The Current Government

we didnt see people smashing up london or poking royals with sticks under the last government for 13 years, but 8 months of this shower, we have had people almost rioting and the worst it yet to come, welcome to tory 2011!

Then perhaps the mentality of some should be scrutinised ?

Money does not grow on trees, something that Labour seemed to forget during their administration years. Does any Tory hater seriously think that Labour were not going to cut spending ?
 
Then perhaps the mentality of some should be scrutinized?

Money does not grow on trees, something that Labour seemed to forget during their administration years. Does any Tory hater seriously think that Labour were not going to cut spending ?

No, and by no means do i support Labour. The Lib Dems had a small chance to make something of this 'democracy' and instead what they chose to do was put the final nail in it's coffin. No politician with any chance of getting in power can reasonably represent the will of the people, therefore it is the people that must stand for themselves.
 
No, and by no means do i support Labour. The Lib Dems had a small chance to make something of this 'democracy' and instead what they chose to do was put the final nail in it's coffin. No politician with any chance of getting in power can reasonably represent the will of the people, therefore it is the people that must stand for themselves.

It's the public and not the politicians at fault.

When Gordon Brown became unpopular everybody focused on his appearance and mannerisms. His one eye, his smile, his temper, etc etc.

That had nothing at all to do with how good (he wasn't) he was at his job.

Politicians cannot be honest. The public have seen to that.
 
It's the public and not the politicians at fault.

When Gordon Brown became unpopular everybody focused on his appearance and mannerisms. His one eye, his smile, his temper, etc etc.

That had nothing at all to do with how good (he wasn't) he was at his job.

Politicians cannot be honest. The public have seen to that.

Only if you swallow the lies of the mainstream media. Some of us like to think for ourselves.
 
Then perhaps the mentality of some should be scrutinised ?

Money does not grow on trees, something that Labour seemed to forget during their administration years. Does any Tory hater seriously think that Labour were not going to cut spending ?

I never said rioting was the way forward, but the actions of a view morons seems to show a level of anger against this government and its policies

its no coincidence that the tories are yet again screwing the middle and working classes, and letting the rich get off, because that is who bank rolls their party.

labour were always going to cut spending, but not this quickly and things like the nhs and welfare wouldnt be seeing the disgraceful cuts made by these tories. Labour were by no means perfect but we wouldnt be seeing the end of the nhs or mass privatisation of public services like were are now
 
The public or the media?

Public, just like politicians we get the media we deserve. That's not strictly true when the media break the law. That's law enforcement at fault there - people didn't know they were supporting law breaking when they bought newspapers who were hacking phones.
 
And we don't matter since the vast majority vote based on choice of tie, or who has the nicest wife or who has the nicest voice.

Ah yes, the reality of Nixon's 'silent majority'. Some people will only become politicized when their lifestyle is threated, so in this way the Tories could be seen as having done well, not in their actions but in the fact that their actions will ultimately lead to their demise, and the demise of this corrupt, exploitative system.
 
How? To both parts please (chance to make something/coffin nail).

1) They had the student vote, and if they'd kept it, by staying true to their word and listening to the will of the people then they could have made something of themselves, because like it or not, the students are the adults of tomorrow.[/QUOTE]

I would have thought that students realise that the Lib Dems are in a coalition government. Did they think that the Lib Dems would form a majority government under the current viote system and even with AV or PR ? Coalition means give and take.
 
1) They had the student vote, and if they'd kept it, by staying true to their word and listening to the will of the people then they could have made something of themselves, because like it or not, the students are the adults of tomorrow.
Most students are also immature, and so while they are the adults of tomorrow, the wisdom that comes from age and experience will likely make them feel what they did and argued so fervently for may not have been so clearcut.
 
Most students are also immature, and so while they are the adults of tomorrow, the wisdom that comes from age and experience will likely make them feel what they did and argued so fervently for may not have been so clearcut.

I take it you haven't actually sat down and had a conversation with the average student protester then? Because age is not a valid debating point.
 
I take it you haven't actually sat down and had a conversation with the average student protester then? Because age is not a valid debating point.
I disliked they way that the students that did make it on to TV to talk seriously, were spoken down to by members of the media. But, while age isn't a valid point, wisdom and experience are. Unfortunately, many students will be just jumping on the bandwagon, and I would be almost certain that the huge swathes of them that turned out to march the streets weren't being entirely reasonable and considered in their opinions.
 
1) They had the student vote, and if they'd kept it, by staying true to their word and listening to the will of the people then they could have made something of themselves, because like it or not, the students are the adults of tomorrow.

2) What they've done is make sure that nobody in this country ever trusts a politician again. People can only go so long voting for the 'best of a bad bunch' before they start to think 'Why?' and 'Surely there's a better way?'.
I reject both counts.

1) The student vote has always been a fickle one. I think you'll find, that whilst students are the adults of tomorrow, their opinions (in tomorrow) will not reflect their current opinions. I cannot emphasise this enough. Plus, students are naïve (no, stupid) if they don't appreciate the LibDems had little option but to join in with the Tories, and in abandoning the unsustainable tuition fee dropping.

2) Nonsense. No one 'trusts' a politician, especially pre-election. Such statements have been uttered for an order of magnitude longer than you have been alive. It's common sense that pre-election they may not have all the facts/research/intelligence on a topic, so merely vote grab. Although I do like, somewhat, how the Tories pointed out this pre-election.

Nick Clegg has done more for the Liberal Democrats than any other member, ever. Voters should be proud of that fact.
 
Yes. They are cutting the Government back to pre-Labour sizes and costs. I just hope they can continue to work towards making a job worth having rather than relying on the state for everything.
 
I disliked they way that the students that did make it on to TV to talk seriously, were spoken down to by members of the media. But, while age isn't a valid point, wisdom and experience are. Unfortunately, many students will be just jumping on the bandwagon, and I would be almost certain that the huge swathes of them that turned out to march the streets weren't being entirely reasonable and considered in their opinions.

Indeed, but judging by personal experience i can assure you that those who joined the protests without valid reason are certainly in the minority.Some people walked out then went straight home, some people went on a march just to say that they had done it, but the overwhelming number of them can explain to you why they were there and what they hoped to achieve by being there.
 
RDM said:
When you stop whining about tax avoidence, sure thing. Though I don't recall whining about it at any point recently.

Yeah, it seems as soon as the Conservatives got it the work-shy benefit scroungers became poor victims of the system :rolleyes:

Not being an expert on other countries tax systems like yourself but I find it hard to believe that they do not have non-dom or other such status that allows citizens to claim income already taxed in other countries as tax free in some way, shape or form.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/apr/11/politics.economy1

The non-domicile rule is a distant echo of empire. It allows some residents of the UK to cite some other country as their real domicile and then, unlike all other residents, to pay UK tax on their earnings in the rest of the world only if they "remit" the money to the UK.

The idea of taxing anybody on this "remittance basis" was introduced when income tax was first imposed - in 1799 - in order to allow those who owned land in his majesty's dominions to escape tax on their colonial wealth unless they brought it back to England.

This remittance rule was then attached, for the first time, to the idea of a "non-domiciled resident" in 1914 to allow those who had been born in the colonies to live in England without paying tax on their foreign rents and stocks so long as the money remained abroad.

Today, however, the rule has been taken over by some of the wealthiest people in the country who can claim to be linked to some other domicile and who thus are allowed to escape UK tax on all of their income and capital gains in all of the rest of the world, providing they do not bring the money into the country.
...
Apart from the Irish Republic, which inherited the rule, we can find no other country in the world which allows any of its residents to claim that their real home is elsewhere. The United States says it does not matter where you were born, if you qualify as a resident of the US, you must pay US tax on all your income and capital gains all over the world.

The Australians, the French and the Danes do the same if you spend more than six months of a year there. The Canadians and the Spanish do it if you spend 183 days of a year there. The Germans and Belgians and Greeks do it if your "customary place of abode" is there. The Japanese have a version of the UK domicile rule but only if you stay there for fewer than five years.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, but judging by personal experience i can assure you that those who joined the protests without valid reason are certainly in the minority.Some people walked out then went straight home, some people went on a march just to say that they had done it, but the overwhelming number of them can explain to you why they were there and what they hoped to achieve by being there.
I also reject this. I watched and read every interview I could (BBC/Sky/Broadsheets). Not one person gave a compelling argument as to why they were protesting. The general themes were "tripling feeeees omg", "Tory scum", "making the poor pay" and so on.

Furthermore, your 'personal experience' could be the minority. Unless you have a 4-5 figure sample size, and appropriate controls.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom