1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

General Election 2015

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Stretch, Jan 5, 2015.

  1. spudbynight

    Soldato

    Joined: Nov 8, 2006

    Posts: 6,667

    Location: Hove, UK

    I think the SNP being successful at the next election would be a disaster for the country.

    Labour, Conservatives, Lib Dems, UKIP....even the minor parties like the Greens & Respect all want the best for the country. They might have bonkers ideas about what the best thing for the country is.

    The SNP doesn't want the best for this country. They want to destroy the Union. They don't care about people outside of Scotland.
     
  2. billysielu

    Capodecina

    Joined: Aug 9, 2009

    Posts: 11,513

    Location: Oxfordshire

    If you vote Tory you'll be financially better off. Simples.
     
  3. Sankari

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 29, 2007

    Posts: 24,342

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2015
  4. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 24,329

    Lol, all they want is whats best for them and their crony friends, as i said previously its a big stinking joke and can only be treated as such.
     
  5. Xordium

    Capodecina

    Joined: Apr 8, 2009

    Posts: 12,702

    If you think that then you are simples.
     
  6. do_ron_ron

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 23, 2002

    Posts: 9,833

    An interesting little piece from the new office manager

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-30763549

    .

    In other words, all devolved policy was made in London when Labour were in power(the majority of the time since devolution)

    for all the brouhaha about Scottish MPs having a say on English-only matters it is now clear that despite the fa├žade of devolution English MPs were still deciding Scottish only matters. I wonder if we will see widespread articles in newspapers etc?
     
  7. Slam62

    Soldato

    Joined: Jan 3, 2006

    Posts: 7,360

    Location: Monaco

    But I'm not a millionaire so they won't benefit me.
     
  8. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,687

    Location: Plymouth

    You don't have to be a millionaire, you just have to not be dependent on the state for your income. The increased tax thresholds mean that those who earn are keeping significantly more of their income than they were 5 years ago.

    Of course, if you rely on the state to top up your earnings or supply your income, then you probably aren't better off.
     
  9. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 19, 2004

    Posts: 17,975

    Location: Kiel, Germany

    But the economic failure of the coalition means that although people are getting a little more take home pay in absolute terms, this isn't true in real terms since inflation + VAT rises have devalued the money received and wages haven't kept pace.

    In any case, it's not sensible to view "better off" in simple terms of income. The many, many positive things paid for by taxation also contribute a lot towards quality of life.
     
  10. Slam62

    Soldato

    Joined: Jan 3, 2006

    Posts: 7,360

    Location: Monaco

    I would like a well funded efficient NHS ,
    An efficient and affordable public transport system and reward for being sensible with your money like decent low risk returns.
    I would like affordable housing and free higher education so my kids can afford to have a life.
    I would like more quality employment and investment in industry.

    The current government want you to borrow up to your eyeballs and employed on a zero hour contract in a budget supermarket.
     
  11. nitram100

    Mobster

    Joined: Aug 7, 2009

    Posts: 4,338

    Location: London

    Green Party for lolz
     
  12. Stretch

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 14, 2004

    Posts: 11,677

    Location: Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge

    Mine have. I'm a "middle earner", who's never voted Tory. I'm unaware of anything the coalition have done which have adversely affected my living standards. Even if my income had tread water, I'd still be marginally better off due to the sustained low interest rates. As it happens, I'm significantly better off than I was at the beginning of the parliament. Not due to tax cuts, hand outs or public services. Just through a healthy economy, job opportunities, career progression etc, i.e. things beyond the direct control of the government.

    It's hard to see any of this as economic failure, especially considering the relative economic uncertainty which existed in 2010, when there was a real possibly of hardship for myself and family.

    I wouldn't be disappointed with another 5 years of the same, although there are obviously some negatives.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2015
  13. Tunney

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 11, 2004

    Posts: 14,549

    Location: London

    I'm never going to be a fan of the Conservative party but what I find truly scary is that over the course of this government, the current Conservative leadership has replaced intelligent, competent people with True Believers and yes men in important positions.

    Look at the position of attorney general as an example. Dominic Grieve was attorney general between 2010 and last year. Grieve is an incredibly well-respected QC who is truly an expert in his field. He got fired because he was in favour of the EHCR. His successor, Jeremy Wright, is a yes man and totally unqualified for the position of attorney general. His legal CV lists just two trials that he's been involved with. It's like letting a nursing student perform surgery.

    His boss, Chris Grayling is even more dangerous. He's the least qualified Lord Chancellor in 400 years. He wants to do away with the ECHR despite knowing so little about how it works that even the Daily Mail had to correct him. He's tried to push through major changes to the legal system and has illegally suppressed reports that make it clear that his changes would deliver a worse service for at a higher cost to the taxpayer. Incompetence and arrogance of the highest level.

    It don't think that I could vote for a party that believes in ideology to the total detriment of meritocracy no matter what my political views were. Parties need dissenting voices. All parties employ yes men but the current Conservative leadership has taken things to extremes.
     
  14. Quartz

    Capodecina

    Joined: Apr 1, 2014

    Posts: 10,044

    Location: Aberdeen

    You mean, much like the Labour government before them, and the Tory government before that?
     
  15. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,687

    Location: Plymouth

    The decline in real terms wages started 2 years before the coalition came to power, so you are either ignorant or dishonest in your presentation of the event as a coalition problem.

    I haven't noticed any decline in the taxpayer services I use. Again, it may be declines in services the earners are paying for on behalf of others where the declines are, but I don't necessarily see that as an issue.
     
  16. Tunney

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 11, 2004

    Posts: 14,549

    Location: London

    Not to this extent, no. The last Labour government had plenty of dissenting voices and the Major government before that even more. None of these governments would have appointed Chris Grayling or Jeremy Wright.
     
  17. gobbo

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 25, 2002

    Posts: 2,862

    One of my favoured sites at the moment to get an idea is here -> http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/

    I know polling can be wildly inaccurate, and we are 4 months out from GE...but this site takes regular (last updated 9th Jan) polling input and uses a couple of different models to aggregate it into something vaguely useful.

    General consensus at the moment is hung parliament and looks very close with Labour or Conservatives as the largest party (may only be a couple of seats in it)

    But what happens if two parties still can't make a majority? A three/four party coalition, which will be a horrible job to control.

    At least most opinion polls are putting UKIP down as only winning ~6 (or less) seats

    EDIT: Paddy Power are also offering odds of 200/1 that Gyles Brandreth takes over as leader of UKIP after this general election!
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2015
  18. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 19, 2004

    Posts: 17,975

    Location: Kiel, Germany

    Yes, it started with credit crunch - that is what happens with recession. Had the recovery that was underway when the coalition took over not been strangled in its infancy by Osborne's incompetence - assisted by the Lib Dems, of course - then the three long, stagnant, years of dismal growth and non-existent wage growth wouldn't have happened and, by now, we'd have seen wages outpace inflation for some time now.

    How delightfully selfish of you. But the problems are coming, the rot has set in under the coalition's assault. As it stands, services are being kept up - just about - but with ever increasing levels of underfunding the cracks will start showing. Your good fortune may insulate you from these problems but the wide impact of failing services will be felt across society even if you're not directly affected.
     
  19. D.P.

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 30,662

    Most likely imo is labour+libdem (maybe +green) for a majority.
     
  20. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,687

    Location: Plymouth

    The economy was not growing as such, deficit spending skyrocketed and created the illusion of growth, while sending the debt skyrocketing.

    This strategy is not necessarily bad, but due to the total incompetence of labour's deficit spending during the boom years, it was rendered bad as a result.

    Note my qualifier of necessarily when saying it may not be a bad thing. The state has been doing far too much with poor results and bad decisions in a number of areas. Cut backs in poorly targeted services, poor focusing or generallying unnecessary activities are not things I oppose just because the state is spending.