Whom ever wins the election... loses....

[daz4m]

randlemarcus said:

daz4m said:

Randle/ Sizenine, get off your band wagons and read what I said...

I'll make it clearer for you both. Instead of spouting out clever reasons on why I am wrong sell the alternative to me I'm attempting to listen to what others are saying as per my original post.

I'm not on a bandwagon, I was simply slackjawed at your post.

OK, reasons to be cheerful:
You are right about the LibDems. They're a bunch of left wing nutters with a centrist veneer, whose leader has done well out of the televised debates, primarily because he's not Gordon, and is a fresh voice because nobody outside Westminster knew him before he was on the TV.
The primary, fundamental difference between the Tories and Labout is the belief in the size of Government. Labour believes that spending 52% of GDP on public sector employment is a good thing. Conservatism aims for smaller government.

You have a choice at this point, as to whether you can live without "five a day" advisors, and folk to weigh your bins.

Its not the choice I want, as I am a great believer in really really small government - if I want my bins emptying, why can't I choose between taking it to the tip myself, and paying a fee, or between five private sector companies to come and empty it when its full?

We need some form of public sector, there is no argument there. The problem is because its quite simply too big, and has grown partly because it does more (though there is an argument that we dont need the services), and partly because of the obsession everyone has with metrics. If you can't measure how much a bin weighs, how will you know if the £2.5 billion you spent on asking people not to by the two for one bananas and throw one away has worked? Argh, who gives a fk?

As for trusting Cameron - I cant say I blame you wholeheartedly there either - he's a bit "smooth" for me, and whoever recommended the Max Headroom makeup for the debates needs slotting. Problem is that thirteen years out of power has taken a toll on the available candidates, and Hague shot his load a few years back.

Might be damnation by faint praise, but Vote Conservative - better than the other idiots, if only marginally.

Thanks that is what I'm looking for. Like it or not though lots of people will share the view I stated earlier. I personally havent made my mind up yet but to be honest I don't know what to do.

The lib dem policy on the tax threshold looks good but at what cost. I also feel they will be the ones to increase motoring taxes.

Looking at past figures voting conservative may be a wasted vote in my constituency so I'm still not sure on a way forward.

[Bing o]

daz4m said:

Tony*T3 said:

Bing o said:

daz4m said:

Jinx said:

daz4m said:

Can you explain this please. I am of the feeling that they are probably the best position to take us through but would like to hear your POV?

So the people who got us into this mess - overspent when times were good, sold the Gold reserves at a cut price level, personally destroyed the private pension schemes that were the envy of Europe (against the advice of the civil servants) , refused to fulfill a manifesto promise of granting a referendum on Europe, embroiled the UK in an illegal war and murdered the scapegoat they had selected, have been shown to be financially an morally corrupt on numerous occasions, quadrupuled the "book of taxes", introduced a new law for every week in power, killing off local pubs, put every man woman and child in the UK into of £15k of debt, allowed immigration to run unchecked (when the French and Germans were not so shortsighted) and have insidiously involved themselves into every level of private life - these are the bunch of muppets "best" equiped to get us through. Dear lord a constipated goldfish would be a better bet than this lot.

Yeah what they have done is not up for discussion my question relates to who will be best equipped to fix the mess we are in. I don't think Cameron is particulary trustworthy and the lib dems are not for me.

So you are in hospital waiting for your arm to be amputated. The doctor amputates your right arm by mistake. Who would you choose to amputate your left arm? The same doctor, or someone else?

Well he couldnt make the same mistake again, could he ?

Or what if the other guy went to the same medical school?? Either way your buggered.

That's a very poor analogy. Please explain why you think Labour are best placed to bring us out of the st we're in?

[andymadmak]

daz4m said:

Can you tell me what your main problems are with the spend and tax mantra and what the alternatives are offering instead?

Thanks

Think of it this way. Great Britain PLC has a number of credit cards. When the Tories left office in 1997, they had managed to bring the card debts under control after the last Labour administration had left power with all the cards maxxed out, and leaving us precious close to having no prospect of making the minimum payments without the card company coming and repossessing the sofa.
Now, after 13 years of being back in power, all our cards are maxxed out again. The only thing that keeps us making the minimum payments is the fact that the card companies haven't put our interest rate up yet - as soon as they do (a la Greece and Spain) we are donald ducked.
Now, the Tory solution is to reduce the SKY account from the full monty monthly, to cut down on the fags and only go out for a beer once a week instead of 3 times a week. The new flat screen TV, the second holiday in Lanzarote and the new sports car will have to wait till we can afford them. Its not nice, but in a few years, when the capital is repaid a bit and thus we are not running on zero available credit we can maybe bring some of these luxuries back onto the spend list.
The Labour solution is to carry on spending, with gay abandon. Cards maxxed out? just get another card. No more cards? Lets visit Ocean Finance. After all, future growth and Harry Potters magic wand will take of the debt, won't it? Trouble is, in the real world "massivedebtium dissapearium" is not an effective spell. Ooops, the bailiffs have cottoned on that the debt is growing still and we can no longer pay the minimums. You don't mind sitting on the floor do you?

[Tony*T3]

andymadmak said:

daz4m said:

Can you tell me what your main problems are with the spend and tax mantra and what the alternatives are offering instead?

Thanks

Think of it this way. Great Britain PLC has a number of credit cards. When the Tories left office in 1997, they had managed to bring the card debts under control after the last Labour administration had left power with all the cards maxxed out, and leaving us precious close to having no prospect of making the minimum payments without the card company coming and repossessing the sofa.
Now, after 13 years of being back in power, all our cards are maxxed out again. The only thing that keeps us making the minimum payments is the fact that the card companies haven't put our interest rate up yet - as soon as they do (a la Greece and Spain) we are donald ducked.
Now, the Tory solution is to reduce the SKY account from the full monty monthly, to cut down on the fags and only go out for a beer once a week instead of 3 times a week. The new flat screen TV, the second holiday in Lanzarote and the new sports car will have to wait till we can afford them. Its not nice, but in a few years, when the capital is repaid a bit and thus we are not running on zero available credit we can maybe bring some of these luxuries back onto the spend list.
The Labour solution is to carry on spending, with gay abandon. Cards maxxed out? just get another card. No more cards? Lets visit Ocean Finance. After all, future growth and Harry Potters magic wand will take of the debt, won't it? Trouble is, in the real world "massivedebtium dissapearium" is not an effective spell. Ooops, the bailiffs have cottoned on that the debt is growing still and we can no longer pay the minimums. You don't mind sitting on the floor do you?

I dont htink even Ocean Finace will want the business that badly. Too high risk, sadly, and no equity available in the old house so cant secure the loan against property.

[daz4m]

andymadmak said:

daz4m said:

Can you tell me what your main problems are with the spend and tax mantra and what the alternatives are offering instead?

Thanks

Think of it this way. Great Britain PLC has a number of credit cards. When the Tories left office in 1997, they had managed to bring the card debts under control after the last Labour administration had left power with all the cards maxxed out, and leaving us precious close to having no prospect of making the minimum payments without the card company coming and repossessing the sofa.
Now, after 13 years of being back in power, all our cards are maxxed out again. The only thing that keeps us making the minimum payments is the fact that the card companies haven't put our interest rate up yet - as soon as they do (a la Greece and Spain) we are donald ducked.
Now, the Tory solution is to reduce the SKY account from the full monty monthly, to cut down on the fags and only go out for a beer once a week instead of 3 times a week. The new flat screen TV, the second holiday in Lanzarote and the new sports car will have to wait till we can afford them. Its not nice, but in a few years, when the capital is repaid a bit and thus we are not running on zero available credit we can maybe bring some of these luxuries back onto the spend list.
The Labour solution is to carry on spending, with gay abandon. Cards maxxed out? just get another card. No more cards? Lets visit Ocean Finance. After all, future growth and Harry Potters magic wand will take of the debt, won't it? Trouble is, in the real world "massivedebtium dissapearium" is not an effective spell. Ooops, the bailiffs have cottoned on that the debt is growing still and we can no longer pay the minimums. You don't mind sitting on the floor do you?

Like that very good.

[Funkateer]

The one part of the public sector that is crying out for investment is transport. All those billions payed in road and fuel taxes could fund expansion of the road and rail network to meet demand, as well as subsidising rail fares and access charges to make them affordable, freeing up the roads for the rest of us.

Think of all the jobs to be had designing, building, maintaining and running this modern transport infrastructure. And the net benefits to the economy. We're currently wasting money and time sat on our creaking, congested roads!

I don't have a problem with paying for the right public services, just the current government's preoccupation with creating jobs for the sake of creating jobs - often commanding very large salaries.

I baulk at the amount of tax I pay for driving, and the utterly p!ss poor state of the roads I'm paying this premium to use.

Edited by Funkateer on Thursday 29th April 13:46

[TonyToniTone]

Mervyn King said:

Election winner will lose power for 30 years

American economist David Hale revealed today that Mr King had confided privately that David Cameron, Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg would face a long-lasting backlash as they squeezed public spending to balance the nation's books.

A generation is regarded as being 30 years.
Mr Hale told Australian TV of the remarks when he was today asked about the possible contagion to the UK from Greece's sovereign debt crisis.

He cited the high debt levels of the major developed economies, including Britain, and went on to comment on the British election campaign.
“I saw the governor of the Bank of England [Mervyn King] last week when I was in London and he told me whoever wins this election will be out of power for a whole generation because of how tough the fiscal austerity will have to be,” Mr Hale said.

The Bank of England refused to comment on the claims, but it is understood that the conversation took place in March rather than last week..

The Institute for Fiscal Studies said this week that all of the three main political parties were not being clear with voters over the scale of the cuts needed to get Britain's £167 billion deficit under control.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-238...

Would seem Mervyn thinks so too..

[Jayzee]

Well, everyone else is using the angry face...

Back on topic. OP, forget Labour for the rasons already outlined in this thread

[Martial Arts Man]

andymadmak said:

daz4m said:

Can you tell me what your main problems are with the spend and tax mantra and what the alternatives are offering instead?

Thanks

Think of it this way. Great Britain PLC has a number of credit cards. When the Tories left office in 1997, they had managed to bring the card debts under control after the last Labour administration had left power with all the cards maxxed out, and leaving us precious close to having no prospect of making the minimum payments without the card company coming and repossessing the sofa.
Now, after 13 years of being back in power, all our cards are maxxed out again. The only thing that keeps us making the minimum payments is the fact that the card companies haven't put our interest rate up yet - as soon as they do (a la Greece and Spain) we are donald ducked.
Now, the Tory solution is to reduce the SKY account from the full monty monthly, to cut down on the fags and only go out for a beer once a week instead of 3 times a week. The new flat screen TV, the second holiday in Lanzarote and the new sports car will have to wait till we can afford them. Its not nice, but in a few years, when the capital is repaid a bit and thus we are not running on zero available credit we can maybe bring some of these luxuries back onto the spend list.
The Labour solution is to carry on spending, with gay abandon. Cards maxxed out? just get another card. No more cards? Lets visit Ocean Finance. After all, future growth and Harry Potters magic wand will take of the debt, won't it? Trouble is, in the real world "massivedebtium dissapearium" is not an effective spell. Ooops, the bailiffs have cottoned on that the debt is growing still and we can no longer pay the minimums. You don't mind sitting on the floor do you?

Every time I see DC on TV I do a Gordon with my hands on my head.

Why on earth does he not explain these issues in layman's terms, like Andy has here?

I even emailed Dave myself with a series of these analogies


As a related aside, I help out as much as I can with our constituent (Tory) MP; the volunteers received no info on how to adress voter concerns whilst out delivering leaflets etc. My mother ended up drawing the group together to coach them on how to get the message across. To be honest, I expected much much more professionalism. Ok, it's a totally safe seat, but nonetheless, every vote helps in this election as % share of the vote will become an issue.

[Size Nine Elm]

daz4m said:

Randle/ Sizenine, get off your band wagons and read what I said...

I'll make it clearer for you both. Instead of spouting out clever reasons on why I am wrong sell the alternative to me I'm attempting to listen to what others are saying as per my original post.

Why sell 'the alternative'? Is there any way that anyone* could be worse than the current incumbents? No. And any alternative would haveto be uterly horrendous to even match the level of incompetence. So its not even a choice.

The answer is obviously yes, because Nick Griffin exists.

[Busa_Rush]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/...

"Whichever party wins this election will have to inflict such painful austerity measures on the British population that they will soon find themselves out of power for generation. Not my words, the words of Mervyn King, Bank of England Governor."

[TankRizzo]

daz4m said:

I don't think Cameron is particulary trustworthy

See, I've been hearing this sort of thing a lot from people who are usually staunch Labour supporters but don't want to vote for them - like my in-laws. They are considering voting LibDem as they won't vote Labour back in, but won't vote for Cameron "because they don't trust him".

My question is, why do you feel this way? Why don't you trust someone who is fresh to the table, has some good ideas and who hasn't, as far as I can see, broken any promises yet? Is it just old Thatcher prejudices coming out?

I don't understand it.

[Mr Whippy]

Cameron is a good guy I'm sure... I'm putting my trust in him.

[Bing o]

Busa_Rush said:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/...

"Whichever party wins this election will have to inflict such painful austerity measures on the British population that they will soon find themselves out of power for generation. Not my words, the words of Mervyn King, Bank of England Governor."

Surely then a Lib-Lab hung parliament would be a good thing? I'm dreading a weak Tory party winning the election and then being blamed for everything.

[mondeoman]

TankRizzo said:

daz4m said:

I don't think Cameron is particulary trustworthy

See, I've been hearing this sort of thing a lot from people who are usually staunch Labour supporters but don't want to vote for them - like my in-laws. They are considering voting LibDem as they won't vote Labour back in, but won't vote for Cameron "because they don't trust him".

My question is, why do you feel this way? Why don't you trust someone who is fresh to the table, has some good ideas and who hasn't, as far as I can see, broken any promises yet? Is it just old Thatcher prejudices coming out?

I don't understand it.

Because he's sold his soul to the opinion pole. Man of no convictions

[Tangent Police]

I don't think the Conservatives are going to get a majority.

Regardless, it's irrelevant. Our big cross-fingers should be on the Eurozone falling to bits. It all comes from Brussels and unless the EU starts looking shaky, they are our winners.

Forget UK politics, look at the EU.

[daz4m]

mondeoman said:

TankRizzo said:

daz4m said:

I don't think Cameron is particulary trustworthy

See, I've been hearing this sort of thing a lot from people who are usually staunch Labour supporters but don't want to vote for them - like my in-laws. They are considering voting LibDem as they won't vote Labour back in, but won't vote for Cameron "because they don't trust him".

My question is, why do you feel this way? Why don't you trust someone who is fresh to the table, has some good ideas and who hasn't, as far as I can see, broken any promises yet? Is it just old Thatcher prejudices coming out?

I don't understand it.

Because he's sold his soul to the opinion pole. Man of no convictions

I feel most of what he says is what he thinks the people want to hear, he doesn't seem to believe in it. Although you could say that for any of them.

[Mr Whippy]

daz4m said:

mondeoman said:

TankRizzo said:

daz4m said:

I don't think Cameron is particulary trustworthy

See, I've been hearing this sort of thing a lot from people who are usually staunch Labour supporters but don't want to vote for them - like my in-laws. They are considering voting LibDem as they won't vote Labour back in, but won't vote for Cameron "because they don't trust him".

My question is, why do you feel this way? Why don't you trust someone who is fresh to the table, has some good ideas and who hasn't, as far as I can see, broken any promises yet? Is it just old Thatcher prejudices coming out?

I don't understand it.

Because he's sold his soul to the opinion pole. Man of no convictions

I feel most of what he says is what he thinks the people want to hear, he doesn't seem to believe in it. Although you could say that for any of them.

I guess that is a problem. I hope, and spoke to another MP about this, that when he comes in he will be true blue, not this multi-coloured appeal to everyone colour.

Personally I'd PREFER him to come across as a true blue than try appeal to everyone. I think people want someone strong minded with a clear direction, rather than a wishy washy all over the place PM.

Dave

[king arthur]

TankRizzo said:

daz4m said:

I don't think Cameron is particulary trustworthy

See, I've been hearing this sort of thing a lot from people who are usually staunch Labour supporters but don't want to vote for them - like my in-laws. They are considering voting LibDem as they won't vote Labour back in, but won't vote for Cameron "because they don't trust him".

My question is, why do you feel this way? Why don't you trust someone who is fresh to the table, has some good ideas and who hasn't, as far as I can see, broken any promises yet? Is it just old Thatcher prejudices coming out?

I don't understand it.

I don't either. I admit he's not the best leader the party may have ever had, but he's all there is right now.

[Busa_Rush]

Bing o said:

Busa_Rush said:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/...

"Whichever party wins this election will have to inflict such painful austerity measures on the British population that they will soon find themselves out of power for generation. Not my words, the words of Mervyn King, Bank of England Governor."

Surely then a Lib-Lab hung parliament would be a good thing? I'm dreading a weak Tory party winning the election and then being blamed for everything.

Quite.