightest.

It is the worst form of the greatest of harm coming from the best of intentions. Quite frankly your views on this are sickening, what motivation is there to work hard if you know upon death you will be screwed over in favour of those who haven't.

Welcome to my ignore list, the first person in my 15 odd years of using the internet.
 
If I didn't find it disgusting, I would have laughed at the way the tories kicked out thatcher, behind her back while she was in france at some foreign policy meeting. The Tories themselves were terrified of her.
 
stockhausen said:
Reducing the yawning gap between the rich and the poor needs to be achieved by increasing the wealth of the poor and reducing the wealth of the rich - redistribution which can sensibly and justly be achieved by means of IHT. Pretending that I or anyone else suggests otherwise is just a thoroughly dishonest form of denial.
Click to expand...

The wealth gap should be closed by the poor working harder.
I have no qualifications outside of my GCSE's, I've worked hard, in crappy jobs, doing long hours, and, by the age of 30, I had two houses, one with a modest mortgage, one with a 75% mortgage, I had two cars, a motorbike, nice furniture, a big TV, all the consoles, and a holiday every year.

When I moved out from my my mum and dads at 18, I had no job, no house,nowhere to live, my motorbike (that was on finance), a rucksack full of clothes and about £500 in my current account.

I didnt claim dole, I didnt take handouts, (in tory Britain at that point as well 1994) I got a crappy warehouse job that paid £200 a week, got a flat, met my first wife and after a year we managed to save enough to put a deposit down on our first house (two bed terrace £32,500 brand new).

The poor should make something of themselves, unless you are so ill that you cannot move you should get nothing and have to support yourself.
 
atpbx said:
The wealth gap should be closed by the poor working harder.
I have no qualifications outside of my GCSE's, I've worked hard, in crappy jobs, doing long hours, and, by the age of 30, I had two houses, one with a modest mortgage, one with a 75% mortgage, I had two cars, a motorbike, nice furniture, a big TV, all the consoles, and a holiday every year.

When I moved out from my my mum and dads at 18, I had no job, no house,nowhere to live, my motorbike (that was on finance), a rucksack full of clothes and about £500 in my current account.

I didnt claim dole, I didnt take handouts, (in tory Britain at that point as well 1994) I got a crappy warehouse job that paid £200 a week, got a flat, met my first wife and after a year we managed to save enough to put a deposit down on our first house (two bed terrace £32,500 brand new).

The poor should make something of themselves, unless you are so ill that you cannot move you should get nothing and have to support yourself.
Click to expand...


When it comes time to move on from this mortal coil, would you want your children to benefit from your hard work, or the Government?
 
Gaidin109 said:
When it comes time to move on from this mortal coil, would you want your children to benefit from your hard work, or the Government?
Click to expand...

Exactly my point, I've worked hard so that (hopefully) they dont have to do what I have had to do.

What the socialists want is for me to give the money to them, so that can give it to somebody who isnt even TRYING to work in the first place.
 
robgmun said:
I will return to the first impression that i always had and been proven right all along, Socialism in the endevor to make everyone well off, makes everyone poor
Click to expand...

Mrs Thatcher is using a very odd definition of "poor" there that no modern sociologist would recognise. Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for Mrs T. She was an exceptional implementer - we could do with those implementation skills in government now, but her ideals were far too simplistic, short-termist and ultimately very damaging to this country. A classic example of why policies that sit well in the Daily Mail might look good, but should be avoided at all cost.

As for making everyone poor - why is it that the more equal a society the better it performs? In almost any criteria you care to mention - life expectancy, mental illness, violence?

If you want to know the answer I suggest you read this book: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Spirit-Leve...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1272307935&sr=8-1
 
Is anybody else beyond frustrated at Alex Salmond and his SNP's behaviour regarding the final television debate?

I've just been reading through this:


Legal challenge to Alex Salmond's exclusion from BBC leaders' debates

The Scottish National party to start legal proceedings to force the BBC to include its leader in Thursday's last televised debate


http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/26/alex-salmond-leaders-legal-challenge


I'm absolutely lost for words... The sheer arrogance.
 
naffa said:
Is anybody else beyond frustrated at Alex Salmond and his SNP's behaviour regarding the final television debate?

I've just been reading through this:


Legal challenge to Alex Salmond's exclusion from BBC leaders' debates

The Scottish National party to start legal proceedings to force the BBC to include its leader in Thursday's last televised debate


http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/26/alex-salmond-leaders-legal-challenge


I'm absolutely lost for words... The sheer arrogance.
Click to expand...

It's absolute utter idiocy and arrogance on the part of Alex Salmond, if he really wants representation, his party should stand in all constituencies.
 
He does seem to have a rather inflated opinion of himself I have to agree. That said, I am not clued up on Scottish politics or the popularity of the independence movement.
 
Last edited:
Von Smallhausen said:
He does seem to have a rather inflated opinion of himself I have to agree. That said, I am not clued up on Scottish politics or the popularity of the independence movement.
Click to expand...

The SNP attracts about 2.9% of the total vote across the UK, and does not even stand outside of Scotland. As Salmond has no chance whatsoever of forming a national government, there is no reason at all for him to be in the national debates.
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8644380.stm

Interesting. He has more patience than me. I switched off as soon as she said "real change". Liberals are older than her parents', parents' parents etc..... She doesn't believe him, yet believes Clegg. O... kay... what a vitriolic antagonistic young lady (the tone of voice, not just what she's saying).

EDIT - not, for once, a Clegg rant, a rant about mindless automatons.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom