General Election

[oafc0000]

That could hurt them. But all they need to do is set out the overall aggregate of how their tax policies will affect households of different income groups. You may stand to lose a grand in child benefit, but you should gain at least 700 quid by lifting the income tax threshhold to 10k.

 

Yes that is a good point I keep forgetting... Farther in law pointed out the same thing this weekend. That is still a loss of £350 though as it stands...

 

The worse case would be the Torys who will scrap Child Benefit and keep the current thresholds...

Edited April 19, 2010 by oafc0000

[garcon]

Yes that is a good point I keep forgetting... Farther in law pointed out the same thing this weekend. That is still a loss of £350 though as it stands...

Until you calculate the net effect of the Lib Dems' full tax package. As a (loosely speaking) middle income household you might find you're down but probably not by as much as you fear. Any household under about £25k per year income (my figure, an educated guess based on average earnings) should probably find they're level at worst.

 

The worse case would be the Torys who will scrap Child Benefit and keep the current thresholds...

Indeed. And we won't know where tjhe Tories' "savings" are coming from until it's too late.

[oafc0000]

Until you calculate the net effect of the Lib Dems' full tax package. As a (loosely speaking) middle income household you might find you're down but probably not by as much as you fear. Any household under about £25k per year income (my figure, an educated guess based on average earnings) should probably find they're level at worst.

 

Yeah.. Fair points...

[leeslover]

Clegg will cost me a :censored: load... Child benefit is worth a £1050 a year Don't think I will be backing him and i think when most familys work out they will scrap it they won't be voting for him either...

Not meaning to be nasty here, but don't you see the irony in you saying that you want social justice and so on but then saying you will vote for the the party that gives you the biggest hand-out? NB for me "social justice" is a wrong-headed goal, I would rather just have justice, but really, make your mind up. It's no wonder we have a system where most of the money the government drags in gets mixed around Whitehall and then passed back to the middle classes.

[leeslover]

Clegg will cost me a :censored: load... Child benefit is worth a £1050 a year Don't think I will be backing him and i think when most familys work out they will scrap it they won't be voting for him either...

Not meaning to be nasty here, but don't you see the irony in you saying that you want social justice and so on but then saying you will vote for the the party that gives you the biggest hand-out? NB for me "social justice" is a wrong-headed goal, I would rather just have justice, but really, make your mind up. It's no wonder we have a system where most of the money the government drags in gets mixed around Whitehall and then passed back to the middle classes.

[Ackey]

LibDem's immigration policy... now that takes some balls!

 

I've not had chance to inspect the policy in detail, but I'll respect anyone strong enough in their convictions to propose something polls suggest over 85% of the population would oppose!

[oafc0000]

Not meaning to be nasty here, but don't you see the irony in you saying that you want social justice and so on but then saying you will vote for the the party that gives you the biggest hand-out? NB for me "social justice" is a wrong-headed goal, I would rather just have justice, but really, make your mind up. It's no wonder we have a system where most of the money the government drags in gets mixed around Whitehall and then passed back to the middle classes.

 

I get very little out of the government due to how much I earn. My kid will get very little out of the government due to how much I earn. If I ever lost my job the state will not help in anyway to help me maintain my life. I am too far outside of the bracket of supportability .

 

The only thing me and my kid get out of the government is a child benefit. It is something I think all families should get. We are a ageing population and we need more children to be born to support it.

 

I do believe in social security, helping those less well off, redistribution of wealth etc etc. I don't think I ever used the phrase social justice though (whatever that means). If a party is going to wipe £1000 from supporting your kid in one easy move its going to make you think twice about backing them.

 

If I was really selfish I would back the Torys but the Torys will seriously hurt a lot of poorer families so I won't do it. The Torys tend to look more favourable on people like me when it comes to tax and general policy making. The libs for me have there head the clouds, leaving only Labour as a real option for me.

 

When I vote at any elections its a combination of whats right for me and m family AND whats right for the country in general. I think for you to suggest I am being selfish or two faced is a tad unfair.

 

Labour offer me a great guilt free option. They do seem to want to tax the hell out of me, which I do not mind. But they leave my kid alone to a large extent. In the past 13 years they have brought out many policies to help people / kids from poorer backgrounds and I believe they will continue to do this as well. So overall they make sense for me.

 

The Torys will screw large sections of the population...

Edited April 20, 2010 by oafc0000

[oafc0000]

LibDem's immigration policy... now that takes some balls!

 

I've not had chance to inspect the policy in detail, but I'll respect anyone strong enough in their convictions to propose something polls suggest over 85% of the population would oppose!

 

It is moronic what they are suggesting. In every other case of having a amnesty immigration rocketed as a result.

[oafc0000]

It's no wonder we have a system where most of the money the government drags in gets mixed around Whitehall and then passed back to the middle classes.

 

Is there actually any proof for this. As someone who will be put in the bracket of middle class the only money I see from the Government is in the form of Child Benefit. I get nothing else at all. I only had a kid two weeks ago so before that I was getting nothing.

 

What are these vasts amounts available to me ? I have clearly been missing out

[Crusoe]

oafc0000, can you give some examples of where amnesties have been tried and had the results you describe?

 

(Not trying to catch you out, but as a potential LD voter I'd like to see the pitfalls ahead.)

 

 

Oh, and on Trident; I see no military value in it, and the idea that it boosts our international standing seems a bit intangible to me. What benefits has it really brought? Most of our international interaction doesn't seem to be in our favour. We've punched above our weight for sixty years and I'm not sure what benefits things like UNSC permanent membership bring. Happy to be enlightened.

 

(Slight tangent, but I do think our military is geared all wrong. The spending on force projection seems ludicrous, like we're trying to convince someone. New aircraft carriers, maintenance of ballistic missile submarines, etc; I'd rather we cut spending to a littoral navy and a Japanese-style defensive military. There'd still be the thorny question of the Falklands, which I don't have an answer to, but that alone can't drive military spending.)

[oafc0000]

oafc0000, can you give some examples of where amnesties have been tried and had the results you describe?

 

(Not trying to catch you out, but as a potential LD voter I'd like to see the pitfalls ahead.)

 

America did it and Spain did it. Spain did it and had something like 40,000 a year attempting to settle and this rocketed to 700,000 during the amnesty. They where talking about it on the BBC last night. Do a little digging and you will find it no doubt.

 

There is another example which I can't remember.

Edited April 20, 2010 by oafc0000

[Crusoe]

Okay, ta.

[beag_teeets]

oafc0000, can you give some examples of where amnesties have been tried and had the results you describe?

 

(Not trying to catch you out, but as a potential LD voter I'd like to see the pitfalls ahead.)

 

 

Oh, and on Trident; I see no military value in it, and the idea that it boosts our international standing seems a bit intangible to me. What benefits has it really brought? Most of our international interaction doesn't seem to be in our favour. We've punched above our weight for sixty years and I'm not sure what benefits things like UNSC permanent membership bring. Happy to be enlightened.

 

(Slight tangent, but I do think our military is geared all wrong. The spending on force projection seems ludicrous, like we're trying to convince someone. New aircraft carriers, maintenance of ballistic missile submarines, etc; I'd rather we cut spending to a littoral navy and a Japanese-style defensive military. There'd still be the thorny question of the Falklands, which I don't have an answer to, but that alone can't drive military spending.)

 

That's what they want you to think, but theyre out there, in the trees, the godamn trees! Just watching, waiting, waiting and watching..... they're out there.....

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

Rather surprisingly poor analysis from a History graduate (albeit from a somewhat middling University). The Liberals had largely abandoned Liberalism, at least in it's economic and social form, easily by the later 19th century. Bigfatjoe1 has it spot on about where the Lib Dems are aligned, although I would take a slightly different conclusion about the way forward to him/her. It's certainly been a long time since the Liberals were the party of low taxation, peace and limited government.

 

I was referring to the Liberal party, not the philosophical position. You must have been drunk again. What I was saying is if they'd had any shame, they would have just disappeared after WWI.

 

As it is, they didn't, but they still can't resolve the tension between liberalism as you understand it (freedom from...), and liberalism as your "new liberals" understood it (freedom to...). The philosophical split was between Herbert Spencer (old liberalism), and DG Ritchie, LT Hobhouse and TH Green, among others (new liberalism). Interesting stuff.

 

Incidentally, since when was Birkbeck "middling"?

 

The Guardian's 2001 RAE subject ranking league tables put Birkbeck in the top 10 for research in the following subjects: English (1st), History (1st), History of Art (2nd), Philosophy (6th), Iberian and Latin American Languages (1st), Earth Sciences (4th), Law (9th), Economics and Econometrics (5th), and Politics and International Studies (5th).

 

Sorry.

[garcon]

Could those against the proposed immigration amnesty explain how they would go about tracing and deporting those currently living illegally in the UK?

 

As is usually the case, when you actually read the small print the amnesty proposal isn't quite as scary as you might think.

 

There are still arguments to answer though - history suggests an amnesty usual does lead to an increase in illegal immigration because it establishes new networks and routes. If the Lib Dems can deal with those consequences, maybe the benefits are worth it.

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

Could those against the proposed immigration amnesty explain how they would go about tracing and deporting those currently living illegally in the UK?

 

As is usually the case, when you actually read the small print the amnesty proposal isn't quite as scary as you might think.

 

There are still arguments to answer though - history suggests an amnesty usual does lead to an increase in illegal immigration because it establishes new networks and routes. If the Lib Dems can deal with those consequences, maybe the benefits are worth it.

 

Is it a one-off amnesty, or will there be a series of amnesties?

 

In any case, do you reckon it will be a vote loser? I think people have made their mind up on the strength of Clegg's TV barnstormer, and they're willing to put up with (or ignore) some of the crankier or more unorthodox Liberal policies.

 

Come on you Liberals! Vote Clegg, get Brown! Happy days!

 

 

[beag_teeets]

No pressure at all on Nick for Thursday now, tee hee.

 

No pressure at all on Dave for Thursday now, tee hee.

 

Gordon eats pressure for breakfast.

[leeslover]

No pressure at all on Nick for Thursday now, tee hee.

 

No pressure at all on Dave for Thursday now, tee hee.

 

Gordon eats pressure for breakfast.

Then locks himself in a dark room, seeing the shadows of enemies everywhere, punches chairs, :censored:s out of calling an election because of one rogue poll, mutters curses to himself like, well, a mad Jocko, screams at people about them ruining his life.... He eats pressure like Princess Di (God bless her) ate family sized steak pies.

 

 

 

 

Could those against the proposed immigration amnesty explain how they would go about tracing and deporting those currently living illegally in the UK?

For a starters there wouldn't be a clean office or toilet in Greater London if you did. Which, granted, many of you wouldn;t care about ;)

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

No pressure at all on Nick for Thursday now, tee hee.

 

No pressure at all on Dave for Thursday now, tee hee.

 

Gordon eats pressure for breakfast.

 

Thursday is let's all laugh at Dave day. For two years he's expected to be the new PM, and it's all gone south. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.

[Stitch_KTF]

Food for thought for those who insist that the successful ought be exploited in order to support the scunners of our society....

 

 

[Stitch_KTF]

Thursday is let's all laugh at Dave day. For two years he's expected to be the new PM, and it's all gone south. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.

 

According to the BBC's election page the polls today show that Cameron is still (just) ahead from Clegg.

 

Brown is now third.

[Gentleman]

Thursday is let's all laugh at Dave day. For two years he's expected to be the new PM, and it's all gone south. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.

 

I wouldn't write Cameron off yet. The electorate is full of impressionable wollies, who'll react purely on the performance of a TV debate (with many of them unlikely to have even glanced at each party manifesto). If Cameron performs well in the next one, then the Tory jizzrag will be out.

[opinions4u]

I wouldn't write Cameron off yet. The electorate is full of impressionable wollies, who'll react purely on the performance of a TV debate (with many of them unlikely to have even glanced at each party manifesto). If Cameron performs well in the next one, then the Tory jizzrag will be out.

The whole election thing is really scary.

 

- All 3 major parties are devoid of decent policies and political conviction.

 

- The most significant thing that is likely to impact voter choice is a case of who looks at the camera most during a TV debate.

 

You may be right about Cameron having a chance to turn the tables with a good TV display tomorrow night. But this is a guy who is so out of touch with the working white-collar man (the traditional Tory voter perhaps, Mr Middle Income not quite higher rate tax) that he seems to think that a policy of "set up your own schools" is going to win votes. No disrespect intended Dave, but after staring at my employer's laptop for 5 days a week, getting home knackered each night and catching the football on a Saturday, exactly when do you expect me to recruit a few teachers and set up a feckin' school? Get a grip man and make the state system do its job better!

 

As for Brown, I see no chance of his personality turning things round for Labour. He displayed a clear understanding (during the first TV debate) that his best chance of retaining power was for Nick Clegg to do well. Hence the sudden Labour love-in for proportional representation. Voters will, on the whole, think "you've had 13 years and made a mess of it, I can't see any reason to keep you in power". But by voting for Nick Clegg they probably will keep Brown in power - for now. Police forces taking over other police forces? What the hell is that all about? How is that concept meant to grab me as a "man in the street" and make me think Gordy's going to sort things out this time round?

 

Clegg is a little bit of an enigma. For me his policies leave him wide open to negative campaigning, which is what we will most likely see from the Tories as they try to push their share of the polls back up towards 40%. There is little "different" about the Lib-Dems in my eyes. If anything their policies are the sort of policitically-correct bollocks that the majority despise. But he has a key advantage of not being Gordy or Dave so voters will be unlikely to see beyond that until after 6th May.

 

I think Labour are done for share of vote wise. It's ironic that the current system will probably keep them in charge of the country as the biggest Parliamentary party in the governing coalition when they have a policy to pull apart that very same system!

 

Surely to God this supposedly great nation can find a better potential leader from within the ranks of our political parties than the current three out of touch opportunist tossers that they are putting in front of us.

Edited April 21, 2010 by opinions4u

[oafc0000]

You may be right about Cameron having a chance to turn the tables with a good TV display tomorrow night. But this is a guy who is so out of touch with the working white-collar man (the traditional Tory voter perhaps, Mr Middle Income not quite higher rate tax) that he seems to think that a policy of "set up your own schools" is going to win votes. No disrespect intended Dave, but after staring at my employer's laptop for 5 days a week, getting home knackered each night and catching the football on a Saturday, exactly when do you expect me to recruit a few teachers and set up a feckin' school? Get a grip man and make the state system do its job better!

 

The setting up schools thing is a total sham to let him and his mates create there own private schools using public money while totally forgetting about the normal state school. He also wants us to "elect" police chiefs like they do in America. So scary! You get 50% of the population feeling represented by the police and other 50% feeling alienated.

 

Cameron is more scary than Griffin in a lot of ways.

f

As for Brown, I see no chance of his personality turning things round for Labour. He displayed a clear understanding (during the first TV debate) that his best chance of retaining power was for Nick Clegg to do well. Hence the sudden Labour love-in for proportional representation. Voters will, on the whole, think "you've had 13 years and made a mess of it, I can't see any reason to keep you in power". But by voting for Nick Clegg they probably will keep Brown in power - for now. Police forces taking over other police forces? What the hell is that all about? How is that concept meant to grab me as a "man in the street" and make me think Gordy's going to sort things out this time round?

 

The Labour vote is still standing up in a number of key seats. Come voting day I can see people voting for Labour. Its pretty much steady as she goes from Labour and I think that is the best policy right now with the economy recovering, all be it slowly.

 

Clegg is a little bit of an enigma. For me his policies leave him wide open to negative campaigning, which is what we will most likely see from the Tories as they try to push their share of the polls back up towards 40%. There is little "different" about the Lib-Dems in my eyes. If anything their policies are the sort of policitically-correct bollocks that the majority despise. But he has a key advantage of not being Gordy or Dave so voters will be unlikely to see beyond that until after 6th May.

 

Put the Libs under the spot light and they fall apart. There immigration bill will kill them alone I think. Most middle class and upper lower families will be worse off under them. The right wing population tend to favour trident renewal. Outside of Clegg and Cabell they are a pretty weak party.

 

I don't see them standing the test of time.

 

I think Labour are done for share of vote wise. It's ironic that the current system will probably keep them in charge of the country as the biggest Parliamentary party in the governing coalition when they have a policy to pull apart that very same system!

 

Surely to God this supposedly great nation can find a better potential leader from within the ranks of our political parties than the current three out of touch opportunist tossers that they are putting in front of us.

 

I do agree whats on the table is crap and that is one of the reasons I am voting Labour. There is no decent alternative.

Edited April 21, 2010 by oafc0000

[opinions4u]

I do agree whats on the table is crap and that is one of the reasons I am voting Labour. There is no decent alternative.

I have always objected to people not using their vote.

 

I fear spoiling my ballot paper might be the only way of expressing myself.