Gavin Scott wrote:To repeal the ban on what I consider a blood thirsty and cruel jaunt for toffs is nothing more than pandering to the upper classes.
Jesus, he's not even got the keys to Downing Street and he's reverting to type.
Gavin I totally agree with you on Fox Hunting, and Cameron showing his true blue toff colours.
scottishtv wrote:I hate myself for resorting to feelings as opposed to rational policy arguments. But watching Cameron in front of the Thames this morning - surrounded by white(not all white), City men in suits - saying that he will stand up for "the great ignored" really made me want to vomit. I just can't trust this guy.
Totally agree. Luckily I disagree with practically all of the Conservative policies, so I have no qualms about disliking the man, and what he stands for!
Chie wrote:A lot of people won't even give their policies a second glance. When you hear people say they don't know what the Conservatives' policies are, it's usually because they don't *want* to know. All the information is available on the Tory website, so there's no excuse for not knowing. It's because they've already made their mind up that the Tories are 'toffs' and that's that.
They may have words on their website, but there is no details, nothing there is fixed in place and their plans constantly change. Most of what they say is aspirational clap-trap, compared to Labour who may not be the most shining of parties, but they have the figures, they took the right decisions on the economy, and have been hit with a worldwide tsunami or events, which have derailed the good Tony Blair had done for the country (ignoring Iraq which is a marmite of a subject)
Chie wrote:But why is their wealth an issue? ...
... It's just another form of prejudice.
It is the wealthy in the city which have caused the huge deficit to be lumped on the public, so all our hard earned savings were not lost in collapsed banks. And then the Tory's who would have allowed that to happen, then come and tell the public we need public services cut, with their wealthy banker friends, saying "we're all in it together", this is why many see them as obscene, take great offence, and fear an incoming Tory government - As well as those who suffered during the 80's and early 90's with them.
Gavin Scott wrote:Name three of these amazing policies. Its not for me to go seeking these - if you think they are winning ideas, lets hear them.
Ask most members of the public with a vauge interest in politics, and they will say,
- Cut Inheritence tax for the super rich
- Cut the public sector fast and hard
- Allow people to start schools without anyone checking up to see if these schools are doing good for the pupils
If the Tories have great ideas for those who are the most disadvantaged, then they arent talking about them. How is that for the "great ignored".
Chie wrote:Who employs people, Gavin? Who creates jobs? Who runs the economy?
Another saying springs to mind here. It's 'don't bite the hand that feeds you'.
We want rich business people to stay in this country not emigrate to somewhere where they and their business won't be taxed to the eyeballs.
So we should let big business do what they want as long as they make money. This is the heart of difference between left and right. I believe there is such a thing as obscene amounts of profit. And I think if a company is to be allowed to make lots of money (without exploiting people thanks to Labour's minimum wage) they should also legally be made to agree to plowing some of that money back into the country, to help those who need it. The Tories would call this responsibility, but would never demand it of business. To the Tories, the individual is always responsible, and big business is always right. Labour had to change to accommodate these big businesses that the Tories allowed to grow and flourish, in order to get into power to help some of the disadvantaged. Its a shame it has taken this global recession, caused in part by Thatcher's "greed is good" philosophy to realise that business, wealth, and the state of society is all interlinked.
When it comes to the Economic policies, I find myself leaning towards the LibDems.
James H wrote:You can't deny the existence of the 'brain drain' though, Gavin? It seems to be middle-sized business owners who are currently hardest hit - in personal experience anyway - and makes 5 more years of Labour a bitter pill to swallow.
There is a sort of 'brain drain' (if you count greedy bankers and execs as brains), but lets not forget that the Tories destroyed the UK's manufacturing industries, because they didn't make HUGE profits. They did nothing to help move people into developing new skills, leaving generations of underskilled people unemployable.
Labour encouraged people to educate themselves and university has become a real possibility for many younger people (although the state of education is not perfect). The banking, and financial service sector was what the Tories encouraged, and it is this sector which have plunged us all in the shit. And now what work is there for those who do not have the academic abilities to get through school, let alone college or university? The very few manufacturing or unskilled jobs are taken up by migrant workers, because employers can exploit them easier, and their respective countries are used to manufacturing roles.
James H wrote:Again, this is all personal experience, and you can't really argue with that, as voting and politics can be deeply personal things.
This is why democracy, isn't really about documents of policies, its about how these ideals effect us as individuals. I remember how hard life was for me and my parents during the late 80's and the 90's. And I have seen things improve so much since 1997. Its not just the big things, its those little things. Like the state of a Job Centre. I had to use them some years back, but remember being with my Dad when he was unemployed for years. Sitting in one of the old Dole offices, was like having your soul slowly drained from you.
I remember all 5 of us having to live in a 1 bedroom flat, on a council estate towerblock, with druggies and prostitutes all around. My block was one of 5 towers, the only one still standing, due for demolition in a few months time. Now replaced by beautiful new build flats and houses, with a revitalised park. I have seen areas like Kings Cross improve. The hospital I was born in, The Whittington, whilst may be seeing an A&E closure, which is being fought against by our Labour MP, and the other candidates staying, despite this new threat. The Whittington has seen vast design improvements. I could go on...
Chie wrote:I'm not bothered what their view is on homosexuality as long as they do a good job of sorting everything else out.
Again, I'm not going to not vote for them just because they wouldn't introduce proper gay marriage. There are infinity more important things going on at the moment that take precedence over some relatively trivial 'rights' of fewer than 10% of the population, which, frankly, we can live without.
... but criticising someone for opposing the policies of one party or another, is not a simple issue, because our personal circumstances determine our political views, and no issue is so trivial enough as to be overlooked, or done down, and our personal views are as valid as cold rational thoughts.
As for the opinions of Chris Grayling... The issue is partly he is not on message with party policy, imagine what his GLBT constituents will now think. The MP is supposed to not only represent the majority of views from his region, but also stand up for those that are oppressed or suffering, if not for his party, than to just be a fucking decent human being! This also speaks to a problem for the Tories. Why has he not been thrown out of the party, unless David Cameron doesn't have a problem with these views?! If that is the case, why is it Tory policy, if the leader doesn't agree with it? It couldn't be they Tories are saying one thing to one group of people to gain votes, but really believe something different (sarcasm meter activated in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1)...
dosxuk wrote:For example, I, and a lot of other people, believe that building more nuclear power stations in this country is required for us to continue to develop as a nation.
No party has a policy for building new Nuclear Power stations as a matter of priority, so when deciding which party's policy I agree on (which is how I decide who gets my vote) I had to choose the one who said the least negative about nuclear... Such is the way of policy choices these days
Chie wrote:Society isn't going to regress back to the 1970s just because the Tories are in government
Look how right wing America became under George Bush, following a Democratic president. And think how would Bill Clinton or Obama, have reacted to 9/11 and how that would have affected the UK and the rest of the World...
Alexia wrote:mostly due to the religionistas getting their own way every time.
Catholics for example oppose adoption by a loving caring gay couple because it interferes with their 2000-year-old piece of parchmant.
Conservatives are full of CofE and WI supporters. Religion is and has been one of the major causes of every single conflict this planet has gone through. And I say this as a former catholic, who despises all religion, and how it has set back equality legislation in this country. Seperate goverment from religion, and seperate all notions of equality, eductaion and legislation from religion. FULL STOP!
Alexia wrote:Also note how the Tories only have one token gay - the corrupt, feeble and unhumerous Alan Duncan. He's your Tory role model for homosexuality. Best of luck.
Lets not get onto gay politicians, as that will inevitably lead to Mandelson and Portillo, and thats one image I would like to avoid.
