Poll: General election voting round 5 (final one)

Voting intentions in the General Election?

  • Alliance Party of Northern Ireland

    Votes: 3 0.3%

  • Conservative

    Votes: 403 42.2%

  • Democratic Unionist Party

    Votes: 2 0.2%

  • Green Party

    Votes: 59 6.2%

  • Labour

    Votes: 176 18.4%

  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 67 7.0%

  • Not voting/will spoil ballot

    Votes: 42 4.4%

  • Other party (not named)

    Votes: 8 0.8%

  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • Respect Party

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • Scottish National Party

    Votes: 37 3.9%

  • Social Democratic and Labour Party

    Votes: 1 0.1%

  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 2 0.2%

  • UKIP

    Votes: 154 16.1%
  • Total voters
    956
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think we're better off under this government with the tax allowance giving everyone more money in their pocket that we can spend on things, rather than a Labour government that would tax everybody more and spend it all on refugee housing and benefit claimants like they are planning.

I'm on the rather low end of the income scale and haven't been feeling this apparent austerity and cuts like Labour keep saying, maybe it's because I don't spend all my cash on fags and trainers?
 
AGD said:
Remember, no one saw the financial crisis coming, and the Tories were in fact calling for less banking regulation at the time.
Click to expand...

This is true. But they also didn't call for us to spend billions bailing out banks and to not prosecute a single CEO over it all.

Quite apart from the fact that public spending was way short of "prudent" at the time because they were trying to "buy" the next election, making things worse.
 
Evangelion said:
I can't understand why Milliband has ruled out any deals with the SNP. It's arguably the easiest way to win power, and Labour would be the dominant party. So why not go for a coalition?
Click to expand...

Because labour doesn't even need an official coalition with the SNP, just for the SNP to vote no confidence for any proposed Tory Government, hence there is already an implicit deal that will ensure Millband sits in #10
 
joeyjojo said:
A
In a delicious bit of irony,.
Click to expand...

not really irony at all, they thought it was a bad system and opposed it.

it would only be ironic/hypocritical if they now touted it as good.

you can think something bad or wrong even if it benefits you.
 
joeyjojo said:
You obviously haven't engaged brain. How is a parent supposed to "earn it instead" when they're looking after young children? Maybe they pay for childcare... We have the second most expensive childcare costs in the world, far beyond what low earners can afford. Hence benefits to help parents stuck in this trap.
Click to expand...

How about: Don't have children until you can afford it?
 
Childcare costs are "second most expensive" because they are calculated against family income, while the same statistic underlines that UK has one of the lowest percentages of working mothers. If mum works, family income goes up and it's no longer expensive...
 
paradigm said:
How about: Don't have children until you can afford it?
Click to expand...

These are working tax credits we're talking about: a reimbursement of tax for working parents.

We can argue that poor people in low paid jobs shouldn't have children, but it's hardly the fault of the unskilled or untalented that living costs are pushed up beyond their measn in our country by the wealth of the higher earners.

Government wants people to have children, and it wants those children to be brought up as functioning, contributing members of society. The success rate of children brought up in poverty is lower than those in wealthier households, and even a small increase in income has a large effect on outcomes. Everyone wins when you help struggling families.
 
Neodite said:
Yes because situations could never possibly change, right?
Click to expand...

Of course they can, but unless you're the kind of person who doesn't think to a) plan for the future, and b) have a "buffer" of funds available, then you're probably not responsible enough to think about having children ;)

My situation would have to have some kind of catastrophic change in order for me to be in a position to want a pittance from any government. And in that case, I'd likely have bigger problems, such as loss of limb... or consciousness.

cheesyboy said:
but it's hardly the fault of the unskilled or untalented that living costs are pushed up beyond their measn in our country by the wealth of the higher earners.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but I'd argue that it IS the fault of the unskilled or untalented that they ARE unskilled or untalented in the first place. You don't need a paid-for education to drag yourself up off the bottom rung.
 
paradigm said:
Possibly, but I'd argue that it IS the fault of the unskilled or untalented that they ARE unskilled or untalented in the first place. You don't need a paid-for education to drag yourself up off the bottom rung.
Click to expand...

That depends on how you see the origins of talent developing.

Do you have children? Whether you do or not: would you take time to read to them, help them experience new things, teach them your skills, help with homework?

Why bother with all of that, if the answer to success is just that they need to drag themselves up?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom