Is there any alternative to the jaundiced Tory attitudes?

by oftenwrong Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:56 pm

First topic message reminder :

Depressing, isn't it? All the miserable gits can come up with is oppression of the poor and fear of the disadvantaged. Never mind, here's something that can make us all feel better about the human race - even if it does have to include Cameron and Company .........

http://www.buzzfeed.com/expresident/pictures-that-will-restore-your-faith-in-humanity

by oftenwrong Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:55 am

One thing that the Coalition has not been able to save is the British end of the Ford Motor Company, which had been here for about a hundred years.
So much for Dave standing shoulder-to-shoulder with The Whitehouse.

Far from being all in it together, we're increasingly "on our own".

by Redflag Mon Oct 29, 2012 3:33 pm

oftenwrong wrote:One thing that the Coalition has not been able to save is the British end of the Ford Motor Company, which had been here for about a hundred years.
So much for Dave standing shoulder-to-shoulder with The Whitehouse.

Far from being all in it together, we're increasingly "on our own".

That is unless you have an off shore account or are a Tory party donor, then the Tories are with you all the way.

by Ivanhoe Mon Oct 29, 2012 3:35 pm

Redflag wrote:
oftenwrong wrote:One thing that the Coalition has not been able to save is the British end of the Ford Motor Company, which had been here for about a hundred years.
So much for Dave standing shoulder-to-shoulder with The Whitehouse.

Far from being all in it together, we're increasingly "on our own".

That is unless you have an off shore account or are a Tory party donor, then the Tories are with you all the way.

The Tory's only ever care about the rich. The poor/sad/stupid working classes who vote for them, do it in my view because they are snobs.

by Redflag Mon Oct 29, 2012 3:44 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:
Redflag wrote:
oftenwrong wrote:One thing that the Coalition has not been able to save is the British end of the Ford Motor Company, which had been here for about a hundred years.
So much for Dave standing shoulder-to-shoulder with The Whitehouse.

Far from being all in it together, we're increasingly "on our own".

That is unless you have an off shore account or are a Tory party donor, then the Tories are with you all the way.

The Tory's only ever care about the rich. The poor/sad/stupid working classes who vote for them, do it in my view because they are snobs.

I hope you do not count me in that number, in fact the Tory party got ONE Tory MP from Scotland, after what the Maggot done to Scotland we will NEVER vote tory I would cut off both hands before I would vote tory. Why do you think that Salmond is waiting until 2014 to hold the referendum he is hoping that Scots get fed up with the tory cuts plus fed up with England always putting the Tories into power and that was the same as the Maggot.

by Ivanhoe Mon Oct 29, 2012 3:48 pm

Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:
Redflag wrote:
oftenwrong wrote:One thing that the Coalition has not been able to save is the British end of the Ford Motor Company, which had been here for about a hundred years.
So much for Dave standing shoulder-to-shoulder with The Whitehouse.

Far from being all in it together, we're increasingly "on our own".

That is unless you have an off shore account or are a Tory party donor, then the Tories are with you all the way.

The Tory's only ever care about the rich. The poor/sad/stupid working classes who vote for them, do it in my view because they are snobs.

I hope you do not count me in that number, in fact the Tory party got ONE Tory MP from Scotland, after what the Maggot done to Scotland we will NEVER vote tory I would cut off both hands before I would vote tory. Why do you think that Salmond is waiting until 2014 to hold the referendum he is hoping that Scots get fed up with the tory cuts plus fed up with England always putting the Tories into power and that was the same as the Maggot.

Redflag, what gives you the impression that I counted you in that number ?

by bobby Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:03 pm

OW Said: People with a strong sense of "entitlement" are likely to claim Unemployment benefit or any other benefit, even if they don't actually need the cash.

You mean people like Herr Cameron claiming DLA for his late Son, despite he and his missus being worth in excess of £32,000,000.00

by bobby Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:07 pm

Ivanhoe said: Redflag, what gives you the impression that I counted you in that number ?

Its because you have a very nasty habit of calling the working class Britt stupid, and I guess that would get up some peoples nose.

by Ivanhoe Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:15 pm

bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: Redflag, what gives you the impression that I counted you in that number ?

Its because you have a very nasty habit of calling the working class Britt stupid, and I guess that would get up some peoples nose.

Well Ill tell you something bobby. I am very very aware that largely the British are sheep when it comes to politics.

We arent like the German's the French, or the Greeks.

Now i'm neither including yourself or Redflag.

by oftenwrong Mon Oct 29, 2012 7:18 pm

I bet he's an absolute hoot down the Pub.

by Ivanhoe Mon Oct 29, 2012 7:20 pm

oftenwrong wrote:I bet he's an absolute hoot down the Pub.

Or oftenwrong.

by Redflag Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:08 am

Ivanhoe wrote:
bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: Redflag, what gives you the impression that I counted you in that number ?

Its because you have a very nasty habit of calling the working class Britt stupid, and I guess that would get up some peoples nose.

Well Ill tell you something bobby. I am very very aware that largely the British are sheep when it comes to politics.

We arent like the German's the French, or the Greeks.

Now i'm neither including yourself or Redflag.

I'm glad to hear that Ivanhoe, and I would not call the UK public are sheep when it comes to politics, more like do not want to get involved in politics which is wrong but then again I can not say anything it took me until May 2010 to get involved in politics, I'm certain you will understand the meaning in that date.

by Ivanhoe Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:20 am

Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:
bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: Redflag, what gives you the impression that I counted you in that number ?

Its because you have a very nasty habit of calling the working class Britt stupid, and I guess that would get up some peoples nose.

Well Ill tell you something bobby. I am very very aware that largely the British are sheep when it comes to politics.

We arent like the German's the French, or the Greeks.

Now i'm neither including yourself or Redflag.

I'm glad to hear that Ivanhoe, and I would not call the UK public are sheep when it comes to politics, more like do not want to get involved in politics which is wrong but then again I can not say anything it took me until May 2010 to get involved in politics, I'm certain you will understand the meaning in that date.

Redflag, For the life of me, I cannot understand why you and bobby took my post personally, I did not point out names in my post, I said that "largely" the British people are like sheep when it comes to politics, and I will add, voting. And I stick to that. We British "largely" have no interest in politics at all, until things effect us personally, then that's a different story.

I became a "traditional" Labour activist in 1987, because I was totally against what Thatcher stood for, and because traditional Labour values were my values.

by Tosh Tue Oct 30, 2012 11:28 am

I bet he's an absolute hoot down the Pub.

Or oftenwrong..

lol, so true.

oftenwrong suffers from concussion, they should take his license away.

by bobby Tue Oct 30, 2012 11:55 am

Ivanhoe said: I did not point out names in my post, I said that "largely" the British people are like sheep when it comes to politics,

No you didn't, what you said is: The poor/sad/stupid working classes.

That is somewhat of a generalisation. Many of our working classes are

probably too busy to get involved in politics, not stupid just too busy, struggling to make ends meet. I don’t know your personal circumstances, but if you where working 40 hours plus a week for the minimum wage, or working part time because that’s all there is, then trying to bring up a young family on that, I wonder how much of a “Traditional Labour Activist” you would have either the time or the will to be. Most in that position are too busy worrying where the next decent meal is coming from or will they be able to get a new overcoat for their children to go to school in.

I personally have only been interested in politics, since my work load lessened and I could employ people to do what I gave every waking hour doing in order to get by businesses flourishing, now the cash is coming in whether I actually work or not, hence the time I can give to politics and time spent on this board. My main point is Ivanhoe, when I was struggling and didn’t have enough hours in the day, then according to your way of seeing things is that I was poor, sad and stupid. Well Ivanhoe I am not poor (albeit I have been) I have a very happy demeanour except when confronted with the likes of you, and if I was stupid, I most certainly wouldn’t have all that I presently enjoy.

I notice your petition has the grand sum of seven signatures, sit back and think of why that is, and then unless its too late do a bit of revision. Also you should stop attacking the very people you want to sign your petition.

by Ivanhoe Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:47 pm

bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: I did not point out names in my post, I said that "largely" the British people are like sheep when it comes to politics,

No you didn't, what you said is: The poor/sad/stupid working classes.

That is somewhat of a generalisation. Many of our working classes are

probably too busy to get involved in politics, not stupid just too busy, struggling to make ends meet. I don’t know your personal circumstances, but if you where working 40 hours plus a week for the minimum wage, or working part time because that’s all there is, then trying to bring up a young family on that, I wonder how much of a “Traditional Labour Activist” you would have either the time or the will to be. Most in that position are too busy worrying where the next decent meal is coming from or will they be able to get a new overcoat for their children to go to school in.

I personally have only been interested in politics, since my work load lessened and I could employ people to do what I gave every waking hour doing in order to get by businesses flourishing, now the cash is coming in whether I actually work or not, hence the time I can give to politics and time spent on this board. My main point is Ivanhoe, when I was struggling and didn’t have enough hours in the day, then according to your way of seeing things is that I was poor, sad and stupid. Well Ivanhoe I am not poor (albeit I have been) I have a very happy demeanour except when confronted with the likes of you, and if I was stupid, I most certainly wouldn’t have all that I presently enjoy.

I notice your petition has the grand sum of seven signatures, sit back and think of why that is, and then unless its too late do a bit of revision. Also you should stop attacking the very people you want to sign your petition.

Bobby, This is what I actually said. Refering to Tory voters among the working classes. """"""The poor/sad/stupid working classes who vote for them""".
do it in my view because they are snobs""""

I stick to this sentence. And these people as you say, have and are probably still voting for the very system that forces them to toil long hours at work every day.

by astra Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:11 pm

Why, oh Why does the British vote take place on a Thursday, when everywhere else will vote over 2 days, namely Sat and Sunday?

Even when I was working 6/7 days, I could manage one of these days!

If voting in this country becomes a legal requirement, thought will have to be given to this

by oftenwrong Tue Oct 30, 2012 3:02 pm

When I was in gainful employment, I would vote on my way to work.

"General Elections are held on Thursdays by convention, although local elections are held on the first Thursday in May by statute.1 General elections used to take place over a period of a number of days, often two to three weeks, until after the First World War when the Representation of the People Act 1918 made provision for general elections to be held on a single day. The first time the general election was held on a single day was Saturday, 14 December 1918."

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-05517.pdf

by Redflag Tue Oct 30, 2012 3:38 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:
bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: I did not point out names in my post, I said that "largely" the British people are like sheep when it comes to politics,

No you didn't, what you said is: The poor/sad/stupid working classes.

That is somewhat of a generalisation. Many of our working classes are

probably too busy to get involved in politics, not stupid just too busy, struggling to make ends meet. I don’t know your personal circumstances, but if you where working 40 hours plus a week for the minimum wage, or working part time because that’s all there is, then trying to bring up a young family on that, I wonder how much of a “Traditional Labour Activist” you would have either the time or the will to be. Most in that position are too busy worrying where the next decent meal is coming from or will they be able to get a new overcoat for their children to go to school in.

I personally have only been interested in politics, since my work load lessened and I could employ people to do what I gave every waking hour doing in order to get by businesses flourishing, now the cash is coming in whether I actually work or not, hence the time I can give to politics and time spent on this board. My main point is Ivanhoe, when I was struggling and didn’t have enough hours in the day, then according to your way of seeing things is that I was poor, sad and stupid. Well Ivanhoe I am not poor (albeit I have been) I have a very happy demeanour except when confronted with the likes of you, and if I was stupid, I most certainly wouldn’t have all that I presently enjoy.

I notice your petition has the grand sum of seven signatures, sit back and think of why that is, and then unless its too late do a bit of revision. Also you should stop attacking the very people you want to sign your petition.

Bobby, This is what I actually said. Refering to Tory voters among the working classes. """"""The poor/sad/stupid working classes who vote for them""".
do it in my view because they are snobs""""

I stick to this sentence. And these people as you say, have and are probably still voting for the very system that forces them to toil long hours at work every day.

Sorry to disagree with you Ivanhoe, there where plenty of Labour voters that voted Tory in May 2010 and of course plenty of them now regretting that they did vote that way, the Labour party lost its way and now Ed Miliband has got to find a way to show these people that the Labour party is going back (not right back) to its core values.

by tlttf Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:19 pm

Contents deleted for seriously breaching copyright laws. Ivan.

by bobby Tue Oct 30, 2012 6:32 pm

Many posters have in the past said that, those who purchased their ex council houses have become Tories, and in some cases that may well be the truth, but there is a difference between becoming a Tory and losing militant tendencies. Part of the reason for selling off council houses, other than to get their hands on more cash, is to put the house purchasers in so much debt, they can not physically afford to tale strike action, as they need every penny they can get to keep their heads above water. These people may well remain sympathetic to Labour but know they will lose their new acquisitions if they can not keep up the mortgage payments and become slaves to work until the mortgage is paid for.
If anyone believes the Tories introduced the Council House Purchase scheme to help them achieve their aspirations, should take themselves outside and give themselves a stern talking to.

by Ivanhoe Tue Oct 30, 2012 6:35 pm

bobby wrote:Many posters have in the past said that, those who purchased their ex council houses have become Tories, and in some cases that may well be the truth, but there is a difference between becoming a Tory and losing militant tendencies. Part of the reason for selling off council houses, other than to get their hands on more cash, is to put the house purchasers in so much debt, they can not physically afford to tale strike action, as they need every penny they can get to keep their heads above water. These people may well remain sympathetic to Labour but know they will lose their new acquisitions if they can not keep up the mortgage payments and become slaves to work until the mortgage is paid for.
If anyone believes the Tories introduced the Council House Purchase scheme to help them achieve their aspirations, should take themselves outside and give themselves a stern talking to.

Thatcher's right right to buy, which included stopping the building of council houses, was nothing more than an opportunist move to get the working class council housing tenants vote.

by oftenwrong Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:23 pm

A simplistic view is to say that a Government has an obligation to ensure, so far as possible, that its people have a basic minimum provision of Food, shelter and clothing. The essentials, in other words, of civilised life.

The Tory view, as expounded by Thatcherists, is that people must be encouraged to stand on their own two feet, and the role of government is not to do those things that people should be able to do for themselves.

The dishonesty of that position is that a Tory administration extracts as much tax from the people as any alternative.

by Ivanhoe Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:44 pm

oftenwrong wrote:A simplistic view is to say that a Government has an obligation to ensure, so far as possible, that its people have a basic minimum provision of Food, shelter and clothing. The essentials, in other words, of civilised life.

The Tory view, as expounded by Thatcherists, is that people must be encouraged to stand on their own two feet, and the role of government is not to do those things that people should be able to do for themselves.

The dishonesty of that position is that a Tory administration extracts as much tax from the people as any alternative.

Well said.

by Redflag Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:51 am

Ivanhoe wrote:
Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:
bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: Redflag, what gives you the impression that I counted you in that number ?

Its because you have a very nasty habit of calling the working class Britt stupid, and I guess that would get up some peoples nose.

Well Ill tell you something bobby. I am very very aware that largely the British are sheep when it comes to politics.

We arent like the German's the French, or the Greeks.

Now i'm neither including yourself or Redflag.

I'm glad to hear that Ivanhoe, and I would not call the UK public are sheep when it comes to politics, more like do not want to get involved in politics which is wrong but then again I can not say anything it took me until May 2010 to get involved in politics, I'm certain you will understand the meaning in that date.

Redflag, For the life of me, I cannot understand why you and bobby took my post personally, I did not point out names in my post, I said that "largely" the British people are like sheep when it comes to politics, and I will add, voting. And I stick to that. We British "largely" have no interest in politics at all, until things effect us personally, then that's a different story.

I became a "traditional" Labour activist in 1987, because I was totally against what Thatcher stood for, and because traditional Labour values were my values.

Up to a certain point Ivanhoe I agree that the majority of the UK public do not take politics seriously enough, as I said earlier it took me until the Tories got in again that gave me the shove to get involved in politics after living through the Maggot years I knew what was coming as did you. The problem is most people want Labour to go back to the values of the 50s/60s and that is impossible, but is it possible to bring those values into the 21st century so they are suitable for today?

by Ivanhoe Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:17 am

Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:
Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:
bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: Redflag, what gives you the impression that I counted you in that number ?

Its because you have a very nasty habit of calling the working class Britt stupid, and I guess that would get up some peoples nose.

Well Ill tell you something bobby. I am very very aware that largely the British are sheep when it comes to politics.

We arent like the German's the French, or the Greeks.

Now i'm neither including yourself or Redflag.

I'm glad to hear that Ivanhoe, and I would not call the UK public are sheep when it comes to politics, more like do not want to get involved in politics which is wrong but then again I can not say anything it took me until May 2010 to get involved in politics, I'm certain you will understand the meaning in that date.

Redflag, For the life of me, I cannot understand why you and bobby took my post personally, I did not point out names in my post, I said that "largely" the British people are like sheep when it comes to politics, and I will add, voting. And I stick to that. We British "largely" have no interest in politics at all, until things effect us personally, then that's a different story.

I became a "traditional" Labour activist in 1987, because I was totally against what Thatcher stood for, and because traditional Labour values were my values.

Up to a certain point Ivanhoe I agree that the majority of the UK public do not take politics seriously enough, as I said earlier it took me until the Tories got in again that gave me the shove to get involved in politics after living through the Maggot years I knew what was coming as did you. The problem is most people want Labour to go back to the values of the 50s/60s and that is impossible, but is it possible to bring those values into the 21st century so they are suitable for today?

Redflag, Britain needs a universial council house building programme. We need the return of an industry and manufacturing base. We need a decent mimimum wage. We need higher State pensions for our elderly and everybody in retirement. We need fair taxation and the abolition of the unjust council tax. We need the return of the role of the State.

by Stox 16 Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:09 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:
Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:
Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:
bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: Redflag, what gives you the impression that I counted you in that number ?

Its because you have a very nasty habit of calling the working class Britt stupid, and I guess that would get up some peoples nose.

Well Ill tell you something bobby. I am very very aware that largely the British are sheep when it comes to politics.

We arent like the German's the French, or the Greeks.

Now i'm neither including yourself or Redflag.

I'm glad to hear that Ivanhoe, and I would not call the UK public are sheep when it comes to politics, more like do not want to get involved in politics which is wrong but then again I can not say anything it took me until May 2010 to get involved in politics, I'm certain you will understand the meaning in that date.

Redflag, For the life of me, I cannot understand why you and bobby took my post personally, I did not point out names in my post, I said that "largely" the British people are like sheep when it comes to politics, and I will add, voting. And I stick to that. We British "largely" have no interest in politics at all, until things effect us personally, then that's a different story.

I became a "traditional" Labour activist in 1987, because I was totally against what Thatcher stood for, and because traditional Labour values were my values.

Up to a certain point Ivanhoe I agree that the majority of the UK public do not take politics seriously enough, as I said earlier it took me until the Tories got in again that gave me the shove to get involved in politics after living through the Maggot years I knew what was coming as did you. The problem is most people want Labour to go back to the values of the 50s/60s and that is impossible, but is it possible to bring those values into the 21st century so they are suitable for today?

Redflag, Britain needs a universial council house building programme. We need the return of an industry and manufacturing base. We need a decent mimimum wage. We need higher State pensions for our elderly and everybody in retirement. We need fair taxation and the abolition of the unjust council tax. We need the return of the role of the State.

Well said and well put too Ivanhoe.

Is there any alternative to the jaundiced Tory attitudes? - Page 3 Image179

by Redflag Wed Oct 31, 2012 3:23 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:
Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:
Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:
bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: Redflag, what gives you the impression that I counted you in that number ?

Its because you have a very nasty habit of calling the working class Britt stupid, and I guess that would get up some peoples nose.

Well Ill tell you something bobby. I am very very aware that largely the British are sheep when it comes to politics.

We arent like the German's the French, or the Greeks.

Now i'm neither including yourself or Redflag.

I'm glad to hear that Ivanhoe, and I would not call the UK public are sheep when it comes to politics, more like do not want to get involved in politics which is wrong but then again I can not say anything it took me until May 2010 to get involved in politics, I'm certain you will understand the meaning in that date.

Redflag, For the life of me, I cannot understand why you and bobby took my post personally, I did not point out names in my post, I said that "largely" the British people are like sheep when it comes to politics, and I will add, voting. And I stick to that. We British "largely" have no interest in politics at all, until things effect us personally, then that's a different story.

I became a "traditional" Labour activist in 1987, because I was totally against what Thatcher stood for, and because traditional Labour values were my values.

Up to a certain point Ivanhoe I agree that the majority of the UK public do not take politics seriously enough, as I said earlier it took me until the Tories got in again that gave me the shove to get involved in politics after living through the Maggot years I knew what was coming as did you. The problem is most people want Labour to go back to the values of the 50s/60s and that is impossible, but is it possible to bring those values into the 21st century so they are suitable for today?

Redflag, Britain needs a universial council house building programme. We need the return of an industry and manufacturing base. We need a decent mimimum wage. We need higher State pensions for our elderly and everybody in retirement. We need fair taxation and the abolition of the unjust council tax. We need the return of the role of the State.

I agree with this post Ivanhoe, but its not the minimum wage the people of the UK need its the "LIVING WAGE" the way that prices are rising right across the board they will need the living wage so they can keep up with rising prices.

by Ivanhoe Wed Oct 31, 2012 4:06 pm

I quite agree, but what is a living wage in your view ?

by boatlady Wed Oct 31, 2012 4:33 pm

oftenwrong wrote:-
A simplistic view is to say that a Government has an obligation to ensure, so far as possible, that its people have a basic minimum provision of Food, shelter and clothing. The essentials, in other words, of civilised life.

The Tory view, as expounded by Thatcherists, is that people must be encouraged to stand on their own two feet, and the role of government is not to do those things that people should be able to do for themselves.

The dishonesty of that position is that a Tory administration extracts as much tax from the people as any alternative.

If that's simplistic, I must be a simpleton - seems dead right to me

by **Phil Hornby** Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:24 pm

"...others believe it is Obama who orchestrated the storm to secure his re-election.

Several conspiracy websites have posted stories over the last few days alleging that the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Programme (HAARP) helped the president engineer Sandy, reports US News. The research programme, managed by the US Air Force and US Navy, studies and conducts experiments relating to the upper atmosphere. Conspiracy theorists believe the government uses the Alaska-based programme to manipulate the weather with the help of electromagnetic waves. " (msn news)[/i]

This represents the level of fanciful propaganda which our own Tories put about when desperation creeps up upon them. So that's just about all the time, actually... Shocked

by **Ivan** Wed Oct 31, 2012 9:45 pm

Can some of you please stop this ridiculous practice of requoting up to six or seven messages at once? If it gets much worse, you'll be requoting the entire thread!

If you're just responding to the previous message, there isn't really a need to quote it at all. However, if you want to post a quote, please just use one or two sentences of one message. Having to wade past piles of "he said, she said..." just to get to a one-line response becomes annoying when it happens so frequently.

(For the benefit of newcomers, the quote button is the twelfth from the left above the standard message box, and the fourth from the left above the quick reply box.)

by Ivanhoe Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:31 pm

Sorry Ivan, it wont happen again.

by oftenwrong Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:58 pm

".... fanciful propaganda which our own Tories put about when desperation creeps up upon them. So that's just about all the time."

Rebel Tories siding with Labour to demand cuts in our payments to Brussels are merely expressing the Will of the People, which as everyone knows is the driving force behind all Coalition proposals ..... waffle, waffle, huff, puff.

by Ivanhoe Wed Oct 31, 2012 11:02 pm

oftenwrong wrote:".... fanciful propaganda which our own Tories put about when desperation creeps up upon them. So that's just about all the time."

Rebel Tories siding with Labour to demand cuts in our payments to Brussels are merely expressing the Will of the People, which as everyone knows is the driving force behind all Coalition proposals ..... waffle, waffle, huff, puff.

And what good will this money do for us, should we claw some back ?

by oftenwrong Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:51 am

I don't doubt that any rebate negotiated from Brussels will appear as a credit on the Government side of the ledger, to be boasted about ad nauseam during any election campaign, but of which precisely nothing will be returned to the taxpayer.

The Eurozone doesn't think we are really in their club anyway, so may be resistant to negotiation.

by Ivanhoe Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:57 am

oftenwrong wrote:I don't doubt that any rebate negotiated from Brussels will appear as a credit on the Government side of the ledger, to be boasted about ad nauseam during any election campaign, but of which precisely nothing will be returned to the taxpayer.

The Eurozone doesn't think we are really in their club anyway, so may be resistant to negotiation.

oftenwrong. Brussells dont run Britain. Our MEP's in the council of ministers dictate what happens in Britain.

We arent in the Eurozone, because we dont have the Euro.

by Redflag Thu Nov 01, 2012 12:01 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:I quite agree, but what is a living wage in your view ?

The ideal living wage IMHO would be between £7.20-£7.50 per hour, and that is just because of the state of things are in at the moment.

by Ivanhoe Thu Nov 01, 2012 12:18 pm

Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:I quite agree, but what is a living wage in your view ?

The ideal living wage IMHO would be between £7.20-£7.50 per hour, and that is just because of the state of things are in at the moment.

Okay, I agree with that. Now the next hurdle is, what about people on means tested benefits ?. Could they not lose their benefits if their wages were increased ?

by Redflag Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:45 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:
Redflag wrote:
Ivanhoe wrote:I quite agree, but what is a living wage in your view ?

The ideal living wage IMHO would be between £7.20-£7.50 per hour, and that is just because of the state of things are in at the moment.

Okay, I agree with that. Now the next hurdle is, what about people on means tested benefits ?. Could they not lose their benefits if their wages were increased ?

If they where paid decent wages with cost of living increases instead of wage freezes, while there bosses get huge pay rises and some of them get there rise for nothing more than sitting on there butts, I'm talking here about the banks here they get huge salaries plus there even larger bonuses for S.F.A. and yet the tellers on the counters are having to loose there jobs because there bosses are a shower of Greedy Backstuds.

by bobby Thu Nov 01, 2012 4:02 pm

Ivanhoe said: Okay, I agree with that. Now the next hurdle is, what about people on means tested benefits ?. Could they not lose their benefits if their wages were increased ?

Ivanhoe, I really dont know what planet you are on, I was always under the impression that the idea of benefits was for those that need them the most, so why should people who receive a living wage get them.

Also you have been peddling the means testing argument for as long as you have been on these boards, “what is so wrong with means testing” I believe DLA is subject to medical condition and quite rightly is not means tested albeit tested against health or dissability, but what’s the point of paying things like Family allowance to those who do not need it, every millionaire who has spread their seeds get it as an entitlement even the bleeding Queen and her relative Herr David Cameron got it.

What means testing would do if administered correctly would be to withdraw such benefits from those who don’t need it freeing up more cash for those that do. If the needy got the extra cash though is another argument.

Tell me Ivanhoe how is any Government supposed to know just who and who not to give benefits too other than by some sort of means testing. Also just where does all of this benefit cash come from. You readily want to give it away even to those who dont need it, what about those who are actually paying for it, who's numbers are reducing even as I type.

by tlttf Fri Nov 02, 2012 7:59 am

Worry not bobby, Ivanhoe lives in a time warp, he's a labour supporter, just not this labour party and his thoughts are stuck firmly in the 60's.

by Sponsored content