Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II

Who will you vote for?

  • Total voters
    1,453
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
As much as a hung parliament would be awful for actually getting anything done, I won't be able to avoid the feeling of schadenfreude of a party with a huge polling advantage throwing it away by attempting to make it personal while being led by somebody with no personality.
 
scorza said:
Home Secretary doesn't set the budgets - the Chancellor of the Exchequer does. Why not ask that question to the current editor of the London Evening Standard?
Click to expand...

Sorry but that isn't true.

The HS has has the opportunity to present the business case to save local policing but chose to ignore advice to do so. One of the most powerful roles in central government and our most senior hands on domestic operational role (PM role is much broader)

TM diverted local policing funds to counter terrorism which is a very valuable asset to the security of our country but it is being delivered at the cost of local policing.
 
Dunno whether to get my euros before or after election.
You can guarantee a slide in pound if it isn't a tory result
 
h4rm0ny said:
This viewpoint always seems to presume that wealth exists rather than is created. The entire history of the species has been a progression away from wealth being stuff you find to stuff you make. The notion that wealth is a finite resource that should be shared out fairly vanishes, imo, the moment you step away from following herds of bison across the plains and towards working the land and crafting things of value. Those who create, facilitate and take the risks are the ones to whom the rewards of those things should most rightly flow.
Click to expand...
What about the companies who "create wealth" for their shareholders and management, but use the taxpayer to pay the wages of their staff?

What about the companies who aren't paying their employees enough to buy food, pay the rent; what about the employed people using food banks?

Should "wealth creators" be immune to all criticism? Should the state be paying people's wages, so that more "wealth creators" can start up businesses?

Also it isn't the case that money can be created out of nothing. A product can, but only the BoE can create money out of thin air (QE). All those welath creators are being paid by money that already exists in the system. For every % more of our collective wealth that ends up in the hands of the 1%, that is money that is being taken from the 99%.

The wealthy can't take a greater share the rest of us getting poorer.

We also have less upwards mobility these days, and with the poor getting poorer, upward mobitily is predicted to decrease in future. Is that something we want? Privilege begetting privilege?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom