[Archived] The General Election 2015

[thenodrog]

You forget Jim, the days of workers not having rights are long gone.Unions are a thing of the past and have no power whatsoever.All they are fit for is lining the union bosses (current and ex) pockets.Care to comment on Scargill's cushy little pad? glad to see somebody came out of the miner's dispute ok because it certainly wasn't the poor buggers brainwashed by him and his ilk.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/arthur-scargill-ordered-to-pay-rent-as-he-loses-fight-to-have-union-pay-for-london-flat-for-life-8428774.html

"All animals are equal but some are more equal than others" George Orwell (Animal Farm).

[thenodrog]

Similar story to me Gav.for years i worked in shoe factories and as they started to close we were urged to join the Footwear union "To protect ourselves" They charged us a weekly fee and the companies still closed and we got no more than what we were entitled to.The union boss got a nice cushy number with a bigger union though.My experience is that unions are out to feather their own nests (Literally!).Some of the salaries that the union leaders are on are scandalous!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10176757/Union-leaders-enjoy-bumper-pay-hikes-and-golden-goodbyes.html

Hypocrisy at it's worst...

“Comrades!' he cried. 'You do not imagine, I hope, that we pigs are doing this in a spirit of selfishness and privilege? Many of us actually dislike milk and apples. I dislike them myself. Our sole object in taking these things is to preserve our health. Milk and apples (this has been proved by Science, comrades) contain substances absolutely necessary to the well-being of a pig. We pigs are brainworkers. The whole management and organisation of this farm depend on us. Day and night we are watching over your welfare. It is for your sake that we drink the milk and eat those apples.”

― George Orwell, Animal Farm

[jim mk2]

The pigs are one step ahead of Gideon.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/603e8076-fe30-11e4-8efb-00144feabdc0.html

[thenodrog]

Lower taxes under the Tories? How much has the rise of VAT to a record level cost you bacup? I think you're getting confused with lower taxes for millionaires, not for everyone else.

Another Cameron lie.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/01/raise-vat-tax-tories

One might argue with very good reason that VAT is a wealth tax den. Wealthier people who spend most on goods and services pay the most. There is for example none on food, none on childrens clothes and a minimum on fuel. Check it out https://www.gov.uk/rates-of-vat-on-different-goods-and-services

[jim mk2]

One might argue with very good reason that VAT is a wealth tax den. Wealthier people who spend most on goods and services pay the most. There is for example none on food, none on childrens clothes and a minimum on fuel. Check it out https://www.gov.uk/rates-of-vat-on-different-goods-and-services

Wrong again Gordon lad. At least you're consistent.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15519727

[thenodrog]

Just had a look at your link: obviously wrong. Does it matter ? Trade union officials in my experience are hard working people like the rest of us. They do a great job in my union and earn every penny of their not very large salaries.

Two words..... Gordon Taylor.

[jim mk2]

Taylor's in one of the most grossly-overpaying industries in the world - don't you think his salary reflects that ? Rather different for the union rep on the shop floor or in a company office.

[Gav]

Told you before I'd ban em. There is no need for such cos proper food is 'cheap as chips'. imo they are just a political invention.

So Gordon would ban foodbanks because food is 'cheap as chips'!

You're clueless, but everyone knows that, that's why the vast majority of your posts are completely ignored.

But the site would be a worse place without you, so I hope I've not hurt you feelings to much LoL

[thenodrog]

Wrong again Gordon lad. At least you're consistent.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15519727

That article talks about proportion of income NOT total amount and you know it.

[Gav]

Two words..... Gordon Taylor.

Exception to the rule, bad example.

[meerkat]

We found out a bunch of stuff in the election.

1. People dont really care very much about the poor and vulnerable
2. The poor dont vote
3. Poor people mainly live in the north

We also learned the media can play really old stories. The Daily Mail 'zinoviev letter' from 1924 designed to scare people into not voting Labour was replaced by the Sturgeon interview in 2015.

We also re-learned that negative campaigning works well and that the media is obsessed by personality politics rather than actual substance.

We learned that political pundits across all media failed to serve the electorate by asking a lot of questions about which party would be in coalition instead of the key questions about what the main contenders would do with power.

[meerkat]

Also learned that thenodrog is on ignore, should improve the limited time I spend here 100%

[yoda]

That article talks about proportion of income NOT total amount and you know it.

When someone tries to hide behind percentage this and percentage that you know they have lost the argument.

Talking about pounds does not come easy to some

[den]

When someone tries to hide behind percentage this and percentage that you know they have lost the argument.

Talking about pounds does not come easy to some

Hardly Yoda. VAT hits the poor, that's a fact.

""This latest piece of research reinforces what is widely perceived to be the fundamental inequality at the heart of VAT: the poorer pay more of it relative to their incomes than the wealthy," said David Breger of HW Fisher & Company chartered accountants.

"It's clear that the Government needs to reconsider the full effect of VAT, which is inherently regressive."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15519727

So there you are, this governments priorities. Tax rises for the poor and tax reductions for millionaires. Indisputable I would argue.

[Gav]

Cameron looking to bring back fox hunting also by all accounts, Jeremy Hunt confirmed this on newsnight.

Party for the rich? NEVER!

[thenodrog]

Value Added Tax. The fact of the matter is that the more that you spend on non necessities the more tax you pay. Simples. For example I'm so public spirited that I will have paid at least 4x as much VAT as Jim mk2 on bathrooms alone!

tbh VAT is a true socialist tax and can only work out as a greater tax on those who spend most i.e. the wealthier in society. The likes of you and Jim etc quite obviously see nothing wrong in living off the endeavours of hard working and successful people den so I'm surprised that you are so opposed to it. You really need to overcome that entrenched and outdated political opinion.

I'd wager you saw the Poll Tax as being unfair too. Just imagine the audacity of asking every member of society over the age of 18 to contribute exactly the same amount of money for exactly the same local services? A truly socialist inspired tax despised and ultimately destroyed by socialists. Crazy eh?

[yoda]

Hardly Yoda. VAT hits the poor, that's a fact.

""This latest piece of research reinforces what is widely perceived to be the fundamental inequality at the heart of VAT: the poorer pay more of it relative to their incomes than the wealthy," said David Breger of HW Fisher & Company chartered accountants.

"It's clear that the Government needs to reconsider the full effect of VAT, which is inherently regressive."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15519727

So there you are, this governments priorities. Tax rises for the poor and tax reductions for millionaires. Indisputable I would argue.

There you go again, percentages

[thenodrog]

Cameron looking to bring back fox hunting also by all accounts, Jeremy Hunt confirmed this on newsnight.

Party for the rich? NEVER!

Lots of rural incomes have suffered as a result of the ban Gav. Fox hunting on horseback is an expensive pastime, dogs and horses cost a fortune to keep and the wealthy inevitably pay people to do it. That money is distributed to many people living in the countryside on low income. Still being a townie I doubt you would comprehend that.

Dunno where you live but I have never in my life seen as many foxes as I now see on a regular basis. The local gamekeepers trap and shoot as many as they can of course but still they appear on the increase and it's wildlife that is suffering . Nobody cares a fig about that of course but let some wealthy member of society chase them on a horse and it's an outrage (even when most get away!). btw It is the most inefficient method of fox control there is.

Yet again it's just entrenched political opinion at work. Opinion that is changing but in many cases will simply have to die out.

But tbh this is hardly an important issue in the greater scheme of things. I am neither in favour nor against fox hunting on horseback but I would never do it myself that's for sure. Should I wish I can dispose of foxes far more efficiently anyway but lets be honest the whole issue is just a silly political football.

[Gav]

There you go again, percentages

There you go again ignoring the facts.

[Gav]

Lots of rural incomes have suffered as a result of the ban Gav. Fox hunting on horseback is an expensive pastime, dogs and horses cost a fortune to keep and the wealthy inevitably pay people to do it. That money is distributed to many people living in the countryside on low income. Still being a townie I doubt you would comprehend that.

Dunno where you live but I have never in my life seen as many foxes as I now see on a regular basis. The local gamekeepers trap and shoot as many as they can of course but still they appear on the increase and it's wildlife that is suffering . Nobody cares a fig about that of course but let some wealthy member of society chase them on a horse and it's an outrage (even when most get away!). btw It is the most inefficient method of fox control there is.

Yet again it's just entrenched political opinion at work. Opinion that is changing but in many cases will simply have to die out.

But tbh this is hardly an important issue in the greater scheme of things. I am neither in favour nor against fox hunting on horseback but I would never do it myself that's for sure. Should I wish I can dispose of foxes far more efficiently anyway but lets be honest the whole issue is just a silly political football.

To be honest it doesn't really impact on my life, but surely any right minded person would agree that dogs ripping an exhausted fox to bits is barbaric.

I'd also take issue with the fox hunting brigade that claim they control the fox population, you only need look at the numbers to see they'd have to fox hunt 365 days a year, 24hrs a day to control the population, its simply not true. The numbers of people losing incomes/jobs due to the ban is estimated to be less than 1000, so hardly a major impact their either.

But the reason for bringing it up goes towards the Tories looking after their rich mates again, this is a clear example.

Lets hope it gets voted out.

[den]

Value Added Tax. The fact of the matter is that the more that you spend on non necessities the more tax you pay. Simples. For example I'm so public spirited that I will have paid at least 4x as much VAT as Jim mk2 on bathrooms alone!

tbh VAT is a true socialist tax and can only work out as a greater tax on those who spend most i.e. the wealthier in society. The likes of you and Jim etc quite obviously see nothing wrong in living off the endeavours of hard working and successful people den so I'm surprised that you are so opposed to it. You really need to overcome that entrenched and outdated political opinion.

I'd wager you saw the Poll Tax as being unfair too. Just imagine the audacity of asking every member of society over the age of 18 to contribute exactly the same amount of money for exactly the same local services? A truly socialist inspired tax despised and ultimately destroyed by socialists. Crazy eh?

Poll tax? . Riots over that one. Elderly people thrown into jail over it. Another one for the rich Gord.

[ultrablue]

So socialists should be in favour of flat tax rates and you lose a debate on regressive and progressive taxes if you mention percentages.

You could spend your whole life searching the internet for utter @#/? and never find two bigger gems just swinging there side by side.

[yoda]

There you go again ignoring the facts.

No one is going to do anything about it based on percentages, FACT

Do you work out your home expenditure based on percentages of well off people ?

[Steve Moss]

To be honest it doesn't really impact on my life, but surely any right minded person would agree that dogs ripping an exhausted fox to bits is barbaric.

I'd also take issue with the fox hunting brigade that claim they control the fox population, you only need look at the numbers to see they'd have to fox hunt 365 days a year, 24hrs a day to control the population, its simply not true. The numbers of people losing incomes/jobs due to the ban is estimated to be less than 1000, so hardly a major impact their either.

But the reason for bringing it up goes towards the Tories looking after their rich mates again, this is a clear example.

Lets hope it gets voted out.

Two thoughts:

1. Is a lion running down and ripping apart a gazelle barbaric? Is a pack of feral dogs running down and ripping apart a fox barbaric? Or does it only become "barbaric" when human agency is involved?

2. The loss of "less than 1000" jobs is a not big deal apparently. I wonder how you would feel if you were one of those 1000 jobs? To re-master a famous quote, a 1000 jobs here and a 1000 jobs there, and pretty soon we're talking about a pretty god economy.

I don't personally like the idea of fox hunting. It costs too much money, is too much effort for not enough gain, and sounds awfully stuck up. I'd rather enjoy a beer and watch a game. On the other hand, it employs people, deals with a pest (however inefficiently), keeps some of the "rich" occupied with things other than figuring out a way to manage my life (for my own good, of course), and is, in the end, about freedom of action. People should be allowed to do what they like up until the time the hurt another human being. Foxes don't count as human beings. So let the hunters get on with it.

[Gav]

Two thoughts:

1. Is a lion running down and ripping apart a gazelle barbaric? Is a pack of feral dogs running down and ripping apart a fox barbaric? Or does it only become "barbaric" when human agency is involved?

2. The loss of "less than 1000" jobs is a not big deal apparently. I wonder how you would feel if you were one of those 1000 jobs? To re-master a famous quote, a 1000 jobs here and a 1000 jobs there, and pretty soon we're talking about a pretty god economy.

I don't personally like the idea of fox hunting. It costs too much money, is too much effort for not enough gain, and sounds awfully stuck up. I'd rather enjoy a beer and watch a game. On the other hand, it employs people, deals with a pest (however inefficiently), keeps some of the "rich" occupied with things other than figuring out a way to manage my life (for my own good, of course), and is, in the end, about freedom of action. People should be allowed to do what they like up until the time the hurt another human being. Foxes don't count as human beings. So let the hunters get on with it.

Absolute Rubbish, with respect.

Lion and gazelle is a natural occurrence, gazelle is a food source.

Fox and hounds/posh folk on horses is some sort of perverted afternoon jolly up akin to bull fighting in my book.

As for the jobs side of things, 1000 jobs is nothing in the grand scheme of things and I'm being generous with the numbers, it's probably half that amount.

Keep than ban I say.