Sameer Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 It doesn't really matter who you vote for. You always get the government. ← Yes we can read div's signature. And it's suggesting there's something wrong with having a governing body, which is utter bollocks. I'm too wittle to vote, me. But I'm seriously not to keen on any this time round. Lib Dems are alright, but Charles Kennedy is a fking joke. Michael Howard is a fkin migrant himself, and now suddenly totally opposes it all. Labour, well... they went to war with Iraq. Vote Green! Make Howies happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swize Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Ime not old enoufght but i want one thats hard on crime and stop pikeys :- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomm Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Yes we can read div's signature. And it's suggesting there's something wrong with having a governing body, which is utter bollocks. I took it as an ironic statement - Everyone moans about the government, when any other government would do the same? Vote Green! Make Howies happy. ← No, Howies are twats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Jordan Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Keep the Tories out! :- unfortunatly i can't vote (16). But if i could i would vote lib dem near me and labour for the general. Labour have no chance near me and lib dems have no chance overall. As long as the tories aren't in power i'll be ok. George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tipsy Jock Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 I'll probably be grudgingly voting for Labour. They've had some stick over the years, from basically the opposition, but they've been OK. Conservatives I would never vote for, and the Lib Dems are just populists who seem to jump on any bandwagon if it'll get them some votes. Their whole party political broadcast (if you've seen it) is about dissing Labour and the Conservatives, without actually talking about any of their policies. Having said that, they're definitely way cooler than the tories. I'd definitely consider tactical voting to keep the tories out. So Labour probably, but Lib Dem if I need to. ← Thats what i've been thinking, Labour again for me :- Lib dem keep banging on about no top up fees and running a diploma scheme, but all this is with no mention of how exactly it will be financed! lol And the tories don't seem to have any polices other than to abuse labour. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Nichols Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Yes we can read div's signature. And it's suggesting there's something wrong with having a governing body, which is utter bollocks. ← I took it as an ironic statement - Everyone moans about the government, when any other government would do the same? ← Yeah, basically there really is only one government. There's no two ways about it - whoever is elected is going to screw us over in one way or another. Sure they talk big now but can you really believe in what they tell us? An example is the 'war on terrorism'. Do you honestly believe that if labour hadn't been in power we WOULDN'T have gone to war? If you do you're living in a dreamworld. Whatever happens, whoevers in power, the same shit WILL go down and thats that. A very dim view, but very real all the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munkee Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Media whore. This so-called chav 'culture' has ALWAYS been around. People only mention it now because of the press coverage it gets now. The lower working class will always have problems like this, its human nature to have a small percentage of f**k ups. Nothing to do with Labour. ← How is it being a media whore? If labour weren't in they would all be gypsies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMonkey Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 LIB DEM LIB DEM LIB DEM. You know you want it. If they got in I think we'd see alot of changes. Better Taxation etc etc. Also less chavvy f**kers. Less than we'd get with Conservatives. And they're more left wing than Labour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Limbo (Trials Chimp) Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Yeah, basically there really is only one government. There's no two ways about it - whoever is elected is going to screw us over in one way or another. Sure they talk big now but can you really believe in what they tell us? An example is the 'war on terrorism'. Do you honestly believe that if labour hadn't been in power we WOULDN'T have gone to war? If you do you're living in a dreamworld. Whatever happens, whoevers in power, the same shit WILL go down and thats that. A very dim view, but very real all the same. ← Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UrbanPoet Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 How is it being a media whore? If labour weren't in they would all be gypsies ← Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sameer Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 You were saying that the 'chav' culture has gained from the Labour government in a big way, which is just untrue. Your saying that the chav epidemic is a new thing when it most certainly isn't. It's been around for decades and will continue to do so. The only reason you feel this way is because of the media coverage of the situation. Daily Mail was it? And what are you saying, that chavs would all be gypsies if Labour wern't in? :- ← Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UrbanPoet Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 What are you on about? There's no way you can deny the chav uprising of recent years. Sure, there may have been 'chav culture' about before, but I for one can easily say I never saw the pricks of today 4 or 5 years ago. It's definately a more recent problem, and coincidentally one that can only be blamed on the Labour government, if indeed it is a political issue at all. Of course it has been around for ages! Maybe you've only noticed it in the past few years but I can quite easily say that there has always been these problems with the non-working class. It's obvious, what reason is there that these yobs would spring up in the past 6 years? It's absurd to think such a dramatic social change can happen in that time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 Media whore. This so-called chav 'culture' has ALWAYS been around. People only mention it now because of the press coverage it gets now. The lower working class will always have problems like this, its human nature to have a small percentage of f**k ups. Nothing to do with Labour. ← + You were saying that the 'chav' culture has gained from the Labour government in a big way, which is just untrue. Your saying that the chav epidemic is a new thing when it most certainly isn't. It's been around for decades and will continue to do so. The only reason you feel this way is because of the media coverage of the situation. Daily Mail was it? And what are you saying, that chavs would all be gypsies if Labour wern't in? :- ← + Of course it has been around for ages! Maybe you've only noticed it in the past few years but I can quite easily say that there has always been these problems with the non-working class. It's obvious, what reason is there that these yobs would spring up in the past 6 years? It's absurd to think such a dramatic social change can happen in that time. ← = Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bondy Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 I'd vote labour....i cant stand the others, also how they expect to miracolousy give back things to everyone without making the working class pay lots more... I also agree with nichols_sam about the way that no matter who was in government we still would have gone to war, because i reeally doubt that if any other person was in power that they would refuse to back our biggest and closest ally, and tell them that we dont want anything to do with them.... As for the chav thing, well yeh these sorts of people have been around for ages, but even without reading the papers and watching the news you can just see the rise in the amount of w*nkers that are about now though and how you cant go hardly anywhere without having to have some person trying to make you participate in some sort of confrontation there trying to start with you, also the amount of bellends driving cars like there on an F1 circuit (then we get done by the police for not cycling on the road but can they seriously wonder why we dont?) and just generally how much unsafer everything has just gotten in this world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UrbanPoet Posted April 21, 2005 Report Share Posted April 21, 2005 + + = ← I don't see why, Mark? Are you saying we've never had any kind of inner-city yob culture? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomm Posted April 22, 2005 Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 I wonder if anyone has evidence of the number of chavs over the years. I suspect not. If I had to guess, I'd be with UrbanPoet. I can always remember scallies hanging around bus shelters etc. Although perhaps it's only when you're a teenager that you notice this sort of stuff (Younger people don't get hastled so much)? They are simply a product of the society we live in. As far as I can tell, Labour has done more to try and stop it than anyone else. Annnyway :- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusional Posted April 22, 2005 Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 Yikes, I'm actually a little shocked at the amount of people who are still willing to put their little x down for Labour. This afternoon I was discussing this with my dad and decided that "only idiots and the horrificly un-informed would vote for labour now", but that was probably a little blase on my part. In a manner that makes me feel a little ill, I'd almost be more likely to vote Conservative than Labour, and I really dislike Conservative style politics. There's quite a long list of horrible things that Labour have done over the last few years, with the war and the multitude of attempts to enroach upon civil liberties being the most prominent. However, those actions in themselves aren't what have put me off Labour as a whole. Rather, I am repelled by the style of government they now seem to espouse. Where once stood a party that still wore it's socialist roots on it's shoulder, now stands a right of center party that seem to be slipping further right all the time. Where once stood a very British, cabinet based democratic party now stands a man and his 'advisers' wishing to create themselves a presidency - it's truly scary how much Blair's been allowed to erode away systems of governing that have been at the core of how our country has been run for generations in only a few short years. Essentially the Labour party today are a right wing, short sighted and economically driven party with aspirations to US style politics. These are all things that disgust me. The Conservatives barely even deserve a mention, their right wing, nationalistic crap was utterly repellant when it was wielded by the she-demon Thatcher. Today it is nothing but a shadow of itself, it's a poor imitation of an abhorrent past and I can see no place for them in the present or the future. The Liberal Democrats stand apart from the Big Two in my mind for several reasons. Firstly, they appear to have generally workable and sensible policies. Points in case: death to council tax - it's crap, structured in an utterly unfair manner and in no way sensible; heavier taxation on top wage earners - damn right, in terms of the needs of the few < the needs of the many this is right on. No-one needs to earn >100k, and if they do they're hardly going to miss a little extra taxation on the coinage that comes in over that figure; death to tuiton fees - education should be available to anyone able and willing, not just anyone who can afford it. Those are just the main examples that stick in my mind, alongside them you of course have their traditional support for the legalisation of cannabis (although I'm not sure how they stand on that contemporarily). Which, while not an issue worthy of a vote in itself, is to me indicative of a party with eyes on the future and feet planted in reality. More than anything else though, the Lib Dems have impressed me by seeming to have ideals and dreams for the future - things which seem to have been missing from mainstream politics for too long. In fact the Lib Dems are in real danger of actually acting like politicians and not business men sometimes, which is something I've been longing to see for quite some time. I think, in summation, I see the Lib Dems as a party that have high ideals that they want to achieve, but realistic policies for the short term that both make sense in themselves and lay the beginnings of a path that could lead to those ideals. Another party that really deserves a mention is Respect. At the moment they're a little young and rough around the edges to actually garner my election support, however they certainly have the right idea - I think they'll be a party to watch in the next couple of elections. From that you can probably guess where my vote is going. The way I see it, I have a choice between two parties that are going to lay the groundwork for two distinctly different futures. One seems to be heading towards a police state, with a highly concentrated power base, global unrest and the further enshrinement of economic in-equality; while the other shows me a vision of greater economic equality, increased social freedoms and a generally nice attitude. I won't even consider the future with the Conservatives, as I don't think they really have one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munkee Posted April 22, 2005 Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 (edited) heavier taxation on top wage earners - damn right, in terms of the needs of the few < the needs of the many this is right on. No-one needs to earn >100k, and if they do they're hardly going to miss a little extra taxation on the coinage that comes in over that figure I really dont understand why people seem to think that success should be taxed. If someone spent well over half their life working for a higher wage... then got taxed more because of this. What would be the point in working for that higher wage in the first place ? Isnt it nice to know that most higher earners donate to charities every year? In a big way even after they are being taxed. Its a totally different life style and in their position you may even be slightly pissed off that your being taxed for something that you have worked for and earnt. Its not as if we all get taxed the same amount, people on 100k+ a year end up getting taxed 40% of their earnings. In my opinion it would be more important to banish inheritance tax.. why on gods earth do we have something like that? Its just totally moraly wrong in my eyes :- and how about someone taking a look in sorting out the pensions which have been going tits up under labour. Edited April 22, 2005 by Spacemunkee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Nichols Posted April 22, 2005 Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 Not really, you're talking rubbish. If the LibDems had been in power they would have opposed the war (and perhaps presented some facts :) ) ← You really believe that? Do you not see that it's all to do with getting elected? It's the easiest thing in the world to say that, after an event has occurred and caused an uproar - 'We wouldn't have gone to war'. It's bullshit. Everything they say revolves around the hope that they'll get elected. Read what Bondy says... I also agree with nichols_sam about the way that no matter who was in government we still would have gone to war, because i reeally doubt that if any other person was in power that they would refuse to back our biggest and closest ally, and tell them that we dont want anything to do with them.... ← Word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfboy Posted April 22, 2005 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 The people who earn the most take the least from society... They probably have private medical care A private pension There kids probably go to private school. They are more likely to give to charitable causes They have worked hard to get where they are, why should we penalise them for that? On the other hand the poorest people take the most NHS Benifits Housing Schooling Crime (just kidding) what kind of message is this taxation sending to future generations... if you work hard and do well.. we'll tax you to death. If you are a bum we'll give you £300 a frikkin month in benifits. A balance has to be found... I think industry should bear more of the taxation. However, his may make us uncompetive in the global market though :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
munkee Posted April 22, 2005 Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 finally someone with the right frame of mind, well done sfboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giptown Posted April 22, 2005 Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 You mean "finally someone with a Conservative viewpoint!". The Conservatives have always favoured the rich, 'because guess what: they and most of their supporters are wealthy. I think the rich should be taxed heavily, and i know many people who would be happy to pay greater taxes to help those less fortunate, thats a function of living in a welfare state. Contrary to the Conservative and Dailymail (et all) doctrain, there are actually people in this country who genuinly need help from the doll etc. and to deny these people that because some of them abuse it is fundamentally wrong. This country has too few tax brackets, whats wrong with impliamenting a few more higher up the scale, even America do this for gods sake. Obviously i agree that that there should be greater controls over people illegitimatly claiming benifits, and i am sure that this is something any elected government will look into, be in Labour or Conservative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tipsy Jock Posted April 22, 2005 Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 More than anything else though, the Lib Dems have impressed me by seeming to have ideals and dreams for the future ← Bam! thats exactly what they are! lol Mo mention on where councils will get their funds from or where money will come from after uni fees are done away with. As much as you might hate Thatcher she did great things for Britain, the tunaround of the economy, putting an end to trade union power to mention a few. As far as i can see Labour are still the better choice, they may not be perfect but they're doing ok. they made a mistake with Iraq but noones perfect, in my opinion it should just be left to history not brought up at every oppurtunity as ammunition for a labour bashing session My 2p pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMonkey Posted April 22, 2005 Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 You really believe that? Do you not see that it's all to do with getting elected? It's the easiest thing in the world to say that, after an event has occurred and caused an uproar - 'We wouldn't have gone to war'. It's bullshit. Everything they say revolves around the hope that they'll get elected. Read what Bondy says... Word. ← I'll think you'll find the Lib Dems did oppose the war but the Conservatives didn't. They can't say oh we did this when we all know they didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JT! Posted April 23, 2005 Report Share Posted April 23, 2005 (edited) oh and JT one vote will make a difference.. at first i wasn't going to like you but then had a think about it. The only worth while parties to vote for are labour or conservatives so you mase well just use it on one of them, all the other parties are just so small and have the most random ideas on how to run a country that they will never ever ever ever get close to. All though if you do want to sit on the fence, vote lib dem they seem to be good at doing that. ← What do you mean by that? I'm an all or nothing type of person. If i was going to vote, i would watch the news or something for 2 hours every day and get into it, but at the moment, i don't know who to vote for as i have no knowledge of either parties, therefor my vote wouldn't be far from the toss of a coin. which isn't much use to anyone. Edited April 23, 2005 by JT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.