BS: From someone who rarely starts threads

Subject: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 06:40 AM

As I type this we are but a few days from a UK general election. It is, frankly, ludicrous that we are not discussing it. So let's discuss it. I'll start by saying I hate the bloody lot of them but that someone has to run the country, so I'm voting. So there. Shoot.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Roger the Skiffler
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:07 AM

Someone in yesterday's Guardian mocked those of us who urged people to vote via social media but, as I said on Thimbles O'Hoologan (my evil doppelganger)'s Facebook page, if you don't vote you can't complain and I love to complain. Sadly, political threads here just get hijacked by name callers so I don't get involved here.
RtS

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Stu
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:15 AM

To not vote is frankly, pathetic. If you don't vote then your opinion is utterly worthless, little more than hot air. It's an old cliche, but people gave their lives so we can vote and we should exercise our prerogative.

That said, if there's no-one worth voting for then the only thing to do is spoil your vote. Spoilt votes are still counted and are a legitimate way to make your voice heard. I write poems on mine.

I've not decided who to vote for yet, as they all seem a right shower. Deffo not the Tories or the idiot kippers, almost certainly not the LibDems after last time and so that leaves Labour and the Greens.

Hmmm.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jack Campin
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:37 AM

SNP.

Who are not all that inspiring, but at least not a gang of murdering thugs, thieves and opportunistic liars.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: BrendanB
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:46 AM

I am definitely going to vote; I have even decided who I am going to vote for. Unfortunately, I am making a choice on which party do I believe is least worst rather than which is best, because there is no best. I just do not trust politicians not to put their own/their party's interests ahead of the interests of society as a whole.
Russell Brand is a self adulating pillock but it does feel as if there is something wrong with the way democracy is working in the UK today. This is in part a result of the rise of the professional politician and the effective disenfranchisement of a large part of the electorate because the education system favours the middle and upper classes regarding achievement. Do I know how that should be fixed? No, I don't.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:47 AM

I will be voting Lib Dem. If I lived in another area I may well have chosen Labour but I don't think they will be in the running in North Norfolk and I don't want the Tories getting in.

Whatever the general feeling about the Lib Dems may be throughout the country, I think Norman Lamb remains poplar round here and, in fairness, I think he is a good MP for the area.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:48 AM

The Greens are very nice people but they live in fairyland. I hate wind turbines and solar farms (all over Cornwall like a rash so that we can sustain the air conditioning in badly-built office blocks in London) and think that the only long-term answer to man-made global warming is nuclear power (oh yes, I know how to lose friends). The planet has proved beyond doubt that it can't and won't behave itself in terms of carbon emissions. So, as my priority is to get the bloody Tories out, I have to hold my nose and vote tactically here in North Cornwall. That would be LibDem, unfortunately, as Labour haven't got a cat in hell's chance here, so if I voted Labour I'd be helping the Tories. I'd rather die.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:49 AM

"To not vote is frankly, pathetic. If you don't vote then your opinion is utterly worthless"
Always been a fan of the old Anarchist graffiti - "Don't vote, it only encourages them" (about the only thing I have in common with Anarchism).
If voting produces the same result every time - electing the same bunch of dishonest and incompetent self-servers, making the same promises that disappear like sea-fog once the election is over and then carrying out the same policies that put us where we are which end up giving us same results - those who have keep having, those who don't become worse off - what's the point?
"Hmmm."
Hmmm indeed
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:50 AM

I suppose I meant the people on the planet. Didn't mean to diss poor old Mother Earth.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:53 AM

There always has to be a least worst though, Jim, no?


(I'll check me grammar later...)

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:12 AM

I see Nick Clegg [ leader fuckwits party ] is promising us the earth again, in full knowledge that he will never have to fulfill any promises. Or like last time if he sells his soul again for 5 minutes of imagined power, he'll go back on his word straight away. Mind, I think he'll not get elected due to what he did to the students and steelworkers.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:21 AM

Ah yes, notwithstanding which party crosses the line first, there's always the tangential pleasure of watching utter pillocks losing their seats. Clegg and Danny Alexander would be the top two on my hit-list. Any other additions gratefully and gleefully received.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:27 AM

"what's the point?"

Spoil your vote. Your vote still gets counted and you don't have to settle for the status quo. Like I said before, I write poems on my spoilt votes but you could paste pictures, write slogans and anything else.

By not voting, you're part of the problem and you don't have a voice. I'm not giving up my vote because the choice is between shysters, lickspittles and tosspots; they can all GTF. I'll damn well stand by the people who fought and died for universal suffrage, who suffered and defended our right to cast a ballot.

It always amazes me when the TV shows folks who can vote, possibly for the first time, are always happy to being doing so. They might have lived under a regime where their voices were silenced by force and oppression; they often queue for hours in all sorts of weather and they recognise the importance of being able to vote.

That people don't vote simply means the've either forgotten or don't care about how important voting is. We're under the kosh of the military-industrial complex and the establishment, but we're also still in with a shout.

Vote.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:31 AM

Although once a member of the Green Party, I am not very political and like Steve will vote for who I think is least worst, holding nose.

My last post on the old election thread was actually posted after it closed in response to its closure.
We really should be allowed to discuss our election.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Stu without cookie
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:34 AM

Guest above was me, not sure what happened to my cookie.

Hmmm (again).

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,#
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:40 AM

"Spoilt votes are still counted and are a legitimate way to make your voice heard. I write poems on mine."

I too have spoiled a few ballots in my time. I write short statements instead of poems. My last one read something like "Give me someone trustworthy to vote for and I won't be writing shit like this on my ballot."

I think it's important to go to the election booth and cast a ballot because it helps ensure we get to do so next election. Even if next election we have to spoil the ballot again.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:46 AM

"There always has to be a least worst though, Jim, no?"
No way to run a country Steve.
Until politicians are made directly answerable to the electorate on the promises they make at election time - there really doesn't seem any point.
I remember the buzz I felt the first time I put cross to paper (for Harold Wilson for god's sake)
Even though I didn't trust him or his promises, there was still a feeling that it was possible to make a difference and make your opinions count - 'all gone, no more tomorrow" as things stand at present.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,#
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:53 AM

We are beginning to feel that way in Canada, Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: BrendanB
Date: 03 May 15 - 09:32 AM

I can't go along with the view that because our democracy is a poor thing at the moment the answer is to disengage. The simple fact is that, in comparison to many countries in the world, the UK is a functioning society in which the vast majority are able to live and work free from fear or anxiety. I know that it is possible to point to food banks etc. and claim that this proves that democracy is not working but again, in comparison to large parts of the globe our system of government has enabled us to enjoy significant freedoms. I am voting because I want to see change - I want to resist the ant-immigration rhetoric of some, the willingness to collude with bad business practices of others. I despise the tax loopholes still available to the wealthiest in our society and want to see them closed. I believe that most politicians are there because of their principles, even though I may not share them. My vote enables me to give some sort of voice to my principles - and what is the real alternative? Bloody revolution? I sincerely hope not.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 03 May 15 - 10:02 AM

I agree that one should vote, but I find voting very depressing being, as I am, in a very safe Tory constituency. I have never voted Tory, never will - I despise the whole greedy, deceitful bunch of them - there is absolutely no chance of anyone getting in other than the sitting Tory, so what point is there in voting?

Until our system of 'first past the post' is replaced with a system of PR, the votes of people like me simply don't count. It's a bugger.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 15 - 10:17 AM

"I can't go along with the view that because our democracy is a poor thing at the moment the answer is to disengage"
I think it's not a problem of democracy not working, but of Parliamentary 'democracy' standing in the way of real democracy.
My chance to make a difference through the ballot box has been whittled away gradually by a series of governments of both complexions.
They are increasingly using tactics to take power and abuse it when they have got it, in particular, the press, which has become a virtual right-wing monopoly which controls information and manipulates opinions.
My rights as a Trades Unionist went with Thatcher and I have no say in my working life (should say, "had" - now retired and living elsewhere)
The tactic of setting one group of working people against another has now become a shameless election ploy - blaming immigrants for housing shortages and resurrecting a housing policy that made many thousands of families homeless as an election promise.
Labour has shown itself no better - Blair's W.M.D. invasion in the face of millions of people on the streets in protest showed that, once they get elected, our opinions are worth nothing.
Oddly enough, though three main parties here in Ireland are basically no different, things have been made slightly more transparent because we have a P.R. system.
We, like Britain, are faced with an unforeseeable series of coalitions so that the rich can stay rich and the poor are kept in their place.
It will be interesting to see what happens this year now Ireland has privatised water in the face of massive protests and now they are moving to privatise public transport, which will put at risk the free transport for pensioners scheme that Ireland prides itself upon.
At least we don't have politicians going to the polls on a racist ticket - yet!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,MikeL2
Date: 03 May 15 - 10:38 AM

Hi

We will not be voting!!!!!!

Only today we have been invited to stay with some friends for a week in Wales. And it is too late to get a postal vote.

If I had voted I would have voted Labour - because their is no way on Earth would I vote for Osborne. But in this constituency he will walk in.

Baaa

Cheers

MikeL2

PS see u all in a week.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 03 May 15 - 11:01 AM

my old mum is 83
and is stubbornly determined to continue walking to the polling station,
in all weathers, for every election,
to proudly vote Labour.

Despite her living in a perpetual tory safe seat.

I live in a neighbouring tory safe seat,
and for the first time after many years of voting tactically for the Liberals
I will enjoy casting my futile vote as my mind and heart has always dictated.. Labour !!!😎

[my dilemma is the local council elections where there is a slim chance
the liberals may defeat the tories...]

Trying to imagine under what dire future circumstances
we might have to contemplate voting even tory to keep UKIP out...?????😬

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 03 May 15 - 11:27 AM

In our constituency, the Tories took it from Labour last time. So perhaps floating voters make the difference?

I have already voted by post and have voted Labour. However, I had to think long and hard first. Are you voting for the candidate or the party?

Party.

The Labour candidate for this strange shaped large constituency has made it quite clear that she is only interested in two large towns, both about twenty miles from us and nobody here uses services there. (Even the council works out of another town, not in the constituency.)

The sitting Tory however has been vocal, present and active in many good causes such as development of trading estates nearby to attract jobs, rural broadband, upgrade of road networks and saving a local police station.

But as I said, you don't vote for him because when he isn't doing good deeds he is being herded through the lobby by his party whips and that is where he does the damage.

They are all opportunist politicians and in the areas where I know a bit, they give the impression of incompetence regardless of party. I just think Labour at least know why we have a public purse and what to use it for. I haven't voted for what is best for me but what I think is best for the country.

If I voted for my best interest it would be Tory but I can look after myself regardless of who is in power. Many cannot look after themselves and the Tories don't seem willing to look after them. Labour will try even if Ed does make a Balls of it.

Dunno about the other two Muskets but one of them is a Labour member so not much surprise I suppose.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 03 May 15 - 11:54 AM

Rather sad.. Two of us posting at around the same time?

I intend to vote Labour too, although with a heavy heart. Up here in Scotland, SNP are a popular party regardless of whether you want The UK or a tin pot Republic. Chiefly because they have policies similar to what most expect from a Labour Party, ie, social democracy, social infrastructure and jobs from inward investment.

I couldn't vote for them all the same, even with their wonderful commitment to equality and recognising the equal status of all. Somewhere, despite the people making it clear they wish to retain the union, they are still fighting for independence and giving them power just encourages them. Although as they have support from people who don't understand their policies and are blinkered by the neverendum dream, they will remain a confused party.

I also think a Tory run Westminster is in their favour as they are more successful at blaming others than getting on with discharging their responsibilities as the Scottish government.

Still, I have just returned from a trip to India that they paid for, encouraging doctors to apply for the huge number of vacancies that cannot be filled in our hospitals and practices. The irony being that the vacancies exist as UK people are loathe to relocate up here over the last few years because of the threat of independence. We have no ties and could move anywhere any time, (sell the house to Musket - he has holiday lets around here!) but once you get your kids in schools etc, you go native. Hence the damage SNP caused by the instability around the referendum.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:02 PM

SNP..but unless some drastic policies are brought forward, I fear an independent Scotland will be just another set of politicians playing the game.

There is much negativity on this thread, and we have a lot to be negative about. We need politicians who are prepared to tell the truth, middle class living standards must fall if we are to train our young people to do the jobs presently filled by immigrants.
Its bad for us and in the long term bad for them, we need to keep a generation on benefits as they are uncompetitive in the jobs market with immigrants from Eastern Europe. We educate our people and there are no proper jobs available for them....I have lost count of the number of highly qualified young shelf stackers and check outs that I've met lately, most living with their families.
The countries of Eastern Europe are in more need of workers to contribute to their economies than we do.
Economic immigration is a double edged sword.


I think perhaps we need something like a years community service for all school leavers, to prepare them for the real world.
To just do nothing and rely on cheap immigration to give a short term fix, is no option at all.

Its time to get serious if we are to provide any sort of future for our grandchildren. I am surprised by the number of people here who still view any negative views on immigration fron the EU as "racism"
The argument has been well made many times, the evidence is there for all to see the infrastructure is going into meltdown.

Of course there are other problems with how this country is run, but addressing unemployment(lack of PROPER jobs), and getting out of the EU are absolute priorities.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:14 PM

Regarding the last post by team Musket, there is already one in ten of our population who were born in England. These people are mainly here for economic reasons.....freebies and differentials in house prices....the vast majority in this area are retired, and do not contribute to Scotland's economy.
So at least the failed referendum did some good in cutting down the Northern drift.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:17 PM

Some people ONLY SAY, they believe in Democracy and freedom of speech....but don't believe or practice it!
They're called hypocrites!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:23 PM

(musket -are you sure you can get more than one vote? i'm off up to the north shortly. just booked 3 nights camping in nethy bridge -but where to stay after that? any cheap accommodation you might recommend?)

i met the labour candidate here yesterday. i said i was thinking of voting for her to keep the tories out (i can't agree 'they are all the same' the current lot are something else -dangerous to everything decent about the uk) but given miliband's stance rejecting the scots to appease the media and considering allowing the tories back in....she agreed that it was embarrassing and said that labour need to be more bold.
as a council candidate i should be voting green anyway

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:29 PM

Gust, you can make this thread about you, or you can back off and let the UK folks talk about their politics. Shaw had a perfectly reasonable beginning to the thread, he wasn't continuing a running fight.

Now if the dog whistles stay in your pockets, this one will run a logical course. But the fighting and name calling has to stop. People are entitled to discuss their political opinions, but when they are followed by "but" and speculation about the motives of others just to start another fight, that is where threads are closed. I didn't close the last thread, I don't close most threads, I'm not the only one here moderating.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 03 May 15 - 12:38 PM

I was originally intending to vote Green. Nevertheless, I am not impressed with the Green Party and someone pointed out to me that if people vote Green, in this constituency, we will get a Labour MP here ... which is not a very palatable outcome in an exclusively Labour run city.

I was then intending to vote for our current LibDem MP, because at least he's a decent bloke who has worked hard for this constituency.

Then something happened which turned everything on its head again. The last leaflet from the local Labour candidate contained a section on the environment (a vitally important subject which has hardly been mentioned during this election campaign). I sent him an e-mail commenting on this section of his leaflet and got an almost immediate reply! I also got a follow-up to my reply to him.

In today's Independent newspaper there's a piece by Nick Clegg about how he wouldn't go back into coalition with the Tories again (don't all shout at once!). One of the reasons he gives is the Tories' hostility to existing environmental legislation and environmental reforms during the course of the coalition government.

I'm just wondering, have their postbags been full of indignant letters asking why they have ignored environmental issues? Could it be that they're rattled?

As a committed environmentalist, I've decided to go back to Plan A and vote Green. If there's an unexpectedly big Green vote next week, it might make them think. If we get a Labour MP, then so be it (after all, Labour are the least worst option for running the country).In addition, he says that he wants to talk to me about my ideas after the election - I'll certainly be holding him to that promise!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 15 - 01:08 PM

"freebies and differentials in house prices"
Tsk tsk - straight from the Ukip manifesto.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST
Date: 03 May 15 - 01:10 PM

Are there any countries with less of a differential in living standards between the middle class and the 'working poor' ? If so how do they work and what could the UK do to get closer to that ?

Which, if any, party's policies would move things in that direction ?

Green for me in a Tory seat that the Lib Dem's couldn't win even when their supporters were not in a mood to punish them.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 May 15 - 01:16 PM

Usually Labour but now living in a safe Tory seat so green for me this time. As to the person trying to get the thread closed by introducing the usual right wing immigration tripe, you are sussed so just give it a rest.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: akenaton
Date: 03 May 15 - 01:28 PM

Jim, my remarks do not concern EU immigrants....The differentials are between Southern England and most of Scotland ....I don't think UKIP would agree with me on the point I was making there.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 15 - 02:27 PM

"Jim, my remarks do not concern EU immigrants"
Apologies if that is the case - however, as a former economic migrant within Britain (Liverpool to Manchester to London) in search of work, the term "freebies" sets my teeth on edge - for the 'hounor' of obtaining work to make money for someone else I found neither handouts or a home without massive sacrifices on my part - the loss of contact with friends, family and familiar surroundings (not to mention fiancee) not being not the least of those.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Stu
Date: 03 May 15 - 03:17 PM

I too live in a safe tory seat, but still vote because the popular vote is not always reflected in the final make up of the government. So your vote still counts, even for those of us whose preferred candidates will never be voted in as the actual number of votes for any given party is part of their legitimacy to govern (in theory).

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 05:13 PM

I suppose so, Stu, but what about those hundreds of thousands of us who vote LibDem for tactical reasons? It inflates their total vote which they then use to claim undeserved legitimacy.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link
Date: 03 May 15 - 05:13 PM

I have in time past, also just written a statement on the card.   I might not decide till the day for definite what to do. Certainly the lack of integrity and honesty in politicians so far has been disappointing to say the least.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Tangledwood
Date: 03 May 15 - 06:33 PM

Any chance of you mob voting for Tony Abbott and getting him out of Australia?

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:02 PM

Ake I think the figure is one in ten who were born elsewhere in the UK. The figure for born in England is 9% so yes most of those who were born elsewhere in the UK. I too live in an area where there are a very high percentage of English born people and yes some are elderly. Not sure if there are figures as to how many are retired compared with the host population or not but you could be right in saying they are more elderly. Not sure! However I don't think they only come because of monetary reasons - though no doubt it helps. Most who come seem to have a history of visiting Scotland and come because they love the place. At least that is what I've found. And of course, I'm talking about here in the Borders, they do contribute to society. Many of the retired incomers seem to be pretty well off and they spend as everyone else does and many will still be taxpayers anyway. They also add to rural life etc and often get stuck into local clubs and associations. So I'd say yes they are valued. Another group we have a great many of in the Borders is the returning retiring Scot. Often people from the central belt and further north who have lived and worked in England for decades. They look to come back to Scotland in retirement and find the Borders the best base because they are nearer to their families down south. Sometimes even the younger families then follow them up! We were worrying about depopulation until little more than a decade and a half ago so I don't think we should be worrying too much about people coming in. Yes we need younger people too but I don't think we can write off the retired as just being a burden!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:08 PM

Achmelvich. You are welcome to a holiday let. They are in most of the UK cottage catalogues! I must admit, bookings are far higher since the referendum, especially from German and Dutch holidaymakers. Last year was a bit flat. It is interesting how politicians can and do influence the real world but not in the way they think! I don't think any of them have any vacancies till October, and it's a long time since I last said that. Most of the bookings are from mainland Europe so some economies are moving upwards.

Scotland isn't the issue nationally other than to say that without SNP existing, Labour could have dreamed of a majority. They only have themselves to blame though, taking Scotland for granted for many years.

What I find funny is that for SNP to prop up Labour, there won't be a damaging and destabilising EU referendum hence no change in the political landscape, so no reason to grant a Scottish independence vote again. As the people living in Scotland rejected it, it remains rejected unless The UK changes in any way.

Interesting...

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:31 PM

The minute Labour so much as hints that it may do a deal with the SNP is the minute Labour signs its death warrant. Far too many English people dislike the SNP and the Scots, largely due to the effective scaremongering carried out by the Tories. The latter are scared to death of the SNP, and with good reason. The SNP will vote down any Tory Queen's Speech and there will be too many of them on current reckoning to allow Cameron to form a coalition with anyone else. Cameron's only chance is to scare off enough Labour voters in marginals to give him enough seats to do deals with the LibDems and/or those rather nasty unionist parties in Northern Ireland. Once the election's over, we'll get deals. They won't be called deals, anything but. But if Labour cosy up too close to the SNP, they will be condemning themselves to a single term only. Unless it works really well. Who knows. There could still be an upset this week. Gordon knew how to blow it, as did Neil. Third time lucky, it could be a Tory!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:36 PM

i always vote labour. my wife is badly disabled and we need the NHS. the private sector is virtually unregulated in this country - their whole attitude is one of obscene indifference to the country in which they are privileged to be doing business.

however i got pissed of with labour when they kept getting into wars that history made very plain we couldn't win. then on top of that they sent the soldiers off to war with crap weapons, because of defence cuts. iwas brought up a quaker and divis sweeney once called me a 'hopeless pacifist'. however i don't agree with this present policy of having a small overworked badly equipped army.

i wish labour was more purposeful - got us out of northern ireland, while at least there is some lull in the violence.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: kendall
Date: 03 May 15 - 07:45 PM

Bad leaders are elected by good people who don't vote. This is so true.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 15 - 08:37 PM

Shaw had a perfectly reasonable beginning to the thread, he wasn't continuing a running fight.

My mum calls me Steve, Mrs Steve calls me Steve (except when she's mad with me, in which case she calls me Stephen, then I know I'm in trouble), my mates call me Steve, my work colleagues called me Steve. I don't respond to Shaw usually, but on this occasion I will, only to ask you to not call me Shaw. Steve will do nicely. You do it in your PMs to me after all.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 03 May 15 - 09:40 PM

Okay. Good enough, Steve!

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Joe Offer
Date: 03 May 15 - 11:57 PM

Stephen... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: Musket
Date: 04 May 15 - 03:07 AM

As the other two have had their say I'll have mine.

Labour.

Although I have huge issues with Andy Burnham and how he says stop reorganising how you manage The NHS then promises a bill if elected to do that very thing yet again!

He frightens me when he wants to put NHS commissioning into the hands of local councils. Since public health went that way, joint planning of health and social care has decreased rather than increased. The drive to redirect NHS money into avoiding hospital based care just means councils propping up their deficits rather than making residential social care better.

The likely scenario would be a councillor saying vote for us and we will reintroduce grommets for glue ear in children then look confused when doctors tell them to piss off and refuse, rightly, to treat. If a majority of people are suckered into the homoeopathy scam, would that mean they would spend even more NHS funding on it???

Still. At least with Labour we would stand a chance of retaining NHS although we are already signed up to trade treaties that allow US multinationals to tender for delivering and no government can risk ripping it up as the deals are amongst all G20 countries in many fields.

Election? It's about health and social care and how much of it we can afford. Don't let anyone kid you otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: From someone who rarely starts threads
From: GUEST,Iain
Date: 04 May 15 - 03:29 AM

Do we actually vote for the politicians we want, or are they selected by the puppetmasters and paraded before us, to enable us to tick the pre-selected boxes?
Is it to believe in conspiracy that many top politicians are Bilderberg attendees before they reach the pinnacles of power?
Or is it more rational to believe that attendance is a prerequisite for selection.
To me it seems an extremely unhealthy relationship for a democracy and it would appear bankers and corporations make the major choices for us.