View Of Golden Gate

Also ignoring Corporation tax where only the Swiss are lower out of the main countries, this would be true even with the suggested increase. Whereas May wants to make us a Tax heaven and protect the rich, funnily enough her husband runs a Trillion pound organisation.

I know it is, the point is that includes those struggling. Do I believe those who can afford it shouldn't pay? No, I don't. I do, however, believe it is a lesser of two evils, and I would rather know that children are being fed at school, even if that includes those who don't need the help.

Why? They will still have lower tax than elsewhere in Europe, the loopholes will be tightened. Is it wrong to tax people who can afford it? Or are we going to carry on being afraid of them? Surely at some point we have to say enough is enough, and we ask them to do more.

Or a non brand item, and even get a banana. Some might not get to eat again until their evening dinner, as their parents can't afford to pay for their lunch. Or the lunch they get is small, and not healthy as their parents have got the best they can afford but it isn't enough, all the while that same child's mate is eating a nice hot meal. Don't forget, though, we are all in this together, just some are more in it than others, and some parents are just lazy and/or stupid.

Yes I did say 67p so if it is 6.7p that is even more damning, don't you think? Also you asked me about to defend JC about his IRA links, but then don't defend your Supreme Leader's own mistakes. While on the subject, do tell me which party has a former fully paid up IRA member running in one of it's council elections? Who is selling arms to the Saudis? Who use them to drop on children, and sell them to ISIS, so we are indirectly giving ISIS weapons. Don't worry guys, because it is 'good for the industry.' Are either leaders perfect? No, of course not, but I choose the one who values human life. I'll chose the one who isn't selling the NHS (for those who doubt Tories are, read the Naylor report), I'll choose the one who did not ignore abuse inside a female prison, I'll chose the one who doesn't disagree with Human and Workers rights, I'll choose the one who doesn't want to kill foxes with her mates for fun, I'll choose the one who isn't promoting the sale of ivory, I'll choose the one who doesn't send a grieving colleague onto a Nationally Televised Live TV Debate because she thought she was above it, I'll choose the leader who, misguided or not, is trying to make a positive difference, I'll choose the leader and party who do not believe they are better than the common person, I'll choose the party who want to see growth. You do you brother that is your right, but do not ignore the facts. if you want to vote Tory do it. I will never claim that he is the best thing to ever happen to us, and I'll even admit I did not like him at first. He has, and Labour have won me over, and give the party that tries to win my vote and talk to me, over the party that assumes they already have it.

The Garden Tax details have yet to be announced, what has been said it will be on unused land. As in land that people own but are doing nothing with, that is subject to change. I challenge you to make a healthy, filling balanced breakfast for 67p. You cannot eat anything afterwards until after 12pm, which is what children will have to deal with. Some won't eat again until the evening, the Tories have already been told it will cost treble what they have set aside for. Do I defend his IRA links? Not even for a moment, can someone change their political leanings in 20 years? Of course, has it been said anywhere he even supported the IRA bombings? I have seen it reported he sympathized with their struggles, and we have to accept there was wrong and evil on both sides. Is it wrong to try and talk to Hamas to try and achieve peace? When the Good Friday agreement was signed (by Labour), was that done via more violence or talking? As for Trident is wanting a to rid the country and the world of chemical weapons a bad thing? Do you really believe any leader evil and crazy enough to use one against us is put off by the fact we have one? Also is it in the manifesto? No because it is not what the party and the country want, yet if May wants something she doesn't even consult her cabinet. Bit Dictatorish for my liking, let's also ask who took 20,000 police off the streets despite warnings it was a threat to national security. Who opposes the Human Rights Act? The Workers Rights Act? Equality for Homosexuals? Final point, have the Tories sorted this mess out, or has their continued cuts somehow led to a higher National Debt?

Defend May all you want but she isn't talking to people, her people are checking political leanings before she meets anyone, she is avoiding anyone who may give her a hard time. She gives the death stare look at anyone who questions her supreme leadership. her policies are uncosted. This is an election she called, how can they not have not costed their own policies for their own election? Ill prepared for a decision they made, how are they going to be ready to deal with Brexit? The only policy that has any costs attached says that childrens' breakfast will be 67p each, let that sink in. Experts say 6 million will lose their winter fuel allowance, 6 million. She is yet to say what the cap for the Dementia Tax will be, a policy she has already backtracked on. She hasn't given any aims for Brexit besides leave, tell me does that mean in the days after the election we will be stable? The Home Secretary she sent to the debate last night believes police officers are paid £40,000 a year, their basic is less than £20,000 in many cases. Is she saying that many are getting £20,000+ a year in overtime? Nurses are going to food banks, there is such a thing as a food bank. Homelessness has gone up, over 150,000 reported to be suffering from malnutrition in hospitals in 2015. Families cannot feed themselves, immigration targets are failed every year (non EU members), May fought against equal rights for homosexuals. Tell me is this woman the person you want to 'lead?' Tell me why, she is the right choice. Please give me a reason not to be afraid of this woman, give me a reason to be fearful of five years with this woman at the helm.

Taking away the obvious highlights and special moments, there are a few that are special for one reason or another. Bad as well as good, I remember sitting in the corner at Leeds, it was cold, wet and we were awful. I can't remember what year but we lost 2-0 and I just remember asking why I bothered with football. In terms of standard league game, the 5-0 over Forest was a highlight, it just seemed unreal.

Have you reported this issue to the club? Not sure what can be done, as like you said some people do require a carer. Not sure there is a fair way to police this, but unless you report it the club and/or the Disability Liaison Officer nothing will get done.

You mean anyone who owns a home worth more than £100,000 (average home is worth £165,000)?

I'm not saying it isn't maybe a small step do not dress it up as a major plus, it is one year unpaid. Many need care for years, many can't take a year off on only benefits, because of course our benefit system will screw them. It is being missed because it is borderline meaningless, it does not do much if anything really. Yes, agreed.

Unpaid

No doubt that those in need residential care could be better off, but those who need care at home? Those who have family live there and help to look after them but require extra support, could be told they have to sell the home after their parent dies. The question is if only 5% of those who own a house more than £100,000 (average UK home is worth £165,000) contemplate an early death as to avoid extra costs to their family is too many, yes. The point is whether a house is worth £100,001 or £500,000 the point is to punish those who need support is wrong. While I disagree with the current system this hurts more people, this is not the answer. We should be making social care as free as possible not taxing the dead, and the U Turn only proves she has no opinion or clue she does with the tide.

Person A owns a £200,000 home and that is their single asset, they require care in their home but not residential. Their need of care increases, they want to leave their children and family the home, but know that years of care will see their home worth less and less to their family. They realise that an early death would mean more will left to their family than going on for years needing care, it will be cheaper for 65 year old to drop dead instantly then to die years later. Not out of the realms of possibility, and even it if it is only 5% that have this train of thought, surely that is too many?

May has hired an ex IRA member, her Dementia Tax is already being attacked by members of her party. There are elderly people will go without care, or worse because of this. How can anyone support a policy that encourages an early death?

They are panicking, they have U-turned on policies while in government already, they have failed at every target they set. They are a weak government losing it's lead and in serious trouble of losing power, people want change and only Labour offer that. May hates human and animal rights, her party hates the NHS, Hunt hates nurses and doctors, they are not for the people, they are for themselves.

So you are disagreeing that there aren't people struggling? I don't quite understand, I never said everyone, but there are many. In reference to other points, they may have pledged £4bn but is that on top of current spending? If that is the case why are schools being told to cut their budgets? They may have a big plan to spend £4bn a year extra and allow schools to spend as much as they need to within reason, however, they could just be building more grammar schools. We do have free healthcare, certain medication you pay for yes. We even more cuts planned the amount of people who do pay and how much they pay will go up, at least with a more considerate government (which the Tories could be, if they cared to) we would see medication become cheaper and in many cases fully free. The overall point it, can anyone tell me, without some half arsed calculations via excel or a desk calculator, how any of these measures and policies benefit the UK? Can anyone tell me how a total disregard for the EU helps the UK? Can anyone on this forum say their life is better now, because of a policy May has brought in? We may have to agree to disagree on which party is better or worse, that's just one of things. The Tories will most likely win, and I hope I am wrong, I hope May proves to be a great PM, I just haven't seen a single thing that she has done that has made me anything less than fearful.

I'm not disagreeing with the idea of means tested benefits, I disagree with this current government's view on what means this is. Wealthy people do not need free dinners or their heating bill subsidised, but why is it we turn a blind eye to those who the government, the people we elect and pay, turn their back on those who are struggling. This one size fits all benefit system does not work, and just saying we cannot do any more doesn't cut it. We are living in a country where outside of a restaurant charging meals for £50 sits a person unable to eat or sleep safely, that isn't May's fault anymore than it is mine or anyone on here. She has the power to change it though, and has she? Of course not, the lowest income families are worse than they have been in the modern era. But who cares? We are losing our NHS a beacon of light in this country, free healthcare, it is a wonderful thing. They want to sell it? Cut the budget, and destroy it. Will May suffer? No she is private, will her peers suffer? No they are private. Millions worth of revenue leaves the UK every year to foreign companies who run our railways, built by us for us and they make the money? Our motorways are now up for sale, which means more toll roads and more expenditure for those who need a car for work. God knows you'll need work, because these bastards won't help if you don't. Cuts to education has to be inexcusable, this our childrens' futures we are talking about here. And their schools are being told to stop spending so much money, teaching them. Improving them as people, improving their knowledge and their chance for success, and the money to do this is being cut. Tell me how that makes sense. Will it affect May? No, even if she had kids they would be private. (I don't care she doesn't by the way, just showing that her plans don't hurt her) We are all in this together unless you are rich, then you don't have to worry.

I always try and see both points of view with political debates, I disagree with Brexit but I understand why people voted. I am really struggling to see how May's policies can be popular? Taking free school lunches off infants? Can a single person tell me who this benefits? Means testing for the elderly fine, however, this a May government so goodbye nice relaxed retirement hello spending your last few years at the food bank. People say it is too dramatic to say that disabled and elderly will die on the streets, and to be fair most will find a way. Do we really want a country where disabled, the elderly and the unemployed find a way? I work everyday to put food in my belly and roof over my head, I have the chance to do that, though. Others don't, we should be helping these people. Giving them a life, helping their children have a better crack at it then they had. Instead we leave them to it, give them minimal support and wash our hands of their problems. We live in a country where asking questions means you are a conspiracy theorist or a traitor, a national newspaper rad a headline about destroying the saboteurs, as if there is a group of people who want to this nation fail just because they don't like General May of The Peoples' Army For The Destruction of People. This is a woman who cannot talk to normal everyday voters, it is a woman who is scared to debate a man she describes as being unfit to lead. Oh let her handle the negotiations with Junker, Merkal and Macron that will be a piece of piss. This is a woman who is fighting over the very time and contents to negotiate the EU with. As if any form of compromise is a defeat, no deal is better than a bad one!! No deal is a bad deal, "The EU have an agenda," of course they do they want to it work. We have an agenda, May has an agenda. It is not a bad thing to have an agenda, we are getting fooled by buzz words and phrases. "Strong and stable" what is that? The foundations of a House? We are talking about a political party with people spinning multiple plates. I want a flexible government, if you don't look at this manifesto and think "oh bloody hell" then you must be in the 5% it benefits.

This may sound sarcastic but in all honesty he should have been given a Gold Brick, also would be great if he wrote a book when he retires.

He scored as many as Ripley, who many consider to be our star man.

Would love to see Tommy Wright back, I honestly think him and Paul Murray were a major reason for Johnson doing well here. Johnson had the tactical brain, whereas they were the man managers, and kept the players on their side.

Ripley has been fantastic I don't think another year would be holding him back, but Boro needing a new manager hinders our chances of getting him. The new guy will want to watch him in pre-season, and training, which as much as I would love him back we need a 'keeper before then. That for me is the first signing we need to make, that and a striker are our main objectives this summer.

A debate I have often struggled to fall on one side or the other of, I find myself leaning towards the idea that we should not decide our own laws. I am not an expert, I am also self centered and more worried about how laws and regulations will affect me rather than the greater good. Therefore I should have a limited say on the laws that will make a difference to everyone's lives, I also do not have the time to read the pros and cons of every law. So I choose to vote for the MP who will represent me best and do their best to create the country I'd like to live in, I do think there is a danger in U turns, as they are the entrusted expert. When a U turn is conducted I lose trust in that whoever made the turn as it to me it means they did not asses the options thoroughly enough in the first place, we have the election to decide what type of country we want, when the vote is made governments should do as they see fit. I will still disagree with them and make my voice heard, however, they are the elected officials, not us. We should be able to trust them to make the laws, if they are doing a bad job we have by-elections to decrease their majority and General to bring in someone new. Others will no doubt feel differently, but I do think there is some merit in a government making a choice that the people will not like if they feel it is for the good of the country and the people they are sworn to serve.

I don't know how it would have turned out he had signed for us, it impossible to know for certain. We may have won promotion, developed a siege mentality and been lauded for giving an innocent man a chance. In reverse it could have seen fights among fans, a massive PR disaster and something we as a club could never recover from. I think the thing that annoys me is we all suffered a shit week, and ended up with nothing at the end of it. The club's name was dragged through the mud, and we will forever be associated with the whole murky affair. I have no issues with the attempt to sign him, I respect that others do and understand why, I just wish we had either signed him and be done with it or not bother. What is done is done, though. Can we stop bringing it up? I'm sure many feel similar to myself, and just want to accept it happened and not have to talk about it every time he scores.