Are the Tories finished before they start?

[Gavin Scott]

However, to answer thread title. The Tories are definitely not finished. I honestly can't wait until they win the election because I'm sick of living in what essentially is a socialist / communist (same difference) society where everybody lives on debt instead of working hard and generally does whatever the hell they please.

New Labour are not particularly left wing Chie - and I've got a few years on you to make the comparison with old labour. The financial "freedom" of credit cards was championed by Thatcher's Britain. But with freedom should come responsibility, and I completely agree that people should work for their income.

I want a government that instills a strong work ethic in its people and encourages them to aspire to grow up and be an adult, and take responsibility for themselves and everything they do, instead of nannying them until they're past 30 like Labour does right now. The people will work, and they'll work hard. If they don't, they will fail, and it'll be nobody else's fault but their own. Don't expect credit cards and loans to bail you out. Don't expect to be handed a job on a plate just because you chose the lazy option and went to 'uni' along with millions of other people, either.

Could you give me a couple of examples where people are encouraged not to work, or are "nannied past the age of 30"? That's the kind of thing Jeremy Clarkson says a lot, but never seems to expand upon.

There's clearly widespread abuse of the benefits system across the UK - I see plenty of able bodied wasters wandering around the city during the day who could clearly take a job - but I don't see how that's attributable to Labour - and moreover, I don't think it will end under Tory rule. There's certainly no evidence that they were any more effective at weeding out the benefit cheats under 17 years of conservative government (unless you count Tebbit saying, "get on your bike and find a job"). Benefit cheats were rife pre-1997 too.

I do think there should be more stringent rules about long-term benefit takers, and I wouldn't be averse to seeing compulsory social tasks being undertaken by those who haven't worked or paid into the NI system. I believe the benefit system - like any other kind of "insurance" - should be contributed to by all; so if your time comes that you need assistance, you've paid a share of what you're taking back.

But that's what the National Insurance system is supposed to do - and wasn't that a Labour invention?

That is a strong capitalist view, but capitalism wasn't invented in the 80's - it's been that way for hundreds of years now. At least it was before Labour screwed things up anyway :roll:

Screwed up how? Labour in the 70s was out of control. The unions held massive influence and the country was largely held to ransom. They opposed privatisation then - but not now. Labour and Tories now have a very similar view about private enterprise and industry.

As you're not old enough to remember the real left wing Labour party, it begs the question how you're arrived at your viewpoint - unless its a regurgitation of opinions of someone much older.

If people would rather live in a communist state like North Korea, then they can go and live there. And if they'd rather live in an ridiculously laid back country like Holland, then they can go and live in Holland as well. No one's stopping them.

Who the hell wants that? There's no real left/right wing separation any more. All the parties straddle the middle ground.

As a voter I don't see much between them - other than the nature and personality types of the politicians themselves.

And whilst Labour are hardly impressing the hell out of me, I see twats like Letwin and Duncan in the tory party and my blood runs cold at the thought of them being in control. They are so far removed from the average hard-working tax paying individual, I find it impossible to believe that they could represent my needs or aspirations.

They are there to represent the people - and they behave like the top 1%.

And PS - please refrain from using the rolling eye emoticon so much.

EDIT: I see Neil has beat me to the reply, so forgive me for any duplication.

[Pete]

When it comes to benefit cheats I always think of Daisy and Onslow from Keeping Up Appearances. There we have a comedy stereotype of something that is supposedly a "NuLiebour" invention a good six years before Blair came to power.

And another yay for the "stop using the rolling eyes" vote, its like you're having an aneurysm after every paragraph.

[Charlie Wells]

The Conservative party could do with banning him from appearing on HIGNFY (unless he's planning to become the next London mayor). In past appearances he's joked about the expense system being great before having to u-turn a couple weeks later. Also lets not forget he said "If you read that Miss California has been murdered, you will know it was me, won't you?".

[all new Phil]

I kind of agree with the gist of Chie's argument, but not so much the finer details. The reason I support the Conservatives and always vote for them is purely because I agree with their principals and what is supposed to be a the heart of what they stand for - that it is up to the individual to make the best for themselves, and that the government should be small and not interfere too much. What this will translate to when they inevitably win the next election, however, is something I'm not sure of. The last time the Conservatives were in power, I was in school, and therefore I'm no expert at what they are like in government.

I do agree with the comment that MPs aren't paid enough. That's not to say that the current lot deserve more than what they get, more that the pay should be higher in order to attract more of the right people. Sixty-odd thousand is not an awful lot, when you bear in mind the salaries of the highest earners in the country, and that's why I do kind of understand Alan Duncan's point - the fact that he chose to express this as he did, however, shows a gross lack of judgement and I don't really see how he can survive this.

What it is up to the Conservatives to do now, in my opinion, is spell out in black and white exactly what they plan to do when they regain power. This is what I think is holding them back from an even bigger lead in the polls.

[Gavin Scott]

What it is up to the Conservatives to do now, in my opinion, is spell out in black and white exactly what they plan to do when they regain power. This is what I think is holding them back from an even bigger lead in the polls.

Quite. I've changed my political leanings (and vote) over the course of my adulthood, so I'm open to persuasion - but without hearing their vision (never mind some policy), I'm only left with the personalities, and their attitude on issues.

There's a couple of issues I'd like to address. If it takes a top salary, say £100k+ to encourage the best people, then fine. The country can bear those salaries - I mean MPs pay is a teeny drop in the ocean of public money. But I hold my own view about those who would say "I don't believe in the job enough to accept a lower income than being a company director".

Taking the job and bitching about the pay after you've been caught fiddling your expense account wouldn't be stood for in any office I've ever worked in. I think that's outrageous. Perhaps that's just my sense of ethics.

And that's the second thing.

There's an inference from both Chie and yourself that the tories hold the monopoly on a strong work ethic or sense of personal responsibility - very much the rhetoric of Thatcher back in the day.

It jars deeply with me, because my work ethic is as strong as anyone's, and right now I would say it knocks Mr Duncan's into a cocked hat.

I think its possible to hold such an ethic, and still see the need for social justice. Things like the minimum wage help to keep people out of poverty. I know people who benefited from its introduction - and it didn't cause thousands of business to struggle or close as the conservative party said it would. In their 17 years of government the gap between the rich and poor became grossly wide. Many workers were below the poverty line. Poverty, in its realest terms, in Britain should be unthinkable to right minded people.

That was one of the policies Labour said they would deliver in 97, and that's why I voted for them at that time.

Soon as Cameron sets out his agenda I'll be able to mull it over.

[Chie]

This is a comedy post, eh?

Please?

This country is nothing like a socialist/communist state. And our government sits too centre-right to be called socialist.

Labour have cultivated a 'you're no better than anyone else' atmosphere - we're all the same according to them. Competitiveness has gone out the window as a result, and trying to better yourself is now looked upon negatively. Labour's cultural policies are very 'Leninist Russia' as well and on that note I'd say that the European Union, in which all countries abide by the same rules, standards and regulations, is no better than the Soviet Union either. You just don't realise it, because it's been re-packaged in a modern, liberal, more acceptable way. But I don't think it's good.

Aren't you under 30?
How exactly are you being nannied?

I've been through the Labour system. It doesn't teach you to grow a backbone and do well for yourself (cos that's a bad thing remember.. unless you're one of the lucky few entrepreneurs they're so obsessed with). It makes you think you can just sit back, be idle and live on debt until you're in your mid-twenties. And after that you may or may not find a good job. But it doesn't matter, you can just get a mortgage, a few more credit cards, a car loan, finance agreement with DFS for your 3-piece, and hey presto - you too can have a fully furnished house, and all without having to lift a finger!

Labour does nothing to discourage this ridiculous borrowing because the city has come to depend on it. On top of that though, Labour thinks we all deserve a break from decades of upper-class repression, and have every right to spoil ourselves if we want to. Not a good ethos.

Hopefully the Conservative government will encourage people to work hard, save money and build themselves up gradually, instead of expecting it all for nothing. Obviously I don't really know what it was like under the Conservatives before. But I expect them to lay down clear, black and white rules and boundaries for us to live by (as opposed to Labour's woolly 'guidelines'). Labour prefers to spend all it's time telling us what we can't do, whereas I think the Conservatives will tell us what we should do if we want to be successful in life, and then let us get on with it.

[dosxuk]

But I expect them to lay down clear, black and white rules and boundaries for us to live by (as opposed to Labour's woolly 'guidelines'). Labour prefers to spend all it's time telling us what we can't do, whereas I think the Conservatives will tell us what we should do if we want to be successful in life, and then let us get on with it.

I don't. They've had two - three years of Labour making more mistakes than anyone would believe possible, but they haven't once offered a solution to these problems, other than "vote for us, and Labour won't be in charge". There are countless examples of Cameron telling Brown he's got it wrong, and not what the country needs, but virtually none of him telling Brown what the country does need.

With the whole expenses scandal, Cameron was on the tallest of high horses demanding a full public enquiry into the cheating Labour MPs, until it became apparent that Conservative MPs were equally involved, and he became very quiet on the subject.

At present, I don't know what the Conservatives are standing for. I think their election campaign will be based on "we're not Labour", but every other party (except Labour obviously) can also claim that.

Things will get very interesting if the economic recovery takes as long as the Bank of England were saying the other day, and it's still running on when we get to the next (5 years time) general election. It will be very difficult for whoever wins next spring's election to retain control if they can't prove they have improved the situation.

[Sput]

. Labour prefers to spend all it's time telling us what we can't do, whereas I think the Conservatives will tell us what we should do if we want to be successful in life, and then let us get on with it.

That's a relief. I thought independent thinking might be required in this conservative utopia.

[Finn]

Aren't you under 30?
How exactly are you being nannied?

I've been through the Labour system. It doesn't teach you to grow a backbone and do well for yourself (cos that's a bad thing remember.. unless you're one of the lucky few entrepreneurs they're so obsessed with). It makes you think you can just sit back, be idle and live on debt until you're in your mid-twenties.

But, of course, you're the exception and have a backbone?

Hopefully the Conservative government will encourage people to work hard, save money and build themselves up gradually, instead of expecting it all for nothing. Obviously I don't really know what it was like under the Conservatives before. But I expect them to lay down clear, black and white rules and boundaries for us to live by (as opposed to Labour's woolly 'guidelines').

I think you want religion. They're the ones who set down rules about how you should live.

Well, and dictators.

You'd soon be complaining if you really were being told how to live.

[barcode]

I have deiced not to vote Tory at the next UK election, what swang it for me? those two ejet, I don;t know who I will vote for but it wont be the Tory,

Saying that if you have the pleasure of Radio 2 Jeramey vine show you would have heard the new major of Doncaster talking, ( he is an english democrat) and alot of people like what he said.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... 3_08_2009/

[Chie]

I have deiced not to vote Tory at the next UK election,

Oh don't be daft barcode, you were never going to anyway :roll: