# General Election 2015



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

*Who's are you settling with?*​
Conservatives 4124.55%Labour 63.59%Liberal Democrats 31.80%The Green Party 127.19%The UK Independence Party 5935.33%The Scottish National Party 84.79%Plaid Cymru 10.60%Sinn Fein 31.80%Other 10.60%Undecided 74.19%Not Voting2615.57%


----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

Since the early polls have started emerging in the papers and other news sources I have become curious as to how a poll on UK-Muscle would turn out. Vote for who has your backing this May!

Yes I am aware I ballsed up the Poll title.


----------



## JuggernautJake (Nov 6, 2013)

labour, only party that look after the MAJORITY and if you vote anything else I consider you to be evil

al beit they are the best of a bad bunch...but I'd rather get ass raped by a 3 inch dick then a 12 inch dick


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

I will be too busy trolling UKM to vote


----------



## Phil. (Feb 18, 2015)

Creating my own party. It's called the common sense party, and has the sole purpose of getting all those fvcking plums to go fvck themselves


----------



## Marcus2014 (Mar 24, 2014)

Green for me.

Totes srs


----------



## Prince Adam (Mar 17, 2012)

Isn't it gonna be two outcomes.

Labour & Snp (vote on Scottish independence)

Tories & ukip (eu vote)


----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

JuggernautJake said:


> labour, only party that after the MAJORITY and if you vote anything else I consider you to be evil
> 
> al beit they are the best of a bad bunch...but I'd rather get ass raped by a 3 inch dick then a 12 inch dick


I dunno, you'd probably get more respect for surviving a 12 inch cock than being bested by a measly three-incher.


----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

Prince Adam said:


> Isn't it gonna be two outcomes.
> 
> Labour & Snp (vote on Scottish independence)
> 
> Tories & ukip (eu vote)


Labour have ruled out collaborating with the SNP; whether you believe them or not is another matter. Also even if they did I doubt Labour would support a referendum as Scotland has historically been a site of major support for Labour up until recently. Labour would be essentially waving goodbye to their hopes of a majority in the future if they catalysed the independence of Scotland.

I think we are probably going to hear most of the parties promising a referendum on Europe in the next couple months in order to curry favour. The Liberal Democrats and the SNP are the only major parties who I know of that have came out as being 100% anti-EU referendum. Even the Greens support a referendum despite being pro-EU.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Tory 100%

Watch the full Budget announcent and tell me why ANY of it is bad for the country? Lol the look on liebours faces as Osbourne belted out fact after fact. They (liebour) had no come back to it at all. Thier best attempt was when milliband (private school boy) said it couldn't be believed...lol what a laugh. So the IMF, OFNS, OFFS, G8 and every other independant international body is making it up to? He he every measure was positive and moving in right bdirection.

Liebour have no answer to the current economic success the Tories have delivered. Even the so called poorest are now better off under Tory government.


----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

Phil. said:


> Creating my own party. It's called the common sense party, and has the sole purpose of getting all those fvcking plums to go fvck themselves


As long as you fill it with the empathetic and/or pragmatic in place of the self serving and/or idealistic that inhabit the other parties you'll do well.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

DrZaius said:


> Labour have ruled out collaborating with the SNP; whether you believe them or not is another matter. Also even if they did I doubt Labour would support a referendum as Scotland has historically been a site of major support for Labour up until recently. Labour would be essentially waving goodbye to their hopes of a majority in the future if they catalysed the independence of Scotland.
> 
> I think we are probably going to hear most of the parties promising a referendum on Europe in the next couple months in order to curry favour. The Liberal Democrats and the SNP are the only major parties who I know of that have came out as being 100% anti-EU referendum. Even the Greens support a referendum despite being pro-EU.


Labour are not giving us a referendum. Millliband has said no to that. Which I find interesting as I always thought it was the people's democratic right to vote on such matters, but apparently nope, Milliband has made the decision for us as presumably we are not smart enough to make our own minds up. Yay labour...not


----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Labour are not giving us a referendum. Millliband has said no to that. Which I find interesting as I always thought it was the people's democratic right to vote on such matters, but apparently nope, Milliband has made the decision for us as presumably we are not smart enough to make our own minds up. Yay labour...not


Some within Labour have voiced support, no surprise as they seem incredibly fractured and disorganised at the moment. I am of the opinion Miliband will change his tune in the run up to the election. He will pass it off as him being incredibly generous when lets be honest, whether you agree with the outcome or not a referendum is the only democratic decision. Then again that's my sense of logic speaking and it hasn't always been helpful in predicting what Labour will do recently.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

JuggernautJake said:


> labour, only party that after the MAJORITY and if you vote anything else I consider you to be evil
> 
> al beit they are the best of a bad bunch...but I'd rather get ass raped by a 3 inch dick then a 12 inch dick


Labour? You gotta be fcuking kidding me? Labour are a bunch of pedophile enabling traitor cnuts who wrecked this country and you'd vote them back in? The Lib Lab Con are pure scum and anyone mad enough to vote for them either hates this country, or is blissfully ignorant of the heinous crimes this toffee nosed bunch of [email protected] have committed against the good people of this nation.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

DrZaius said:


> Some within Labour have voiced support, no surprise as they seem incredibly fractured and disorganised at the moment. I am of the opinion Miliband will change his tune in the run up to the election. He will pass it off as him being incredibly generous when lets be honest, whether you agree with the outcome or not a referendum is the only democratic decision. Then again that's my sense of logic speaking and it hasn't always been helpful in predicting what Labour will do recently.


I am a Tory so biased here but I think the easy way to predict what labour will do next is once again copy Tory policy and then promise more to trick the electorate into voting for them (which is not financially viable)

In a way I feel sorry for Ed Balls(up) as everything he predicted over the last 4 years has been proven wrong. Now his only tactic left is to keep quiet and act like no one notices or remembers.


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

GCMAX said:


> Labour? You gotta be fcuking kidding me? Labour are a bunch of pedophile enabling traitor cnuts who wrecked this country and you'd vote them back in? The Lib Lab Con are pure scum and anyone mad enough to vote for them either hates this country, or is blissfully ignorant of the heinous crimes this toffee nosed bunch of [email protected] have committed against the good people of this nation.


 @JuggernautJake is a communist, so Labour are an ideal party for his type. Fvck labour though I'm not voting for them, like you say they're trying to wreck the country.


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

TommyBananas said:


> Words elude me. You must have all lost your fvcking mind, why are you even playing their sick game? If you vote, you should be ashamed of yourselves. All of you.
> 
> I say this because there is *no-one* worth voting for; it has never changed, it never will under this current system, year after year after year false promises, false hopes, the same boring crap, doesn't matter who gets voted in.
> 
> ...


What's your solution to the problem of this political system we have now, if any?


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

TommyBananas said:


> Words elude me. You must have all lost your fvcking mind, why are you even playing their sick game? If you vote, you should be ashamed of yourselves. All of you.
> 
> I say this because there is *no-one* worth voting for; it has never changed, it never will under this current system, year after year after year false promises, false hopes, the same boring crap, doesn't matter who gets voted in.
> 
> ...


For someone who hates politics so much you sure do like to get involved in political threads and debate. Maybe in future you should just not post in such threads if you are so anti politics?


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

EpicSquats said:


> What's your solution to the problem of this political system we have now, if any?


None...he thinks we should all just live off the land apparently. Free as birds...


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Delhi said:


> I am a Tory so biased here but I think the easy way to predict what labour will do next is once again copy Tory policy and then promise more to trick the electorate into voting for them (which is not financially viable)


I'm guessing you want to stay in the EU then? Trust me, 'cast iron' Dave will renege on his 2017 EU referendum 'promise' like he did on the Lisbon treaty + you say you're a Tory but the Tories aren't the Tories anymore, are they? I just don't get this tribalism in voting, especially considering we are teetering on the edge of incredibly turbulent times with all the wars going on in the world and us still being vastly overpopulated with failing public services and in the middle of an economic depression.

Call me wearing a tin foil hat, or whatever you want but do yourself a favor and look up QMV (Qualified Majority Voting) - this could be the last general election that actually matters because on completion of QMV in 2017, ALL our national laws will be transferred to the EU to be voted on by a Brussels select committee of unelected bureaucrats and our nation will no longer be our own. Remember innocent before proven guilty, the magna carta, habius corpus, all will be overridden by EU law.


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> None...he thinks we should all just live off the land apparently. Free as birds...


Oh yeah, that hippy bullsh1t that hippies never think through. It wouldn't work.


----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

Delhi said:


> None...he thinks we should all just live off the land apparently. Free as birds...


It's the Russel Brand style of logic. If you don't have any ideas or constructive opinions to be criticised then you can apparently criticise everything else without fear of rebuttal and as an added bonus get the moral high ground. Or that's the theory apparently.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

GCMAX said:


> I'm guessing you want to stay in the EU then? Trust me, 'cast iron' Dave will renege on his 2017 EU referendum 'promise' like he did on the Lisbon treaty + you say you're a Tory but the Tories aren't the Tories anymore, are they? I just don't get this tribalism in voting, especially considering we are teetering on the edge of incredibly turbulent times with all the wars going on in the world and us still being vastly overpopulated with failing public services and in the middle of an economic depression.
> 
> Call me wearing a tin foil hat, or whatever you want but do yourself a favor and look up QMV (Qualified Majority Voting) - this could be the last general election that actually matters because by November the 1st this year in 2015, ALL our national laws will be transferred to the EU to be voted on by a Brussels select committee of unelected bureaucrats and our nation will no longer be our own. Remember innocent before proven guilty, the magna carta, habius corpus, all will be overridden by EU law.


Personally I am Euro sceptic BUT I agree with Cameron that just leaving without first trying to negotiate a better deal would be silly. I could be swing either way with Euro but for now I am sceptic


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Delhi said:


> Personally I am Euro sceptic BUT I agree with Cameron that just leaving without first trying to negotiate a better deal would be silly. I could be swing either way with Euro but for now I am sceptic


If your looking to get renegotiation on EU open borders that will never happen as Juncker and others have stated that the free movement of people is a fundamental underlying principle of EU law and cannot be altered. Also if your Euro Skeptic, you should know the upper ranks of the Conservatives are all very Pro EU. I know there are Euro skeptics in the Conservative party but they are not in control, the party heads are and they have strategic personal interests in developing an EU superstate.


----------



## JuggernautJake (Nov 6, 2013)

EpicSquats said:


> @JuggernautJake is a communist, so Labour are an ideal party for his type. Fvck labour though I'm not voting for them, like you say they're trying to wreck the country.


yep... although labour are a bit too centre for my liking, but they have the most in common with my political views out of the main parties


----------



## Armitage Shanks (Jul 7, 2014)

I would vote for Maajid Nawaz if he was my local candidate.

Maajid seems to make the most sense to me in this political mess.


----------



## Snorbitz1uk (Sep 21, 2005)

i have never voted before this will be my first time, the way i see it there are only 2 parties who could actually run the country Tory and Labour and there is no way i would vote labour.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

I dont vote, I leave all the political stuff to people more qualified.

I never moan about politics because I dont vote and not voting negates my entitlement to an opinion.

Whichever Government is in charge doesnt effect my life one way or another to a degree enough so I would notice.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Armitage Shanks said:


> I would vote for Maajid Nawaz if he was my local candidate.
> 
> Maajid seems to make the most sense to me in this political mess.


subtle troll post right there.


----------



## MFM (Jul 25, 2013)

I don't see the BNP there.


----------



## Armitage Shanks (Jul 7, 2014)

banzi said:


> subtle troll post right there.


Eh?


----------



## Prince Adam (Mar 17, 2012)

It's wide open for sure this year.

Old boy I used to work with would book a few days holiday so he could stay up till silly hours watching the live count come in over the country lol

I just can't see a majority win for any party.

& I still won't vote, pointless.

They serve their paymasters, not the general public.

Revolution coming, yea right.


----------



## Varg (May 17, 2010)

banzi said:


> I never moan about politics because I dont vote and not voting negates my entitlement to an opinion.


No it doesn't.


----------



## JohhnyC (Mar 16, 2015)

UKIP will certainly get my vote. I am tired of seeing this country being rapidly destroyed by people coming in here and contribute nothing to our society, while Westminster stand idly by and let it happen and bend over backwards to appease everyone but their own. Sickens me


----------



## AlexB18 (Dec 10, 2013)

Never have voted and i doubt that will change, i dont moan about politics i just get on with my life and truth be told i dont understand a ****ing thing about politics anyway, whichever party is in power doesnt change how i live my life anyway, to me they all make false promises in an effort to beg for votes so i personally dont see the point.


----------



## banzi (Mar 9, 2014)

Varg said:


> No it doesn't.


Yes it does.

:confused1:


----------



## Varg (May 17, 2010)

banzi said:


> Yes it does.
> 
> :confused1:


Why?

If you don't vote because you don't like any of the candidates or you don't believe they can or will make a difference you are entitled to moan.


----------



## Clubber Lang (Nov 4, 2009)

100% Tories, i hate Labour with a passion! Labour voters are people who want something for nothing, benefit this, free money for that, sickens me! I dont work two jobs and get taxed 20% on my second job to give money to Gregg eating smackheads who cant be ****d to work. If it was any other country they'd probably starve to death... i hope!

Labour = boom and bust, then takes a Tory Government to balance the books, only for Labour to come back into power and spend it all and bring the country down to its knees....again!

and if Labour and the SNP join forces, then we are truely FECKED!!

UKIP, as much as i agree with some of the policies, i think voting for them with only do Labour a favour and get them in power, or increase theyre chances. Dont vote UKIP!


----------



## dannythinx (Oct 4, 2014)

The truth is it will make 0 difference to the average joe who's in power


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

Really tough call this one......

Conservatives - lying toerags who have broken just about every election promise they made last time so no reason to assume it's not all empty rhetoric again this time. As for the notion mooted earlier that "even teh poor are better off now.." are you f'ing kidding me???? Record numbers forced to access foodbanks, record numbers of repossessions (I've been flat hunting recently...I've seen about 30 flats...all but one was a repo...according to teh various estate agents this is how it is right now). The tories have deliberately and blatantly lied about teh figures, they have "redefined" things to make themselves look good - and then of course...there's ATOS...well that brought the benefits figures down didn't it....admittedly some people declared fit for work died of their medical conditions within a few days of being assessed as "fit" but apparently that's ok. And don't get me started on the fact they "can't find teh money" for some substantial parts of teh NHS..........but they can find 780 million to pay private contractors who need to turn more of a profit, including two with a demonstrably poor record. They ride roughshod over the people over this country and their policies have unequivocally NOT taken us to a better place in any real sense.

Lying, nepotistic scumbags.

Labour - see above....but with red ties.

Lib Dems - nope nope nope. I used to vote for them until they got into bed with the Con-merchants.....but now...no.

Greens - if you look at actual policies then they are definitely in the lead for me......... however i'm not entirely convinced by their leadership...

UKIP - give me a break........one horse party with an ars3 for a leader. The focus on immigration demonstrates quite clearly they are about daily mail vote grabbing headlines rather than any sensible policies that mean something to us. Immigration is a side issue. If UKIP get in I would seriously consider leaving the country. Utter, utter cvnts.

They are all jumping on the immigration/eu/benefits bandwagons brought in by sensationalist media......but the reality is that virtually every "fact" that people get fed about those issues is in fact; utter garbage. Whip up fear and consternation about those issues...distract from the bigger issues.....win vote on the back of the "we will save you from the stuff we invented to scare you"...and on we go.

And as for the idea that Labour broke our banks and the Tories "rescued us" - that's been torn apart so many times I am amazed it's still being spouted. Our problems started under the tories and they got worse.

The big issue of course is...............people sit there and blithely accept being spoon fed by teh media as opposed to actually bothering to find out what's happening for themselves. Well that and the fact that there doesn't seem to be any genuine party that is prepared to challenge the media driven nonsense.........


----------



## andyboro (Oct 1, 2006)

I cant decide this time around, I Voted Conservative last time, I doubt I'll ever be able to bring myself to vote Labour considering that they're completely responsible for the mess that we're in financially and within the EU.

The Conservatives have taking to effectively shouting slogans to appeal to the lowest common denominator though which has made them go down significantly in my estimations.

might even have to vote Lib-Dem at this rate.


----------



## superpube (Feb 18, 2015)

Only a crazy man would vote labour. I'm still astonished that no prosecutions for war crimes have gone down. Let alone what they did in their own country.

And let's not forget David Kelly, where the cover up speaks louder than the deed

Murdering lying thieving scum.


----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

kuju said:


> Really tough call this one......
> 
> Conservatives - lying toerags who have broken just about every election promise they made last time so no reason to assume it's not all empty rhetoric again this time. As for the notion mooted earlier that "even teh poor are better off now.." are you f'ing kidding me???? Record numbers forced to access foodbanks, record numbers of repossessions (I've been flat hunting recently...I've seen about 30 flats...all but one was a repo...according to teh various estate agents this is how it is right now). The tories have deliberately and blatantly lied about teh figures, they have "redefined" things to make themselves look good - and then of course...there's ATOS...well that brought the benefits figures down didn't it....admittedly some people declared fit for work died of their medical conditions within a few days of being assessed as "fit" but apparently that's ok. And don't get me started on the fact they "can't find teh money" for some substantial parts of teh NHS..........but they can find 780 million to pay private contractors who need to turn more of a profit, including two with a demonstrably poor record. They ride roughshod over the people over this country and their policies have unequivocally NOT taken us to a better place in any real sense.
> 
> ...


Greens policies look good until the logical side of your brain kicks in and you realise it's idealistic twaddle. They don't know how they would implement all of the sweeping socialistic changes and it's probable that it would be impossible without further bankrupting the country. Furthermore, as somebody who has studied enviromental/sustainable chemistry at university, their energy plans could turn out to be be worse for the environment than better. Although I must be fair, they are a political pressure party and their policies reflect this.


----------



## BennyC (Mar 18, 2010)

I'll be giving the Conservatives another term to finish mopping up the steaming pile of **** Labour left behind.

Austerity was coming whichever way you looked at it and anybody who expected otherwise is a ****ing idiot and shouldn't be voting.


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

DrZaius said:


> Greens policies look good until the logical side of your brain kicks in and you realise it's idealistic twaddle. They don't know how they would implement all of the sweeping socialistic changes and it's probable that it would be impossible without further bankrupting the country. Furthermore, as somebody who has studied enviromental/sustainable chemistry at university, their energy plans could turn out to be be worse for the environment than better. Although I must be fair, they are a political pressure party and their policies reflect this.


Yeah fair comment - to be honest i'm pretty disillusioned with every major party right now.

I suspect there may be an issue with UKIP splitting the right wing and the greens splitting teh left wing vote so we end up with nobody having a clear majority. Which will then of course lead to yet another scramble for people to form coalitions - and none of the options for that sound good.

I say burn them all and start again with some honest people who will put teh press in their place...........if such a thing exists in the political world..


----------



## FlunkyTurtle (Aug 5, 2013)

I was torn between Greens, UKIP and Tories.

Ukip - Get us out of the EU, don't agree with much more than that

Greens - Lost my vote when they started talking about persecuting Motorcyclists

Tories - best option so far

I need to read their manifesto's before the general election.

while i agree my vote makes bugger all difference, you have no right to moan if you don't put pen to paper.


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

BennyC said:


> I'll be giving the Conservatives another term to finish mopping up the steaming pile of **** Labour left behind.
> 
> Austerity was coming whichever way you looked at it and anybody who expected otherwise is a ****ing idiot and shouldn't be voting.


Except that whole "Conservatives mopping up labours mess" is a load of propaganda garbage with no sybstance and completely unsupported by any actual real world evidence and actually - that utter fvcknut Osborne has increased our deficit in real terms.

Finally! Exposed! The Deficit Myth! So, David Cameron When Are You Going to Apologise? | Ramesh Patel

(Written by a Conservative ecomnomist...and still doesn't toe that particular line)

A more concise and cutting examination....

Political Myth Busting: The "always cleaning up Labour's messes" narrative

The bottom line is that Tories have, on balance, screwed teh country far more than any Labour government ever have. Admittedly there have been labour blunders too.......but the tories have unequivocally made things worse in real terms.

Austerity was probably coming due to a worldwide recession......caused by bankers instigating it and then betting that a recession would be the outcome...and making a fortune out of it. But it is not due to government policies besides those that govern (for want of a better word) the financial sector.


----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

FlunkyTurtle said:


> I was torn between Greens, UKIP and Tories.
> 
> Ukip - Get us out of the EU, don't agree with much more than that
> 
> ...


How could you forget Ed?


----------



## Clubber Lang (Nov 4, 2009)

DrZaius said:


> How could you forget Ed?


says it all.....


----------



## FlunkyTurtle (Aug 5, 2013)

DrZaius said:


> How could you forget Ed?


If i wanted to go to hell i'd just crash a commercial jet....

Too soon?


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

Ukip for me just for a change tbh. In my life I've had conservative and labour fvck things up so I think it's time for someone else to have a bash.


----------



## Heavyassweights (Jan 18, 2014)

barsnack said:


> I will be too busy trolling UKM to vote


fcukn troll


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

kuju said:


> Really tough call this one......
> 
> Conservatives - lying toerags who have broken just about every election promise they made last time so no reason to assume it's not all empty rhetoric again this time. As for the notion mooted earlier that "even teh poor are better off now.." are you f'ing kidding me???? Record numbers forced to access foodbanks, record numbers of repossessions (I've been flat hunting recently...I've seen about 30 flats...all but one was a repo...according to teh various estate agents this is how it is right now). The tories have deliberately and blatantly lied about teh figures, they have "redefined" things to make themselves look good - and then of course...there's ATOS...well that brought the benefits figures down didn't it....admittedly some people declared fit for work died of their medical conditions within a few days of being assessed as "fit" but apparently that's ok. And don't get me started on the fact they "can't find teh money" for some substantial parts of teh NHS..........but they can find 780 million to pay private contractors who need to turn more of a profit, including two with a demonstrably poor record. They ride roughshod over the people over this country and their policies have unequivocally NOT taken us to a better place in any real sense.
> 
> ...


Are you me? You have just saved me from having to take the time to post my thoughts, thank you! :beer:


----------



## Marcus2014 (Mar 24, 2014)

DrZaius said:


> Greens policies look good until the logical side of your brain kicks in and you realise it's idealistic twaddle. They don't know how they would implement all of the sweeping socialistic changes and it's probable that it would be impossible without further bankrupting the country. Furthermore, as somebody who has studied enviromental/sustainable chemistry at university, their energy plans could turn out to be be worse for the environment than better. Although I must be fair, they are a political pressure party and their policies reflect this.


I don't know about you but i would rather wind/ nuclear energy than fracking and poising my water.....


----------



## zyphy (Jun 23, 2014)

lib dems- theyre pretty much finished. anyone who votes for them clearly doesnt have a fully functioning brain

lab/con - well it's a case of picking the best of the ugly sisters but labour caused a real mess when they were last in it and haven't convinced me enough throughout the past 4/5 years they'd do a better job

UKIP - lol 1 trick pony with a leader who spouts a load of bs (ironically his wife is ****ing german :lol: wonder if she'll be getting kicked out)


----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

Marcus2014 said:


> I don't know about you but i would rather wind/ nuclear energy than fracking and poising my water.....


The Green party are completely anti-nuclear though... Furthermore, wind power is not a reliable and cost-effective solution to primary energy generation. Personally I would like to see all parties embracing new, exciting means of solving the energy problem. France for example has invested huge amounts into creating a stable, safe nuclear power program and produces about 50% of its energy using nuclear fission.

Furthermore, with the first commercially viable nuclear fusion reactor currently in the prototype stage, I would like to see the major parties demonstrate an interest in that. Nuclear fusion has the potential to be completely clean, producing no harmful by-products or greenhouse gases and is seen by most in the scientific community as being the "magic bullet" for the energy problem.

So in short, I don't have a particular vendetta against the Greens, it's just that due to them championing their energy plan more so than other parties, I feel that justified scrutiny is fair.


----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

zyphy said:


> lib dems- theyre pretty much finished. anyone who votes for them clearly doesnt have a fully functioning brain
> 
> lab/con - well it's a case of picking the best of the ugly sisters but labour caused a real mess when they were last in it and haven't convinced me enough throughout the past 4/5 years they'd do a better job
> 
> UKIP - lol 1 trick pony with a leader who spouts a load of bs (ironically his wife is ****ing german :lol: wonder if she'll be getting kicked out)


Could it be that Nigel Farage's campaign is just an elaborate ruse to get rid of his wife?!


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

According to the poll here, UKIP are almost on par with the CONS and Labour are way behind. This seems to be a reflection of national feeling in the comment sections of many websites, yet mainstream media are reporting Labs and Cons are neck and neck in popularity. Their psy op clearly isn't working this time.


----------



## Heavyassweights (Jan 18, 2014)

GCMAX said:


> According to the poll here, UKIP are almost on par with the CONS and Labour are way behind. This seems to be a reflection of national feeling in the comment sections of many websites, yet mainstream media are reporting Labs and Cons are neck and neck in popularity. Their psy op clearly isn't working this time.


your avatar is creepy creepy


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Heavyassweights said:


> your avatar is creepy creepy


Then its having the intended effect :tongue:


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

GCMAX said:


> According to the poll here, UKIP are almost on par with the CONS and Labour are way behind. This seems to be a reflection of national feeling in the comment sections of many websites, yet mainstream media are reporting Labs and Cons are neck and neck in popularity. Their psy op clearly isn't working this time.


Because our voting systems a joke, ukip will get loads of votes but be lucky to get a few seats. I'm in Scotland, no point in voting for anyone other than labour or snp due to them all being skint up here lol


----------



## coke (Jan 17, 2015)

To be fair they are all a bunch of stuck up tosses!......for me right now immigration and not being part of europe are key, so on that note ill be voting UKIP.

Hopefully the scare of so many people voting UKIP will give the conservative or labour parties (whoever gets in) a kick up the ass to tighten up immigration by leaving the EU.


----------



## JuggernautJake (Nov 6, 2013)

genuinely shocked at the votes for UKIP

how about reading up on more just there immigration policy


----------



## coke (Jan 17, 2015)

JuggernautJake said:


> genuinely shocked at the votes for UKIP
> 
> how about reading up on more just there immigration policy


Why so shocked?

I have read there policies along with labours and conservatives. To be honest i take most of there promises with a pinch of salt. I do believe that UKIPs policy on the EU is 99% true as the devil is in the detail UKIP!. This for me as said above is key, i want out of the EU. I want the UK to set there own laws and not be governed by people who dont even live in our country.


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

coke said:


> To be fair they are all a bunch of stuck up tosses!......for me right now immigration and not being part of europe are key, so on that note ill be voting UKIP.
> 
> Hopefully the scare of so many people voting UKIP will give the conservative or labour parties (whoever gets in) a kick up the ass to tighten up immigration by leaving the EU.


What about all the immigration from outside of Europe?


----------



## Dezw (May 13, 2009)

UKIP hate Scotland so anybody up here voting for them is nuts, and they are basically just another BNP.

Although all the parties are pretty useless at present I will be voting SNP, be great to have no Tory politicians in Scotland.


----------



## CandleLitDesert (Mar 8, 2015)

I'm a big supporter of the Green party but might vote Labour to stop UKIP got to love tactical voting.


----------



## Wasp (Nov 1, 2009)

Nigel Farage actually knows what it's like to be brought up in the normal world and still lives in it. Fed up of tory BS labour BS and Lib dem hippy no back bone ****e. I got a feeling that UKIP will be a good thing.

And no, I'm not a racist, my Mrs is black.


----------



## MR RIGSBY (Jun 12, 2007)

Dezw said:


> UKIP hate Scotland so anybody up here voting for them is nuts, and they are basically just another BNP.
> 
> Although all the parties are pretty useless at present I will be voting SNP, be great to have no Tory politicians in Scotland.


Seems to me like most of Scotland will be voting SNP. Part of me thinks now it would have been better if you had gained independence. The thought of Salmond or Sturgeon in Westminster worries me.

Not aimed at you directly mate, but why do you think there has been such a surge in support for the SNP on the basis their independence campaign was a joke. They based almost all their forecasting on oil revenues, a month later the global oil price crashed. If the price of oil stays low (which most analysts predict) Scotland would have been goosed on the SNPs costings. Seems mad to me to put your faith now in a party that could have bankrupted the country?


----------



## spod (Mar 25, 2010)

Wasp said:


> *Nigel Farage actually knows what it's like to be brought up in the normal world* and still lives in it. Fed up of tory BS labour BS and Lib dem hippy no back bone ****e. I got a feeling that UKIP will be a good thing.
> 
> And no, I'm not a racist, my Mrs is black.


.....SAY WHAT???

Farage is a public school educated son of a stockbroker.

He's from a world of privilege - just like most of the other muppets in politics - and no amount of sickeningly staged photo opportunities of him swigging a beer at his local boozer, making himself out to be a common working man should deceive anyone! :nono:


----------



## Adz (Jan 29, 2008)

I don't usually vote as to be honest I don't know enough about the different parties.

The problem is all the politicians are so boring, I don't listen to what they say. We haven't got a single likeable politician in the country!

Not like usa where they have people like Obama who seems pretty cool, and people get right into it


----------



## Acidreflux (Mar 3, 2015)

UKIP...


----------



## killamanjaro (Dec 30, 2013)

Wasp said:


> And no, I'm not a racist, my Mrs is black.


Thanks for clearing that up


----------



## Clubber Lang (Nov 4, 2009)

JuggernautJake said:


> genuinely shocked at the votes for UKIP
> 
> how about reading up on more just there immigration policy


voting UKIP only increases the chance of Labour, which sounds like a Communist Party with theyre tax the successful to pay for the scum whos curtains are still closed at 11am cus theyre arent and cant be bothered to work people! Thats Labour through and through. Party for people that want something for nothing!! Absolute bollocks do they speak for the working class. My missus mum works a min wage job at a supermarket, and through the Tories shes now much better off as she now pays less tax. Labour havent got a leg to stand on, and do remember it was a Labour government that brought this country down to its knees!!!

dont vote UKIP, vote Tories, if you dont you'll end up with possibly a Labour & SNP government, and if the Scots get in, we're truely fecked! Scots voting on English only matters, oh dear!


----------



## Huntingground (Jan 10, 2010)

I have two votes (mine and missus) so will split them.

1 vote for Tories - financial policy and benefit cuts.

1 vote for UKIP - immigration policy, destroy faith schools, eradicate extremism, ensure all imigrants live by UK rules or GTFO.

I think Tories will win outright.


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

I reckon they should stick all the political leaders into Big Brother house...give them a week, and begin voting out who you hate, until the last one is standing, his / her Party can run things


----------



## vlb (Oct 20, 2008)

MR RIGSBY said:


> e.
> 
> Not aimed at you directly mate, but why do you think there has been such a surge in support for the SNP on the basis their independence campaign was a joke.


Seems abit remiss to call the campaign a joke, Yes they lost but the also more than doubled their support for their cause and since then have quadroupled their party membership. seems to me that they have gained alot on the back of a loss.



MR RIGSBY said:


> *They based almost all their forecasting on oil revenues*, *a month later the global oil price crashed*


Actually they didnt base almost all their forcasts on oil.... there was an oil forecast (which was wrong) but still LESS than the UK governments own oil forcast and LESS than the OBR oil forecast. In the white paper oil was treated as a bonus not a basis for economy.



MR RIGSBY said:


> If the price of oil stays low (which most analysts predict) Scotland would have been goosed on the SNPs costings.


Not sure which analysts you are referring to but accoring to the following experts the price is a slump not a trend

Oil-Price Rebound Predicted - WSJ

Energy Agency Predicts High Prices in Future | Worldwatch Institute

https://www.outsiderclub.com/report/2015-oil-price-forecast-how-to-profit-when-crude-comes-back/1238

Oil Price Forecast: 2015-2016 - Forbes.

no one could argue that an asset dropping from £70 per unit to £40 per unit is a ****er but being "goosed" is abit far, I mean we are part of a country at the moment with over £1 Trillion worth of debt, it does tget much more goosed than that.



MR RIGSBY said:


> Seems mad to me to put your faith now in a party that could have bankrupted the country? .


As i said earlier, the SNP forcasts were below the UK Governments (civil Service) and OBR forecasts so by your own logic you shouldnt vote for the current UK government either?


----------



## vlb (Oct 20, 2008)

Clubber Lang said:


> if the Scots get in, we're truely fecked! Scots voting on English only matters, oh dear!


quite the contrary. The Scottish government has made it clear that they will only vote on matters which directly affect calculations made under the barnett formula.

not sure where you are getting your information from but it is incorrect.


----------



## Clubber Lang (Nov 4, 2009)

vlb said:


> quite the contrary. The Scottish government has made it clear that they will only vote on matters which directly affect calculations made under the barnett formula.
> 
> not sure where you are getting your information from but it is incorrect.


SNP want independence, so will do theyre utmost to break up the country from the inside, its obvious.


----------



## JohhnyC (Mar 16, 2015)

Huntingground said:


> I have two votes (mine and missus) so will split them.
> 
> 1 vote for Tories - financial policy and benefit cuts.
> 
> ...


can't click "like" yet but exactly! Look at that bloody Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal. No one wanted to mention it or dpo anything about it because some left wing Muppet would start screaming racism. In fact it was the Pakistani community that were most out spoken about the cover up.

I am definitely voting for UKIP. They are never going to get a majority vote but only until they have a strong representation in parliament will the other parties start to sit up and take notice of the issues everyone wants to discuss

David Cameron and even Ed Miliband now are starting to go on a "European change" stance now and talk about "tackling immigration". They didn't give a toss when UKIP were a tiny party

Farage made Clegg look like a total tit on the head to head debate on the BBC last year.


----------



## vlb (Oct 20, 2008)

Clubber Lang said:


> SNP want independence, so will do theyre utmost to break up the country from the inside, its obvious.


Your original statement was that the SNP would be voting on english only matters when the evidence shows the contrary.

Is today just your day for making sweeping statements without any evidence to back it up?

Yes the SNP want independence but the majority of Scottish people have just voted to remain within the UK. The SNP have stated clearly that there will only be another referendum under 2 circumstances

1) They win a SCOTTISH election campaign which has been run on a manifesto which includes another referndum.

2) England votes to leave the EU where a majority of Scots wanted to stay.

So with that in mind if the SNP go to westminster as a minority party and side with labour on a vote by vote basis then they wont be in a position to break up anything (unless of course you are suggesting labour will give them the votes needed to pursue a "break up strategy").

Personally i hope the tories win and keep to their promise of an in/out referendum on europe, in that scenario i can see the majority of English wanting to leave the european union (if polls are to be beleived) and the majority of Scots wanting to stay (if the polls are to be beleived.)

This will force another Scottish referendum which i am sure would be the opposite result of the last one.

If Cameron doesnt call an in/out referndum on europe then i can see the rise of UKIP kicking the sh1t out of the tories in the 2019 GE.


----------



## vlb (Oct 20, 2008)

JohhnyC said:


> can't click "like" yet but exactly! Look at that bloody Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal. No one wanted to mention it or dpo anything about it because some left wing Muppet would start screaming racism. In fact it was the Pakistani community that were most out spoken about the cover up.
> 
> I am definitely voting for UKIP. They are never going to get a majority vote but only until they have a strong representation in parliament will the other parties start to sit up and take notice of the issues everyone wants to discuss
> 
> ...


Actually agree with this (not the support for UKIP) but for the idea that the 2 party state needs shaken up. It looks like it will continue up here with Labours norther branch losing heavily to the SNP and imo it can only be a good thing.


----------



## Carbon-12 (Feb 26, 2013)

none. all of them are **** anyway. although i am very tempted to vote for any just for the sake of having more votes than UKIP. really hope that retard farage doesn't come to power because his ways of "benefiting the people of the UK" are just idiotic e.g. going out the EU, sending immigrants back, giving employers the right to pick their employees based on colour and country of origin etc. whilst doing fck all about all those people that are capable of working but sit around on their asses day after day claiming benefits.

think the people that have seen benefit britain or living life on the dole would understand


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

Carbon-12 said:


> none. all of them are **** anyway. although i am very tempted to vote for any just for the sake of having more votes than UKIP. really hope that retard farage doesn't come to power because his ways of "benefiting the people of the UK" are just idiotic e.g. going out the EU, sending immigrants back, giving employers the right to pick their employees based on colour and country of origin etc. *whilst doing fck all about all those people that are capable of working but sit around on their asses day after day claiming benefits.*
> 
> think the people that have seen benefit britain or living life on the dole would understand


What's the UKIP policy on that?


----------



## Carbon-12 (Feb 26, 2013)

EpicSquats said:


> What's the UKIP policy on that?


not sure but i haven't heard him mention anything about it nor budget plans etc. all i've heard is "ill bring england back the english people".


----------



## DeskSitter (Jan 28, 2013)

Mi5 rigged the Scottish referendum.

Clearly if you want to be a part of the 'democratic' charade cast your pointless vote. I quite frankly would see an end to the political institution, it was designed for an era where people used donkey's and carts, it's now become an expensive irrelevance. I think it's clear politicians have nothing to offer, they are not technicians or masters in any field other than spin, they pander to those in control of the money system, the Rothchilds and the Rockafellas of this World responsible for countless genocides, economic and environmental destruction spanning generations. This is who runs your flip flop of a nation. Look at those who have suffered first hand the twisted power plays of those lording it out within this countries institutions, pedophile rings covering swathes of the media and entertainment industries all interlinked with government. There are vast networks of pederasts like Saville who were and still are supplying children to those in the upper echelons, those involved in satanic devil worship within secret societies when on the face of it they masquerade as entertainers, philanthropists and 'officials'. Children in poverty are most likely to fall victim to these diseased scum, those who should be protected by the state and by the services we support with our plodding slavery. The standard of living has increased exponentially and we have technology to thank for this not politics. In just 50 years we will look back on politics as a pointless pantomime that gave the masses the illusion they had any say in anything that matters. If you want to know what will happen with your country in the next decade and beyond look to the Rothchild's, these Zions think they have the right to enslave all of humanity whilst at all times playing the victim, a clever and deviant psyopy that has worked for hundreds of years


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

DeskSitter said:


> Mi5 rigged the Scottish referendum.
> 
> Clearly if you want to be a part of the 'democratic' charade cast your pointless vote. I quite frankly would see an end to the political institution, it was designed for an era where people used donkey's and carts, it's now become an expensive irrelevance. I think it's clear politicians have nothing to offer, they are not technicians or masters in any field other than spin, they pander to those in control of the money system, the Rothchilds and the Rockafellas of this World responsible for countless genocides, economic and environmental destruction spanning generations. This is who runs your flip flop of a nation. Look at those who have suffered first hand the twisted power plays of those lording it out within this countries institutions, pedophile rings covering swathes of the media and entertainment industries all interlinked with government. There are vast networks of pederasts like Saville who were and still are supplying children to those in the upper echelons, those involved in satanic devil worship within secret societies when on the face of it they masquerade as entertainers, philanthropists and 'officials'. Children in poverty are most likely to fall victim to these diseased scum, those who should be protected by the state and by the services we support with our plodding slavery. The standard of living has increased exponentially and we have technology to thank for this not politics. In just 50 years we will look back on politics as a pointless pantomime that gave the masses the illusion they had any say in anything that matters. If you want to know what will happen with your country in the next decade and beyond look to the Rothchild's, these Zions think they have the right to enslave all of humanity whilst at all times playing the victim, a clever and deviant psyopy that has worked for hundreds of years


although theres some truth to this, why do you discredit yourself and the point by making it sound like a movie description!

most people are blind to the rothschilds and how the money system works, but the ones preaching it are fools aswell due to using youtube videos to back themselves up and smoking weed lol


----------



## Guest (Apr 1, 2015)

-


----------



## DeskSitter (Jan 28, 2013)

b0t13 said:


> although theres some truth to this, why do you discredit yourself and the point by making it sound like a movie description!
> 
> most people are blind to the rothschilds and how the money system works, but the ones preaching it are fools aswell due to using youtube videos to back themselves up and smoking weed lol


Alternative media spreads more truth than misinformation, the word has to get out in some way there is no perfect way to educate people on their realities. How do you think most people react when they begin to realise their entire world is a prison constructed for them by those that seek psychopathic levels of control over their fellow humans? Again, there is no correct way to inform people. Research money mechanics and witness your opinion of the World crumble in front of your eyes. You are taking one extreme (those who choose to make money from spreading new age theology) and then saying they smoke weed and all the rest and you mention youtube as a bad example which it isn't. You should not be concerned that some personalities make a good living from exposing government agendas, THEY GET THE INFORMATION OUT. This makes the wheels start to turn, if you are foolish yourself enough to take everything on youtube at face value perhaps you do the same with all other media channels including those controlled by Zion, this makes you exactly what you call others doesn't it. Exercise judgement and common sense, you don't need some authoritarian figure head to come out at a conference to say something is correct, use your faculties you will go further


----------



## NoodleArms (Apr 17, 2011)

JuggernautJake said:


> labour, only party that look after the MAJORITY and if you vote anything else I consider you to be evil
> 
> al beit they are the best of a bad bunch...but I'd rather get ass raped by a 3 inch dick then a 12 inch dick


Anyone who votes Labour should be flogged, for the simple reason of being a complete Muppet.



GCMAX said:


> Labour? You gotta be fcuking kidding me? Labour are a bunch of pedophile enabling traitor cnuts who wrecked this country and you'd vote them back in? The Lib Lab Con are pure scum and anyone mad enough to vote for them either hates this country, or is blissfully ignorant of the heinous crimes this toffee nosed bunch of [email protected] have committed against the good people of this nation.


fook me, when was the last time the 'Labour' government was a true 'labour' party!?


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

Carbon-12 said:


> none. all of them are **** anyway. although i am very tempted to vote for any just for the sake of having more votes than UKIP. really hope that retard farage doesn't come to power because his ways of "benefiting the people of the UK" are just idiotic e.g. going out the EU, sending immigrants back, giving employers the right to pick their employees based on colour and country of origin etc. whilst doing fck all about all those people that are capable of working but sit around on their asses day after day claiming benefits.
> 
> think the people that have seen benefit britain or living life on the dole would understand


lol capping child benefit at 2 kids is in their manifesto aswell as capping benefits in general, think you're mixed up with Labour. They never said to allow employers to pick by colour either lol. Non white English people are favoured at the moment though as companies have to have x amount of Asians etc.


----------



## mph (Jul 4, 2009)

Prince Adam said:


> Isn't it gonna be two outcomes.
> 
> Labour & Snp (vote on Scottish independence)
> 
> Tories & ukip (eu vote)


Based on my limited knowledge I agree with this. Ruled out or not by either 'major' party I see either of the above as likely.

Majorly conflicted because something isn't right about being ruled (partly) by the SNP when you can't even vote for them!


----------



## Marcus2014 (Mar 24, 2014)

well that leaders debate was a bit intense.


----------



## Frandeman (Mar 24, 2014)

And nothing will change...


----------



## DeskSitter (Jan 28, 2013)




----------



## DrZaius (Jul 23, 2014)

Marcus2014 said:


> well that leaders debate was a bit intense.


Intense in the same manner as the shiit I took after eating an entire bag of suger-free gummy bears was intense.


----------



## Wasp (Nov 1, 2009)

I joked about Farage before but I've never voted and I never will.

My vote is my approval, and with all of them lined up none of them deserve it.

I don't HAVE to vote for the sake of voting, I think that's wrong as you're giving a candidate a freebie, for what? They haven't convinced me to give it and I'm sure they will never earn it in the next 4 years.

They're all the same, they won't make anything better they will just fcuk it up in some difference way trying to make the wrong people happy.


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

The apathy of people makes me, people keep having a whinge on social media and doing nothing to encourage change. Then complaining there's no change


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

In the last general election....if more people had actually turned out to vote - the outcome would likely have been VERY different. The belief that your own vote doesn't matter is just plain wrong. And it's not about giving a vote of approval to a particular person - it's about helping to determine what policies (may) come in next - which can potentially affect you quite drastically.

I still haven't decided who i'm voting for yet; mainly because (a) the candidates are all a bunch of no hope @rse wipes and ( B) whilst some of the policies seem sound...I am increasingly unconvinced that any would get implemented as promised. The tories said "Kick us out in five years if we break our promises" - which they have. In abundance and quite dramatically. We currently have a bigger debt than we ever saw under Labour. Not one of the bankers who is actually responsible..and I mean directly responsible...for the financial mess the world landed in has been jailed. This despite specifically engineering a situation whereby a recession hit...and thanks to their further actions...they literally made millions on it. Several governments have completely failed to properly regulate the financial industry and enforce those regulations. Despite being very heavily regulated.....a small group of people still managed to bring about a global recession.

Which in turn has led to the diabolical, unworkable, unthinkable and utterly retarded austerity cuts that every independent economist has condemned as worthless and harmful.

Which in turn has led to decreased job security, less wages in real terms and therefore worries about whether or not people are going to be able to pay bills...feed their families...keep their homes...

Which in turn leads to the government and media going "Look over there! Immigrants! Benefit scroungers! They're stealing your money and your jobs!"

Utter. Utter b0llocks. The net effect of immigration is such that they actually contribute more financially than they take. The cost of benefit fraud is about 1.2 billion....a lot of money. But compared to the 30+ billion that could be claimed by closing financial loopholes for big businesses (ie tory and UKIP funding groups) ...it kind of pales.

I say if we throw the immigrants on benefits out....then every UK citizen on benefits abroad (of which there are many more than there are immigrants on benefits here) needs to be thrown out the country's they're in. Except......then our benefit bill will go up.

We are part of a global society and our economy is intricately tied in to it in such a manner that taking an isolationsist approach is likely to be damaging in teh long run. We *can* leave the EU and survive and thrive...but only if it's handled carefully and intelligently. ie: Not by that walking, spluttering, daily mail caricature Farage. The idea of entrusting our position on the global stage to a man that is seemingly terrified of foreigners generally...is ridiculous. Especially given that he triumphantly crows about being an MEP and actually not attending very often. He is basically saying - I get paid a fortune for this...some of it is your taxpayer money...but I'm not going to do the job because I don't like Europe. [email protected]

The problem of course is......Cameron and his cronies have broken almost every promise and are running us into the ground (despite what their spin doctors say) and Milliband/ Labour just don't seem to have their act together AT ALL.

But regardless....I will choose and I will vote....because we must have a government and I'm not about to sit back and wait for a default outcome. Or another hung parliament.

Imagine a coalition of UKIP and Tory................jesus.

Still - Labour have one good thing going for them - Katie hopkins said she'll leave the UK if they won. :thumb:


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

Although the above post is good, it's wrong about the immigrants contributing to this economy, I need to find the report showing it tbh, the whole world is run by money and no politician is going to change much, they're in it for their career not the people..


----------



## JohnEades (Apr 16, 2013)

Delhi said:


> Tory 100%
> 
> Watch the full Budget announcent and tell me why ANY of it is bad for the country? Lol the look on liebours faces as Osbourne belted out fact after fact. They (liebour) had no come back to it at all. Thier best attempt was when milliband (private school boy) said it couldn't be believed...lol what a laugh. So the IMF, OFNS, OFFS, G8 and every other independant international body is making it up to? He he every measure was positive and moving in right bdirection.
> 
> Liebour have no answer to the current economic success the Tories have delivered. Even the so called poorest are now better off under Tory government.


"The so called poorest", suggesting that you don't think that there even is a poorest demographic in society. A nice hearty lol from me. And you don't think that George Osbourne is dishonest? Another hearty lol. Not that I am voting labour. But both of those insinuations are ridiculous.


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

Delhi said:


> Tory 100%
> 
> Watch the full Budget announcent and tell me why ANY of it is bad for the country? Lol the look on liebours faces as Osbourne belted out fact after fact. They (liebour) had no come back to it at all. Thier best attempt was when milliband (private school boy) said it couldn't be believed...lol what a laugh. So the IMF, OFNS, OFFS, G8 and every other independant international body is making it up to? He he every measure was positive and moving in right bdirection.
> 
> Liebour have no answer to the current economic success the Tories have delivered. Even the so called poorest are now better off under Tory government.


To add to the post above (and the link I posted a while back...written by a conservative ..that completely debunks the Selfservatives nonsense about the conomy)....this is eloquently put ...

Why did Britain's political class buy into the Tories' economic fairytale? | Ha-Joon Chang | Comment is free | The Guardian

Admittedly I may be slightly biased here...as my job will be going due to the cuts. As are many other people's that I know of - and if the tories get in again it will get worse.


----------



## NSGym (Aug 23, 2011)

going with conservatives this time as i think the country needs to continue on with them at least for another term, however I am in many ways for ukip and would like some of their policies in place,


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

kuju said:


> To add to the post above (and the link I posted a while back...written by a conservative ..that completely debunks the Selfservatives nonsense about the conomy)....this is eloquently put ...
> 
> Why did Britain's political class buy into the Tories' economic fairytale? | Ha-Joon Chang | Comment is free | The Guardian
> 
> Admittedly I may be slightly biased here...as my job will be going due to the cuts. As are many other people's that I know of - and if the tories get in again it will get worse.


The guardian is hardly a hotbed of impartial politics.


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

simonthepieman said:


> The guardian is hardly a hotbed of impartial politics.


No - very true...but the article still cites factual information and cites independent evidence. The harsh truth remains - the tories said "kick us out if we break our promises" - and they did. They inherited a debt in the hundreds of millions. Now we have a debt in the trillions. They promised not to dismantle the NHS. They are dismantling the NHS; the most crucial point there being the idea that they couldn't find funding for certain services.....but they found 780 million to award private contractors that need to turn a profit to do those services....including two that have shown how incompetent they are at doing it. WHy is that important? Because (a) it's a very big broken promise, ( B) it will affect us all, © the contracts have in some cases not been offered to the best tender...but to the one contributing to party funds and (d) because - look at the USA. Pound for pound they have some of the worst health outcomes in the western world. But they have great doctors, amazing hospitals and other facilities..........and a privatised health market which costs several times what it does here to do the exact same things with the same drugs and equipment.

However - getting back to the economy.....leading economists pretty much all take issue with teh austerity measures. The conservatives are making money for their mates; that's it........teh rest of us can go take a running jump as far as they're concerned. And given they broke their promises last time I have no reason to believe any policy they put forward this time.


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

kuju said:


> No - very true...but the article still cites factual information and cites independent evidence. The harsh truth remains - the tories said "kick us out if we break our promises" - and they did. They inherited a debt in the hundreds of millions. Now we have a debt in the trillions. They promised not to dismantle the NHS. They are dismantling the NHS; the most crucial point there being the idea that they couldn't find funding for certain services.....but they found 780 million to award private contractors that need to turn a profit to do those services....including two that have shown how incompetent they are at doing it. WHy is that important? Because (a) it's a very big broken promise, ( B) it will affect us all, © the contracts have in some cases not been offered to the best tender...but to the one contributing to party funds and (d) because - look at the USA. Pound for pound they have some of the worst health outcomes in the western world. But they have great doctors, amazing hospitals and other facilities..........and a privatised health market which costs several times what it does here to do the exact same things with the same drugs and equipment.
> 
> However - getting back to the economy.....leading economists pretty much all take issue with teh austerity measures. The conservatives are making money for their mates; that's it........teh rest of us can go take a running jump as far as they're concerned. And given they broke their promises last time I have no reason to believe any policy they put forward this time.


I'm actually voting Tory. Not actually excited or that proud, but they are the best of a bad bunch and whilst a bit of a knob. Cameron is the only one that resembles a statesman and with exception of farage, the other options I fear are international walkovers. And UKIP would screw things up in the long term.

The economy is in a good progressive way at the moment, but I have a London centric view and can't comment well out my bubble here.

But big business is driving small business and that's what is important at this moment so I think the boat needs to be unrocked for the next 4 years.

I'm not happy with what they are doing with the NHS at the moment, but I think it's a **** sandwich for any party and it will take a huge effort to turn around and no one has given me long term confidence on a solution


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

Who is that woman "incharge" of the green party? I'm sure that's a stitch up. So if you do well for yourself and worth 3 million your gonna be bummed. The dole dossers are just a myth apparently according to her on the radio yesterday. Well I can bust that myth in 2 seconds if she would like to come to my town. Them and the vermin pigeons just walk around together as equals


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

simonthepieman said:


> I'm actually voting Tory. Not actually excited or that proud, but they are the best of a bad bunch and whilst a bit of a knob. Cameron is the only one that resembles a statesman and with exception of farage, the other options I fear are international walkovers. And UKIP would screw things up in the long term.
> 
> The economy is in a good progressive way at the moment, but I have a London centric view and can't comment well out my bubble here.
> 
> ...


Fair enough I guess. I think the tories will screw us over; admittedly my perspective is from working in Public Health and that's nto a good place to view them from. They're also lying scumbags...

However I take your point about UKIP; utter morons who simply don't have the political nouse or the global vision to lead this country anywhere good. Their whole "being ruled by brussels" garbage drives me insane....perhaps if they actually turned up for their job as MEPs and represented us properly...the thing they get paid £60,000 a year for doing (plus expenses)..we wouldn't have the issues they are using to win votes. It's like your local MP never attending parliament and then complaining how local interests aren't represented there. Exactly like that in fact. Hardly a good starting point...Farage is already an MP..but can't be bothered doing the job properly. Excellent. Let's make him prime minister. Ffs.....

And yes - essentially we have to try and pick the best of a bad bunch this time round. None of them particularly inspire me either. Aside from SNP but obviously that's not much use here....... f it - i'll move to Scotland...


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

kuju said:


> Fair enough I guess. I think the tories will screw us over; admittedly my perspective is from working in Public Health and that's nto a good place to view them from. They're also lying scumbags...
> 
> However I take your point about UKIP; utter morons who simply don't have the political nouse or the global vision to lead this country anywhere good. Their whole "being ruled by brussels" garbage drives me insane....perhaps if they actually turned up for their job as MEPs and represented us properly...the thing they get paid £60,000 a year for doing (plus expenses)..we wouldn't have the issues they are using to win votes. It's like your local MP never attending parliament and then complaining how local interests aren't represented there. Exactly like that in fact. Hardly a good starting point...Farage is already an MP..but can't be bothered doing the job properly. Excellent. Let's make him prime minister. Ffs.....
> 
> And yes - essentially we have to try and pick the best of a bad bunch this time round. None of them particularly inspire me either. Aside from SNP but obviously that's not much use here....... f it - i'll move to Scotland...


I don't blame you conning from your background.

I'm a city worker for a high grow tech business and my wife works in a bank, so natural bias'.

I have private medical, but the NHS' safety is still important to me

I actually like Nigel Farage, but the party is a bunch of feckwits who i wouldn't trust to look after a plant.


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

simonthepieman said:


> I don't blame you conning from your background.
> 
> I'm a city worker for a high grow tech business and my wife works in a bank, so natural bias'.
> 
> ...


Farage is a blinkered idiot I think....certainly no better than Cameron and Milliband - same stock.

But yes - UKIP.....jesus. I saw a video last night of a UKIP MEP on a rare European parliament visit....standing up and complaining that if we reduce CO2 emissions....plants won't be able to breathe and that therefore this is a scandalous idea. Utterly retarded.


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

kuju said:


> Farage is a blinkered idiot I think....certainly no better than Cameron and Milliband - same stock.
> 
> But yes - UKIP.....jesus. I saw a video last night of a UKIP MEP on a rare European parliament visit....standing up and complaining that if we reduce CO2 emissions....plants won't be able to breathe and that therefore this is a scandalous idea. Utterly retarded.


I'm facepalming.


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

simonthepieman said:


> I'm facepalming.


Amazingly..it was UKIP that posted and shared the video.......

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2015/03/11/ukip-mep-claims-decarbonising-europe-will-mean-less-carbon-dioxide-for-plants/

The original has mysteriously disappeared. I'm guessing someone from UKIP has children doing science at school.....maybe accidentally read one of their textbooks or something...


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

my vote is green and active member of party

someone asked whos this woman thinking dole dossers should get it easy this is called living in humanitarian society where we dont blame the problems on other people like benifits or immigrants

and i wouldnt want to vote for any party willing to spend 100billion on nucluar weapons and make auterity cuts at same time id rather have that money spent on NHS education and other public services i mean the ones we have still go BOOM so why cos USA and others are getting shiney new ones why should we i dont agree with having them at all

its been said the NHS needs 2 billion a year over next five years but the say theres no money for that well thats only 10% of what trident will cost

austerity can go **** itself and is not needed get the people who aint paying tax to pay it then wont need to cut the public services

i mean the NHS is on a shoe string and its only the great staff that are holding it together but suppose they cant sell it off if it aint broken so they wont invest

my take on the partys

torys --absolute scum who make the rich richer while ****ing everyone up the **** hard

UKIP--- when your feeling sore from tory **** ****ing and your wondering why your sore ukip are pointing the finger at immigrants and saying they are doing it i mean there complete one trick pony blaming people who havent caused the problems also if our ukip voter you must have IQ of a peanut

labour -- mixed about them they was better than torys by mile but started the sell off of NHS and went to war (tony should be tried as war criminal) and why vote for the better of two evils

lib dems-- i used to like these and think they was ok and still think they have right values to degree but after getting into bed with torys and going back on promises no one can believe them

SNP -- i think if i was scottish there would be no one else for me they have done a lot for scotland and more mp make more voice for scottland

the party of wales--- again if i was wlesh i would look at what SNP have done for scottland and think **** us welsh are getting the **** end of stick hear need to be more like scottland

GREENS--hear is where i lie a party that can believe in a party that has policies that work and matter the only english party againts trident and fracking and the TTIP

they are pro EU but believe its been too long since the british people have had choice and think we should have referendum but will campaing to stay in

commeted to bringing up wages as for too long we havent had enough to increase with inflation but the rich pay has over doubled

time to start thinking about the people so everone can have better life not just the elite


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

kuju said:


> Farage is a blinkered idiot I think....certainly no better than Cameron and Milliband - same stock.
> 
> But yes - UKIP.....jesus. I saw a video last night of a UKIP MEP on a rare European parliament visit....standing up and complaining that if we reduce CO2 emissions....plants won't be able to breathe and that therefore this is a scandalous idea. Utterly retarded.


saw that aswell surly you would do some research before opposing something these are people in power and have less education that school kids

im supprised they turned up not normally there just like taking the EU money while saying the shouldnt get ours


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

andyebs said:


> my vote is green and active member of party
> 
> someone asked whos this woman thinking dole dossers should get it easy this is called living in humanitarian society where we dont blame the problems on other people like benifits or immigrants
> 
> ...


I agree.

It's a shame about Labour. I have been thinking very carefully about whether my vote goes to Green or Labour in May. Labour would be more of a tactical vote as I don't trust them. I could never forgive or forget that they led us into the Iraq War, although I think the blame on them for the GLOBAL recession caused by the bankers is not entirely fair. They have admitted and apologised for the fact that they did not regulate the banks enough which allowed that to happen (meanwhile the Tories wanted them regulated even less). I have considered Lib Dem, they speak sense but I don't think I would vote for them. Not necessarily because they went back on promises in the co-allied government, but because they haven't made as many promises in this election campaign that would be hard to go back on without an uproar like Labour have done.

For me it's about making a decision between the party which I believe will keep to promises, prioritises people's lives and well being over making a profit and overhauling the current system (Green), or tactically vote for a party that is making keepable promises to see the lying Tories get kicked out of Government. It's a tough call and I'm running out of time to decide!


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

Alanricksnape said:


> I agree.
> 
> It's a shame about Labour. I have been thinking very carefully about whether my vote goes to Green or Labour in May. Labour would be more of a tactical vote as I don't trust them. I could never forgive or forget that they led us into the Iraq War, although I think the blame on them for the GLOBAL recession caused by the bankers is not entirely fair. They have admitted and apologised for the fact that they did not regulate the banks enough which allowed that to happen (meanwhile the Tories wanted them regulated even less). I have considered Lib Dem, they speak sense but I don't think I would vote for them. Not necessarily because they went back on promises in the co-allied government, but because they haven't made as many promises in this election campaign that would be hard to go back on without an uproar like Labour have done.
> 
> For me it's about making a decision between the party which I believe will keep to promises, prioritises people's lives and well being over making a profit and overhauling the current system (Green), or tactically vote for a party that is making keepable promises to see the lying Tories get kicked out of Government. It's a tough call and I'm running out of time to decide!


i know how feel there is still lot of support for torys and if i had to deal with another term with them id be starting the revolution myself but i have to vote with what i believe in and feel is right

i have so musch dislike for torys they dont work for anyone but the elite they say things like if your honest hard working poeple you will be better off

well im electrician and misses is NHS nurse so our incomes not bad and owned my own house since was 20 now 33 and i am so worse off than i ever have been and the stress my partner is under from work is hell at home and she used to love going to work

and when i see friends and family getting benifits slashed or cut and useing food banks its upsetting

100000kids in poverty in the 6th riches country in the world come on


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

andyebs said:


> i know how feel there is still lot of support for torys and if i had to deal with another term with them id be starting the revolution myself but i have to vote with what i believe in and feel is right
> 
> i have so musch dislike for torys they dont work for anyone but the elite they say things like if your honest hard working poeple you will be better off
> 
> ...


The fact that Cameron didn't know about the increase in food bank useage when he was quizzed by Paxman is disgusting. And then he had the cheek to praise the voluntary workers who serve people at the food banks. Well that's all fine and dandy then isn't it Mr PM? Kn0b.

People using food banks include those that can't even be accused of being "dole dossers" by the ignorant. They include people trying to earn a living on sh!tty low wages that do not cover the cost of living. It says a lot about the state of the country and the government running it. All they go on about is the state of the economy and the amount of jobs they have created, when so many people working in those jobs STILL can't afford to put food on the table.










These statistics speak loudly and clearly about the true state of our economy and these jobs that have been created since Tories got into power in 2010.

Yet there are people here that are so deluded by media propaganda that they seriously think the prime causes of our problems are down to people who are poor and need benefits to scrape together enough for a decent meal, people who are foreign and being in the European Union. Mind-boggling!

Not spending hundreds of billions on a nuclear deterrent that will never be used would help to fix our economy with plenty left over to be put into public services that will TRULY make all of our lives better.


----------



## dsldude (Sep 11, 2008)

andyebs said:


> i know how feel there is still lot of support for torys and if i had to deal with another term with them id be starting the revolution myself but i have to vote with what i believe in and feel is right
> 
> i have so musch dislike for torys they dont work for anyone but the elite they say things like if your honest hard working poeple you will be better off
> 
> ...


And why do you feel you are worse off? I am only a modest wage earner and my take home pay is certainly more than when labour were in power

Due to the increase in our personal tax allowance, the place I work for have started to take staff on again in

Decent numbers and things on the whole are looking better again after the recession, l think the conservatives are doing a decent job and are the only party out of them all who can carry that on.

I certainly haven't forget the note that was left by the departing labour government saying 'Sorry but there is no money left'


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

Is just like to LOL at the food bank argument, food is cheap as fark and these aren't needed for most of the people that go, it should be for the homeless and that's it! I've seen people with Sky TV, mobiles etc going and they should be refused, people who can't prioritise the FREE money they get and FREE house then should starve, ANYONE can survive on £70 a week easily, esp when everything else is paid for..

The problem is people who don't work want a lifestyle they can't afford so spend money on crap then cry poverty for some free food

There's obviously exceptions!


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

dsldude said:


> And why do you feel you are worse off? I am only a modest wage earner and my take home pay is certainly more than when labour were in power
> 
> Due to the increase in our personal tax allowance, the place I work for have started to take staff on again in
> 
> ...


cost of living as said my misses is NHS her pay has not gone up what so ever no good giving me small bit of tax allowance that dont cover the increase in my payments out

i feel like im very worse off and used to have lot of spear money now feel like struggle

on joke note i did start lifting 5 years ago and this sport aint cheap lmao


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

b0t13 said:


> Is just like to LOL at the food bank argument, food is cheap as fark and these aren't needed for most of the people that go, it should be for the homeless and that's it! I've seen people with Sky TV, mobiles etc going and they should be refused, people who can't prioritise the FREE money they get and FREE house then should starve, ANYONE can survive on £70 a week easily, esp when everything else is paid for..
> 
> The problem is people who don't work want a lifestyle they can't afford so spend money on crap then cry poverty for some free food
> 
> There's obviously exceptions!


the second largest cause of going to food banks is low pay so as he said there are working people who are going to these places due to not affording to live on the pay they recieve and times like now see huge increase as perents whos child is off of school hols cant afford to feed them as they normally get free school meals

kids suffer thats all i really need to hear dont matter if there poor kids or rich kids no children should suffer

lack of quality food also makes for bad learning and doing worse at school than those who have

also some people on zero contracts dont get sick pay hears another cause try not watching so much benifits street or immigration street as these people aint the villians the people at the top are


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

andyebs said:


> the second largest cause of going to food banks is low pay so as he said there are working people who are going to these places due to not affording to live on the pay they recieve and times like now see huge increase as perents whos child is off of school hols cant afford to feed them as they normally get free school meals
> 
> kids suffer thats all i really need to hear dont matter if there poor kids or rich kids no children should suffer
> 
> ...


Lol it's the people at the top causing parents to spend money on things other than food, erm okay......

What happened before food banks became popular? Did these people starve or adapt?

FYI I was brought up on a single parent with low income and because my mum isn't a retard I had everything I wanted, including holidays etc

It's just money management and priorities..

The only thing I don't agree with is the zero hour contracts as that can **** people over easily!


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

b0t13 said:


> Lol it's the people at the top causing parents to spend money on things other than food, erm okay......
> 
> What happened before food banks became popular? Did these people starve or adapt?
> 
> ...


maybe low income jobs used to be a living wage

as in our perents time there wasnt a crash where bankers made billions in profit then used tax payers money to pay there debts so then austerity made cuts to everything while driving up living costs then people got made redundant or lost jobs and pay is driven down due to claim should be thankfull still have a job its a circle of ****

i mean im paing my debts twice now

i borrowed m morgage from the bank who borrowed that money then our taxes pay there debts but we are still left with ours double the money for them

and the banks that got bailed out still getting billions in bonuses

the rishest 1% have doubled there money in the last 5 years why we are all struggling where do you think that money come from US the have long term economic plan to make themselves richer and trickle down aint happening


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

The global super-rich are estimated to have squirreled away between £13 and £20 trillion of wealth in countries where they can avoid tax, including in the UK.[18] In 2012, even as global income fell during the great recession, that of the very richest rose abruptly. An additional 210 people became dollar billionaires, a club whose 1,426 members together sat on almost £4 trillion. They made up just a fifth of 1% of 1% of the richest 1% of all people in the world.

All the way up the wealth spectrum, right to the very top, those just above you appear to have the wealth of emperors and those just below look like paupers. To be in the global 1%, to be one of the best-off 70 million people in the world, requires wealth of at least £440,000. However, it takes 1,400 of the worst-off of this global 1% to match the wealth of the poorest billionaire.[19] Over the course of 2013 a further 268 people became dollar billionaires, taking the global figure to 1,645 with a combined wealth approaching £4.2 trillion

that money there getting its comming from YOU and ME and dont pay tax so we get nothing back


----------



## Fletch68 (Mar 17, 2013)

Holy sheeite.....i'm surprised that The Taleban or ISIS are not standing in any UK town. The day may come


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

andyebs said:


> The global super-rich are estimated to have squirreled away between £13 and £20 trillion of wealth in countries where they can avoid tax, including in the UK.[18] In 2012, even as global income fell during the great recession, that of the very richest rose abruptly. An additional 210 people became dollar billionaires, a club whose 1,426 members together sat on almost £4 trillion. They made up just a fifth of 1% of 1% of the richest 1% of all people in the world.
> 
> All the way up the wealth spectrum, right to the very top, those just above you appear to have the wealth of emperors and those just below look like paupers. To be in the global 1%, to be one of the best-off 70 million people in the world, requires wealth of at least £440,000. However, it takes 1,400 of the worst-off of this global 1% to match the wealth of the poorest billionaire.[19] Over the course of 2013 a further 268 people became dollar billionaires, taking the global figure to 1,645 with a combined wealth approaching £4.2 trillion
> 
> that money there getting its comming from YOU and ME and dont pay tax so we get nothing back


I love stats, most of this wealth is in the form of assets and net worth, all imaginary numbers,

If the stock market dropped tomorrow billions would be 'lost' but where did it go!?

There's a difference between wealth and spendable cash, yes they'll have more but that doesn't stop the fact people in the UK should ever have to goto a food bank purely because of all the fricking benefits available!

Give me a NORMAL situation that happens today that means a person HAS to use a food bank, not one that's some extreme and I bet you can't justify it 

Something like single mum on low wage paying rent with 2 kids in London etc...


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

b0t13 said:


> I love stats, most of this wealth is in the form of assets and net worth, all imaginary numbers,
> 
> If the stock market dropped tomorrow billions would be 'lost' but where did it go!?
> 
> ...


i think you allready have given one answer as single mother on min wage couldnt afford to live private rent in london

benifit sanctions and stops are the main cause but i get from your flow you couldnt give rats **** about anyone on benifits

so there are single mothers with two kids on low paid jobs and with increases in rent witch happen all time and fual costs in cold winters sometimes money isnt streaching to all bills

they also feed homeless and they dont claim nothing and in colchester where i am more and more seem to be ex service men witch discuss me

how about women of domestic voilence mabe they have left there partner and there partner was main person of income and she may have tried to claim but it takes time

this is story took from the huff post

21 year-old college student Charlotte had not eaten properly for weeks and could not afford gas to heat her flat when she came to the foodbank in January. After leaving state care she was determined to make something of her life and was funding herself through college. Working two evening jobs to make ends meet, she was made redundant from both within a month. As a 21-year-old in full time education with no children she did not qualify for benefits. She sold everything she had and, with nowhere else to turn, she asked her local councillor for help; they referred her to the foodbank. When she arrived she was ill, dehydrated and in the first stages of malnutrition. For Charlotte, the foodbank was a life saver. She says she has no idea what she would have done without it. She was so impressed by the support she received that she began volunteering at the foodbank.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Fletch68 said:


> Holy sheeite.....i'm surprised that The Taleban or ISIS are not standing in any UK town. The day may come


You can vote for the people who created them: Labour, Conservatives, or Liberal Democrats.


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

andyebs said:


> i think you allready have given one answer as single mother on min wage couldnt afford to live private rent in london
> 
> benifit sanctions and stops are the main cause but i get from your flow you couldnt give rats **** about anyone on benifits
> 
> ...


Ok so let's pic the example apart, she's decided that she's going into 'full time education' so a student? Ok student loans to pay for housing and food whilst she 'learns' millions of students live on their own with loans and part time jobs just fine...

She's an idiot. Oh and has spare time to volunteer but can't get a part time job!?

Domestic violence doesn't account for the thousands of people grabbing some free food, although a good extreme example

Aren't the sanctions usually when the foley doesn't turn up to meeting etc? If so then good if they can't goto a meeting once every two weeks there fooling lazy

I'd support food banks if they went to genuine causes, however 80% of the people that now go can sort themselfs out f they had half a brain and changed something..


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

andyebs said:


> perents whos child is off of school hols cant afford to feed them as they normally get free school meals


Crazy idea but how about not having kids if you can't afford them?


----------



## dsldude (Sep 11, 2008)

Why are there so many fat people in pictures of food banks?

If you're going to take advantage of a food bank, at least have the good grace to look a bit peckish and skeletal.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

dsldude said:


> Why are there so many fat people in pictures of food banks?
> 
> If you're going to take advantage of a food bank, at least have the good grace to look a bit peckish and skeletal


Probably because they are poor, I know it doesn't immediately make any sense, bear with me. The cheap food is lacking in good protein: mostly crap, full of carbs and saturated fat. That's all they eat, beans and chips and spaghetti hoops. Imagine eating that shyte every day. The way people are being treated in this country is shocking and therefore I just don't get when people say they are still going to vote for lib/lab/con.


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

Well done UKM. A nice mature discussion that isnt tied to tabloid views of immigration.

I actually prefer discussing conflicting points of view in a mature manner and this thread has gone surprisingly well


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

dsldude said:


> And why do you feel you are worse off? I am only a modest wage earner and my take home pay is certainly more than when labour were in power
> 
> Due to the increase in our personal tax allowance, the place I work for have started to take staff on again in
> 
> ...


Well given that the current government has saddled us with debt that FAR exceeds what Labour managed....I wonder what note they're going to leave behind?

A Conservative writer.....dismantling the Conservative nonsense about the national debt and deficit:

Finally! Exposed! The Deficit Myth! So, David Cameron When Are You Going to Apologise? | Ramesh Patel


----------



## Prince Adam (Mar 17, 2012)

Voting card thing came the other day, put it straight in the bin.


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

b0t13 said:


> Ok so let's pic the example apart, she's decided that she's going into 'full time education' so a student? Ok student loans to pay for housing and food whilst she 'learns' millions of students live on their own with loans and part time jobs just fine...
> 
> She's an idiot. Oh and has spare time to volunteer but can't get a part time job!?
> 
> ...


Your point about students is quite ignorant to be honest and you haven't picked the example apart at all. You seem to be quite out of touch with reality if you think that it's all that simple.

Student loans often do not stretch to pay for housing and food. They get the loan for tuition which they see none of. The rest for maintenance is often much smaller and the way they decide how much you get does not take into account many factors. Landlords take advantage of and exploit students and make housing very difficult to afford. I know this first hand as my other half has gone to uni, where her maintenance loan doesn't even cover the rent for the year. She has to work a part time job just to be able to afford some cheap food from Lidl, which takes up a fair amount of time that she could be using to study and improve her education. Then there is paying the bills in the house, then there is paying for supplies for her degree which are not covered by the tuition loan. I am often having to buy her food as she can't afford it all herself. Without me helping she would be screwed and would probably have to turn to a food bank herself. I am basically her food bank!

Millions of students may live on their own with loans etc. etc. but you're not taking into consideration that the less privileged have a harder time and this needs to change. There should be an equal right to study time and the chance to achieve a good degree and it is wrong that someone from a wealthier background has a greater chance of achieving when they may not necessarily deserve it as much on merit. This is one of the reasons why social mobility in this country is so low. When hard work is not rewarded and the opportunities are not equal then where is the incentive?


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

Alanricksnape said:


> Your point about students is quite ignorant to be honest and you haven't picked the example apart at all. You seem to be quite out of touch with reality if you think that it's all that simple.
> 
> Student loans often do not stretch to pay for housing and food. They get the loan for tuition which they see none of. The rest for maintenance is often much smaller and the way they decide how much you get does not take into account many factors. Landlords take advantage of and exploit students and make housing very difficult to afford. I know this first hand as my other half has gone to uni, where her maintenance loan doesn't even cover the rent for the year. She has to work a part time job just to be able to afford some cheap food from Lidl, which takes up a fair amount of time that she could be using to study and improve her education. Then there is paying the bills in the house, then there is paying for supplies for her degree which are not covered by the tuition loan. I am often having to buy her food as she can't afford it all herself. Without me helping she would be screwed and would probably have to turn to a food bank herself. I am basically her food bank!
> 
> Millions of students may live on their own with loans etc. etc. but you're not taking into consideration that the less privileged have a harder time and this needs to change. There should be an equal right to study time and the chance to achieve a good degree and it is wrong that someone from a wealthier background has a greater chance of achieving when they may not necessarily deserve it as much on merit. This is one of the reasons why social mobility in this country is so low. When hard work is not rewarded and the opportunities are not equal then where is the incentive?


Millions of students verses your GF? This suggests your GF isn't the majority, students are known for being skint but they also go drinking a lot and waste cash on stuff in all the free time they have, yet still don't use food banks

Don't want to sound a ****, but your coming across as one of them people that can't handle life and find people to blame for things being **** in your life, student loans are designed to cover tuition, housing and living or spending, then a part time job ontop means more cash

I went to uni, ran a car went out a lot and had a part time job 12hours a week....

No money or help from elsewhere because I can manage money and don't buy stuff I don't need, food is the top of the list of things to buy and if people spend it on other stuff instead then they're retarded!

Food then housing then housing bills then other stuff, a lot of people do this order backwards..


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

Students probably don't use food banks because you have to be referred to them...you don't just walk in and pick up a free tin of beans ffs. Which also goes against the idea that "80%" of people using foodbanks" (where did that number come from??!) don't need to.

The Trussell Trust | How It Works


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

b0t13 said:


> Millions of students verses your GF? This suggests your GF isn't the majority, students are known for being skint but they also go drinking a lot and waste cash on stuff in all the free time they have, yet still don't use food banks
> 
> Don't want to sound a ****, but your coming across as one of them people that can't handle life and find people to blame for things being **** in your life, student loans are designed to cover tuition, housing and living or spending, then a part time job ontop means more cash
> 
> ...


Once again your ignorance makes you look like a bit of a penis. I can handle life just fine and things are not **** in my life. I co-manage the costs department in a London law firm and I have worked hard from just an assistant role to get there. I am not a student so I have a very unbiased perspective. Just because I do not share your ignorance and feel that it is right to speak up on issues that are not addressed, it does not mean I cannot handle life. I thank you for your concern however.

My other half was one example. But it isn't the only example. You know that, you're just being silly. I suppose you know nothing about the student protests regarding this problem? Students are known for being poor, yes. Of course. However, there is poor and then there is being penniless. Student loans are designed to cover tuition, housing and living. Yes. No argument there. My argument is that they often DON'T and I have pointed out why. Well done, you went to uni, ran a car etc. Where did you get the money to buy your car, insure your car, tax your car, run your car? How long ago did you go to uni? Everyone will have different circumstances and they won't all be the same as yours.

Food then housing and housing bills seems the logical order to prioritise, yes, but when the only way you can go to Uni is by prioritising your housing needs then that IS what comes first. If you don't have a house located by your Uni then you can't go to the Uni to study. If your maintenance loan is not enough to cover the rent alone because Landlords exploit student tenants, then you struggle to be able to afford food and bills.


----------



## dsldude (Sep 11, 2008)

kuju said:


> Well given that the current government has saddled us with debt that FAR exceeds what Labour managed....I wonder what note they're going to leave behind?
> 
> A Conservative writer.....dismantling the Conservative nonsense about the national debt and deficit
> 
> Finally! Exposed! The Deficit Myth! So, David Cameron When Are You Going to Apologise?*|*Ramesh Patel


An old article from 2012 rehashed, many of the points debunked by other political writer's.

Such as Did Ramesh Patel Get Paid For This? :: A Very British Dude


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

dsldude said:


> An old article from 2012 rehashed, many of the points debunked by other political writer's.
> 
> Such as Did Ramesh Patel Get Paid For This? :: A Very British Dude


I'll happily take a referenced article, where I can independently verify the facts stated (even if it is "rehashed" from 3 years ago) over an agenda-driven opinion piece which offers no *cited* contrary evidence but lots of rhetoric.

The bottom line is - Conservatives have been lying about both deficit and debt and continue to do so. I don't want liars running the country.


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

Alanricksnape said:


> Once again your ignorance makes you look like a bit of a penis. I can handle life just fine and things are not **** in my life. I co-manage the costs department in a London law firm and I have worked hard from just an assistant role to get there. I am not a student so I have a very unbiased perspective. Just because I do not share your ignorance and feel that it is right to speak up on issues that are not addressed, it does not mean I cannot handle life. I thank you for your concern however.
> 
> My other half was one example. But it isn't the only example. You know that, you're just being silly. I suppose you know nothing about the student protests regarding this problem? Students are known for being poor, yes. Of course. However, there is poor and then there is being penniless. Student loans are designed to cover tuition, housing and living. Yes. No argument there. My argument is that they often DON'T and I have pointed out why. Well done, you went to uni, ran a car etc. Where did you get the money to buy your car, insure your car, tax your car, run your car? How long ago did you go to uni? Everyone will have different circumstances and they won't all be the same as yours.
> 
> Food then housing and housing bills seems the logical order to prioritise, yes, but when the only way you can go to Uni is by prioritising your housing needs then that IS what comes first. If you don't have a house located by your Uni then you can't go to the Uni to study. If your maintenance loan is not enough to cover the rent alone because Landlords exploit student tenants, then you struggle to be able to afford food and bills.


Still blaming everyone else, if you can't afford the rent, you can't afford to go, it's simple money management, this shows stupidness(like buying a house you can't afford the mortgage on! Oh blame the bank instead...)

If you don't have the money to afford the uni you want to goto, then wait a year and save for it, it's people wanting things right now, not saving and getting into things they can't afford that causes them issues,

I refuse to pay London rent prices, so I don't live there, if I moved there and I was skint who should I blame!?

Oh I saved up for my car whilst at college, oh and also paid my own lessons insurance etc etc etc whilst other people wasted cash on **** constantly, the same people that now moan about being skint and it's everyone else's fault,

Back to the original point though, I still stand by that only a very very small minority of people have a genuine reason to use a food bank, but it's suddenly got a lot more popular yet the country hasn't gotten that much worse!


----------



## freddee (Mar 2, 2009)

Delhi said:


> Tory 100%
> 
> Watch the full Budget announcent and tell me why ANY of it is bad for the country? Lol the look on liebours faces as Osbourne belted out fact after fact. They (liebour) had no come back to it at all. Thier best attempt was when milliband (private school boy) said it couldn't be believed...lol what a laugh. So the IMF, OFNS, OFFS, G8 and every other independant international body is making it up to? He he every measure was positive and moving in right bdirection.
> 
> Liebour have no answer to the current economic success the Tories have delivered. Even the so called poorest are now better off under Tory government.


Firstly its Labour, on the economic success, it is a success for the few, in the last several years, the top 1000 richest people have doubled their wealth, why should they want anything to change!, in 2013 a survey came in with the fact that the top 5% of earners gave themselves, on average, a 49% wage rise why should they want anything to change, the people at the bottom, those who least cant afford have had wages cut, with higher rents, gas, electric, council tax, try telling them inflation is at 1.7% they have no money left having paid for what they have to.

Brazil have a buoyant economy, but it is super rich and extremely poor, we are turning in to brazil, the real workers must be paid more, that will never happen under the tory.


----------



## Lousy_Bastard (Oct 20, 2008)

It's all a load of crapp

Fella once told me no matter who you vote for the government always gets in.

People think they have a choice, they don't .

Biggest scam apart from religion.


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

b0t13 said:


> Still blaming everyone else, if you can't afford the rent, you can't afford to go, it's simple money management, this shows stupidness(like buying a house you can't afford the mortgage on! Oh blame the bank instead...)
> 
> If you don't have the money to afford the uni you want to goto, then wait a year and save for it, it's people wanting things right now, not saving and getting into things they can't afford that causes them issues,
> 
> ...


If people are being exploited then yes, I will blame the people doing the exploiting. What you're saying is, if you're not from a wealthy or privileged background and you can't afford to go to University, despite earning the right to go through hard work and getting good grades, you don't deserve to go because it's not affordable? Does that not at all make you stop and think that this is wrong?

No "simple money management" can make something financially feasible if you're exploited due to the position that you're in. "Simple money management" does not magic money out of thin air to make everything affordable. You keep making this same argument, but it's not really relevant.

Like I said, where is the incentive to get good grades and work hard if at the end of it you can't afford to go on to achieve greater things? Once again, this is why social mobility is so low. The higher your social class and the greater your income, the easier it is to achieve what you need to remain in that status. There are people who are not so privileged that work harder and are brighter than those who have it handed to them, but they do not get an equal opportunity. It should not be like that, it's a very simple point to understand. I can see this as someone who has never had to deal with this problem and make a decent living.


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

Alanricksnape said:


> If people are being exploited then yes, I will blame the people doing the exploiting. What you're saying is, if you're not from a wealthy or privileged background and you can't afford to go to University, despite earning the right to go through hard work and getting good grades, you don't deserve to go because it's not affordable? Does that not at all make you stop and think that this is wrong?
> 
> No "simple money management" can make something financially feasible if you're exploited due to the position that you're in. "Simple money management" does not magic money out of thin air to make everything affordable. You keep making this same argument, but it's not really relevant.
> 
> Like I said, where is the incentive to get good grades and work hard if at the end of it you can't afford to go on to achieve greater things? Once again, this is why social mobility is so low. The higher your social class and the greater your income, the easier it is to achieve what you need to remain in that status. There are people who are not so privileged that work harder and are brighter than those who have it handed to them, but they do not get an equal opportunity. It should not be like that, it's a very simple point to understand. I can see this as someone who has never had to deal with this problem and make a decent living.


How are people being exploited?

Here is the price to rent a room XXX

Take it or leave it, it's called supply and demand,

By your logic I should be crying about house prices being too much because there well overpriced, it's the banks and politicians fault I can't afford a mansion...

You sound like someone who voted for the Green Party, very left and doesn't live in the real world, if someone can't afford something then you shouldn't expect to be given free stuff, the whole world is dominated by money if you have less than others then your life will be harder, that's called life!

Goto America and see how far you get, the university bills are saved for from being a baby by parents because it's extremely expensive, I agree people that work hard should be rewarded regardless of where they're from, the cleaner at my job works hard but rides a pedal bike, because I don't work as hard but smarter and have a better job I should buy him a car!?


----------



## gearchange (Mar 19, 2010)

I wont be voting for Tory as they are liars and manipulators. First thing was the bank collapse that labour got slated for even though the bank system is run by wealthy conservatives..And then this unemployment fallacy.They claim to have taken 2000.000 off the list but in reality anyone on a "course" which is a mandatory requirement and unpaid,is removed from the unemployment list for the duration even though they have no real job...Makes the figures look good though..


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

b0t13 said:


> How are people being exploited?
> 
> Here is the price to rent a room XXX
> 
> ...


Judging by the post you made in the thread about homelessness, you're an intolerant [email protected] who probably goes on Britain First marches. But neither my nor your political stance makes a difference to the point being discussed.

You're making completely irrelevant arguments. Student housing is housing intended for students, in case that is too complicated for you to grasp. Students can only afford this housing with a maintenance loan or if they have very wealthy parents. If the STUDENT housing is priced to make it inaccessible or extremely tough to get by for those without wealth to begin with, then that's exploitation. You're not allowing those without wealth to have access to progress to where they could get to if they had an equal opportunity.

It's got nothing to do with crying about house prices overall, it's about equal opportunity for those who work hard and deserve the same access to education and quality of life whilst studying. But you ignore that over and over to make the same narrow minded, ignorant and irrelevant points. I do ok for myself so I will re-iterate once again that this is not personally a problem for me, but I do see it as a problem for others and that it should be addressed. I am not one to bury my head in the sand and say "that's called life!" when I see a problem that doesn't personally effect me but could reduce the quality of the lives of others when on merit they deserve better and at least the same opportunity to move up the ladder as someone who already has a large amount of wealth. If something is clearly unfair in society then why ignore it just because it is not effecting you personally?


----------



## vlb (Oct 20, 2008)

b0t13 said:


> but it's suddenly got a lot more popular yet the country hasn't gotten that much worse!


Totall agree, the country hasnt got worse atall.

£60 Billion hasnt been cut from public spending, 500000 public sector jobs havent been cut and the fund to help those 500000 new jobless also hasnt been cut by £7billion.

what on earth could all of those new unemployed people be complaining about

Oh wait.....


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

Alanricksnape said:


> Judging by the post you made in the thread about homelessness, you're an intolerant [email protected] who probably goes on Britain First marches. But neither my nor your political stance makes a difference to the point being discussed.
> 
> You're making completely irrelevant arguments. Student housing is housing intended for students, in case that is too complicated for you to grasp. Students can only afford this housing with a maintenance loan or if they have very wealthy parents. If the STUDENT housing is priced to make it inaccessible or extremely tough to get by for those without wealth to begin with, then that's exploitation. You're not allowing those without wealth to have access to progress to where they could get to if they had an equal opportunity.
> 
> It's got nothing to do with crying about house prices overall, it's about equal opportunity for those who work hard and deserve the same access to education and quality of life whilst studying. But you ignore that over and over to make the same narrow minded, ignorant and irrelevant points. I do ok for myself so I will re-iterate once again that this is not a personally a problem for me, but I do see it as a problem for others and that it should be addressed. I am not one to bury my head in the sand and say "that's called life!" when I see a problem that doesn't personally effect me but could reduce the quality of the lives of others when on merit they deserve better and at least the same opportunity to move up the ladder as someone who already has a large amount of wealth. If something is clearly unfair in society then why ignore it just because it is not effecting you personally?


Typical lefty,

Throw me some figures that prove your point, IE it costs £7000 a year for a student flat but the loan to pay for it is £1000 leaving a £6000 shortfall..

Student housing is a private market mostly with housing by landlords etc.. Again supply and demand...

You've proven my point "students can only afford this with a maintaince loan or wealthy parents" Erm that's what the loans for!? If it covers the bill then WTF are you complaining about as its

1.) the cheapest loan anybody in the country can get

2.) doesn't get paid back until student has a proper job earning a gd wage

3.) has no effect on credit rating or mortgage applications

Your solution sounds like give free housing to students!?

Higher education is very easily achievable for everyone in this country, even idiots that do ****ty degrees somehow manage to go easily..


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

b0t13 said:


> Typical lefty,
> 
> Throw me some figures that prove your point, IE it costs £7000 a year for a student flat but the loan to pay for it is £1000 leaving a £6000 shortfall..
> 
> ...


 :lol:

I haven't proven any point you have made on the actual topic we were meant to be debating as you kept on changing your argument! I said in my first post that the loans aren't covering the bill because of exploitation and there is also the fact that the means testing for handing out the loan is too limited.

I give up arguing with you :lol:


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

b0t13 said:


> Back to the original point though, *I still stand by that only a very very small minority of people have a genuine reason to use a food bank,* but it's suddenly got a lot more popular yet the country hasn't gotten that much worse!


What are you basing that statement on though? You keep repeating it as though it's absolute fact - where's the evidence? You even put a number on it...where did that come from?

You are absolutely entitled to your own opinion on absolutely anything.

You are not entitled to your own facts.

The link form a foodbank I posted show quite clearly it's not a simple matter to access a foodbank. So again.............where's your evidence?


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

As for the idea the country hasn't gotten much worse.........it is literally just about the only thing almost every political viewpoint currently agrees on (to varying degrees). My job is funded via a mixture of private and public funding. However since the Tories have come in...the annual wage increase has been well below cost of living increases. My salary is now worth less than it was 5 years ago in real terms. This is not at all unusual in the UK right now.

I'm also being made redundant because of the cuts. For me personally - I can weather it. Many other people I know can't.

But yeah....everything is just fiiiiiiine.


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

kuju said:


> What are you basing that statement on though? You keep repeating it as though it's absolute fact - where's the evidence? You even put a number on it...where did that come from?
> 
> You are absolutely entitled to your own opinion on absolutely anything.
> 
> ...


It's an opinion on something that cannot be proven,

For example if I see a parent with 2 kids on benefits with no job, yet has a flat screen TV sky and an iPhone (which we all know is VERY common) then if I was running the food bank I'd consider them unsuitable

They can sell the TV stop paying phone contracts and buying needless crap elsewhere,

I can't see form due to using phone atm though,

I'm all for helping people in need, but they should sort themselves out best they can first, a food bank is a last resort!

If someone has a TV and iphone yet is starving, they deserve to starve IMO or


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

b0t13 said:


> It's an opinion on something that cannot be proven,
> 
> For example if I see a parent with 2 kids on benefits with no job, yet has a flat screen TV sky and an iPhone (which we all know is VERY common) then if I was running the food bank I'd consider them unsuitable
> 
> ...


Actually....it can be proven..... and your opinion, common as it is, has frequently been proven wrong. A few case studies doesn't make a trend. A few examples does not equal prevalence.

Lots of people BELIEVE the flat screen tv and phone are common...but is there evidence for that? Belief does not equal evidence.

What if they had those before being made redundant? What if they were gifts? What if they were second hand? What about teh many who DON'T have those things?

It's a daily mail fantasy that is only supported by a few case studies.....and literally nothing more.

Of course a food bank is a lst resort - try visiting one. Better yet...volunteer in one. I did. Real eye opener. Then come back and tell me that load of fairy tales above.

Seriously..........you're just repeating media nonsense here. I defend your right to your beliefs and opinions completely. But don't state things as fact if they're not..it weakens your case.


----------



## freddee (Mar 2, 2009)

b0t13 said:


> It's an opinion on something that cannot be proven,
> 
> For example if I see a parent with 2 kids on benefits with no job, yet has a flat screen TV sky and an iPhone (which we all know is VERY common) then if I was running the food bank I'd consider them unsuitable
> 
> ...


You have to get a prescription for the food bank, you just cant turn up, what type of telly should they have, all this flat screen tv [email protected], everyone has a tv, a phone is pretty necessary to get work, and a lap top does no harm, however he or she does not have to smoke or drink alcohol/drugs, and in my opinion a food bank would come before a zero hour minimum wage job!


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

kuju said:


> Actually....it can be proven..... and your opinion, common as it is, has frequently been proven wrong. A few case studies doesn't make a trend. A few examples does not equal prevalence.
> 
> Lots of people BELIEVE the flat screen tv and phone are common...but is there evidence for that? Belief does not equal evidence.
> 
> ...


Good counter argument 

Can I see the proof? of how badly the majority of these people have it, I know I'm generalising a lot but I still think a lot of the people at the bottom can help themselfs more before EXPECTING handouts,

Also by the TV comments etc I was expecting you guys to read between the lines, I meant examples of spending money that they don't have and not buying food, such as booze, weed, other drugs, phones, trainers etc etc etc

If they've bought it when they could afford it then fine, I was mostly referring to the career work shy that try living a lifestyle they can't afford and taking every freebie they can get, including food


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

you cant help him see the light he will always say we live with head in clouds and he knows better


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

This may have swayed my vote...impressive stuff


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Peter Hitchens tells the truth about the state of the country. Is this the most truthful thing you have ever heard or what?!!


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

43 votes for fascism and so many tories on here.

Wow!


----------



## TommyBananas (Nov 23, 2014)

LOL b0t13


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

1990 said:


> 43 votes for fascism and so many tories on here.
> 
> Wow!


What about Labour and Conservatives? Do you include them too as fascists?


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

GCMAX said:


> What about Labour and Conservatives? Do you include them too as fascists?


Blue Tories and red Tories not much difference between the two is there!

Both are anti working class and have backed austerity cuts that have hammered the most vulnerable in society while the rich get richer.

The UKIP xenophobes need a scapegoat so they blame immigrants


----------



## B.I.G (Jun 23, 2011)

GCMAX said:


> Peter Hitchens tells the truth about the state of the country. Is this the most truthful thing you have ever heard or what?!!


He's talking a lot of sense there


----------



## Pinky (Sep 3, 2014)

No matter who you vote for some cvnt will either call you racist, a facist, a bigot blah blah blah, people cant win IMO.


----------



## FlunkyTurtle (Aug 5, 2013)

Pinky said:


> No matter who you vote for some cvnt will either call you racist, a facist, a bigot blah blah blah, people cant win IMO.


you bigotted rascist f**got!


----------



## Pinky (Sep 3, 2014)

FlunkyTurtle said:


> you bigotted rascist f**got!


 :tongue:


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

1990 said:


> Blue Tories and red Tories not much difference between the two is there!
> 
> Both are anti working class and have backed austerity cuts that have hammered the most *vulnerable in society *while the rich get richer.
> 
> *The UKIP xenophobes need a scapegoat so they blame immigrants*


Is that REALLY the best Anti UKIP argument youve got? Its all becoming, tired boring and predictable.


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

GCMAX said:


> Peter Hitchens tells the truth about the state of the country. Is this the most truthful thing you have ever heard or what?!!


Pete hitchens couldn't tell the truth if you put a gun to his head.....


----------



## Prince Adam (Mar 17, 2012)

So who's gonna be in charge after the election???


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

essexboy said:


> Is that REALLY the best Anti UKIP argument youve got? Its all becoming, tired boring and predictable.


Same goes for the anti-foreigner rhetoric from you lot.

What are your actual arguments other than keeping the immigrants out?


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

1990 said:


> Same goes for the anti-foreigner rhetoric from you lot.
> 
> What are your actual arguments other than keeping the immigrants out?


UKIP Manifesto Summary - UKIP


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

1990 said:
 

> Same goes for the anti-foreigner rhetoric from you lot.
> 
> What are your actual arguments other than keeping the immigrants out?


Lol go on the BBC website, click the party policies part in election section and compare UKIP against everyone else but ignore the immigration section, if you don't think they all make sense then something is wrong!


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

1990 said:


> Same goes for the anti-foreigner rhetoric from you lot.
> 
> What are your actual arguments other than keeping the immigrants out?


I'm fine with immigrants, whatever colour or religion, what I'm not fine with is the massive tidal wave of immigration that Labour started and the Cons perpetuated. The EU requires by law of any member state, the complete freedom of movement, this is also a major problem.

We are a small island, our services like the national health service cannot cope: Patients can't get beds, they're being treated inside Ambulances, storage rooms, or in corridors! Waiting times are so long people are dying.

All the other services are swamped too, education, transportation etc. they cannot cope with the masses of people because they were never designed to. Services will eventually break down completely if we continue with mass immigration.

Lastly, the argument that we don't have enough services, or enough staff is redundant as we certainly don't have the space, nor money to expand existing services to cope with current population levels.


----------



## Chrisallan (Jul 11, 2014)

Prince Adam said:


> So who's gonna be in charge after the election???


The same people who are in charge,now,although they might have different puppets to play with.


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

b0t13 said:


> Lol go on the BBC website, click the party policies part in election section and compare UKIP against everyone else but ignore the immigration section, if you don't think they all make sense then something is wrong!


Looked at it and for a start they want to spend 100 billion on trident that will only be used in the result of a nuclear war. How many schools and hospitals could be built with that? Their 'policies' are pathetic without even taking into account their clear undercurrent of xenophobia.



GCMAX said:


> I'm fine with immigrants, whatever colour or religion, what I'm not fine with is the massive tidal wave of immigration that Labour started and the Cons perpetuated. The EU requires by law of any member state, the complete freedom of movement, this is also a major problem.
> 
> We are a small island, our services like the national health service cannot cope: Patients can't get beds, they're being treated inside Ambulances, storage rooms, or in corridors! Waiting times are so long people are dying.
> 
> ...


I believe in freedom of movement. Would those who dont believe in freedom of movement wouldn't have a problem emigrating to Australia or Spain?

If there is a Tory-UKIP alliance the state of the NHS will only get worse with the plans for privatisation. The problem is not immigrants taking hospital beds, its the Tory privatisation and cuts of the NHS. Immigrants contribute to the economy and are essential due to the aging population.


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

1990 said:


> Looked at it and for a start they want to spend 100 billion on trident that will only be used in the result of a nuclear war. How many schools and hospitals could be built with that?


All parties want to keep trident other than the greens who'd spend it on windmills


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

1990 said:


> Same goes for the anti-foreigner rhetoric from you lot.
> 
> What are your actual arguments other than keeping the immigrants out?


Im not arguing at all.I just support the UKIP manifesto.However, any negative press criticising UKIP always focuses on immigration.The usual "racist, xenophobic" nonsense.Its the only tool that the opposition feel

that they can use, because historically it was political suicide to mention it.The tide has now turned thankfully.

Many of the population, from all parties are concerned on the impact that sheer numbers are having on the welfare system.

Its called rational self interest.Nothing more.Besides the fact, that I give this country nearly £10,000 a year in tax.Why should my medical treatment be compromised, for someone whos just arrived from Idontgivea tossville,and receive care, that Ive paid for?


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

dann19900 said:


> All parties want to keep trident other than the greens who'd spend it on windmills


5 parties in total in the poll want rid of trident.

Others have individual members who believe in unilateral disarmament.

100 billion just on a weapon that will only be used when the world ends. Ludicrous.

Do you believe we should be keeping these weapons of mass destruction?

The people of Scotland certainly don't and its being kept on their doorstep.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

dann19900 said:


> All parties want to keep trident other than the greens who'd spend it on windmills


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

essexboy said:


> Im not arguing at all.I just support the UKIP manifesto.However, any negative press criticising UKIP always focuses on immigration.The usual "racist, xenophobic" nonsense.Its the only tool that the opposition feel
> 
> that they can use, because historically it was political suicide to mention it.The tide has now turned thankfully.
> 
> ...


Yeah its the welfare system that's the problem.

View attachment 170692


120 billion in Tory enabled tax avoidance

1.2 billion in benefit fraud

16 billion in UNCLAIMED benefits.

Time to stop scapegoating people on benefits when its the bankers you should direct your anger at.

As for your last point I think people should be given medical care regardless of what country they are from.

Soon you will have to pay for medical care just like in America and it isn't the fault of immigrsnts!


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

1990 said:


> 5 parties in total in the poll want rid of trident.
> 
> Others have individual members who believe in unilateral disarmament.
> 
> ...


think you mean 4 tiny/local parties?

Yes, you mean 100 billion maximum for replacing it and running it for 40 years don't you? Thats 2.5 billion per year which is less than we give in foreign aid to the countries who want to blow us up with their own lol

I live in Scotland, don't really care what they want, its 1 big council estate shouldn't be allowed to think for themselves in my opinion, oh they're not lol.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

1990 said:


> Yeah its the welfare system that's the problem.
> 
> View attachment 170692
> 
> ...


The welfare system isnt just about benefits.Im not scapegoating anyone.Yes, the bankers should be held to account.Wait, till you get a job, have HMRC try and take most of what you earn, then your mother cant get treatment, because of the backlog.Youll soon change your mind son.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

dann19900 said:


> think you mean 4 tiny/local parties?
> 
> Yes, you mean 100 billion maximum for replacing it and running it for 40 years don't you? Thats 2.5 billion per year which is less than we give in foreign aid to the countries who want to blow us up with their own lol
> 
> I live in Scotland, don't really care *what they want, its 1 big council estate shouldn't be allowed to think for themselves in my opinion, oh they're not lol*.


Ha Ha Brilliant!


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

dann19900 said:


> think you mean 4 tiny/local parties?
> 
> Yes, you mean 100 billion maximum for replacing it and running it for 40 years don't you? Thats 2.5 billion per year which is less than we give in foreign aid to the countries who want to blow us up with their own lol
> 
> I live in Scotland, don't really care what they want, its 1 big council estate shouldn't be allowed to think for themselves in my opinion, oh they're not lol.


What a strange individual you are.


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

essexboy said:


> Ha Ha Brilliant!


You won't be laughing when the SNP get more seats than UKIP.


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

essexboy said:


> The welfare system isnt just about benefits.Im not scapegoating anyone.Yes, the bankers should be held to account.Wait, till you get a job, have HMRC try and take most of what you earn, then your mother cant get treatment, because of the backlog.Youll soon change your mind son.


Nothing to do with the tories privatising the NHS its all the immigrants fault.

Heard it all before for the UKIP/BNP mob.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

1990 said:


> Nothing to do with the tories privatising the NHS its all the immigrants fault.
> 
> Heard it all before for the UKIP/BNP mob.


So now your lumping UKIP in with the BNP as well. Why not go the whole hog, and lump them in with the Nazis too? Again all you can say is that everyone is blaming the immigrants.Why not try and understand how basic Mathematics work.Its very simple.You can probably learn it at school too.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

1990 said:


> You won't be laughing when the SNP get more seats than UKIP.


Not a chance.Your just going to have to accept your view, is fading into the past, very rapidly.


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

essexboy said:


> So now your lumping UKIP in with the BNP as well. Why not go the whole hog, and lump them in with the Nazis too? Again all you can say is that everyone is blaming the immigrants.Why not try and understand how basic Mathematics work.Its very simple.You can probably learn it at school too.


you seem to be advocating spending 200 billion on trident while complaining about NHS cuts.

would the money for trident not be better spent in the NHS so your mother can get a hospital bed?

you're a real mathematical heavyweight mate


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

essexboy said:


> Not a chance.Your just going to have to accept your view, is fading into the past, very rapidly.


Really?

How many seats do you think UKIP will get?

The SNP get 35 seats at the very least and any issue will have to go through them on a vote by vote basis if they form a coalition with labour. so they 'will have a say'.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

1990 said:


> you seem to be advocating spending 200 billion on trident while complaining about NHS cuts.
> 
> would the money for trident not be better spent in the NHS so your mother can get a hospital bed?
> 
> you're a real mathematical heavyweight mate


Trident is a necessary evil.You can pay for it, and fund a healthy NHS.As long as its not overburdened by patients.All very simple stuff.A hospital bed, wouldnt be of much benefit to my Mother unfortunately.


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

essexboy said:


> Trident is a necessary evil.You can pay for it, and fund a healthy NHS.As long as its not overburdened by patients.All very simple stuff.A hospital bed, wouldnt be of much benefit to my Mother unfortunately.


The only time you need to use trident is if you want to end the world.

Immoral and illegal weapons of mass destruction that cost 200billion and will only be used in a doomsday scenario. I think the money could be better elsewhere on schools houses and hospitals. isnt that rational?


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

1990 said:


> The only time you need to use trident is if you want to end the world.
> 
> Immoral and illegal weapons of mass destruction that cost 200billion and will only be used in a doomsday scenario. I think the money could be better elsewhere on schools houses and hospitals. isnt that rational?


No its not.It would leave us vunerable.The existence of these weapons, has kept the peace since WW2.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

1990 said:


> You won't be laughing when the SNP get more seats than UKIP.


If the SNP get into power we will see massive damage to our economy because they want to increase minimum wage to £8.70 a hour. This would mean small businesses who are ALREADY struggling would have to make staff redundant and then the business would fail. The economy would collapse as a result if their idea became law.

The most logical thing to do would be to abolish tax from minimum/low wage earners (UKIP) and like you suggested earlier, end the inflation type system by kicking out the central bankers, stopping the printing of money.

Unfortunately no party, including Farage, has the balls to tackle the banksters head on and this is where our biggest problems lie.



1990 said:


> Immigrants contribute to the economy and are essential due to the aging population.


This is a regurgitated sound bite from the mouths of plastic puppet leaders like Clegg, Millipede or Cameron of the Lib/Lab/Con. While there is an element of truth in this regarding contribution, the purpose of the statement is to prolong mass immigration and protect it from public scrutiny. Most of the UK public (including immigrants) think immigration is out of control.



1990 said:


> The problem is not immigrants taking hospital beds, its the Tory privatisation and cuts of the NHS.


If you ploughed billions into the NHS so staff were at capacity and every ward had as many beds as possible and the latest drugs and equipment and software, the NHS would still be hopelessly overwhelmed as there are simply too many British citizens and that's not even counting immigrants!


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

essexboy said:


> No its not.It would leave us vunerable.The existence of these weapons, has kept the peace since WW2.


You really believe that crap? they make the world a much more dangerous place.

The SNP will get more seats than UKIP. Ill come back and bump the thread up and we will see after the election.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

1990 said:


> *You really believe that crap? they make the world a much more dangerous place*.
> 
> The SNP will get more seats than UKIP. Ill come back and bump the thread up and we will see after the election.


Of course I believe it.History, has proven it to be true.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

essexboy said:


> Of course I believe it.History, has proven it to be true.


Exactly and getting rid of Trident now would be the worst possible timing due to rising global tensions like Ukraine.


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

GCMAX said:


> If the SNP get into power we will see massive damage to our economy because they want to increase minimum wage to £8.70 a hour. This would mean small businesses who are ALREADY struggling would have to make staff redundant and then the business would fail. The economy would collapse as a result if their idea became law.
> 
> The most logical thing to do would be to abolish tax from minimum/low wage earners (UKIP) and like you suggested earlier, end the inflation type system by kicking out the central bankers, stopping the printing of money.
> 
> ...


Its simple, if the minimum wage rose people would have more money in their pocket to spend so the money would go right back into the economy anyway. It would stimulate the economy because working class people would be spending more money.


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

GCMAX said:


> Exactly and getting rid of Trident now would be the worst possible timing due to rising global tensions like Ukraine.


Tory soundbite.

If trident is used the world ends. simple as that! So why bother.

Is it just so you can puff your chest out to the Russians?


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

1990 said:


> Its simple, if the minimum wage rose people would have more money in their pocket to spend so the money would go right back into the economy anyway.


Firstly, you say you hate bankers right? So why feed the beast even more? That extra tax would be taken by bankers to pay off the money we borrowed, making them even more powerful.

Secondly, small businesses cannot afford to give rises, most business tax comes from small businesses and there are many all over the country In fact small businesses are the bread and butter of this nation. They would be wiped out by such an increase NMW without having a severe reduction in VAT to counteract it.

Thirdly, increasing minimum wage is accepting that the vicious cycle of inflation has to continue.


----------



## NoodleArms (Apr 17, 2011)

I hear a lot of short term thinking here, what happened to the good old 'Victorian' thinking?


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

1990 said:


> Tory soundbite.
> 
> If trident is used the world ends. simple as that! So why bother.
> 
> Is it just so you can puff your chest out to the Russians?


That's the point! No one is stupid enough to actually use nuclear weapons at this stage due to M.A.D. Mutually Assured Destruction.

Nukes are a deterrent to war.

---

As far as Russia goes, I don't buy ANY of the nonsense that our Western media transmits, specially the liars at the BBC.

It was the EU with US backing that created a coup d'é·tat in Kiev, allowing NAZIS to take power. UK government along with other NATO countries have conspired to commit wholesale murder across the middle east for the last 15 years and because of that and Ukraine, NATO is losing favor with the world.

NATO, the UN, the EU, the treasonous, warmongering pedophiles in the UK government and the dirty scheming Zionist banker scum can all rot in hell.


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

GCMAX said:


> That's the point! No one is stupid enough to actually use nuclear weapons at this stage due to M.A.D. Mutually Assured Destruction.
> 
> Nukes are a deterrent to war.
> 
> ...


I agree with all that except it being a nuclear deterrent. i believe in unilateral disarmerment, why spend 200 billion on something no one is stupid enough to use when people are having to resort to using food banks. its unjustifiable imo.

The moral aspect of the weapons existing.. the money aspect when people are using food banks.

Scrap trident and raise the minimum wage. raising the minum wage will get more people into work and boost the economy.

I agree on NATO And the Ukrainian nazis.


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

1990 said:


> Its simple, if the minimum wage rose people would have more money in their pocket to spend so the money would go right back into the economy anyway. It would stimulate the economy because working class people would be spending more money.


This one statement shows the stupidity of the left wing and lack of knowledge on how this country works economically, people try to brand the far right as stupid but the far left would send the country into the Stone Age if they had full power!

The left ideas are all based on a utopia dream where everyone gets paid millions, no money is wasted and everything is equal, which would be nice but would NEVER happen!

Trident is purely used to stop a war, do we WANT to spread that money on it? No, but we have too because most of the world are ****ing backwards and would destroy us if we had no scary weapons


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

b0t13 said:


> This one statement shows the stupidity of the left wing and lack of knowledge on how this country works economically, people try to brand the far right as stupid but the far left would send the country into the Stone Age if they had full power!
> 
> The left ideas are all based on a utopia dream where everyone gets paid millions, no money is wasted and everything is equal, which would be nice but would NEVER happen!
> 
> Trident is purely used to stop a war, do we WANT to spread that money on it? No, but we have too because most of the world are ****ing backwards and would destroy us if we had no scary weapons


OK mate

Keep trident and normal people having their lives improved by having a bit more money in their pocket is a bad thing. Did you ever stop and think that you might be the backwards one?

Look up Keynesian economics if you want to understand the point I was making about the minimum wage.

Keynesian economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

1990 said:


> OK mate
> 
> Keep trident and normal people having their lives improved by having a bit more money in their pocket is a bad thing. Did you ever stop and think that you might be the backwards one?
> 
> ...


Ok here's what happens when u increase minimum wage

Higher company costs

Less corporation tax paid from profit (if not scamming already)

Increase in prices of products which considering the amount of low paid workers means increased inflation,

Which I hopefully don't have to explain that means money is worth less,

Increased redundancies and unemployment

Etc etc etc


----------



## NoodleArms (Apr 17, 2011)

Ed Miliband pictured at Russell Brand'''s house after dark after taping an interview - ITV News

Oh dear god.


----------



## kuju (Sep 15, 2010)

As if there wasn't enough reasons not to get these feckless lying cvnts back in to power (like you know...the complete failure to stick to any major election promise from last time...the financial shambles they are creating etc etc)

This. Just...this. Wow. WOW! I saw the interview with a minister saying all this detail isn;t important; what;s important is the message...that small businesses are right behind the wonderfully positive change the conservatives have brought in. That's what's important here.

Except it isn't - what's important here is the fact that this letter is fraudulent, it is a fabrication - there are a significant number of conservative candidates who have signed it...one of whom says he's a "waiter"..not exactly a small business owner. Another one who is a director of a charity...which is not a business you can "own"... several of the signatories don't even have shares in the companies, never mind any control over them.... there were a raft of duplicate entries....lots of companies turned out to be dissolved (hardly a great advert).

The list of fraudulent activity in this one document is just staggering...truly staggering. But hey - let's vote them back in again on the back of their unbelievably ill-defined and promises, that lack so much detail it is literally impossible to even begin to assess them.

Assuming they're telling the truth about them in the first place..which didn;t happen last time...and judging by this "letter"....isn't happening this time either.

Wow.

https://sturdyblog.wordpress.com/2015/04/27/small-business-letter-to-the-telegraph-an-attempt-to-defraud-the-electorate/


----------



## 1990 (Jan 31, 2011)

kuju said:


> As if there wasn't enough reasons not to get these feckless lying cvnts back in to power (like you know...the complete failure to stick to any major election promise from last time...the financial shambles they are creating etc etc)
> 
> This. Just...this. Wow. WOW! I saw the interview with a minister saying all this detail isn;t important; what;s important is the message...that small businesses are right behind the wonderfully positive change the conservatives have brought in. That's what's important here.
> 
> ...


The **** in the video didn't even look embarrassed


----------



## raisins (Mar 28, 2013)

1990 said:


> The SNP will get more seats than UKIP. Ill come back and bump the thread up and we will see after the election.


They should do now Miliband pressed the destruct button on Scottish votes, lol.

Can't see them getting to even caress the power stick in parliament though, much less share office.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

One of the many problems with elections is that you have to pick a party* who has a range of policies, some of which you may agree with and other likely not. Ultimately you have to decide what is most important and vote on the basis of that. Whatever people's views of Trident, this is a fringe issue as far as I'm concerned. In the long run I'd like to think that the public could get to vote on more seperate issues (via phone/internet ballots not old fashioned referenda), but for now we're stuck with what we've got.

I'll be voting conservative as I wouldn't trust labour (and particularly Ed Balls) to run the economy. (If I could vote for a Lib. Dem. / Conservative coalition rather than a conservative majority I would though.) This does not mean I agree with all conservative policies, or that I don't get wound up with some of the nonsense they are coming out with during the election campaign. The current 'changing the law so we can't put up taxes' thing is particularly idiotic.

*Obviously we all vote for the local MP who will best represent us...


----------



## MR RIGSBY (Jun 12, 2007)

Ultrasonic said:


> One of the many problems with elections is that you have to pick a party* who has a range of policies, some of which you may agree with and other likely not. Ultimately you have to decide what is most important and vote on the basis of that. Whatever people's views of Trident, this is a fringe issue as far as I'm concerned. In the long run I'd like to think that the public could get to vote on more seperate issues (via phone/internet ballots not old fashioned referenda), but for now we're stuck with what we've got.
> 
> I'll be voting conservative as I wouldn't trust labour (and particularly Ed Balls) to run the economy. (If I could vote for a Lib. Dem. / Conservative coalition rather than a conservative majority I would though.) This does not mean I agree with all conservative policies, or that I don't get wound up with some of the nonsense they are coming out with during the election campaign. The current 'changing the law so we can't put up taxes' thing is particularly idiotic.
> 
> *Obviously we all vote for the local MP who will best represent us...


I wouldn't trust Ed Balls with a corner shop, never mind the economy. Yvette Cooper was on the Andrew Marr show this morning, she failed to answer one question she was asked. I don't see the point of asking any of these politicians a straight question as they can never give a straight answer.


----------



## Major Eyeswater (Nov 2, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> One of the many problems with elections is that you have to pick a party* who has a range of policies, some of which you may agree with and other likely not. Ultimately you have to decide what is most important and vote on the basis of that. Whatever people's views of Trident, this is a fringe issue as far as I'm concerned. In the long run I'd like to think that the public could get to vote on more seperate issues (via phone/internet ballots not old fashioned referenda), but for now we're stuck with what we've got.


This is very true. I find that I'm usually in agreement with Labour on their social issues, but I don't trust them to run the economy. I tend to agree with he Tories on economic stuff, but don't care for their elitism & lack of compassion.

Also our voting system means that - barring an absolute wipe-out of the Tories, they will win our seat with a comfortable majority. Because of this, I'll be voting Green. This is not because I think they would make a good government, because I don't, and their economic policies are way too socialist for my liking. My reasoning is that if the Greens can get a good level of support, then environmental issues come further up the priority list when decisions are being made.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> One of the many problems with elections is that you have to pick a party* who has a range of policies, some of which you may agree with and other likely not. Ultimately you have to decide what is most important and vote on the basis of that. Whatever people's views of Trident, this is a fringe issue as far as I'm concerned. In the long run I'd like to think that the public could get to vote on more seperate issues (via phone/internet ballots not old fashioned referenda), but for now we're stuck with what we've got.
> 
> I'll be voting conservative as I wouldn't trust labour (and particularly Ed Balls) to run the economy. (If I could vote for a Lib. Dem. / Conservative coalition rather than a conservative majority I would though.) This does not mean I agree with all conservative policies, or that I don't get wound up with some of the nonsense they are coming out with during the election campaign. The current 'changing the law so we can't put up taxes' thing is particularly idiotic.
> 
> *Obviously we all vote for the local MP who will best represent us...


The conservatives are not the conservatives any more, they have perpetuated Labour policy in the respect of increasing immigration, increasing EU compliance, reducing wages, cutting front line services, damaging small business growth and protecting pedophiles in their own ranks and you want to vote for these fekkers? Why not UKIP?


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

GCMAX said:


> Why not UKIP?


Because under no circumstances would I want Nigel Farage and the assorted loons in his party running the country. They can't even run UKIP competently.


----------



## MrM (Feb 6, 2012)

I don't understand why labour is so steadfast that they won't go coalition with snp - it would be an almost cert to be in power.


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

The results are going to be whatever the powers that be want them to be, it's all a pantomime, but as long as people enjoy playing along, that's the main thing.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

EpicSquats said:


> The results are going to be whatever the powers that be want them to be, it's all a pantomime, but as long as people enjoy playing along, that's the main thing.


So the election is rigged is it? Don't vote if you don't want to but don't make up nonsense like that as an excuse not to.


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

Ultrasonic said:


> So the election is rigged is it? Don't vote if you don't want to but don't make up nonsense like that as an excuse not to.


Yes, it's rigged, don't kid yourself. You think politicians are honest?


----------



## zyphy (Jun 23, 2014)

EpicSquats said:


> The results are going to be whatever the powers that be want them to be, it's all a pantomime, but as long as people enjoy playing along, that's the main thing.


lol ok


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

EpicSquats said:


> Yes, it's rigged, don't kid yourself. You think politicians are honest?


Politicians being honest and the election being rigged are COMPLETELY different things. If you think they're all somehow working together you are spectacularly underestimating the animosity between some of the individuals involved.

There are people in the world who genuinely have no say in how they are governed. We are fortunate enough that we do (although far from perfectly), and should be grateful for this fact.

As I said, don't vote if you don't want to, but don't make up farcical excuses.


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

zyphy said:


> lol ok


UKIP are more popular than the other parties, but the results will be rigged to show that they didn't get the most votes.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

EpicSquats said:


> UKIP are more popular than the other parties, but the results will be rigged to show that they didn't get the most votes.


And how do you know UKIP are more popular? You don't. If only there was some way of finding out everyone's views to figure out for sure...


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

Ultrasonic said:


> And how do you know UKIP are more popular? You don't. If only there was some way of finding out everyone's views to figure out for sure...


Yes, a way that we could know for sure isn't rigged. There isn't one. You just believe it's not rigged.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

EpicSquats said:


> Yes, a way that we could know for sure isn't rigged. There isn't one. You just believe it's not rigged.


Along with the overwhelming majority of the UK population.

You could volunteer at your local count if you're really bothered about huge numbers of UKIP votes mysteriously disappearing.


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

Ultrasonic said:


> Along with the overwhelming majority of the UK population.
> 
> You could volunteer at your local count if you're really bothered about huge numbers of UKIP votes mysteriously disappearing.


No I'm not voting, I don't have faith in any of them to improve the country the way I want.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

EpicSquats said:


> No I'm not voting, I don't have faith in any of them to improve the country the way I want.


And that's fair enough.


----------



## zyphy (Jun 23, 2014)

EpicSquats said:


> UKIP are more popular than the other parties, but the results will be rigged to show that they didn't get the most votes.


and im sure you're going to be keeping count of who votes for who on election day arent you.


----------



## #93 (Oct 12, 2014)

zyphy said:


> and im sure you're going to be keeping count of who votes for who on election day arent you.


Does EpicSquats live in Tower Hamlets then? :tongue:


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

#93 said:


> Does EpicSquats live in Tower Hamlets then? :tongue:


Are you a mind reader?

Mayor of Tower Hamlets Lutfur Rahman guilty of electoral corruption | Daily Mail Online

Voter fraud happens and it happens frequently, how do you think Conservatives and Labour have held onto seats for so many years while the state of the country has declined so much? No one else has ever come close to their numbers and you can't put all this down to simply a matter of tribalism or stupidity.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Isn't UKM as diverse a community as any other?

Look at the poll;

Conservatives

38	23.90%

Labour

6	3.77%

Liberal Democrats

3	1.89%

The Green Party

11	6.92%

*The UK Independence Party*

*
57	35.85%*

The Scottish National Party

8	5.03%

Plaid Cymru

1	0.63%

Sinn Fein

2	1.26%

Other

1	0.63%

Undecided

7	4.40%

Not Voting

25	15.72%


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

GCMAX said:


> Isn't UKM as diverse a community as any other?


Not really. For starters it significantly under-represents women and pensioners. And do you really think Labour will only get 3.8% of the votes?

If you want a better estimate:

Election 2015 poll tracker - BBC News

But nobody will really know till after the election.

BTW I sadly don't completely discount the possibility of localised election fraud, but that's rather different to the whole election being rigged.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> Not really. For starters it significantly under-represents women and pensioners. And do you really think Labour will only get 3.8% of the votes?
> 
> If you want a better estimate:
> 
> ...


I stopped paying attention as soon as you pointed to the BBC as they are proven liars.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

GCMAX said:


> I stopped paying attention as soon as you pointed to the BBC as they are proven liars.


Solid argument. Never mind the fact that I'd pointed out significant problems with your POV even before mentioning the BBC.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> Solid argument. Never mind the fact that I'd pointed out significant problems with your POV even before mentioning the BBC.


Not really, pensioners are even more inclined to vote for a patriotic party, so that's lib lab con out of the picture straight away.

You may have a point with women as there aren't many on UKM, still, if you actually went out and spoke to people on the street, you would very quickly find out what most people think and I'm glad to say, *most people* want out of the EU!

We all know only one party is offering an EU referendum and that party is UKIP because Cameron (Cast Iron Dave) has infamously failed on offering a referendum on the Lisbon treaty.

Only wet idiots would vote Conservative if they truly wanted out of the EU.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

GCMAX said:


> Not really, pensioners are even more inclined to vote for a patriotic party, so that's lib lab con out of the picture straight away.
> 
> You may have a point with women as there aren't many on UKM, still, if you actually went out and spoke to people on the street, you would very quickly find out what most people think and I'm glad to say, *most people* want out of the EU!
> 
> ...


Polling companies go to great lengths to try to get as representative a sample of the population as they can. This is their job. Strangely I therefore place considerably more faith in their findings that the impression you get from the small group of people that you have spoken to in the area that you live.

Membership of the EU is also not an issue I feel strongly about either way, but I do think it would be good to have a referendum to try to put the matter to bed.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> Polling companies go to great lengths to try to get as representative a sample of the population as they can.


That's a blanket statement with no evidence to substantiate it. Some polling companies may wish to present legitimate information but rest assured if a poll is conducted on a busy social media website, it will be adulterated by government paid operatives under Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG) which is a joint NSA and GCHQ operation which does many things including modifying the outcome of online polls to fall in line with government agenda, in this case the agenda of the Westminster establishment who wish to remain in power.

Not sure what I'm talking about/don't believe me? See Edward Snowden's release of information which shows official documents from the NSA explaining joint operations with GCHQ.

Have a look, digest and realize you are being fooled.

Overview Link: GCHQ JTRIG Tools and TechniquesSecurity Affairs

Full documentation: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/document/2014/07/14/jtrig-tools-techniques/

EDIT: The US want to try Edward Snowden for treason which carries the death penalty. Snowden is currently living happily in Russia.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

GCMAX said:


> That's a blanket statement with no evidence to substantiate it.


Are you referring to my suggestion that polling company results are likely to be more reliable than information you have gleaned from the people you have met (and obviously asked about voting intentions in an unbiased fashion)? LOL! (People I speak to locally mostly support labour, and I've not met a single person who says they will vote for UKIP. But this means the same as your own 'sampling' - nothing.)

The point of the BBC link you chose to ignore was that it combines the results of multiple polls, and tracks changes in this over a period of time. In order for hacking to have a significant effect it would need to affect a signficant proportion of all polls taken.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> Are you referring to my suggestion that polling company results are likely to be more reliable than information you have gleaned from the people you have met (and obviously asked about voting intentions in an unbiased fashion)? LOL! (People I speak to locally mostly support labour, and I've not met a single person who says they will vote for UKIP. But this means the same as your own 'sampling' - nothing.)
> 
> The point of the BBC link you chose to ignore was that it combines the results of multiple polls, and tracks changes in this over a period of time. In order for hacking to have a significant effect it would need to affect a signficant proportion of all polls taken.


Labour = the party of pedophiles, traitors and warmongers. Started Iraq, Afghan war, sold our gold, introduced mass immigration & killed 10,000 disabled under ATOS.

BBC = a very biased organisation which hid mega pedophile Jimmy Saville and creates fake stories to back up the wars: BBC controversies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

By the way, you completely ignored my previous post so here it is again underneath;

*PLEASE READ - IMPORTANT*

If a political poll is conducted on a busy social media website, it will be adulterated by paid government operatives under Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG) which is a joint NSA and GCHQ operation which does many things, including modifying the outcome of online polls to fall in line with government agenda: in this case the agenda of the Westminster establishment who wish to remain in power.

Not sure what I'm talking about/don't believe me? See Edward Snowden's release of information which shows official documents from the NSA explaining joint operations with GCHQ.

Have a look, digest and realize you are being fooled.

Overview Link: GCHQ JTRIG Tools and TechniquesSecurity Affairs

Full documentation: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/d...ls-techniques/

The US want to try Edward Snowden for treason which carries the death penalty. Snowden is currently living happily in Russia.

*PLEASE READ - IMPORTANT*


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

GCMAX said:


> By the way, you completely ignored my previous post...


No, I didn't, read my post again.

But you clearly have very strong views that will not be swayed by any rational argument so I will leave this discussion here.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Ultrasonic said:


> No, I didn't, read my post again.
> 
> But you clearly have very strong views that will not be swayed by any rational argument so I will leave this discussion here.


BAM! Once again you have ignored my post.

My 'views' as you call them are publicly understood irrefutable facts, backed up with mountains of evidence. Your unwillingness to check out anything I'm saying speaks volumes about your intentions to misinform people on this thread.


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

BUMP


----------



## zyphy (Jun 23, 2014)

Lol what happened to "omg loads of people are gonna vote UKIP"


----------



## b0t13 (Jan 3, 2013)

zyphy said:


> Lol what happened to "omg loads of people are gonna vote UKIP"


They did, 13% of the country but because of the BS way the system works they didn't get many seats, yet 5% voted SNP and they got 50+ seats....

It doesn't need to be rigged as it's just ****ing pointless anyway, UKIP got 3million+ votes yet have hardly any say compared to SNP who have **** loads more seats, never mind the lab/con numbers!


----------



## zyphy (Jun 23, 2014)

b0t13 said:


> They did, 13% of the country but because of the BS way the system works they didn't get many seats, yet 5% voted SNP and they got 50+ seats....
> 
> It doesn't need to be rigged as it's just ****ing pointless anyway, UKIP got 3million+ votes yet have hardly any say compared to SNP who have **** loads more seats, never mind the lab/con numbers!


so? That's how it's always been for years. Can't start whinging about it now lol

Also the number of votes is just a generic number. The number of scots voting in certain constitencies in Scotland will be far less than some in England where UKIP received a lot of votes but still lost out (eg in farage's constiuency), thus I'm not suprised at all by the outcome.


----------



## Mclovin147 (Nov 11, 2013)

Bloody interesting old chaps! Jolly good show I must say!

Not much to add to it all other than, Britain has made its bed and can now bloody well sleep in it. I don't want to see anyone pointing fingers, you've all only got yourselves to blame!

Wake me up when the rioting starts lads :thumbup1:


----------



## freddee (Mar 2, 2009)

b0t13 said:


> They did, 13% of the country but because of the BS way the system works they didn't get many seats, yet 5% voted SNP and they got 50+ seats....
> 
> It doesn't need to be rigged as it's just ****ing pointless anyway, UKIP got 3million+ votes yet have hardly any say compared to SNP who have **** loads more seats, never mind the lab/con numbers!


The most important fact of that, with only 38% of the vote the Conservatives have a 12 seat majority over the all the rest put together, there are going to be some real social issues in this country now, but I am sure the tory propaganda machine will have you hating the poor for being poor, by the way I am no labour voter, just know the Tories are very efficient at looking after themselves....


----------



## Pablos888 (Aug 26, 2012)

Very suprised 'Cannabis is safer than alcohol' only got 1800 votes - Election 2015 - BBC News.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

People complaining about how the voting system converts percentage of votes into seats should bear in mind that there was a referendum to change to a more representative system in 2011 (albeit an alternative vote system rather than proper proportional representation):

United Kingdom Alternative Vote referendum, 2011 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Holding this referendum was a major concession won by the Liberal Democrats as part of the coalition agreement. Unfortunately for them, the public voted by about 2:1 to keep the present system. Or perhaps I should say the portion of the UK publc who bothered to vote, as turnout was only 42%.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

Pablos888 said:


> Very suprised 'Cannabis is safer than alcohol' only got 1800 votes - Election 2015 - BBC News.


I suspect they only had candidates in very few seats, as it will likely have cost them £500 for each candidate (the deposit they will have lost if they didn't get at least 5% of the vote). The Liberal Democrats lost about £169k because of this system BTW.


----------

