Poll: General election voting intentions poll

[Destination]

This is false; the extra tax contribution does not pay for the increased health costs.



The cost of that 'huge margin' has been sharply lower growth - and, worse, a desperate failure to raise GDP-per-capita - an extraordinary failure to raise living standards, especially for the poorest and most vulnerable and a sharp contraction in investment for the future. None of which was necessary.

In your opinion, in an unproven basis that things would be much better if we'd just kept spending money without any thought to paying off the debt, something labour have never ever done over the course of their terms. Something they have historically never managed.

 

[kitfit1]

When Labour has not one person who was involved with the 1997-2010 government then they should be reconsidered. That was the worst government the UK ever had and there should be no chance of ever returning to that.

Now i could be wrong on this, but wasn't Ed Balls (shadow chancellor) part of Gordon Brown's treasury team and also one of his biggest supporters for taking Blair's job as PM. So i place no trust in Ed Balls to run a sweet shop, let alone the economy.

 

[Secret_Window]

Out of interest, what are the websites people have been using to help determine which party to vote for based on policies (quiz wise)?

I really don't feel convinced any of them are good leaders, so I'd rather take a quiz on the policies I support to help me decide instead of using the live debate.

 

[Mr Jack]

In your opinion, in an unproven basis that things would be much better if we'd just kept spending money without any thought to paying off the debt...

On the basis of history, and some of the best evidenced economic theory. As well as backed by a comparison of countries that have engaged in pointless austerity to those that have engaged in stimulus plans.

...something labour have never ever done over the course of their terms. Something they have historically never managed.

Every Labour administration in history save two - both of which suffered from large external shocks - reduced the debt-to-GDP during their term in office. It's not like the Tories have the best record on this front either: Debt-to-GDP rose by 15 percentage points under Major.

 

[Uther]

Sturgeon did a Brown and she won't be able to dig herself out of this one. Bigot-gate all over again.

She denies it, the French diplomat denies it, everyone says it didn't happen.
Just more infantile dirty politics. I think its hilarious that she and the SNP are the new bogeymen, wasn't it ukip last year?
Maybe our glorious leaders shouldn't have tried so hard to keep Scotland, they wouldn't now be having this problem, and the not so UK would have had a Con government for the forseeable future.

 

[Destination]

On the basis of history, and some of the best evidenced economic theory. As well as backed by a comparison of countries that have engaged in pointless austerity to those that have engaged in stimulus plans.

Japan hasn't done so well with its spending package.
Korea did better with its, but one could suggest that is as Samsung and LG are selling so much to the rest of the world, rather than any other stimulus.
Hungary, France, Germany, Netherlands haven't been served by their stimulus packages.
Australia where this did work in part was shielded initially as their banks were not exposed in the same manner as the US UK and Euro banks. Their national debt was 10% of GDP, it is now virtually 30%, so tripled their national debt. That is something we simply couldn't bear from our current position.

What other nations were you alluding to when you said stimulus packages worked?

 

[Silly Goose On The Loose]

Now i could be wrong on this, but wasn't Ed Balls (shadow chancellor) part of Gordon Brown's treasury team and also one of his biggest supporters for taking Blair's job as PM. So i place no trust in Ed Balls to run a sweet shop, let alone the economy.

He was also the education secretary. They say Michael Gove was unqualified, so was he.

He doesn't have a clue what he's doing: cut the winter fuel allowance to save 100 million, in order to reduce the deficit. Does he even know how large the deficit is and that is because of his Government's irresponsible spending?

 

[Outcast]

Leftie Britain

Having suffered the election debate, the passionate intervention by Victoria Prosser (the heckler who interrupted Cameron) was welcome. With the exception of UKIP, I concur with Miss Prosser's view that the debate provided a clear illustration of how detached, self-serving and hypocritical our politicians have become.

http://conservativewoman.co.uk/kevi...hows-how-far-britain-has-lurched-to-the-left/

Pretty good article imho

 

[robgmun]

Leftie Britain



http://conservativewoman.co.uk/kevi...hows-how-far-britain-has-lurched-to-the-left/

Pretty good article imho

Great article. A lot of stuff I have thought for a while

 

[delta0]

Now i could be wrong on this, but wasn't Ed Balls (shadow chancellor) part of Gordon Brown's treasury team and also one of his biggest supporters for taking Blair's job as PM. So i place no trust in Ed Balls to run a sweet shop, let alone the economy.

Exactly. It will be a few years yet before Labour are clean.

 

[Rroff]

You'd have to be mad to vote for Conservatives (look at their ideals for internet censorship to see how they really feel personal freedoms, etc.), you'd have to be crazier than mad to vote for Labour, so its either not vote or throw your lot in with a random party and hope its not frying pan->fire.

 

[thep02]

Exactly. It will be a few years yet before Labour are clean.

Why because every capitalist country agreed to be insurer of last resort to the banks which had, imho, made criminal investments for bonuses and commisions based on bundled securities and mortgages which collapsed due to rising US unemployment which resulted in more unpaid debts than the criminals who set up the deals believed were likely.

I myself think the banks should have been left to fail and go bankrupt so others could take their place but the criminals who benefited would have been made poor and as top dogs they couldn't allow that so they conned politicians worldwide.

 

[silvagti]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32180744
Porn sites must have age checks, say Conservatives

This demonstrates a lack of understanding on how the internet works and for a party that supposedly champions minimal state interference and control is a worrying direction. Who gets to decide which sites are adult/inappropriate and how independent s this 'regulator' going to be? Isn't it the responsibility of parents to monitor their kids online activities rather than the government using it as an excuse to spy on everyone? They tried to roll out this policy a couple of years ago and have recently exhumed it a month before the election in the hope of winning a few more votes. My guess is that it'll backfire!

Not that any 'filtering' really matters as everyone just sign into anonymizing services (VPN,TOR.etc) and bypass it anyway! Or will services like this also be filtered and blocked as adult?

 

[xs2man]

This is false; the extra tax contribution does not pay for the increased health costs.

Do you have a reliable source for these figures?

Here you go. From Ash themselves...

http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_95.pdf

So that'll be £12 billion from smokers into the treasury, and £2 billion in NHS costs per year. So a £10 billion surplus. Since ASH are a lobby intent on stopping smoking, their figures are either going to be on the money, or shooting too high (with respect to the costs) as it's in their interest to do so.

Now, elsewhere they do have some costs for other aspects of smoking related costs as mentioned elsewhere.

• loss in productivity due to premature deaths (£3bn)

Well, I don't see this at all. Smoking related premature deaths aren't quick. Usually there is time to train and replace the person who is about to die. Moreover, this is just freeing up a job for someone else to do, who didn't previously have a job. So good for the economy really.

What it also fails to mention is that, on average, a smoker will die 5 years earlier than a non smoker. So that's 5 years less of state pension to go out the door. So on the top of the extra £10 billion every year smokers are ADDING to the country, each individual is also taking £29,400 LESS from the government here.

cost to businesses of smoking breaks (£5bn)

Again, this is another falsity in my eyes. I've never had a job with specific smoke breaks. You smoke on your proper breaks, same breaks as everyone else gets.

There are other costs that go on from here too, but realistically, they aren't hitting the government anyway, more likely private business (sick days etc..), so has no real bearing on your point anyway.

Just because you don't smoke, or don't like smoking, and knowing it kills people, does not necessarily mean it is costing you anything. In fact, it is saving you money. Without smokers taking the hit, everyone else would have to pay more taxes. THAT is why it isn't illegal.

 

[thep02]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32180744
Porn sites must have age checks, say Conservatives

This demonstrates a lack of understanding on how the internet works and for a party that supposedly champions minimal state interference and control is a worrying direction. Who gets to decide which sites are adult/inappropriate and how independent s this 'regulator' going to be? Isn't it the responsibility of parents to monitor their kids online activities rather than the government using it as an excuse to spy on everyone? They tried to roll out this policy a couple of years ago and have recently exhumed it a month before the election in the hope of winning a few more votes. My guess is that it'll backfire!

Not that any 'filtering' really matters as everyone just sign into anonymizing services (VPN,TOR.etc) and bypass it anyway! Or will services like this also be filtered and blocked as adult?

Sounds like the tories have been taken over by their Mary Whitehouse tendency wing, weirdos.

 

[Mynight]

The porn site age checks will work better than the blocking. Can't easily bypass those with a vpn or proxy.

However this could lead to an increase in fraud if you have to supply credit card info. Not that I even own one.

Besides there will always be sites that ignore such a ruling. It will work better but still be a complete farce.

 

[koolpc]

Sounds like the tories have been taken over by their Mary Whitehouse tendency wing, weirdos.

Typical response from a porn addict

 

[Zethor]

Japan hasn't done so well with its spending package.
Korea did better with its, but one could suggest that is as Samsung and LG are selling so much to the rest of the world, rather than any other stimulus.
Hungary, France, Germany, Netherlands haven't been served by their stimulus packages.
Australia where this did work in part was shielded initially as their banks were not exposed in the same manner as the US UK and Euro banks. Their national debt was 10% of GDP, it is now virtually 30%, so tripled their national debt. That is something we simply couldn't bear from our current position.

What other nations were you alluding to when you said stimulus packages worked?

The US stimulus worked. It worked in China too.

Japan has other issues which are too complicated to explain in a short post, they haven't had sustained growth in 25 years, probably due to low birth rates and lack of immigration.

You're trying to find other reasons for the growth in Australia and Korea but the fact is they implemented strong stimulus packages and kept growing.

Hungary, France, Germany or the Netherlands implemented minor packages in late 2008 that couldn't have had long term effects.

Meanwhile, the austerity of the 'fiscally responsible' Tories failed miserably and that, by the way, is the consensus among academic ecomomists.

http://cfmsurvey.org/surveys/importance-elections-uk-economic-activity

 

[V F]

She denies it, the French diplomat denies it, everyone says it didn't happen.
Just more infantile dirty politics. I think its hilarious that she and the SNP are the new bogeymen, wasn't it ukip last year?
Maybe our glorious leaders shouldn't have tried so hard to keep Scotland, they wouldn't now be having this problem, and the not so UK would have had a Con government for the forseeable future.

Partially. It's been kind of back and forth from whatever is the biggest threat. Do you not remember them all marching up to Scotland trying to scare everyone away from Salmond? Now it's the same for Sturgeon.

 

[thep02]

Typical response from a porn addict

Typical response from a nanny knows best censor.